Quick help appreciated.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Hi guys,

I'm in a situation where I need to back up my findings as soon as possible. I'll be spending the rest of the afternoon researching, but figure some of you may know code references off the top of your head.

The home was built in 2004:

1)Composition shingles for the roof were stapled instead of nailed. Anyone have a code reference from that far back in regards to staples not being allowed? (IRC/ORSC)

2)Someone ran NM-B cable through a foundation vent and up to a switch disco for an AC unit. The NM-B is one concern, while they used FMC for protection. I believe both of these are issues, but need a code reference. Ideally from back then.

3)I wrote up the lack of any water heater vent connector rise before it turned diagonally atop the water heater. I don't often write this up, but didn't like the look of the set up.

I greatly appreciate any help................. I need to start archiving code books.

[Bill Kibbel]

1) I'm assuming asphalt shingles.

From 2000 IRC:

R905.2.5 Fasteners

Fasteners for asphalt shingles shall be galvanized steel, stainless steel, aluminum or copper roofing nails, minimum 12 gauge shank with a minimum 3/8-inch diameter head, ASTM F 1667, of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of �-inch into the roof sheathing.

2) Wait for Jim K.

3) I'm assuming you mean a vent connector or a chimney connector.

There is no code requirement, that I know of, for any rise before the first elbow. There are some manufacturers' instructions that recommend a 6" minimum rise, where possible. 90-95% of all vent connectors I see have an elbow attached to the hood. I only identify it as a problem if it is causing or contributing to improper venting.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Hi Bill,

I'm doing damage control right now-- hence the rush.

I have an agent that sent a scathing e- mail basically stating that if I mention that things do not appear to comply with codes/ standards, I dang well had better cite the exact code, etc.

I wrote her back and basically said that if someone were willing to pay me for the extra research time, I'd love to do so. I told her that all decent inspectors use the code for the basis of their inspections and reports. I told her that I'm unaware of any inspector who cites the reason for each and every write up in their reports (code, industry standard, manufacturers installation instruction, etc.).

Here is part of my reply I just sent out:

R905.2.5 Fasteners.

Fasteners for asphalt shingles shall be galvanized steel, stainless steel, aluminum or copper roofing nails, minimum 12 gage [0.105 inch (3mm)] shank with a minimum 3/8-inch (10 mm) diameter head, ASTM F 1667, of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing. Where the roof sheathing is less than 3/4 inch (19 mm) thick, the fasteners shall penetrate through the sheathing. Fasteners shall comply with ASTM F 1667.

Roofing staples on asphalt shingles have been prohibited in Oregon since April 1, 2003. (Thanks Jim K.)

Your roofer you have go out there very well may say that everything is fine. It depends on how knowledgeable he is, etc. All a roofer has to do is get a contractors license, and required insurance/bond. No technical training is required to become a roofer, or other form of contractor for that matter (exceptions are plumbers and electricians). I still see staples used on new construction, and flag the installations accordingly.

ELECTRICAL:

1) Conductors in wet locations must be rated for exposure to water. This means THWN conductors or XHHW conductors, or other water rated conductors. This rule applies even if the conductors are in cable or in a conduit. They must be water rated.

If you are interested, here is one forum where someone asks a question about running wiring, similar to what I have written up. This question was asked back in 2004, the same year this house was built. If you read the answers, you will see how difficult it can be to understand and apply the building code:

http://forum.doityourself.com/electrica ... nduit.html

Here is a code cite for you--see bold:

348.12 Uses Not Permitted.

FMC shall not be used in the following:

(1) In wet locations unless the conductors are approved for the specific conditions and the installation is such that liquid is not likely to enter raceways or enclosures to which the conduit is connected

(2) In hoistways, other than as permitted in 620.21(A)(1)

(3) In storage battery rooms

(4) In any hazardous (classified) location other than as permitted in 501.10(B) and 504.20

(5) Where exposed to materials having a deteriorating effect on the installed conductors, such as oil or gasoline

(6) Underground or embedded in poured concrete or aggregate

(7) Where subject to physical damage

NM-B cable is not permitted for wet locations.

I recommend that you guys do a permit history search--I willing to bet that you will find that electrical work has been done without a permit on this house.

