montana

The newer NEST thermostats claim to also act as smoke and CO detectors. https://nest.com/smoke-co-alarm/meet-nest-protect/ Do NEST thermostats meet fire code requirements? I tend to view them the same way as I think about security alarm systems that also act as smoke and fire detectors. They may work fine for a prior homeowner, but what if the next home buyer chooses not to pay the subscription fees and the system is inactive? I always felt you could not rely on alarm systems because they could be de-activated for any number of reasons, therefore standard smoke detectors should still be in installed. Does this logic carry with the NEST thermostat systems? IRC 2012: SECTION R314 SMOKE ALARMS R314.1 Smoke detection and notification. All smoke alarms shall be listed and labeled in accordance with UL 217 and installed in accordance with the provisions of this code and the household fire warning equipment provisions of NFPA 72. R314.2 Smoke detection systems. Household fire alarm systems installed in accordance with NFPA 72 that include smoke alarms, or a combination of smoke detector and audible notification device installed as required by this section for smoke alarms, shall be permitted. The household fire alarm system shall provide the same level of smoke detection and alarm as required by this section for smoke alarms. Where a household fire warning system is installed using a combination of smoke detector and audible notification device(s), it shall become a permanent fixture of the occupancy and owned by the homeowner. The system shall be monitored by an approved supervising station and be maintained in accordance with NFPA 72.

I would be careful about testing and reporting on leaks at gas meters and propane regulators. These have a vent that is designed to release gas at certain excess pressures. You will often detect gas "leaks" that are part of the normal function of the regulator; this seems especially true for propane tanks and regulators. (which is why there are clearance requirements between gas meters, regulators, tanks, and potential ignition sources like air conditioners and electrical panels).

The 'exceptions' always throw me. Exceptions: 2.3. Return-air inlets shall not be located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of any appliance firebox or draft hood in the same room or space. 3. Rooms or spaces containing solid-fuel burning appliances, provided that return-air inlets are located not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from the firebox of such appliances. Ok, it is a big family room that opens to a hallway, and stairway to the main floor. So there is plenty of air capacity, even with combustion air for the wood stove. But the way that I interpret it, because it is big room it is ok to have a return vent, but still must be at least 10-foot separation between the return and wood stove. Am I reading it wrong?

My concern is that any smoke exhaust from the wood stove would enter into the HVAC duct system (i.e. when you open the door of the wood stove). To answer the other question: It is not the only return vent in the home (2 more on main level). I was not aware that if there was more than one vent, it was ok to place one within 10 feet of a drafting combustion device. Is is ok if there are more returns?

Return vent in ceiling of finished basement, I'd guess 9' ceiling without pulling out a tape measure. A wood stove just underneath the return vent. The home buyer wanted an heating expert in addition to a home inspector. So, why didn't the licensed, certified, professional HVAC contractor that was there there mention this as a concern to the buyer? Am I missing something? (sorry about the quality of the picture) I also got on a ladder and pulled the return vent cover off to make sure that the wood stove exhaust vent wasn't passing through the return air chase (it is not, there is blocking between the I-joists that separates the return air chase). Click to Enlarge 47.77 KB

Felt like I was standing on my head. House built in 1960. Old 2x4 rafters with what looks like black tar used to cement a silvery rolled roofing on the underside of the roof. But the black ooozy tar compound looks like it dripped UPWARD. I would almost think that the the rafters were originally used somewhere else lying down, and then flipped upside down and re-claimed as rafters. Any other ideas? I was stumped. Oh, don't worry about all the brown mold, that is a side issue to my question here. Click to Enlarge 60.08 KB Click to Enlarge 59.59 KB

While I agree that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink, you're right that any idiot can mis-use or abuse any house or item in a house. However, we have established some rules that the builder should at least provide some basic working elements. Just because the homeowner may remove the smoke alarm because he got tired of hearing it beep when the batter runs low, the builder is still required to install smoke alarms in the proper locations. So, again, my question. Is a builder required to provide a basic functioning heating system, even though the home owner may forget to turn it on. Is a wood stove sufficient as the sole source of heat?

The draft standard is available for review here: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/cacfurn_dfr_final-version.pdf Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps 10/31/2011 https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...nd-residential "The direct final rule published on June 27, 2011 (76 FR 37408) became effective on October 25, 2011. Compliance with the standards in the direct final rule will be required on May 1, 2013 for non-weatherized furnaces and on January 1, 2015 for weatherized furnaces and central air conditioners and heat pumps." August 27, 2012 Another article about the request for delay - http://www.achrnews.com/articles/120805-industry-requests-18-month-regional-standards-extension Industry Requests 18-Month Regional Standards Extension | 2012-08-24 | ACHRNEWS "The DOE announced on July 2 that residential HVAC appliances regulated under the pending regional efficiency standards (non-weatherized gas furnaces, mobile home gas furnaces, and non-weatherized oil furnaces) must be installed no later than May 1, 2013. Weatherized gas furnaces, central air conditioners, and heat pumps will follow the same ?install by? enforcement ruling, but with a Jan. 1, 2015 compliance date." "The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) formally petitioned the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), requesting an 18-month extension for residential non-weatherized gas furnaces from the proposed May 1, 2013 implementation date set for the amended federal minimum efficiency standards. AHRI is requesting the compliance date be delayed until Nov. 1, 2014."

