hausdok

Not odd around here at all. Sometimes the color change is very little, if at all, and one has to look very closely to see the treatment slits. OT - OF!!! M.

So, it appears I put my foot in it. It happens......a lot. You have codes for Everett, WA for 1989? Kewl! Now magnify the photo to about 150% and take a really, really good look at that sill. You'll see some surprisingly regularly spaced perforation dashes all along the side of that sill and not on any of the others above it. Could it be that it is PT wood after all? Hmm. The water stain is coming from a dryer duct that's concealed above the insulation in that floor joist bay. If you look closely, you can just see the tinyest bit of galvanized steel peeking out at you. The gray stuff on the insulation looks like lint and cobwebs. The louvered duct cap probably pulled loose from that duct at some point and they left it open and exposed like so many do and it dumped moisture all over that sill. With the outlet missing, dirt can blow right through the hole in the rim and onto the insulation - usually when they're mowing the lawn. There's a crawlspace vent right there as well and wind will blow dust through that vent and onto that insulation. It's very typical for around here. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Funny you should mention that, It reminded me that I've had four different houses in the past year or so where one or more of the the ducts under the house was full of water. In one, the homeowner said that he'd had a pipe burst in an exterior wall under the kitchen sink in 2003, right after he bought the house! The duct for the toe kick heat comes up to that floor and stops right there - the register is secured to the toe-kick and the cavity below that cabinet fills with air before it's forced out of the register - all that water drained into the crawl and a bunch went into the ductwork. He had a guy come in and clean up the kitchen - hell they even replaced the hardwood floors - but nobody ever bothered to check the ducts. Jeez, there was about 50 gallons of water in those ducts. The weight of the water had them sagging and stretched to the max and they were just resting on the floor of the crawlspace full of water for all those years. I can just imagine what that stagnant water must have smelled like when they finally pumped those ducts out and replaced them after six years. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, It sounds like you're talking about a gas space heater or wall heater. My brother had a home in Connecticut about 30 years ago that was heated with electric baseboard heat and he had one of those at one side of the kitchen/dinette that he used to heat the house during the day. At night when the bedroom doors were closed, it was turned way down to an idle and the electric heaters in the bedrooms were turned on. It worked OK, but during the day - even in the dead of winter - they had to crack a window in the kitchen because it got so hot in there. We don't see those much out here but we do see gas fireplaces a whole lot. Those are a little bit different in that primary heat radiates through the glass on the face and then convection current flowing in beneath and then around the firebox flows out of the wall above the firebox and adds to the heat in the room. One can heat a house with them in an emergency but they aren't real efficient; and the doors must be left open in every room. Around here, the builders will sometimes install in-wall electric fan heaters throughout a house and then install a gas fireplace in the living room. It works well to augment the heat in the living room, dining room and kitchen areas that are open to the living room; but, as Chad says, once you close the doors that open to the common area things cool down pretty rapidly, so the stats in the bedrooms kick the bedroom heaters on. I think it's a little odd that the owner removed the baseboard heaters and stats. It wouldn't really have hurt anything to have left them there. He/she could still have used the stove to heat the house the way it's being heated now; and, should the day come that it's so cold out that relying on that warm air rising just doesn't get it, they could have been turned on. Fortunately, it's not hard to fix; baseboard heaters and line stats are fairly inexpensive and the wiring is probably still in place; so an electrician could probably reinstall heaters in the bedrooms fairly easily. The question is; was the house modified such that the electrical load on the panel was increased to the point where the owner was faced with the choice of either removing the baseboard heaters or replacing the service panel, which probably would have cost more than installing a gas space heater? If so, reinstalling the baseboard heaters might not be an option now without increasing capacity of the system. Another question is whether it's even safe to use it with all of the doors to those other areas closed. Those things require an exhaust vent and need a minimum of 50 cubic feet per thousand Btu/Hr that they put out. If they don't have that with the doors of all of the other areas closed, they've got an issue. That's the reason that they also have to be equipped with a thermocouple that will shut them down if the pilot goes out and they have to have an oxygen depletion sensor that will shut them down in the event that they deprive the room of too much oxygen. The inspector should have confirmed all of that during the inspection. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

This article by Barry Bluestone in the Boston Globe describes a proposed government stimulus program for the housing market. This plan, which allegedly would cost about $10 billion per million homes, envisions a government-run insurance policy for buyers that would ensure buyers against catastrophic loss and motivate new buyers to get into the market. To read more, click here.

