One glyph system, consistent across all six branches. The acceptance
tiers grade how much a jurisdiction has actually published about third-party inspection; the
enforcement glyphs cover West Virginia, where the building code itself is local-option and the
first question is whether a code regime exists at all.
Acceptance tiers — MD · VA · DC · NC
●NamedA published, product-specific rule requires or accepts engineer / third-party inspection for this exact work.
◆AllowedA published general third-party or engineer-certification mechanism covers the work — conditions in the notes.
◇UnpublishedNothing in print; acceptance is building-official discretion. In Virginia a written §113.7 policy must exist — request it. In Maryland there may genuinely be nothing published.
Enforcement regime — WV (local-option code)
■EnforcedState Building Code adopted and enforced: permit + code inspections required; no third-party policy published — ask.
□Permit-onlyA local permit is required but full code-inspection enforcement is unconfirmed.
○NoneNo building-code regime at all; engineer letters serve client / lender purposes only.
▲Flood overlayFloodplain development permit applies to work in a mapped flood zone regardless of the building-code answer.
Modifiers
*PartialPartial published carve-outs or hooks exist despite no general policy — see the jurisdiction's notes.
?UnconfirmedReported but unconfirmed — verify before relying on it.
UP column — do we inspect here?
✓UP inspectsUnlikely Professionals performs third-party / special inspections in this jurisdiction.
✗UP does notUnlikely Professionals does not currently perform third-party / special inspections here.
VVERIFIED — the primary page or PDF was fetched and read.
SSNIPPET — from a search result that was not fetched; treat as a lead, not a fact.
IINFERRED — deduced from statewide code or analogy, not a local document.