What are the minimum heating standards for a home? I am thinking specifically a home that has a wood stove as the sole source of heat. HUD has established Minimum Property Requirements for purposes of appraisals, "Homes with a wood burning stove as a primary heat source must also have a permanently installed conventional heating system that maintains a temperature of at least 50 degrees Fahrenheit in areas with plumbing." In the IRC, R303.8 Required Heating: "When the winter design temperatures in Table R301.2(1) is below 60 degree F, every dwelling unit shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a minimum room temperature of 68 degrees F . . . ." But the IRC does not seem to state that the source of heat has to include something other than a wood stove. What if you have to leave the house for a day or two, and can't be there to shove more wood on the fire? Plumbing eventually freezes. Aside from common sense, is there anywhere else in building code that requires a "conventional" source of heat besides a wood stove? -

Jim, Yeah, I thought of testing it that way too, but not until after I got home. I may not get over that way for a while (about an hour away), but worth the thought. I found a picture like the one you have in "Electrical Inspections" by Doug Hansen et al, and it is described at having line and load connections. However, in the two panels I saw, the were no service feeders to the breakers (just circuit branch wiring), so at least in these panels the breakers must somehow be drawing power from a bus bar in the Magnitrip panels. Terry

Zinsco - Line vs load side of breaker House is originally 1912, remodeled to 3 apartments for university students, would guess some work done in 50's or 60's. Two Magnitrip panels with Zinsco breakers. I will be calling out the electrical work for multiple other reasons, and I'm already aware of all the other complaints about Zinsco, FPE, etc. My question here is more academic and curiosity than anything. Looking at these breakers, they seem to have Line and Load sides of the breaker (like older Bulldog Pushmatic). Some of these single pole breakers have terminal screws, and branch circuit wiring coming off both sides of the breaker. Can't find any old installation instruction for the panel or breakers. Is there a Line and Load side on some older Zinsco breakers? I don't understand the bus design of this Magnitrip panel; I would assume the breakers draw power through a bus bar. The attached pictures are of two different panels. In both pictures, the branch circuit wire terminals are on the right side. Is the circuit wire on the left protected by the breaker, or is that terminal live all the time? Terry Click to Enlarge 52.31 KB Click to Enlarge 72.79 KB

The systems room containing 4 water heaters (3 provide hydronic heat for radiant floor heating, and 1 for DHW), is an exterior room off a walk-out basement. After original construction, a landing was added off a wrap-around deck, that is over the top of this systems room. So, now the 4 exhaust vents are under the deck landing. The nearest door or window is at least 16 feet away. I know lots of standards for exhaust vent on roof, near windows, etc, but is there any concern about an exhaust vent under a deck (not immediately near a door or window)? My first thought would be heat damage, but I know from experience that the temperature of exhaust from a 36,000 BTU water heater is nowhere near high enough to torch the deck. There is no visible indication of heat damage on the underside of the deck. I know clearance requirements for B-type vents, but is there a clearance requirement for an exhaust hood? Puzzled Inspector (need an icon for a home inspector scratching his head) Click to Enlarge 92.47 KB Click to Enlarge 77.81 KB

Jim, Thank you for YOUR reasoned and patient reply too. My inspection reports contain standard language in my Definition of Terms page that essentially states something similar to what you said. Guess nobody reads that part of the report. Now, if I can just communicate it properly to folks tomorrow, we'll all be winners.

Are you THE Doug Hansen, co-author of "Electrical Inspection of Existing Dwellings". I loved your book, and have re-read it front to back many times over the years. Good job man. Yes, the first pic includes the main disconnect and the meter. Thank you for your well-reasoned and patient answer. What you say does make sense, and it helps a lot. I had called a different state inspector on this same question two or three years ago. and he said something similar, but also stated that even with an arrangement like this that there was some chance that the breakers might not operate properly (I couldn't follow his logic on that one). As to your other observation, except for one particular electrician, ALL the approved panels I have seen around here have always allowed multiple neutrals and/or grounding wire to share terminal screws. That one has bothered me too, but like you said, I have to pick my battles - especially around here, a rural area. Unless I am working in the city to the north of me, except for the state electrical inspector, there are no inspections. So imagine what I see for structure, heating, plumbing, and the list goes on. Thanks

