StevenT

So if you are the moderator, does that mean you will not dispute any "hogwash?" I wish it were a debate. Please post the schedule when it is available. I'm in NYC, I would consider the drive.

When and where is this conference? I would drive to Vermont to see Caoimhkn. Especially if he says it's worth the trip.

I'd pay to see that. Hey Caoimhkn, Stick you thumb in her eye. That always worked for me.

The reason that I am adding such detail to this comment is because after the inspection, when I went over the house with my client, there were two areas that of concern. 1. A small area clad with EIFS that (of course) was installed wrong, and showed signs of water intrusion. The concensus was that because it was a small area, and since my client liked the house and it's location, he would deal with the EIFS, even if it meant it's removal. 2. This infestation. (I told him I wasn't sure what it was, and before I started screaming "TERMITES," I wanted to look investigate it more, as it may or may not be anything serious) I did not want to look at it and because I did not know what it was, deem it harmless. I really tried to figure it out. It was a concern at the inspection, I didn't want to "blow it off" in the report. It had to be addressed. I put it out here to get some help, which I got, including the critique of the narrative. I will go back, re-read it and make some adjustments. The finished product will be somewhere in between. By the way, I am happy to hear that everyone feels that I explained it too well. That makes me feel better than if I was being told that I did not explain it well enough.

Thanx, I had a feeling about that. Couldn't find it in Wikipedia.

This is the narrative that I included in my report regarding this anomoly. Any feedback would be appreciated. A brown mass, approximately 3" x 3", resembling insect byproduct was present on the EIFS, below the front window, next to the front steps. The mass was visually inspected in situ, and a careful examination of the surrounding area was conducted, looking for indications of active, inactive, and/or additional infestations. No such indications were found. The mass was removed and examined under magnification. The material looks like sand and dirt. There were no tunnels, cavities, egg residue, or decayed insect parts present. Other than a surface stain that should be able to be removed with soap and water, there is no damage to the area. Without laboratory testing, it is impossible to determine the absolute makeup of the material. Since this mass was located next to a "cradle" in the adjacent shrub, it is also possible that it is the remnant of a bird's nest, of a species such as a Swallow, who uses a sand/mud mixture to construct it's nest. Although it is important to monitor all homes for infestations, I believe this mass to be incidental, and believe it to be harmless.

Les, I don't run into many radon systems where I am. The passive system idea makes sense, as does the sump pit/pump. My question is, does the sump pit (container) act as a plenum to collect the gas? Is the discharge pipe simply attached to the sealed lid/cover?

NY DEP uses both, although the certification is Pesticide Applicator. CP, Are you joking?

Most likely, that ejector pump is being fed from below the slab. The 3" line is the discharge. The 2" line is the vent. There should be a pump inside the tank. Flush the toilet, it should come on. I would not open it. Should be GFI protected.

I went back and examined the mass, Using a sharp knife, I shaved off whatever it is. As you can see, there is no damage to the EIFS below. The only blemish is a stain, which I think will come clean with soap and water. I brought the shavings back to the office. With a magnifying glass, I see nothing that resembles eggs, insect parts, or vegetation. All I see is sand and mud. Everything crumbles into very fine particles. I'm considering that someone simply lobbed a lump of dirt onto the wall. Unless someone can add to the sceniero, I am going to classify this as harmless. Click to Enlarge 52.12 KB Click to Enlarge 29.08 KB Click to Enlarge 42.82 KB

Good morning Mike, When I wasn't holding the tree out of the way for the sake of the camera, it was right up against the building. Threre is a "cradle" in that part of the branches. Maybe there could have been a nest there. I seem to remember that swallows nest out of mud. Is that so?

Probably not, it's located within reach, as you walk down the front steps.

This was located below the mass. I looked at the debris with a magnifying glass. I didn't see any wings, but I did see plant and insect parts. I also looked all around the foundation below the plants. I really didn't see anything else. Click to Enlarge 54.27 KB

Hi Guys, Thanks for jumping in. I considered Jim's explanation, but was drawn off when I scratched it with my fingernail. Then, like Brandon and Garet, I was drawn towards the nest idea. It looked like, and scratched off like sheltertube. It's also located below a water intrusion on an EIFS wall. I'm going to look at it again. I hope Jim is right, maybe it's just a bad fix. I'll scratch a little more and see whats under it. There is what seems to be an impression below the mass. Alot is riding upon what I name this patch. Whatever it is, I don't want to call it what it is not. Thanks again.

