Proposal To Ban EIFS By Oregon State Senators Moves Forward
In a unanimous vote of 26-0, Oregon State Senators, led by Senator Jackie Winters (R-Salem), voted to ban the use of synthetic stucco on Oregon homes. This decision came after Senator Winters told the story of an 11-year old Salem resident, Whitney McClain, who is currently being treated for multiple brain tumors after a mold outbreak in her home. The girl is Senator Winters’ granddaughter, and just one of many sufferers of several diseases (including brain tumors, pneumonia and bronchitis) caused by mold infestations in their homes.
After the unanimous vote by the Senate, the bill was sent to the House of Representatives. Representative Paul Holvey (D-Eugene), led an initiative to deny the bill, until it also includes banning stucco on commercial buildings. While this would increase the safety for the residents of Oregon, many feel the ban on commercial properties is not necessary. A conference committee was assigned to reconcile House and Senate approaches in HB 2112-B.
This is a follow up to an earlier post. As you may recall the ban is focused upon the product, as opposed to the improper installation of EIFS on residential construction projects. As this proposal has moved forward, more information has come to light.
Specifically, the ban is proposed to be extended to commercial construction as well, in order to pass. The other important piece of information comes to us via the Oregon Staff Measure Summary which clarifies that this ban only applies to barrier-type systems, not the preferred drainage-type systems. (Barrier-type EIFS does not incorporate a drainage mechanism or a specific weather-resistive membrane in the design, whereas drainage-type EIFS does - thus the name.) These two points are very important.
In regards to extending the ban to commercial construction, the industry representatives are clearly preparing for battle. Phillip Loscoe, Jr., a spokesman for Dryvit, a leading manufacturer of EIF systems, stated “that’s a concern to us and we would probably go to litigation phase.” Barrier-type EIFS is used in commercial construction over concrete shells and solid sheathing in a fashion similar to the product’s original application in Europe - as an exterior insulating finish system. Furthermore, the ICC has required the use of drainage-type systems over open framing (typical of residential construction) for some time now. But, according to Oregon Representative Mike Schaufler, “I think there is a direct correlation between this product and the mold problem,” a statement not supported by scientific evidence. This is what is known to researchers as a logical fallacy.
Is barrier-type EIFS as a product inherently bad? There is no correct answer to that question because the answer depends upon too many variables. Is barrier-type EIFS appropriate over open-framed residential housing without the addition of a weather-resistive membrane? Not according to the building code. Nor is acceptable to EIFS manufacturers that explicitly call for a drainage-type system for such an application. Is a barrier EIFS product safe to use on commercial construction? It is if the building is one of the approved substrates that are clearly listed in both ICC Evaluation Reports and manufacturer recommendations. Does EIFS cause mold? Only if it is installed incorrectly, or if the wrong product is used for the wrong application. But then any building product that creates an environment conducive to mold growth will cause mold. Should Oregon ban all building products, just to be on the safe side?
Link to Article, Link to Another Article, Link to HB 2112-B Summary
12 July 2007 | Construction, Construction Defect, Construction and Law, Litigation | Comments
Leave a Reply