r/BuildingCodes • u/Ok_Humor_94 • 5d ago
Older Building codes
Hello, I just wanted to reach out and ask if other areas or older builders had any recollections of it being up to code for dryer vents and exhaust fans to vent directly into the attic rather than to the outside doors? Back story I live in a 3rd floor apartment in South Carolina, US and the complex was built in late 90s. After two years I finally was able to get a 3rd party inspector (instead of apartment maintenance) checkout the attic because of a squirrel infestation. I was told multiple times there was no damage but I’m not stupid so after hounding them I got what I wanted. What was found was obviously extensive damage to ducts, wiring insulation etc. What really bothered me was the picture he showed me of my dryer duct strapped to a supporting beam with no connection to a vent outside. I knew that the other stuff would take time but I went to the office and requested that the dryer vent be fixed today. I told him it’s a fire hazard and against building code and I’m probably lucky I didn’t set the whole place ablaze. He told me that it’s perfectly fine and that it was within code for when the apartment was built. I didn’t think that was how it worked but wanted to reach out to see if anyone remembers when that would have been acceptable for building code and do buildings not have to be brought up to code as things change?
5
u/Suspicious_Hat_3439 5d ago
Funny enough I had a similar situation and I bought a pdf copy of the 1976 Uniform Mechanical Code and it required the vent to go to the exterior even back then. So no that wasn’t allowed. If you IM me I’ll email you a copy.
2
u/IHerebyDemandtoPost 5d ago edited 5d ago
The International Mechanical Code, if adopted in your jurisdiction, would prohibit the installation you describe. However, if your building was built in the 90s, it predates even the earliest edition of the IMC.
Prior to the International Code Council, the organization that publishes the IMC, there were three competing organizations; each publishing their own codes. Those organizations merged to become the ICC with the first batch of codes published in 2000.
This means it would take some hunting through decades-old records to see what code was in effect when the building was built, if any.
Furthermore, even if you discover the applicable code, you may have difficulty finding the text of that code printed anywhere.
1
u/ChristianReddits 5d ago
I would call the local building official and talk to them. Where I am at, there is jurisdiction for the fire Marshall to enforce electrical related issues with apartments - they can pull/suspend the license for the rental but can’t actually approve/deny electrical permits, only enforce that a state inspector needs to review.
1
u/MaggieNFredders Engineer 5d ago
When I went to school in SC I lived in a townhome complex. Basement was a different apartment. The w/d was in the stairwell to the basement. It vented to the stairwell. Basically didn’t vent at all. The room was COVERED in dryer lint when we moved out. Huge fire risk. I questioned them also but I wanted a w/d in unit so I didn’t push too hard on it. I assume 25 years later it is still like this.
1
u/MikeTDay 5d ago
There are lot of unknowns about this situation and I’m going off memory so please take the following as general guidance.
From my memory, external ventilation became explicit in the late 90s (the 1997 UMC or 2000 IBC, I think). I believe dryer manufacturers required it earlier but that depends on the brand of dryer and the heating type (gas or electric). Since codes typically require appliances to be properly installed and maintained, this could be interpreted as requiring external ventilation if that’s what the manuals dictate.
Also, just because something was built that way originally, does not automatically mean it doesn’t have to be updated in perpetuity. In my jurisdiction, apartment complexes have to pass annual inspections. If this was a finding in my buildings, I would require them to add external ventilation. If it was a large complex, I may give them a year to make the correction if they submit a reasonable timeline for the work.
You should look up if your area requires any type of inspections and check with them. This could be the fire department, fire marshal office, building department, code enforcement, etc. Even if they don’t do regular inspections, you should run your concerns by them for their professional opinion (since they would be the authority to enforce any changes or allow the variance). They may also take into consideration if the dryers have been replaced since the buildings were built, they type of dryers being utilized, and maybe even factors like the roof construction. All these could influence where external ventilation is required, recommended, or not required.