In regards to the water heater vent installation:

The below text is straight from the Simpson Dura- Vent B vent installation manual:

http://www.duravent.com/docs/instruct/L204A_July09.pdf

6. Slope. If the venting system contains

lateral (horizontal) components, they shall be

positioned so they have an upwards slope

away from the appliance of not less than

1/4-inch rise per foot of run. (Horizontal

vent installed in attics, unconditioned area (garage-- my note), or

between floors have further restrictions, please

consult your local building codes for specific

limitations.)

8. Connector Rise. Plan a minimum of one

foot vertical connector rise coming out of each

appliance.

Here is a post I copied from Bob Harper, an expert in this field:

Minimum slope per foot for horizontal offsets.

From manufacturer’s installation instructions

1/4" per ft. sloping up towards the breeching.

Minimum 1 foot rise before first elbow turning horizontally.

From the codes (residential and fuel gas)

As for the 1 ft rise, it is not a clear code requirement per se. Here's how you arrive at it:

First of all, the sizing charts in the International Fuel Gas Code begin with a 1 foot rise for vent diameters up

to 12 inches. At 12 inches diameter the vent rise starts at 2 feet.

You must look up your minimum vent height for a given setup. For instance, a 100,000

BTU/hr natural vented appliance with a 5 inch draft hood would need a 50 foot vent

height if there is only a 1 foot vent connector rise. However, if you provide a 2 foot

vent connector rise, you only need a 20 foot vent height, and if you provide a 3 foot

vent connector rise, you would need an 8 foot vent height.

See the effect of vent connector rise? It is a practical matter. Putting an elbow directly

on a draft hood is just begging for it to spill fumes into the building, and for 125 foot

vent height (based on the other listings which show a factor difference of 2.5 increase

in vent height per 1 foot reduction in vent connector rise, which works for using this as

an example of what ‘could be’).

Information explanation by Bob Harper.

If someone were willing to pay me an hourly rate, I'd be happy to cite each and every building code, industry standard, and manufacturers installation instruction violation in my reports. The above reply to your question has taken me about an hour to write up. This was just to research 3 items written in the report. It would take days to cite each and every item properly.

I hope all of the above information helps.

Have a good weekend.

[Brandon Whitmore]

1) I'm assuming asphalt shingles.

From 2000 IRC:

R905.2.5 Fasteners

Fasteners for asphalt shingles shall be galvanized steel, stainless steel, aluminum or copper roofing nails, minimum 12 gauge shank with a minimum 3/8-inch diameter head, ASTM F 1667, of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of �-inch into the roof sheathing.

Yes, asphalt shingles. My bad, I need to slooowwww down.

2) Wait for Jim K.

Unfortunately, Jim K. saves the day way too often. I need to start archiving building codes.

I'd be willing to pay for a subscription to a site that provided archived building codes

3) I'm assuming you mean a vent connector or a chimney connector.There is no code requirement, that I know of, for any rise before the first elbow. There are some manufacturers' instructions that recommend a 6" minimum rise, where possible. 90-95% of all vent connectors I see have an elbow attached to the hood. I only identify it as a problem if it is causing or contributing to improper venting.

My bad again. Yes, vent connector rise.

If you read my previous post, you may see that it's possible to arrive at the conclusion that it is required. The info. I pulled about the vent connector rise was taken from JP and Bob Harper over at IN.

In my report, I wrote that the lack of a vent connector rise was questionable, and that they should discuss this concern with a competent HVAC professional. I didn't like the long horizontal run directly off of the water heater on this one, so I mentioned the concern.

The reason I wrote up the staples is that many of them were diagonally and vertically positioned, rather than horizontal-- the reason they quite allowing staples to begin with from what I am told. If everything else about the installation was fine, I probably wouldn't have mentioned it.

In regards to the electrical: They ran NM-B from the garage panel in a sleeve of FMC down into the crawlspace. Then, they discontinued the sleeve until the NM-B exited the crawlspace vent, where the NM-B was re- sleeved to where it attached to the AC disconnect. The other issue was the use of single wire (THHN/THWN-- non cable stuff). Some of the single wire stuff was run exposed in the crawlspace where it was improperly tied into a disconnect box for a water feature. The agent is mad because I didn't provide a code cite, said the installations most likely violated several electrical codes, and that permits were most likely not pulled for the electrical work in these areas.