Hi, Well, maybe I was a bit rude, however, there is no requirement for pressure treated wood unless you're close to grade anyway; so, without knowing how high that sill is off of grade, I don't think there's any reason to start sounding off about PT wood. Bottom line, that's a 20-year old home in a damp environment and that wood looks pretty good. By the way, he wouldn't be worried about subterranean termites in Everett - they don't go up there for some reason. I've never found them around here except for in West Seattle. Maybe they can't get an exit visa; who knows? In Everett, he has to worry more about Pacific Dampwood Termites, Carpenter Ants and Deathwatch Beetles. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Really? You have a copy of the building codes from Everett, WA from 1989? Impressive. Can I call you the next time I'm looking at a 1970's ranch and don't know what the local code authority was requiring back then? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Gee Tom, I dunno. I might recommend one of those things to my ex-wife but I don't know that I'd want to take a chance on having one with my current wife. She hates to iron; and clothes come out of those condensing dryers looking like they've been in the bottom of the hamper for two weeks. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, Not now but this home was built 20 years ago. OT - OF!!! M.

Actually, when you think about it, it's probably more stabile than if they'd tried to frame up a tiny little cripple wall and secure it in the gap below that sill and the foundation. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Yep, I've seen a few hundred of those. The down side is that I've never been able to figure out why they did that (I've got theories) and the upside is that, so far, they'd all been doing pretty well despite the goofiness of it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

The acceptable range for voltage is 108 to 132 volts. They used to say that a 10% drop was unacceptable. 108 is a 12 volt drop from 120 volts or 10%, no? I guess that's where they came up with the 108 volts. Anyway, I've mellowed over the years. I think I'd only report it if it was in excess of 10% and reading less than 108 volts. I don't think you're going to see that with new wiring but you might see it with K & T or some of the older post-WWII stuff. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Fuirseoir ! Aon Foireann - Aon Troid!!! Mícheál

Kewl! Is there a prize? Don't suppose you could make it a personal visit by yourself to Olympia to testify against a hare-brained bit of insanity that a very ill-informed Senator keeps trying to push through that will require home inspectors in Washington State to inspect for mold. It's SB5644 - Senators Parlette and Kohl-Welles The language of the bill goes thusly: Sec. 1. RCW 18.280.030 and 2008 c 119 s 3 are each amended to read as follows: A person licensed under this chapter is responsible for performing a visual and noninvasive inspection of the following readily accessible systems and components of a home and reporting on the general condition of those systems and components at the time of the inspection in his or her written report: The roof, foundation, exterior, heating system, air-conditioning system, structure, plumbing and electrical systems, and other aspects of the home as may be identified by the board. The inspection must include looking for mold and certain fire and safety hazards as defined by the board. The standards of practice to be developed by the board will be used as the minimum standards for an inspection. The duties of the home inspector with regard to wood destroying organisms are provided in RCW 18.280.190. Last year, I went to Dr. Fallah at Veritox and IDEHL and they prepared a pretty good response to the idea but this year she's back again and hasn't changed a word of her bill. That tells me that she's probably got some kind of heavy hitters lined up to testify in favor of the bill at the public hearings this year and thinks that she be able to bulldoze it through. We're going to need to line up additional heavy hitters to beef up Dr. Fallah's rebuttal. If the thing goes through, I'm in favor of the board directing that every home inspection report must report the presence of mold in every single home and recommend follow up by an IAQ lab and remediation as necessary prior to closing. After all, there's some of that alleged "toxic" mold in every cubic centimeter of air that we breath so it's got to be on every single surface, No? Can you imagine the amount of excrement that will hit the proverbial fan if that were ever done? Whooey! The building industry association of Washington and the Washington Realtors (WAR) will bury those two legislators like an old turd that's stinking up the lawn. Oh well, my apologies to Lancey, I seem to have drifted a bit. I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Download Attachment: VeritoxMoldRebuttal.pdf 280.32 KB

