My Address To The WETT Board And The WETT Education Committee Regarding The Need To Train Inspectors More Effectively How To Inspect Chimneys In Attic Areas, Including My Draft SOP Proposal

In This Case The Hazard Of Insulation Touching The Chimney Could Be Viewed From The Attic Hatch

My Letter sent March 14th, 2026

Dear Members of the Board of Directors and Education Committee,

I am writing to respectfully introduce a concept for consideration regarding the continued development of WETT inspection methodology. Over time, and through field experience, training engagement, and reflection on our collective practices, I have come to believe there is an important opportunity for WETT to strengthen consistency and clarity in one particular area of inspection: the evaluation of chimney systems within attic spaces.

My intent in raising this is constructive. I believe WETT has built an important and credible framework for solid-fuel inspection in Canada; however, as our profession evolves, there remain areas where methodology could be better defined in practical, teachable, and measurable ways.

In practice, WETT inspections are frequently required to support insurance underwriting decisions and consumer due diligence. Given this reliance, there is increasing value in ensuring our methodology reflects clear minimum expectations that are teachable, repeatable in the field, and defensible to external stakeholders.

Through my experience, I have observed that some aspects of our methodology are still interpreted inconsistently across practitioners. In particular, references to “levels” or types of inspection may imply methodological consistency that is not always reflected in field execution; guidance on when to escalate or refer for more advanced inspection is not always clearly defined in a practical sense; and some inspection zones that carry known risk — particularly attic spaces — are not addressed consistently despite being accessible under reasonable conditions.

From a technical standpoint, attic spaces are one of the most critical areas for evaluating chimney system safety. In my experience — and supported by field findings generally — the attic is where many of the most serious installation deficiencies occur, including missing manufacturer components such as attic insulation shields, clearance failures, and insulation or combustible contact with chimney systems.

Despite this, attic evaluation is not consistently treated as a baseline component of WETT inspections, even where reasonable access exists. At the same time, related codes and standards frameworks generally recognize attics as accessible spaces where conditions permit, using reasonable-access definitions that are measurable and widely understood. Aligning WETT methodology with these established concepts could improve clarity and defensibility while remaining practical for inspectors.

I respectfully suggest that WETT consider adopting a more defined baseline methodology for attic evaluation within solid-fuel inspections based on the following principles:

• Attic evaluation should be standard practice where reasonably accessible.

• Clear and reasonable limits should be defined.

• A risk-based safety model should guide entry decisions.

• Reporting should address both observed and unobserved conditions.

To help illustrate how this approach could function in practice, I have developed a draft methodology outlining reasonable access parameters, safety considerations, inspection objectives, and balanced reporting language. My intention is not to suggest this as a finished solution, but rather as a starting point for discussion around strengthening consistency in this area of practice.

I believe adopting a clearer and more consistent approach to attic evaluation would improve consumer protection, strengthen the credibility of WETT inspections, support consistent training outcomes, and better align our methodology with related standards frameworks. 

I would welcome the opportunity to discuss the attached 'sample draft' of how this could function as an addition to the WETT SOP with the Board, future Education Coordinator and Education Committee for consideration, development and implementation.

Thank you for your time and for your continued work in advancing WETT education and professional standards.

Respectfully submitted,

Ian Myers

My submitted WETT Standard Of Practice Proposal:

WETT_Inspection_SOP attic access sample section .pdf

Download PDF • 8KB