Bill,

Thanks for the IRC code cite for the use of staples-- greatly appreciated.

[randynavarro]

These little exercises certainly help us become better inspectors.

Whatever we write, we'd better be able to back it up with something credible. . .

It appears you done well, Brandon.

[Brandon Whitmore]

Thanks Randy.

[Richard Moore]

Brandon, now send the agent a "scathing" bill for the time you spent on this! It was a beautiful day here in the NW. I hope you got to enjoy at least some of it.

[kurt]

I think that if one says that there's a violation of the code, then one has to be able to pull up the appropriate code reference, and put it in wiring.

Then, one gets to stuff it up the fundamental orifice of obnoxious real estate ladies.

Good job.

[Brandon Whitmore]

It was a beautiful day here in the NW. I hope you got to enjoy at least some of it.

Heck yeah. I went riding up at my favorite spot in the woods with some buds (friends-- not the beer). Had an uhhh, eventful day out there, but had a blast. I completely snapped off my rear fender and cracked a side panel. To end the day, I got a flat in the front tube and bent the rim. I've learned that it's better to sacrifice the bike in order to save my body; the bike takes more of a beating now, but I don't have so much as a bruise[:-thumbu].

The only bummer is that I showed up at home, washed my bike, and decided to check my e- mails.......

[Jim Katen]

Hi guys,

I'm in a situation where I need to back up my findings as soon as possible. I'll be spending the rest of the afternoon researching, but figure some of you may know code references off the top of your head.

The home was built in 2004:

1)Composition shingles for the roof were stapled instead of nailed. Anyone have a code reference from that far back in regards to staples not being allowed? (IRC/ORSC)

2)Someone ran NM-B cable through a foundation vent and up to a switch disco for an AC unit. The NM-B is one concern, while they used FMC for protection. I believe both of these are issues, but need a code reference. Ideally from back then.

3)I wrote up the lack of any water heater vent connector rise before it turned diagonally atop the water heater. I don't often write this up, but didn't like the look of the set up.

I greatly appreciate any help................. I need to start archiving code books.

Hi Brandon,

Sorry to chime in so late, but I'm in Eugene this weekend and didn't check in till this evening.

It sounds like you found pretty much everything you need. The only thing I'd have thrown in is 300.9, which talks about how the interior of a couduit is considered a wet location if the conduit itself is located in a wet location.

As for the issue in general, don't be surprised to find that the troublesome agent is being prodded by another home inspector.

For some time now, I've been adding code references to my reports in footnote form. I don't like to clutter the report with actual code quotations, but by inserting the appropriate cite, anyone can look it up and verify it. I've found that both customers and agents really like the code cites because they make the issue a lot more clear cut and black & white. The cites eliminate the wishy-washy stance that most HI reports seem to take.

The people who really don't like the code cites are other home inspectors. I'm amazed at some of the really nasty feedback that I've gotten from other inspectors. This is a discussion for another thread, but I wanted to point out that, if an agent seems to be upset about code citations, I'll bet that a home inspector is really the driving force behind it.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Brandon Whitmore]

Sorry to chime in so late, but I'm in Eugene this weekend and didn't check in till this evening.

No worries. You may just be the only inspector in OR that hangs out on here who has access to building codes from a ways back. I'm going to start locating out of date copies on E-bay, etc. That is, if I continue in this line of work.

For some time now, I've been adding code references to my reports in footnote form. I don't like to clutter the report with actual code quotations, but by inserting the appropriate cite, anyone can look it up and verify it.

I add code cites for new construction inspections, and newer houses where codes are available. Do you add code cites for older houses, or just newer ones? If you add cites to older homes, how can you figure out when construction permits were pulled? Also, if you are adding code cites for older houses, how much time are you spending on your reports?

Thanks Sir Katen.

[Jim Katen]

. . . I add code cites for new construction inspections, and newer houses where codes are available. Do you add code cites for older houses, or just newer ones? If you add cites to older homes, how can you figure out when construction permits were pulled? Also, if you are adding code cites for older houses, how much time are you spending on your reports?

I include the cites in newer houses -- 20-30 years old -- where I'm fairly certain that I can produce an accurate cite from the time the item was installed. It's easier for us in Oregon to do this than it is for people in other states because we have a long history of state-wide building codes.