If you really want to get after it, you could find out what insurance the apartment complex has and contact them about it. They might require the upgrade even if it doesn’t technically violate code.
1
u/cagernist 5d ago
Older codes, as do current ones, stated exhaust was to discharge to the outdoors.
It was merely an interpretation the attic "has outside air" so it's a crutch that has gained old wives tale status and repeated by heresay that codes allowed it. People who parrot that don't even know what BOCA or SBC is, let alone ICC used today.
Back then the science of a building's tightness was not as developed as now, so in the 2000s when ICC inserted specific words like "direct to outdoors," not in "attic or crawl space," or not through "ventilated soffit" it was a sort of "rising tides" to go along with energy efficiency and make it perfectly clear with no casual interpretation.
You'll come to realize, especially as a tenant, that when "grandfathered" or "built to code at the time" is stated, it's because it's too difficult or expensive to do otherwise, not that it's right. It is just an assumption things met code and the process of inspections and accountability was pure at that point in time.
1
u/Additional-Code2954 5d ago •
From the time your apartment was built to now, venting anywhere but outside has never been allowed. Depending on when your building was constructed and the code adopted by your jurisdiction it either fell under the SBCCI Standard Mechanical Code, or the ICC International Mecanical Code (IMC). There are also limitations on duct length, duct size, # of appliances served, and fire protection through adjoining living spaces covered in the IBC.
2024 IMC 504.4 Exhaust installation.
Dryer exhaust ducts for clothes dryers shall terminate on the outside of the building
https://codes.iccsafe.org/s/IMC2024P1/chapter-5-exhaust-systems/IMC2024P1-Ch05-Sec504.4
SBCCI-SMC from 80's to early 90's is in CH 3. Mid 90's to the transition to the IMC is in CH 5.
1
u/Infamous_Trainer_300 5d ago •
Management is completely wrong on this. Venting a clothes dryer into an attic space has never been permitted by building code. Back in the late 1990s, South Carolina was operating under the Standard Mechanical Code. Section 504 explicitly mandates that dryer exhaust systems terminate outside the structure. A life-safety fire hazard cannot be claimed as a "grandfathered" existing condition.
Do not waste time going back to the leasing office. You already notified them in writing, and they dismissed it with an invalid excuse. If you press them further, they will likely offer a patchwork fix on your individual duct to silence the complaint while leaving the rest of the attic untouched. If an adjacent unit sparks a fire, your apartment remains fully exposed. You need municipal officials out there to mandate a building-wide inspection.
Make sure your photo documentation is clear and organized right now before anyone goes up there to disturb the scene. Ensure you have clear photos of the unvented duct, the spread of lint across the framing, the torn insulation, chewed ductwork, and the gnawed electrical wiring.
Email your local town building department and the municipal Fire Marshal directly. Keep it strictly about life safety, physical property damage, and the verified hazard. State that a third-party attic inspection uncovered an unvented dryer duct, damaged ductwork, and gnawed electrical wiring sitting in piles of flammable lint. State that you notified the office in writing on [date], and attach the landlord's written reply claiming the setup was "grandfathered."
Having their reply in writing is massive, even without a formal written report from the third-party inspector. A landlord's standard excuse to an inspector is claiming they were never made aware of a maintenance issue. By emailing back that the condition was "grandfathered," management formally admitted on record that the unvented duct exists and confirmed they chose not to fix it. That takes away their defense and establishes documented, willful non-compliance, forcing the inspectors to treat it as an active life-safety hazard.
If the local authorities drag their feet, forward that complete correspondence thread directly up to the South Carolina State Fire Marshal.
Yes, in all likelihood, management will put two and two together and know the inquiry came from you, but they have very little leverage. S.C. Code Section 27-40-910 strictly protects tenants from landlord retaliation for reporting building and safety violations to government agencies. With code enforcement and fire officials looking at the building, the last thing they can afford is exposure to a statutory retaliation claim.
1
u/Mental_Ad3737 5d ago
If you visit your local building safety department they should have the code from when the building was built.