PARAMETERthe

CENTRAL VIRGINIA CHAPTER of the CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS INSTITUTEwww.csicentralva.com

234

7

11

November 2009Vol. 20, No 2

10

5

9

6

8

President’s Message

CalendarGreen Word

Member News

Guest Article

Leadership Roster

Membership Report

Curmudgeon’sCorner

MARC 09

Guest Article

Minutes

FoamNov. 17, 2009

5:30 - Social Hour | 6:30 - Dinner7:30 - Presentation

RSVP by Thursday, Nov. 12tinyurl.com/cvcsiRSVP or tskipper@pella386.com

$26 - member fee$36 - non-member fee$15 - program only fee

Membership not required!FREE Parking at the Omni!

Foam – What’s Hot and What’s NotFoam plays an important part in today’s construction projects. Hear how foam is made, what forms it comes in, and how Amvic, Superior Walls and Murus products benefit from the insulating properties of this versatile material. Also, foam will be looked at in terms of how it rates as a green building product on sustainability, indoor air quality and energy efficiency. Panel Discussion - Jim Avery with Superior Walls, , Deb Brown with Allied Concrete on ICFs, Chris Bloom with Murus Panels on SIPs, Chris Parmele with Dow Building Solutions

MAILING LIST CHANGESOn January 1, 2010 all newsletter subscriptions will be distributed electronically un-less a paper copy is specifically requested. By switching from a paper Parameter to an electronic Parameter, we are not only saving the chapter printing and mailing costs, but we are also helping to reduce our environmental im-pact. The Parameter is always linked with a photo of the front page... it is never attached to your e-mail. By linking rather than attaching, there is no risk of filling your inbox.

You may specifically request a paper copy of the Parameter continue to be mailed to your address via the link below, or by faxing your request and mailing address to 434-979-9126.

tinyurl.com/cvcsiPARAMETER

Omni Charlottesville Hotel

Guest Article

A Message From

Your PresidentWe are continuing to feature some of our board members bios this month...

Nida DeBusk, Intl. Assoc. AIA, CSI-I, CDT, LEED AP is a licensed Architect from Turkey with a masters degree in construction management. She gradu-ated from Istanbul Technical University, Turkey in 1997 with a B. Arch. and obtained her M.Sc. in Construction Management in 2000. She worked as a Project Architect for 7 years in Turkey before moving to the US. To accredit her degrees, Nida attended Central Texas College while doing free-lance work. Nida has been happily working for Martin Horn, Inc. since 2007 as an Assistant Proj-ect Manager. Nida obtained her CDT in 2007 and joined CSI as an intermediate member where she remains connected. She was elected to the CSI-CV board of directors in 2009. Nida is dedicated to in-tegrate architecture and construction disciplines through the use of BIM applications, and special-izes in integrated and sustainable design. Nida married to Mark DeBusk on June 06, 2009. Her husband owns a woodworking business called DeBusk Originals, LLC. Mark went to Virginia Tech, so Nida is a “Hokie by marriage”.

Adrienne Stronge, CSI-I, LEED AP graduated from UVA in 2006 with a BS in Architecture. She has been working with the architecture firm, The Gaines Group, PLC since graduation. She joined CSI in fall of 2006 and was elected to the board the next fiscal year. She currently serves as our awards chair, Parameter edi-

tor, and serves on various committees as the graphics chair. Her work on the Parameter and the product expo booklets has earned the chapter recognition at the regional level. Adrienne resides at Lake Monticello with her husband, Andrew, and their three dogs, Harley, Spudnik, & Daisy. Andrew’s company, Stronge Designs, often volunteers illustration, graphic, and web work for our local chapter.

Mark Wingerd CSI, CDT graduated from UVA in 1980 with a BS in Architecture. From 1980-1995 he worked in construction wearing many hats including residential designer, trim car-penter, project manager, office manager, and laborer. In 1996 he joined the exciting world of windows and has been a supplier of residen-tial and commercial windows and doors to the present. He joined CSI in 1997 and has served on the Board of Directors since 1998 including 2 year terms as both Vice President and Presi-dent, and is currently Chairman of the Finance Committee . Mark resides in Charlottesville in a house he designed and built in 1990, with his wife Mary and daughter Molly.