I came across this today, and although I have an either or idea what I'm looking at, before I call it what it is not, I'd like some input. Click to Enlarge 60.72 KB Click to Enlarge 42.07 KB Click to Enlarge 41.66 KB

From time to time, we have our little discussions about mould inspections/sampling, and I am definately of the mind set that belives most mould inspections are little more than snake oil shows. I don't start pulling fire alarms when I see mould, I do believe that "some people are sensitive to some moulds," and removing the cause, and a clean up is most often all it takes. I advise the client that if they really want the mould tested and identified, we will need an industrial hygienist, or micologist. Certainly not a "two day wonder." I do not do... "Mould Inspections," nor do I want to. But, I have been thinking about mould removal... For those client's that want it removed/cleaned up. I am interested in hearing Caoimhkn's (and everyone else's) opinions about remediators. Is it necessary to study for years to become a "worthwhile" remediator? I see some websites that guarentee 100% removal, and guarentee that it won't return. I find that difficult, since I believe that mould is everywhere on earth. I believe the service should be to eliminate the cause, dry it up, and clean up whatever is possible. I've seen buildings that needed a quick clean up, from a one time leak, and buildings that needed total gutting, from prolonged heavy exposure... and everything in between. I see a number of schools/"institutes" that train remediators, and wonder which is the most reputable? Which offers the best training? Or are they all full of mould?

This is a home that was renovated by the owner/builder. Although the house has ""pretty" floors and some other items, when looked at closely, it's a hodgepodge of faults. The house has new service, but there are a few things that bother me about the over all job. Like no GFIs, improperly identified conductors. He tells me he did the wiring.

I agree with you, and am also considering moisture. If it were excessive line voltage, would it be like that all of the time? Or would it be a surge problem? I would like to test it.

I inspected a house today that had about 30% of the lightbulbs burnt out. All were recessed ceiling fixtures, some were located inside, some were located outside. My initial thoughts are over sized bulbs (overheating), moisture, or cheap bulbs. SInce it's a one story structure, I am ruling out vibration. Is there a more "frequent" explanation?

That is a capacitor. I've used them in low voltage systems, such as alarms (to monitor the circuit so it cannot be jumped out. I have not ever seen them used like the one in the picture.

EIFS... Exterior Insulation Finishing System. The key word is Insulation, with EIFS is usually EPS or XPS, either way, it is a styrofoam type insulation. When you rap on it, and is sounds like it's installed over foamboard, it's EIFS. It can get confusing when a thin hardcoat is applied over plywood. It could sound hollow. That is where the thumb pushing comes in. Sometimes you will see the EIFS basecoat and finish coat directly on concrete. This is not EIFS. I've also seen basecoat and finishcoat directly on wood, this is not EIFS either. If the foamboard is not there, it is not EIFS.

Hi Bryan, Like you, I used to think about it. I answered an ad on Craigslist. I've since then tracked down another company, and now do work for both.

A little while ago I was asked to start a thread regarding Insurance Inspections, I apologize for the delay, I couldn’t avoid it. Anyway, For those considering additional inspecting resources, Insurance Inspections is an option. Although some “Insurance Inspectionsâ€

That is PRECISELY my point. But I have decided that in this case, I am wrong. Although tecnically I am right, this 4 hour (approx.) class was given by a company that I am doing insurance inspections for. I realize that they don't really care about technical data, and they were trying to get across how they want their reports done. They have their own report system, and they want flat, 3 tab roof called; asphalt shingle... which it is. The architectural asphalt shingle, they want called architectural. The question would have been ok if they asked; "In our reporting system is there a diff..." It's their horse, they can ride it any way they want.

If you are worried about it being below the header, I get the feeling that you installed it in the front of the garage... near the door. Can you install it lower towards the rear of the garage? If it turns out that there is no way to vent it safely, use an electric heater, or if you have hot water heat, get a hot water space heater. There are also wall mounted heaters that can be installed lower. Whatever you do, the way it is now, is NG.