Even in older houses, I include some cites for items that I know were added recently. For instance, I'd include cites regarding a 2004 air conditioner that's installed in a 100-year old house.

In general, I always include the most modern code reference. From there, it's easy to backtrack to the appropriate historical reference if I need to. But it usually isn't necessary because I never say, "This thing is wrong because it's 'against code'." I say, "This thing is wrong because it can blow up, heat up, cause someone to trip, come apart during an earthquake, leak, or whatever." This is followed by a footnote that says, "The source of my opinion is the National Electrical Code, Article, XXX.X(X)."

In this way, I'm just saying that my opinion has a source. I didn't just make it up. The date of the code doesn't really matter because I'm not enforcing the code. I'm merely using it to inform my opinion. I think that NM cable shouldn't be used in wet locations. I include the most recent code citation to that effect as the source of my opinion. The age of the citation doesn't matter because my opinion doesn't change with the age of the installation. If someone wants to challenge that opinion (almost never happens), then I can pull out the books and nail the coffin shut.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Terence McCann]

Brandon stated: Unfortunately, Jim K. saves the day way too often. I need to start archiving building codes.

I'd be willing to pay for a subscription to a site that provided archived building codes.

Are there web sites out there that provide a searchable database for this type of thing? Do you use any Jim?

[Jim Katen]

Brandon stated: Unfortunately, Jim K. saves the day way too often. I need to start archiving building codes.

I'd be willing to pay for a subscription to a site that provided archived building codes.

Are there web sites out there that provide a searchable database for this type of thing? Do you use any Jim?

Never seen or heard of such a thing.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Terence McCann]

Brandon stated: Unfortunately, Jim K. saves the day way too often. I need to start archiving building codes.

I'd be willing to pay for a subscription to a site that provided archived building codes.

Are there web sites out there that provide a searchable database for this type of thing? Do you use any Jim?

Never seen or heard of such a thing.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

Another opportunity...

[Bain]

In the great state of Kentucky, we are forbidden by state law to put the word "code" in a report, or to even utter it to our clients.

I could probably attack the state law claiming it violates the first amendment, but I really don't have the time . . .

It is a bitch, though, when I find myself in a situation similar to Brandon's.

[Brandon Whitmore]

I've called AHJ's to get their interpretation in regards to some code cites. Half of them are receptive, but some sound ticked off that I use the code at all since I am not "code certified".

I just inspected a house for a Gresham building inspector. The inspection was last week in Gresham, and my client showed up with his boss to watch me work. They were both cordial, and didn't seem to have any problems with me.

After the walk through, and after the boss had left, my client laughed and let me know that the boss was the original building inspector. There were plenty of code violations that we discussed, and my client said he'd give him a hard time at work.

[Terence McCann]

In the great state of Kentucky, we are forbidden by state law to put the word "code" in a report, or to even utter it to our clients.

Why???

Sounds like the tail is wagging the dog John.

[Bain]

In the great state of Kentucky, we are forbidden by state law to put the word "code" in a report, or to even utter it to our clients.

Why???

Sounds like the tail is wagging the dog John.

I think the rationale was to protect us and firmly establish that Kentucky HIs aren't "code inspectors," and therefore can't be held liable if we neglect to mention a violation.

The predecessor to this new law was that we couldn't mention "code" in a report, but could do so orally in follow-up conversations.

I don't want to say too much on a public forum, but I think the five board members--there are currently five vacancies--are well-intended, but they're pretty much learning the ropes as various issues arise. Remember the flare-up over the Fed-Pac advisory bulletin? The board tried to sanction someone for saying a Stab-Lok should be replaced, but when there was pushback, they were forced to admit that they couldn't legally issue sanctions and didn't have the legal authority to enforce the laws of other boards--in that instance the electrical board. The Fed-Pac advisory bulletin--which was also deemed illegal--has since been rescinded.

Again, I think the board means well, but it's all a little confusing for a schmuck like me.

[Jim Katen]

I think the rationale was to protect us and firmly establish that Kentucky HIs aren't "code inspectors," and therefore can't be held liable if we neglect to mention a violation.

The predecessor to this new law was that we couldn't mention "code" in a report, but could do so orally in follow-up conversations.