Meghan E. M. Johnston, CSI, CDT graduated from the University of Virginia in 2004 with a B.S. in Architecture and from the University of Richmond in 2008 with a Masters of Business Administration, where she also has worked as a Project Manager in the Architectural Services department since graduating from UVA. She

was a founding member and first President of the UVA CSI Student Affiliate Chapter in 2004 and joined the Central Virginia chapter after graduating. Meghan was elected to the Board of Directors of the Central Virginia Chapter in 2005 and has remained an active member since then. She also served as the CVCSI Web-master from 2006-2009. Meghan is originally from Westchester County, New York, but now calls Downtown Charlottesville home where she lives with her husband, Ben.

Patrick Wright, CSI, LEED AP. He currently works as a project manager for the Charles Luck Stone Center. Also, he is a current student at the BIS Program (Business Concentration) at UVA. Following a recommendation from past president, John Grubb, he joined CSI in spring of 2007. He currently serves on the board as a director and chair for the education commit-tee. Patrick resides in Northern Albemarle with his wife, Susan, and their dog and cat, Denver and Gabe. When he is not working or going to school, you can find him floating on the river or hiking in the woods. Patrick joined CSI to strengthen industry con-tacts and to further his knowledge around construction. In his role as a project manager, he is a vital link between the supplier, architect, installer, and end user. CSI has helped provide Patrick with the latest construction trends and valuable networking.

2... SEPTEMBER 2007 - THE PARAMETER

CVCSI Membership CVCSI membership currently stands at 76

The Parameter - November 20092

Quiet Solution: Fundamentals of Architectural Acoustics & Noise Control

November 18, 2009

Clementine Café, 153 S. Main St, Harrisonburg, VA

NOON - 1pm For more information, please contact Charles Hendricks at cbhendricks@thegainesgroup.com.

Valley Meeting

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat

1 2 3 4 5

8 9 121110

15 16 191817

22 23 26 2724

November 2009November 2009November 17 - CVCSI DInner Meeting

November 20 - CVCSI Valley Lunch Meeting

___

February 2, 2010 - CVCSI Product Exposee www.csicentralva.comto register!

GREEN TERM OF THE MONTH

Capable of producing illness from repeated expo-sure.

Chronic Toxicity

Upcoming Events...

November 2009 - The Parameter 3

6

13

20

7

21

25

http://louisville.edu/purchasing/sustainability/keygreendefinitions.html

28

CVCSIDinner Meeting

29 30

14

Virginia Film FestivalELECTION DAY

CVCSI ValleyLunch MeetingHarrisonburg

Learning ObjectivesUpon completing this course, you will have a betterunderstanding of:

The occupant/user needs for sound insulation in •buildingsThe basics of noise control (including frequency, level, •modes of transmission)Good versus poor building designs for noise control•

Sound Design is Good DesignPoor classroom acoustics can inhibit learning•Sound is #1 complaint in hospitals by both patients •and staff (J Hopkins Study)Noise is #2 litigation issue (NAHB)•Noise remediation can exceed $30K per unit (NRC)•Sound control cost 1/10 in design phase vs. remediation•Achieving code min of STC50+ happens by design•

VETERAN’S DAY

THANKSGIVING

4 The Parameter - November 2009

Member News

The CVCSI chapter received three awards at MARC 09 - Charles Hendricks received the Robert Brosseau memorial award for his hard work and dedication to CSI on the Chap-ter, Region, and Institute level. Adrienne Stronge received the periodical award for her work with the Parameter and Adrienne & Andrew Stronge received awards for their work on the 2009 Prod-uct Expo graphics.

The Gaines Group, PLC has opened a second office in Harrisonburg, VA to bet-ter serve their clients on the other side of the mountain. The new office is located in downtown Harrisonburg at: 107 S. Main Street, Suite 2 above Oasis art mu-seum just around the corner from Dave’s Taverna. Phone Number: 540-437-0012

Lawrence Halperin, FASLA died Sun-day, October 25, 2009 at the age of 93. One of the more prominent landscape architects in the world, Mr. Halperin was the first recipient of CSI’s prestigeous Mi-chaelangelo Award in 2005. His work in-cluded the FDR Memorial in Washington DC and Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall. His six decade career included many other prieminent works. An attempt to list them in this space would not do jus-tice to his storied career.

