I have an inspection coming up Friday and the client is very concerned about past UFFI insulation that was in the house that the seller who has owned the home for over 50 years says they had removed back in the eighties when all the hype started about UFFI. I have explained to the client already about the findings that UFFI is not as major a problem as it was once believed and will provide some literature for her about it. My question is that the sellers say that the removal process was that the contractor opened the walls up removed the UFFI and also scubbed the cavities with brushes, they then insulated with fiberglass and closed up and repaired the walls. Does this sound like the right way to remove it? Its sounds OK to me , but I just would like to hear from someone with some more experience with UFFI. Thanks.
Yes!! Our small company did about 20 houses then.
In most cases in the 1980’s, this work was done under a partial grant process from the federal Dept of Consumer affairs…but no gov. records are available. Ask if any records / contractor invoices available from vendor?
After the walls were brushed, they were sprayed twice (and then allowed to dry) with a solution containing metabisulphite to neutralize UFFI chemicals that may be seeped into the wood.
The work in our area was always inspected by CMHC staff at various stages and sometimes with unannounced site visits!!
The sellers are an old couple in their 80’s moving to a retirement home, the buyer says that the sellers son says that he has copies of the contractors documents that did the removal. Thanks for the info Brian.
Question - why bother to remove the UFFI insulation? My understanding is that any potential problems from out-gassing happened a long time ago.
Answer: The “suits” got involved…mining for courtroom gold
For our American friends;
This is an article from our Gov. agency resposible for housing [CMHC] very interesting read.
Jerry,
Also, just for your info, sometimes it was more cost effective to remove the facade, whatever that was [brick, wood siding etc.], instead of the interior finishes. Furthermore, sometimes the UFFI was left in place and an HRV was installed and the house was sealed tight as a remedial measure. Very similar to an R-2000 home.
Thanks Mario, that is some of the literature that I am providing to the client tomorrow.
Not even close to an R2000 home!!!
No?
Is an R-2000 home not sealed tight?
Does an R-2000 home have an HRV?
Give it a rest BOY, you are way out in left field or on “Kool Aid”!:shock:
I wish I could give you red all day long!:roll:
Mario:
Our company was doing remedial work on UFFI homes from 1981-86 and did about 20+ homes…all but 2 were full exterior siding/sheathing removal. Only 2 were sealed with HRV’s…the first in 1981. The level of airsealing was not even close to an R2000 home since it did not entail any interior renovation but simply caulking/sealing at receptacles, switches, trim, etc. Air leakage at the partition/exterior walls and floors/exterior walls in 2 story houses was still untouched. The HRV was put in not because the house had become tight enough to need an HRV as in an R2000 house, but simply to provide lots of air exchange with heat recovery to remove any formaldehyde that may have entered the living space.
Another reason I can say that it was not even close to an R2000 home is that for 9-10 years until 1992, I was a site advisor/inspector, researcher, and the NB “troubleshooter” for the R2000 program…if there was a real or perceived problem with an R2000 home, I was called to go visit, inspect and recommend remediation. BTW, in 1989 and in 1993, 2 of my clients, whom I helped develop their energy efficient building skills, were named “Canada’s R2000 Builder of the Year”, not bad for a little place like Moncton (Pop 80,000)!! If you wish to confirm this, I can give you the names of the 2 builders and you can call them!!
Mario, I don’t think I’m “out in left field”, just try not to talk about things I don’t know much about!!
BTW…I don’t see you adding much technical content to these boards…A lot of “rah!! rah!! rah!!”, “attaboy”…etc. Maybe all your technical help is on the member boards that I don’t see…maybe I should join just to confirm!!!
Yes, Mario, you give me more reds than anyone else, big boy!!
Here we go with yet another book from MacNeish!!
The above “Dumb” statement is one of many from you!!
I give up with you.
Do you ever wonder why you get reds from me?
The first [of many] reason and the most important is that you published a private communication between yourself and me.
You can’t be trusted with private e-mail. The second reason, you are a pompus a$$hole, should I go on?
Mario:
You, I and this whole board knows that the mentioned email was changed/items deleted to remove any way of identifying it as yours!! I simply said it was from a Canadian INACHI member (about 540 Canuck members at that time) and his comment on joining INACHI. If you remember…YOU OUTTED YOURSELF…by owning the email.
I had no intention to say from whom I received it!! Calm down!!
Yes, I took ownership of the e-mail, I can’t have an a$$hole like you posting BS on this board as if you have something hanging over members heads.
You saved that e-mail for 6 [six] months, only to use it when YOU thought it would suit you best. I can’t trust someone like you.
I can’t figure you out, you bash NACHI every chance you get and yet you are on this MB at all hours of the day! Now that is wierd don’t you think?:shock:
For all NACHI members, don’t get fooled into exchanging private e-mails with this non-member. He will and has used them on this MB. He is a snake, you are all warned.