Tsk, Not nice, Cuz. Lancey, go here. http://www.epa.gov/mold/ Whatever you do, if, after you review the stuff on the EPA site, you think it's bad enough to need to hire a specialist, don't hire any home inspector claiming to be a mold specialist. None of us really knows squat about mold, regardless of what any of us claims to be our qualifications, and you'll just be wasting your money. If it's that bad, instead of someone with a three-day seminar under his belt, you'll want to hire a reputable indoor air quality firm with a real scientist on staff who is really qualified to look at what you've got going on there, help you determine what's causing it and guide you in how to get it taken care of. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Interim Guidance – Identification of Homes with Corrosion from Problem Drywall1 by the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Department of Housing and Urban Development January 28, 2010 Executive Summary This preliminary identification guidance represents what the Federal Interagency Task Force on Problem Drywall believes is the best approach based on the limited information available today. This identification guidance is based primarily on the presence of metal corrosion in homes as well as other indicators of problem drywall. Additional work will continue to validate these methods and the identification guidance will be modified as necessary. Identification Method The identification process is two steps: (1) an initial or threshold inspection to find visual signs of metal corrosion and evidence of drywall installation during the relevant time period, and (2) the identification of corroborating evidence or characteristics. Step 1: Threshold Inspection Visual inspection2 must show: (a) Blackening of copper electrical wiring and/or air conditioning evaporator coils; and (b) The installation of new drywall (for new construction or renovations) between 2001 and 2008. A positive result for this step (including both criteria) is a prerequisite to any further consideration. Step 2: Corroborating Evidence Because it is possible that corrosion of metal in homes can occur for other reasons, it is important to obtain additional corroborating evidence of problem drywall. Homes with the characteristic metal corrosion problems must also have at least 2 of these corroborating conditions if the new drywall was installed between 2005 and 2008. For installations between 2001 and 2004, at least 4 of the following conditions must be met. Collecting evidence of these corroborating conditions will in some cases require professional assessors and/or testing by analytical laboratories. (a) Corrosive conditions in the home, demonstrated by the formation of copper sulfide on copper coupons (test strips of metal) placed in the home for a period of 2 weeks to 30 days or confirmation of the presence of sulfur in the blackening of the grounding wires and/or air conditioning coils; (b) Confirmed markings of Chinese3 origin for drywall in the home; © Strontium levels in samples of drywall core found in the home (i.e. excluding the exterior paper surfaces) exceeding 1200 parts per million (ppm); (d) Elemental sulfur levels in samples of drywall core found in the home exceeding 10 ppm; (e) Elevated levels of hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfide and/or carbon disulfide emitted from samples of drywall from the home when placed in test chambers using ASTM Standard Test Method D5504-08 or similar chamber or headspace testing4; (f) Corrosion of copper metal to form copper sulfide when copper is placed in test chambers with drywall samples taken from the home. Detailed Description Introduction This preliminary identification guidance represents what the Federal Interagency Task Force on Problem Drywall believes is the best approach based on the limited information available today. We recognize that important additional guidance is still needed to clarify qualifications for inspectors and test laboratories and to describe methods for making the measurements in the criteria defined herein. This interim identification guidance is being released in recognition of the immediate need of homeowners for this information. Consumers should exercise caution in contracting for testing, and should be diligent in confirming the references, qualifications, and background of individuals and firms that offer such testing5. Scientific investigations have moved as quickly as possible to understand the complex problems presented by the issue of Chinese6 drywall. The scientific work completed to date by the Federal Interagency Task Force has been essential to building the foundation for decision-making by homeowners and local, state and federal authorities.7 The investigation continues on several fronts to expand our understanding of this issue – but the Task Force believes that current information is sufficient to develop interim guidance on how to identify homes with problems associated with this drywall. Findings have shown a strong association between the presence of problem drywall and metal corrosion in homes. The results of investigations reported by the Federal Interagency Task Force provide criteria and indicators for identifying those homes. The Task Force developed this preliminary guidance document based on these findings. This identification guidance is based primarily on the presence of metal corrosion in homes as well as other indicators of problem drywall. It is possible to misclassify homes because of other possible sources of metal corrosion such as volatile sulfur compounds from sewer gas, well water, and outdoor contaminants that may enter the home independent of the drywall in the home. Homes may also be misclassified as having no drywall problem due to the absence of characteristics found to be typical in the limited testing to date. Given these limitations, additional work will continue to validate these methods and the identification guidance will be modified as necessary. Identification Method The identification process will be two steps: (1) an initial or threshold inspection to find visual signs of metal corrosion and evidence of drywall installation in the relevant time period, and (2) the identification of corroborating evidence or characteristics. Step 1: Threshold Inspection A visual inspection shall seek to identify blackening of copper electrical wiring and/or air conditioning evaporator coils (or documentation of replacement of evaporator coils due to blackened corrosion causing failure), and the installation of new drywall (for new construction or renovations) between 2001 and 2008. Meeting both criteria for this step is a prerequisite for further consideration. Rationale Visual observations of corrosion of air conditioning evaporator coils and/or electrical wiring by trained inspectors is believed to be a prerequisite for consideration of a home as having problem drywall. The Florida Department of Health has long included such corrosion as part of its definition of problem drywall homes8,9. It is appropriate to limit the dates to the relevant time period, as this corresponds to the vast majority of complaints received by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), also much older homes could exhibit corrosion due to different sources acting over longer periods of time. A CPSC contractor completed a detailed study of 51 homes in Florida, Louisiana, Virginia, Alabama, and Mississippi; the report was issued on November 23, 2009 and is available on www.drywallresponse.gov. This investigation included inspections of each home for the presence and extent of corrosion. Copper and silver metal test strips, called “coupons,â€