Joseph Graham Howe Jr., died at home on Sunday, November 1, 2009, of meta-static melanoma at the age of 85. Joe was a much respected member of the local construction industry, who deliv-ered the keynote speach at the CSI Cen-tral Virginia Chapter’s Charter Ceremony. Joe obtained his Master of Civil Engineer-ing degree in 1952 at UVA. He proudly served from 1965 until 1966 as President of the Virginia Branch of the Associated General Contractors of America. From 1972 until 1977, he was Vice-President and Partner of Thacker Construction in Charlottesville. For many years after that he consulted on construction projects in the Charlottesville area. In 1977 Joe be-gan a second career teaching the subject that was so special to him - construction. He taught at the University of Virginia School of Architecture and School of En-gineering. His love for his students and the work he was doing kept him actively teaching until illness forced him to stop in March 2009.

The Blue Ridge Home Builders Associa-tion (BRHBA) is proud to announce that a local builder has recently received cer-tification of a new house as an official EasyLiving Home.John Kerber, of Dominion Develop-ment, was recently presented with a cer-tificate declaring his latest home in the community of Proffit Ridge as an “easy living” home by EasyLiving Home. This is only the 5th home in Virginia to earn this certification. EasyLiving Home is a certification pro-gram focused implementing cost effec-tive features that are attractive, visitable and convenient for everyone. Whether it is strollers, grocery carts, wheelchairs, 330-pound football players or heavy fur-niture and equipment, all will move eas-ily in an EasyLiving Home. “I’m excited about the program,” said Kerber, “but, most importantly, the fu-ture owner will get a home that any family member or guest, regardless of age or ability, will feel comfortable and welcome in.” The Dominion Development home in-corporates the EasyLiving design ele-ments such as:

A step-free entrance into the home •for easy access;Every doorway on the main floor is •36” wide (including bathrooms) for easy passage;Bedrooms, kitchen and bathrooms •all were designed with sufficient maneuvering space for easy use.

“One of the best things about this ap-proach to building and design,” added Kerber, “is that the modifications are subtle and virtually unnoticed, but add significantly to the welcoming warmth and access of the home.”The home is also certified as an Earth-Craft home for its energy efficiency and also won the Suzanne Grove award in this year’s BRHBA annual Parade of Homes.The house can be seen at 2946 Daventry Lane in the Proffit Ridge neighborhood off Proffit Road, Charlottesville, or on the web at www.dominion-development.comFor further information about the home, please contact:Jay Willer, BRHBA, 434.981.8708,John Kerber, Dominion Development, 434.466.1166, orBill Fuller, Virginia Housing Development Authority, 804.343.5754

November 2009 - The Parameter 5

Mid Atlantic Region Conference October 8-11 2009, Charlottesville, VA

RECAPThe Mid Atlantic Region Conference was a HUGE success! We had almost 100 members, non-members, and guests attend this year’s tours, seminars, and awards ceremony. A num-ber of attendees raved about the strength of our program, which focused on two Charlottesville projects, the Emily Couric Cancer Center & the South Lawn Project.

The Parameter - November 20096

The preceding graphic summarizes some of the dif-ferences between green buildings and the concepts the authors have found in lower risk buildings. For example, lower risk buildings do not exceed indus-try guidelines on mechanically introduced outside air; but emphasize humidity control (especially in hot, humid climates). Green buildings, on the other hand, reward the introduction of more outside air than current industry standards, which can lead to indoor humidity problems and mold growth.