I don't want to say too much on a public forum, but I think the five board members--there are currently five vacancies--are well-intended, but they're pretty much learning the ropes as various issues arise. Remember the flare-up over the Fed-Pac advisory bulletin? The board tried to sanction someone for saying a Stab-Lok should be replaced, but when there was pushback, they were forced to admit that they couldn't legally issue sanctions and didn't have the legal authority to enforce the laws of other boards--in that instance the electrical board. The Fed-Pac advisory bulletin--which was also deemed illegal--has since been rescinded.

Again, I think the board means well, but it's all a little confusing for a schmuck like me.

Now, that's just the sort of thing where I'd want to read the language very carefully so that I could flaunt it with impunity.

Could you post a link to the actual wording of the law?

Here in Oregon, our governing board recently passed a rule that's similar, in that they intend for it to cover our backsides, but it's just silly. All home inspectors in the state are required to include the following paragaph on the front page of their reports, printed in bold, 12-point type, in all caps:

THIS REPORT IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE PERSON PURCHASING THE HOME INSPECTION SERVICES. NO OTHER PERSON, INCLUDING A PURCHASER OF THE INSPECTED PROPERTY WHO DID NOT PURCHASE THE HOME INSPECTION SERVICES, MAY RELY UPON ANY REPRESENTATION IN THE REPORT.

It's silly because, while they can require us to print the words on our reports, they have absolutely no authority to actually enforce the meaning of the words. There's no rule that says who can & can't rely on a report. That's way, way outside their jurisdiction.

Besides, if I were a seller, that paragraph would be my out in terms of agreeing to make any repairs or concessions. I'd just say that the buyers have no basis for their request for concessions. If they try to use the HI report, I just point to that paragraph and say, "That's all well & dandy, but *I* can't rely on the information in that report. Says so right here, Sorry."

Since I'm a good law-abiding Oregonian, even though I object to this paragraph, I've included it on the first page of my reports. But I set the font color to white.

- Jim in Oregon

[Bain]

I think the rationale was to protect us and firmly establish that Kentucky HIs aren't "code inspectors," and therefore can't be held liable if we neglect to mention a violation.

The predecessor to this new law was that we couldn't mention "code" in a report, but could do so orally in follow-up conversations.

I don't want to say too much on a public forum, but I think the five board members--there are currently five vacancies--are well-intended, but they're pretty much learning the ropes as various issues arise. Remember the flare-up over the Fed-Pac advisory bulletin? The board tried to sanction someone for saying a Stab-Lok should be replaced, but when there was pushback, they were forced to admit that they couldn't legally issue sanctions and didn't have the legal authority to enforce the laws of other boards--in that instance the electrical board. The Fed-Pac advisory bulletin--which was also deemed illegal--has since been rescinded.

Again, I think the board means well, but it's all a little confusing for a schmuck like me.

Now, that's just the sort of thing where I'd want to read the language very carefully so that I could flaunt it with impunity.

Could you post a link to the actual wording of the law?

Here in Oregon, our governing board recently passed a rule that's similar, in that they intend for it to cover our backsides, but it's just silly. All home inspectors in the state are required to include the following paragaph on the front page of their reports, printed in bold, 12-point type, in all caps:

THIS REPORT IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE PERSON PURCHASING THE HOME INSPECTION SERVICES. NO OTHER PERSON, INCLUDING A PURCHASER OF THE INSPECTED PROPERTY WHO DID NOT PURCHASE THE HOME INSPECTION SERVICES, MAY RELY UPON ANY REPRESENTATION IN THE REPORT.

It's silly because, while they can require us to print the words on our reports, they have absolutely no authority to actually enforce the meaning of the words. There's no rule that says who can & can't rely on a report. That's way, way outside their jurisdiction.

Besides, if I were a seller, that paragraph would be my out in terms of agreeing to make any repairs or concessions. I'd just say that the buyers have no basis for their request for concessions. If they try to use the HI report, I just point to that paragraph and say, "That's all well & dandy, but *I* can't rely on the information in that report. Says so right here, Sorry."

Since I'm a good law-abiding Oregonian, even though I object to this paragraph, I've included it on the first page of my reports. But I set the font color to white.