Absolutely, you are doing your client a disservice not to let them know that stapled shingles are not OK. R101.6 Referenced codes and standards. The codes and standards referenced in this code shall be considered part of the requirements of this code to the prescribed extent of each such reference. Where differences occur between provisions of this code and referenced codes and standards, the provisions of this code apply. Exception: Where enforcement of a code provision would violate the conditions of the listing of the equipment or appliance, the conditions of the listing and manufacturer's instructions shall apply It is not a function of our profession to argue with the AHJ. We are supposed to be giving the client all of the facts so that the client can make an informed decision. From that point on, what happens is none of our business, unless we've made a call that's going to end up calling into question our credibility and competency. I don't give a rip whether a house sells or not. I do absolutely no marketing - none, nadda, zip - and I stay plenty busy without relying on realtors, so why would I? For not mentioning what? I didn't say I don't mention it; I said that I give the client all of the information - not half of the information as you seem to want to do. If I'm going to tell someone that something is not allowed by code, while I know that it's allowed by the local municipality as well as the manufacturer, I have a duty to give the client all of that information. Bottom line; the client has a right to be fully informed so that the client can decide what is right for the client. Say I just do as Jeremy suggests; say nothing because the municipality allows it, and the client buys the home. If five years later the client is selling the home and you inspect it, you're going to start going off about how the roof is an inferior product - even if the roof is doing fine - and the client is going to be ambushed by the buyer. Then the seller, my former client, is going to blame me for not informing him/her that it was a violation of the IRC, despite the fact that the local municipality allows shingles to be stapled, and the manufacturer allows it. If the client puts the house up for sale knowing those facts the client can decide ahead of time how he or she wants to handle it but won't be ambushed. On the other hand, if I take your approach, just condemn the roof outright because the IRC doesn't allow stapling, and not tell the client that stapling is allowed by the municipality, and perhaps the manufacturer as the CertainTeed instructions demonstrate, the seller ends up yelling at his roofer. If the roofer has done his homework, he or she solicits the help of the local code guy and the code guy tells the client that I'm wrong. Now I've got three people ganging up on me - seller, roofer and code guy - all telling my client that I'm one of those out-of-control cowboy inspectors that doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Now my credibility is tarnished - all because I wanted to hang my hat on a strict interpretation of the IRC and didn't want to fully inform the client and let the client decide using all of the facts. The object isn't to win; the object is to inform the client of all of the facts and allow the client to decide what to do with that information. I have no problem letting the client know what my personal opinion of an installation is, but I'm not going to deprive the client of relevant facts just because I don't care for those facts. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Take it to an electric motor shop. Those guys usually have every kind of motor imaginable. Back in '73 I did a short stint as a maintenance guy in a factory in Torrington, CT and we were constantly replacing electric motors or getting them rebuilt and I often visited a local electric motor shop. Bet they can help. I once picked up a really old chest freezer that somone had kicked to the curb. I took it home, plugged it in and discovered that the motor was burned out. I removed the motor, drove downtown to an electric motor shop and asked 'em what it would cost to rewind the motor. They guy glanced at it, said, "No need, I've got a half dozen of those around here someplace," and disappeared into a back room stacked floor to ceiling with electric motors. About five minutes later he emerged with an exact match. He sold it to me for $15 'cuz he'd never had a call for one, and I installed it in that freezer. I kept that danged thing for years and finally gave it away to another GI. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

