Skip to content
Violation library › Case analysis › 28-301.1
Inspector-description analysis · administrative review

Electrical installation and permit: NYC DOB 28-301.1 / OATH summons 39191979P

Original enforcement allegation, not a proven case outcome. The quotation below is from an inspector-written description in a public-record dataset. Extracts may end mid-sentence. The inspection origin, complete supporting evidence, legal finding, and disposition have not been independently verified. Interpretive explanations below are explicitly analytical possibilities.
Law citation: 28-301.1OATH infraction: 102Summons: 39191979P

Original inspector allegation — verbatim available export

OBSERVED IN THE BASEMENT GAS METER ROOM BEING USED AS STORAGE ROOM. GAS LINE LACKS PROPER SUPPORT AND GAS LINE RUNNING ABOVE ELECTRICAL METERS. ADDITIONAL PIPE PENETRATION NO FIRE STOP WHICH IS CONTRARY TO CODE

Source limit: Source reference: NYC OATH/DOB summons 39191979P; BIN 4044299; export issue date 06/10/2026. The earlier export status was ACTIVE; obtain current status from DOB or OATH. The CSV contains a respondent mailing address, which is not presumed to identify the inspected property. This is the entire description available in the supplied export, not a certified full summons, inspector notes or evidentiary exhibits. The description is at the export’s approximately 210-character field limit and may terminate mid-word or mid-sentence.

Get the complete, authentic notice: search summons 39191979P in OATH Summons Finder instructions (download actual summons) and download the actual summons; review DOB records in NYC DOB records search. Never substitute the editorial discussion below for the inspector’s words.

Charge classification: law controls; keywords do not

Recorded citation: 28-301.1; recorded infraction: 102. Primary legal issue: safe building maintenance. Interpretive issue: Owner maintenance obligation. AC 28-301.1 requires buildings, equipment, safeguards and means of egress to be kept safe and maintained. The physical condition, rather than whether a particular permit exists, is normally the central question.

What must be tested: The applicable underlying technical standard and the actual defective component determine a lawful repair. An assertion that the building is generally safe does not rebut a specific defect.

Possible exceptions and legal limitations: An exemption from cyclical façade reporting does not exempt a building from general safe-maintenance duties. Determine whether the special rule actually applies. Eligibility is not established merely because the excerpt uses a word such as “repair”, “permit”, “cellar”, or “occupied”. Refer to NYC DOB construction codes.

Specific conditions mentioned in this inspector wording

1. Electrical installation and permit

Investigative test: Locate the exact wiring or equipment and determine whether the allegation is unsafe installation, unpermitted electrical work, posting, or inspection/permit status.

Evidence matched to this issue: Licensed-electrician site notes, panel/circuit identification, photos, electrical filing/permit history and test results when appropriate.

Boundary / potential counterexample: The evidence for a missing electrical work permit is not identical to proof of defective circuitry or missing display.

2. Gas equipment or fuel piping

Investigative test: Establish affected equipment and gas line route; check whether a licensed plumber and utility coordination are required and document safe isolation if indicated.

Evidence matched to this issue: Licensed-master-plumber assessment, approved gas work plans/permits, utility authorization, pressure/test reports and final inspection if applicable.

Boundary / potential counterexample: Do not recommend turning gas on or modifying piping based on a web excerpt; licensed trades and agency/utility procedures govern.

3. Authorized use versus observed occupancy

Investigative test: Identify each floor/unit and its claimed function and compare the C of O/authorized plan with actual use on the cited date.

Evidence matched to this issue: C of O and historical building records; dated layout/room photos, use documentation, rent/booking records only where genuinely relevant, and design-professional egress review.

Boundary / potential counterexample: Basement/cellar classification, legal dwelling status and transient-use rules are distinct determinations; do not conflate them.

Inspector wording mapped to testable facts

Passage 1 — OBSERVED IN THE BASEMENT GAS METER ROOM BEING USED AS STORAGE ROOM.

This recorded passage identifies a question about gas equipment or fuel piping, not a proven final determination. Establish affected equipment and gas line route; check whether a licensed plumber and utility coordination are required and document safe isolation if indicated. Do not recommend turning gas on or modifying piping based on a web excerpt; licensed trades and agency/utility procedures govern.

Passage 2 — GAS LINE LACKS PROPER SUPPORT AND GAS LINE RUNNING ABOVE ELECTRICAL METERS.

This recorded passage identifies a question about electrical installation and permit, not a proven final determination. Locate the exact wiring or equipment and determine whether the allegation is unsafe installation, unpermitted electrical work, posting, or inspection/permit status. The evidence for a missing electrical work permit is not identical to proof of defective circuitry or missing display.

Passage 3 — ADDITIONAL PIPE PENETRATION NO FIRE STOP WHICH IS CONTRARY TO CODE

The negative/deficiency wording is an inspector allegation about a missing, failed or unsafe condition. Determine precisely which component, obligation and time period the asserted absence covers. The supporting documents must establish or rebut the condition on the offense date, not merely its condition today.

Identifiers, locations, measurements and chronology to verify

Identified floor: BASEMENT
Tie inspection photographs to the stated level, approved floor plan, egress route, and actual room use.

Case-specific correction decision tree

Branch A — defect remains: assess risk and protection immediately, then undertake an appropriate licensed/engineered repair. Branch B — already repaired: pair before/after photos with scope, inspection and test results that address the *specific* defect. Branch C — inspector misidentified the component: use an elevation/floor key and technical field report; do not rely on an unspecific clean-inspection assertion.

First targeted evidence collection: Licensed-electrician site notes, panel/circuit identification, photos, electrical filing/permit history and test results when appropriate. This is an investigative request, not a claim that the work or evidence already exists.

Editorial closure of the shortened allegation — NOT source text

Verbatim excerpt ends: “ LINE RUNNING ABOVE ELECTRICAL METERS. ADDITIONAL PIPE PENETRATION NO FIRE STOP WHICH IS CONTRARY TO CODE”. Non-source editorial completion (conditional reconstruction, not a quotation): “The allegation appears to concern electrical installation and permit; whether additional observations, directions, dates, measurements or exceptions followed is unknown and must be checked in the original summons.”

No missing words, dates, measurements, liability conclusion or regulatory remedy have been invented. Even if the final syllable looks obvious, completing it as a purported inspector quotation would misstate an official record.

Response, certification and closing evidence

A hearing defense, correction of the underlying condition, a DOB AEU Certificate of Correction and payment of an imposed penalty are distinct questions. Retrieve the summons and confirm the OATH hearing or outcome and DOB violation status. Under current DOB guidance, Certificate of Correction review requests are made in DOB NOW: Safety → Violations & Notices of Deficiency; submitter/certifier signatures and evidence requirements are case-specific. Refer to Certificate of Correction instructions.

Source record limitations: The dataset does not authenticate who inspected the property, why inspection started, whether a defense succeeded, which contractor made repairs or whether AEU later accepted a correction. Do not turn this example into a claimed client success story or an invented inspection history.

Primary authority and fact-check links

Related library and official records

Official sources: Search DOB records · DOB summonses · Certificate of Correction FAQs · OATH hearing options · Construction codes

Need a resolution plan tied to the full summons?

Building Violation LLC can review the violation wording, permits, drawings, correction evidence and available OATH hearing procedures. A web example is not a determination of compliance for any property.

Call (866) 545-4440