Walter's memory must be failing, or he just chooses to pick on someone or on what suits him on any given day. Couple years back on the ASHI board, he chided me for saying a defect *presented* a hazard. He told me in no uncertain terms that the defect *posed* a hazard versus *presented* a hazard. I thanked him for the correction, and have used it ever since. He's done this to me a couple times on this board lately. Last month, it was how a defect *needed* something. He defended saying such here recently, but in fact chided me years back about same, stating how an inanimate object couldn't *need* anything. I truly value his help, but wish he would be consistent instead of being *crotchety* (his own words here last month to explain his inconsistency).