I tell folks during the pre-inspection phase when they're getting ready to sign that contract that I'm not going to be testing microwaves or kitchen counters, checking high tension wires with a gauss meter, testing for microwave leakage, looking for poltergeists or any other kind of inspector voodoo - I'm there to inspect the house and the things that make the house work, not the convenient to have accessories. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Mid-60's original and no sign that there's ever been an issue with an overheated SEC due to reloading? It sounds like it might be a #2 tin-coated copper SEC, in which case it's rated for 125-amps and correct. Did the SEC have a woven loom over the top of the rubber insulation or was it clean thermoplastic insulation? If you upgrade, I'd recommend going for 200 amps; the cost isn't that much different and it gives him more wiggle room as more and more ampacity requirements are placed on the home as technology, and load, continue to march onward. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

I think it certainly does matter and I think you risk damaging your own credibility when you start arguing with a local code guy about stuff like this - especially if a manufacturer's instructions allow it; because we all know that a manufacturer's instructions trump code. Sure, a manufacturer's recommendations don't trump code; but if the municipality has decided that they do, then the client needs to know that - not just what the IRC says. We get paid to fully inform clients; not to tell clients only what we want them to know. When you hang your hat on a code cite that's based strictly on what the IRC states, and you contradict the AHJ and what a manufacturer allows, then it's necessary to ensure that the client understands that, though the IRC might state one thing, individual municipalities have the right to adopt or reject portions of the IRC as they see fit. Then, if you know that the local rules contradict the IRC, it's incumbent upon you to tell the client what the local municipality allows; or, when you don't know, to advise the client to check with the local AHJ before rejecting the house out of hand or demanding corrections. As an example, Seattle doesn't allow staples but Sammamish has; so, though I agree that stapling is a cheesy way to install a cover, and I routinely have to write up stapled roofs for damage caused by staples that have backed out (as I've had to do with nails as well), I think it would be a disservice and downright dishonest of me to tell a client who is intent on buying a 12-year old home in Sammamish with a perfectly serviceable cover, that's been wearing normally and shows no sign of damage, that the roof installation sucks and the roof needs to be replaced because it wasn't installed IAW the IRC. In a situation like that, I think it's incumbent upon me to fully explain to the client that a municipality has the right to reject or adopt portions of the IRC as it sees fit, and explain that, notwithstanding my personal preferences, the municipality has allowed the installation in question and point out that the roof has been wearing normally and shows no sign of having been damaged. I think that if it's a brand new roof I might be able to make the case for why the cover should be replaced or re-nailed, because there won't be any way to predict what will happen with that new cover, but I think that trying to impose my opinion on an older home where no damage has occurred, while hanging my hat on the IRC, just makes it look like I'm hell bent on "winning" at any cost. I think that kind of an attitude can hurt us as a profession. This thread is a good example of why one can't learn this business strictly online or out of a book. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, Thanks for that link. It looks like Schneider Electric must have bought the rights and has resumed production on the other side of the border. I guess the Stab-Lok story is about to play out a new chapter. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Phillip, Thanks for your many contributions to Picture This over the years and thank you for being one of TIJ's most ardent supporters. One of these days I hope to be able to shake your hand and buy you a beer. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Step 1: Set the sump pump on the ground in the crawlspace. Step 2: Support it with an old lawn mower. Step 3: Knock a hole through the foundation and connect some black plastic pipe for a discharge line. Step 4. Cut the plug off the end of the power cord and splice into the nearest electrical wire. Step 5: Wrap some wire mesh around it to keep trash out. Step 6: Go drink a sixpack and watch Larry the Cable Guy Click to Enlarge Many thanks to Phillip Smith Home Sweet Home Inspections Samantha, AL

Kurt, Look at the GEC in the graphic; it is continuous and passes through each of those devices but is not cut. All of the other things are spliced to the GEC. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike