I’m going through IBC SECTION 10, Means of Egress
This is pretty typical wording:
“Although it served an occupant load listed as more than 49, an exit passageway that formed part of a means of egress in this building had a width measuring less than the minimum 44 inches (1118 mm) mandated by widely-accepted modern safety standards. Although this condition may have been acceptable at the time this building was originally constructed, and buildings are not required to be upgraded to comply with newly-enacted standards, this condition would not be allowed in new construction for safety reasons. The Inspector recommends that action be taken to correct this condition at any such exit passageways in a manner that complies with applicable safety standards.”
I’m guessing that a lot of non-compliant buildings will be older, and if they’re not, it’s faster to delete the next-to-last sentence than it is to write it or copy and paste it.
I went back and forth about using only “applicable” modern safety standards, but if a property is not required to be upgraded to meet current code, then it could be argued that the code wasn’t applicable, so I wound up using both that and “widely-accepted modern safety standards”.
Also, unlike the residential narratives, I’m not making recommendations for who should make corrections like “qualified contractor”. I think at this level clients will be sophisticated enough to understand that corrections, repairs, further evaluations, etc. need to be performed by competent people, and some of those may be in-house, like maintenance staff. If an inspector wants to make a specific recommendation, they can add that themselves.