Green building environmental goals are typically or-ganized around a set of nationally accepted bench-mark guidelines such as those of LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), which is the guideline established by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC). LEED® certification is a checklist and point system of recommended prac-tices where achieving various point levels can cer-tify the building as having achieved silver, gold, or platinum status. These practices involve such issues as efficient water and energy use, the reuse of waste materials, and the use of renewable and regionally produced products.1

The overall goal of these new materials and proce-dures is to achieve a structure with reduced negative environmental impact -----both during construc-tion and throughout the building’s life. The intent of building green is unquestionably noble and good, and should be aggressively pursued. However, be-cause of the dramatic change that this will present to the design and construction industry, its imple-mentation will present new risks that are likely to be both technical and legal in nature.

Some of the legal risks are fairly obvious, such as the risk of not meeting a building owner’s expectation of achieving a certain level of LEED® certification (i.e., implied or even written warranties). Other risks are more obscure, such as:

o The failure of new products to meet their pro-moted performance levels, which is more likely with new materials compared to proven materials found in traditional buildings.

o Accepting the higher standard of care that a green building might present-----what is currently considered ‘‘best practices’’ may now become the new expected ‘‘standard of care.’’

o Failing to recognize (or prepare for) the un-knowns in cost and schedule impacts that a green building might present.

It is even unclear if a LEED® certified building can be built under a design/build method without the construction team assuming huge amounts of un-known risks because of the vague definition of what is considered ‘‘green.’’

The building industry has been historically conser-vative, relying on time-proven construction materi-als and methods. The introduction of new materials and methods has not always proven to be success-ful, and sometimes has resulted in notable building failures, especially those related to moisture intru-sion and mold contamination. Many of the time

tested materials found in lower risk buildings are hydrocarbon based. The long term efficacies and performance levels are unproven for some of the new carbohydrate based materials being promoted for green buildings.

The proliferation of new products and innovative building approaches related to green development is challenging the design and construction com-munity in such a dramatic fashion. These changes virtually guarantee an increase in building failures and lawsuits. Past experience indicates that many of these failures will be predictable, and some are likely to be catastrophic.2

Examples of Technical Risks for Con-tractors & Designers

Moisture intrusion, whether bulk water intrusion through the building envelope or a relative humid-ity increase due to the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) system, results in a large per-centage of construction claims in the U.S. Moisture intrusion not only results in building deterioration, but has been linked to occupant comfort and health issues, especially in those buildings that become contaminated with mold.3 Sustainable building practices, some of which are part of the LEED® ac-creditation process, can increase the potential for moisture intrusion if not carefully considered and implemented. Examples include:

The Hidden Risks of Green Buildings:Why Building Problems are Likely in Hot, Humid ClimatesBy J. David Odom, ASHRAE, Richard Scott, AIA, NCARB, LEED®, AP and George H. DuBose, CGC, Liberty Building Forensics Group, LLC

The great irony of building green is that the very concepts intended to enhance a building’s performance over its entire lifetime are many of the same things that make a building highly susceptible to moisture and mold problems during its first few years of operation.

While green buildings have many positive ben-efits, there is also strong evidence to suggest a di-rect correlation between new products/innovative design and building failures. Simply put, departing from the ‘‘tried and true’’ often means increasing the risk of building failure.Two strong characteristics of most green build-ings are: 1) the use of innovative, locally-produced products and 2) the implementation of new de-sign, construction, and operation approaches that are intended to reduce energy usage and be envi-ronmentally sound.

Green Building VS. Lower Risk Building

November 2009 - The Parameter 7

o Vegetative roofs, which are more risky than con-ventional roofs (due to the constantly wet condi-tions) and must be carefully designed, constructed, and monitored after construction.

o Improved energy performance through increased insulation and the use of new materials, which may change the dew point location in walls, resulting in damaging condensation and a reduced drying potential for wall assemblies. Lower risk buildings emphasize the drying potential of the envelope over increased insulation. While it is desirable to increase insulation for energy savings, the designer must also evaluate moisture impacts.

o Reuse of existing buildings or recycled compo-nents, which may not provide optimum water-shedding performance in new configurations or may not be readily integrated to the adjacent new materials.

o Use of new green construction materials that have not been field-tested over time. The designer needs to assess new materials and their risks com-pared to traditional materials found in lower risk buildings.

o Increased ventilation to meet indoor air qual-ity (IAQ) goals that may unintentionally result in increased interior humidity levels in hot, humid climates. The designer must consider the increased energy load (and cost) and HVAC equipment sizing required to properly dehumidify a building when exceeding the minimum outside air requirements recommended by the American Society of Heat-ing, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning, Engineers (ASHRAE).

o Building startup procedures, such as “building flush out,” which could result in increased humid-ity levels and mold growth. Lower risk buildings rely almost exclusively on source control (which is also a green building goal) rather than relying on “flush-out” and increased building exhaust. Build-ing “flush out” along with building “bake-out” were concepts developed in the late 1980’s by the indoor air quality industry, which often caused more prob-lems than they solved.