- Jim in Oregon

The provision that prevents mentioning codes is on page 11 of the link, Jim. Since our forum is public, I don't want to say much more.

http://bhi.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/4F0D48EF ... ations.pdf

[Tom Raymond]

Since I'm a good law-abiding Oregonian, even though I object to this paragraph, I've included it on the first page of my reports. But I set the font color to white.

I almost spit my coffee all over my laptop when I read that! I think you've just redifined civil disobediance.

Tom

[Erby]

Read carefully, John,

KRS 198B.738 Home inspectors prohibited from indicating compliance or noncompliance with building code.

Home inspectors, when acting in that capacity, are prohibited from indicating orally or in writing that any condition is or is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.

First, it's the law as passed by the Legislature (KRS), not the administrative regulations developed by the board (KAR).

It doesn't say you can't use the word code, it just says you can't say or write that something does or does not comply with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B, i.e., the Kentucky building codes.

I have this in the general info section of my reports.

===================================================

The first thing to remember about building codes is that safety hazards DO NOT read the building code book. Safety hazards don't care about the building code book. Safety hazards just sit and wait to cause you and your family personal injury. Also remember that the building code is developed by nationwide experts in particular topic areas. It is then sent to the state where some home builders, a few experts, and politicians decide what is going to be enforced in the state. It is then sent to the local level where mostly home builders and politicians decide what's going to be enforced locally. It's then given to the code enforcement inspectors to interpret according to how they read the code. In addition, the local code often lags several years behind the national codes.

The building code is not a great and lofty standard. It is the bare minimum legal standard that a home builder, electrician, plumber, etc, must comply with. To do anything less would be illegal.

B4U Close Home Inspections services a large area of Kentucky with many different building code enforcement authorities, each with their own individual interpretations of the national and state building codes based on their local politics and beliefs. I cannot be completely conversant with each and every building code enforcement authority's interpretation of the national building codes; therefore B4U Close Home Inspections does not perform code compliance inspections nor guarantee that all items are in compliance with governing codes, regulations, ordinances, statutes, covenants and manufacturer specifications. My references and sources for calling out different items as a safety concern or defective or marginal or in need of repair may include the national building codes (International Residential Code / National Electric Code / Uniform Plumbing Code, etc), manufacturer's instructions, the building industry's standards, continuing education, and personal experience.

Note that the Kentucky Home Builders Association lobbyists managed to have the Kentucky State Legislature include the following in the Kentucky Home Inspector Licensing Law:

Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) Chapter 198B.738

"Home inspectors, when acting in that capacity, are prohibited from indicating orally or in writing that any condition is or is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B."

Therefore, if you think an issue might be a code violation, you need to consult your local building code enforcement department for a determination, as it is illegal for me to indicate "orally or in writing that any condition is or is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.".

Remember: Only YOU can choose what level of risk you want your family to live with.

If you have any questions, please call me.

===============================================

It also doesn't prohibit me from recommending that a client check with the local AHJ (or even the state building code office, and I provide that number for them) about whether or not a particular issue may or may not comply with the building code.

Semantics can be a bitch! [:-monkeyd[:-monkeyd[:-monkeyd

[Jim Katen]

From Kentucky Revised Statutes:

198B.738 Home inspectors prohibited from indicating compliance or noncompliance with building code.

Home inspectors, when acting in that capacity, are prohibited from indicating orally or in writing that any condition is or is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.

On the one hand, there's nothing here that prohibits you from mentioning the word, "code" in your reports. You can mention it all you want, and you can even quote from it. You just can't indicate compliance or non compliance.

On the other hand, this section -- whether the authors intended this or not -- prohibits you from mentioning any defect that happens to be covered by the codes. Is there a #14 wire being protected by a 50-amp breaker? If so, you can't say a word about it because that condition is covered by the electrical code. Is there a stairway with no handrail? Too bad. You can't mention that in your report; it's covered by the building code. Missing safety glass? Undersized rafters? Return air grille next to the furnace? Nope, nope, nope. Not allowed.

Perhaps Kentucky needs to get some legislators who are not morons.

- Jim Katen, Oregon

[Erby]

It's not the board, Jim. It's the legislature that passed the original law (in writing) before the board was even appointed. And then amended to include "orally" at the behest of certain lobbyists (professional and non-professional) some of whom are no longer in that position.

I don't mind. Semantics can be used a lot of different ways.

-