Jim Katen

What's the safety problem in this case?

If it was done "correctly" at the time, there should be a grounding electrode at the post and another at the garage. If the neutrals and grounds are tied together at the garage (as they should have been according to that era's requirements), then you'll probably get current travelling through the earth between the garage GES and the post's GES. In some cases people or animals might actually become part of that path. That's one of the reasons why the rule changed.

Going off course here a little but the impression I get is that the rule was changed in the 2002 NEC (250.32) because incidental parallel conductive paths between the two buildings (steel water pipe, steel conduit, etc) would end up carrying neutral currents if the neutral were bonded to the grounding system in both buildings. It's the same problem that happens when an EGC is bonded to the neutral in two locations in a house: neutral currents will end up flowing thru the much smaller EGC and overheat it.

Actually, the whole parallel-conductive-path-between-buildings concept was introduced in the 1999 edition. It was abandoned in 2008. The issue isn't so much one of overheating as having current in unexpected places.

Electricity normally flows in the Earth for a variety of reasons. It's why some expansive industrial sites have multiple ground rods inserted at points along a long circular path on the property and are joined together along with all metallic structures and electrical systems onsite. It equalizes the local electric potentials of the Earth.

JMHO.

Marc

True. But they install those systems because electricity flowing through the earth is not a desirable thing.

They separate at the garage. So, cant clear a ground fault that way?

Click to Enlarge

65.22 KB

If they're separate, yes, the equipment grounding conductors won't do their job very well.

What's the safety problem in this case?

If it was done "correctly" at the time, there should be a grounding electrode at the post and another at the garage. If the neutrals and grounds are tied together at the garage (as they should have been according to that era's requirements), then you'll probably get current travelling through the earth between the garage GES and the post's GES. In some cases people or animals might actually become part of that path. That's one of the reasons why the rule changed.

"? window operation could be a safety hazard due to the

lower pane having a strong spring action that prevents

window from staying open preventing easy exit in an

emergency. Recommend review by installer or a qualified

contractor."

this is an example of an entry that I find frustrating. Could be correct, but still seems lazy reporting.

It's not frustrating, it's wretched. How about, "The window won't stay open. Have it fixed."

Guilty as charged, I searched three reports and found five uses, but all of which, I think pass muster. The best thing about the phrase is its brevity.

Distribution of receptacles was not easy to tell due to the large amount of furniture and personal belongs in the rooms.

I did not operate the cooling side due to ambient temperature.

My crawl traverse found some damaged insulation. Much of duct length did not or only barely cleared ground, due to height limits in crawl.

Some joists look original, some are newer due to repairs through time.

Some decking on both sides of the chimney column is rotted due to flashing leaks.

All are wrong. Simple rule: if you can substitute "because of" then "due to" is wrong.

. . . I learned that my frustration with the phrase is often baseless. How many of you use the phrase " Due to xxxxx"?

Interesting question. My last 20 reports don't contain a single instance of "due to." Not surprising since I avoid passive voice and "due to" is a passive voice enabler.

When that service was installed, you could feed a sub panel in a separate structure with only a 3-wire feeder.

That would be about right in my area.

For 23 sq on a 4:12 roof, why not hire a helper and do it yourself?

Point taken. But I've learned that is best to keep spending time getting paid to do what I do and pay others to do what they do.

Can you get paid $8,800 for a weekend's work?

That would be about right in my area.

For 23 sq on a 4:12 roof, why not hire a helper and do it yourself?

The standing portion in the back has more hole than wall on the side facing the camera. Where are the brace panels?

. . . What would be your choice of DB?

Marc

If I ever decide to go that route, I'd explore FM Pro just because Kurt and another friend of mine both sing its praises. I find, though, that my brain just doesn't seem to bond well with database programs. Perhaps I just haven't given them the attention that they deserve but every time I tangle with one it beats the crap out of me and spits me to the curb.

Ironically, my wife is an information architect and database designer who mostly works with SQL Server and who has repeatedly offered to make a database inspection program using any product that I want. In the interest of preserving my marriage, I have steadfastly refused.

. . . Excel never makes a mistake in simple arithmetic. . . .

Unless you do something unforgivable, like insert a blank space in a cell by mistake. Took me hours once to figure that one out.

My reports look almost exactly like yours - at least in terms of layout of text and pictures. I've never had any trouble dropping pictures into the right-hand side using Wordperfect (many years ago) or Word. You don't need a column, although that's one way to do it. You can write a macro that will size and place the pictures as you wish. Inspectit used to do this automatically (might still) and Intelligent Reporter still does (both MS Word-based programs). Devwave's PictureDrop is an MS Word Add-in that does this too (as well as several other things).

If I were to jump from a word processor to a database, Excel would not be my first choice. Just a personal prejudice. Excel doesn't like me and I don't like it.

I have yet to find a sweep that is ethical. Not saying they don't exist, just that I have not found one.

Someone told me the same thing about home inspectors yesterday - exactly the same words. . .

I can't recall having ever seen that style draft hood on a gas-burning appliance - only oil. And even then it's sideways. When the boiler hasn't fired in a while and the air in the chimney is cold, that thing is going to spew gas exhaust like a firehose.

On another note, do you often see pilot lights tapped before the gas shut-off valve? We only see that on really ancient installations - like pre WWII. Never on an installation as recent as this.

I'm surprised that you could find one in your size.

Looks comfortable, if a bit dorky. Didn't they have a Mighty Morphin Power Ranger one?

I've seen it happening from that far away.

Why don't you think that it's reflected sunlight from windows? I see a beam of concentrated reflected light in the picture.

...with the AC, no. With the box fastening, yes. As an AHJ I had a discussion of bundling with an electrician whose wire puller put a bundle of romex into a pvc sleeve to penetrate a ceiling frame. His argument about typical residential loads won my approval.

The bundling (what there is of it), is the least of the problem.

Absolutely.

Just an observation:

One of the best building inspectors that I ever worked with got his training in the joint. Cost him nothing (out of pocket, anyway), and he came away with a bonus: "Love" and "Hate" tattooed on his right-hand and left-hand knuckles, respectively. These translated from the prison yard to the job site remarkably well. Few builders argued with him.

Very stylish. Though I'd hate to run into it while wading through the snow.

Looks more like corrosion than patching.

Good grief! What a mess. It'd take me the better part of a day just to figure out the setup.

I have a 3yr old home. When I built it contractor told me code wouldn't allow him to insulate the attic it unless I was covering it with drywall or no paper. Now that I'm in it I want to insulate it,my question is it a fire hazard if I leave the paper on like from the heat in the summer? Because I don't want to drywall it .

they are attic trusses, so I'm referring to insulating the walls and ceiling, the trusses are boxed out like a room

Setting aside the flammability issue, and presuming that you'll be installing fiberglass, you'll probably want to cover the insulation anyway, just to make it more effective. Open fiberglass insulation on a wall performs horribly. And the ceiling will be even worse; if you leave an air space between the insulation and the underside of the roof sheathing and you don't cover the bottom of the insulation, air will flow through it as though it weren't there. Cover it with something - even cheap paneling.