Would like some support if I'm right, and correction if I'm wrong. About to enter a discussion with an electrician over this. Meter and service entrance panel are installed on exterior of house. This panel is grounded and bonded. Inside the wall is the "main panel' (or what I would call the main distribution panel). Three conductors come in through the back of the panel, the 2 hot service conductors, the 3rd service neutral, AND a bare grounding wire that attached to the left bus bar - which is attached to right bus bar, which has a bonding jumper to back of the panel enclosure. Equipment grounding conductors and neutrals terminate at both busses. To me, this means that this 'sub panel' (main distribution panel), has been bonded a second time. Hitch - it had been approved by the local state electrical inspector (now retired). The electrician that I am talking to says that the current state electrical inspector approves this setup on a regular basis (which is why he refuses to sign his name to something that says it is safe, which is all that I asked for in my report anyway). See pics. Now - is anything wrong with this picture(s)? IF it is wrong, then what is the danger? Using NEC 2005 (current code at time of construction), I am looking at sections: 250.24 (A)System Grounding Connections section (5) Load-Side Grounding Connections and 408.40 (3rd paragraph) I am weak on theory. Can anyone provide some some clarification on what is the real danger? It makes good sense in panels in detached buildings, but when it is a "sub" panel is being bonded when the service entrance panel is 6 inches away on the exterior side of the wall? Some of this seems somewhat arbitrary. Click to Enlarge 36.44 KB Click to Enlarge 55.64 KB Click to Enlarge 63.86 KB Thanks ahead of time, Terry (Montana)

There is ONE other critical item. The buyer and seller can be significantly affected by the definition, especially if it is an older manufactured (mobile) home. Anything built before 1976 is essentially considered a "mobile home", and you would be very hard pressed to find any lender willing to offer a loan on an old mobile home. I recently did an inspection on what the listing realtor called a 1970 constructed "modular home", built over a permanent finished walk-out basement. A fair amount of remodeling had been done over the years including the exterior siding, but there were a few tell-tale signs. Finally in the basement I found a couple of closet areas that had not been finished off, and found the metal framing charastic of manufactured homes. The vents on the roof, the roof style, the heating system, and the electrical panel were other clues that had made me suspicious early on. Though the home was probably a large top-of-the line model when it was built, with extras, and was in VERY good condition for its age with a lot of interior remodeling, it was still essentially a mobile home (notice, being pre-1976, I am calling it a mobile home, not a manufactured home), on a very desirable lot. Of course the listing realtor blew her lid when I told the buyers. Because she knew that if disclosed, NO buyer could get a loan (especially any FHA or HUD-backed loan program), and the sellers were essentilly stuck with a home they could not sell except on a cash basis. So, besides terminology, it can make a BIG difference. Even if the manufactured home is newer, banks have become more critical these days (especially after the recent real estate disaster). Most banks now require closer idenficiation, wanting to have the Serial number verified, and most now also want to make sure that foundation ("permanent" or piers which is acceptable) has been certified (tie-downs, etc).

The plumbing is what I call a real mish-mash of materials. I see lots of indications of prior leaks on the plastic moisture barrier, but from what I see most of that appears to be from supply lines (some sloppy joining of CPVC and galvanized supply lines). Living in a rural area like this, I tend to not jump up and down on every little thing that doesn't technically meet code, especially on older stuff. And its not like they used it for water supply lines. I will note that it is technically incorrect (to cover my tail so when the client sells it in 3-5 years), and defer to a plumber that he needs to call out for a different reason anyway. If anyone has a different opinion, please yell.

I 'know' it's wrong, but can't find an obvious answer why not. 1983 house with mixture of ABS and white PVC, and quite a bit of gray schedule 40 PVC electrical condiut for waste line plumbing. Stamp on the gray PVC says [1-1/2" CARLON PVC CONDUIT, "PV DUIT 40 PLUS", NEMA TC2]. This is obviously electrical PVC conduit. Since there is no ASTM stamping, it is obviously not intended for plumbing. My stupid question of the day is why is this Schedule 40 PVC not suitable for waste line plumbing? Is there some sort of chemical reaction? Is it because the solvents for white plumbing PVC don't bond with electrical PVC?

Inspected a 1999 house, 1-story over a finished walk-out basement (on a moderate slope), no significant elevation behind the house. Found three PVC pipes sticking up out of the ground at an angle, all close together on the downhill side of the house. These would appear to be pointing down below the basement slab; no ideal how deep they go. The soil in this area is generally stable. Radon is high in about 20% of the homes in the region, but this would obviously not be a standard radon mitigation method (and why 3 pipes?). Anyone want to venture a guess? Download Attachment: foundationvents.JPG 140.88 KB

Yes the article is somewhat disturbing in several respects. Despite reference to adhearence to ASHI standards, it still expects us to see through walls. Sorry, but I was born without superman x-ray vision. However, in defense of the homeowner's expectations, the inspector probably was not very thorough in his job. All he had to do was use a cheap electrical outlet tester on at least a few outlets in each room to know that at least portions of the the wiring was ungrounded. With at least some of the outlets showing ungrounded and the age of the home, he should have then suspected knob & tube wiring still existed behind the walls and looked a little harder - or at least reported the presence of some ungrounded wiring.