New green construction materials are entering the market at a staggering rate. Because many of these products help to achieve multiple LEED® credits, designers working on green buildings are eager to specify these materials. The risk to contractors is that many of these new items are not time-tested, and designers often do not have the time to fully research their efficacy. If the new product fails, it may be diffi-cult to determine if it is a design error, an installation error, or a product defect. Additionally, general con-tractors must rely on subcontractors to install new

materials that they are inexperienced in installing.

Some of the expandable foam insulation products are examples of green materials that pose increased risks. The water absorption properties of these in-sulation materials can be quite different than what designers expect with traditional insulation. Ad-ditionally, some of the carbohydrate based foam insulation materials may retain more water than traditional hydrocarbon based foam insulation. In-creased absorption of water into the insulation could negatively affect the wall performance. This is not to say that such materials should not be used; however, their properties need to be recognized and accom-modated in the design.

The amount of ventilation (outdoor air) necessary for occupant health and comfort has been debated for decades. Although there are sound arguments on both sides of the debate, the emphasis on increasing ventilation to achieve LEED® environmental qual-ity credits has increased the incentive to add more outdoor air to a building through its HVAC system (a minimum of 30% more outside air above ASHRAE recommended minimums is required to obtain a LEED® credit for ventilation).1

Increased ventilation is especially risky in the south-east U.S., where outdoor relative humidity levels are elevated for a good part of the year. Experience in the southeast, as well as other areas of the country with humid summers, has shown a direct correlation between the number of moisture problems and in-creased ventilation rates.

To effectively minimize the risk of moisture problems while increasing ventilation, designers may need to increase the complexity and capacity of the HVAC components and control systems to achieve proper dehumidi-fication. This adds to contractor risk, since complex systems historically fail more often than simple systems. Additionally, the complexity of the system operation can result in unin-tended pressurization relationships where local depressurization causes humid outdoor air to be drawn into interstitial building cavities, causing condensation and mold growth.4

Building owners, designers and con-tractors all assume more risk when they deal with complex, and possibly untried, technologies not generally found in traditional buildings. Pin-pointing whether the problem is de-sign- or construction-related may be

very difficult after problems have already occurred.5

Building startup procedures to meet LEED® credits include a credit flush-out of indoor containments using increased outdoor air either at the end of con-struction or during the initial occupancy period. The intent is to remove pollutants from off gassing of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from new mate-rials. The amount of air needed to meet the flush-out requirements places a building at increased risk be-cause of the amount of moisture introduced with the increased outdoor air. LEED® requirements are that a minimum of 14,000 cubic feet per square foot of floor area is required for flush out. This presents mul-tiple problems: most HVAC systems are not designed to dehumidify that amount of outdoor air which, in a 100,000 square foot building, is 1,400,000 cubic feet of outside air. Depending on outside conditions at the time of the flush-out as much as 240,000 gal-lons of water can be added to a 100,000 square foot building. This added moisture will be absorbed into building materials, finishes, and furnishings, increas-ing the risk of mold growth.6

Most specifications put the general contractor in charge of the flush-out, including controlling rela-tive humidity levels during flush-out. If the system is not designed to handle such loads, the contractor is faced with a difficult challenge that may require the addition of a temporary, and extremely costly, dehumidification system. Lower risk buildings tend to avoid flush-out.

The Parameter - November 20098

Conclusions‘‘There’s one sure way to kill an idea: Sue it to death.’’Quote from ENR, July 2008What is the greatest risk to the green build-ing movement? It’s likely not the increased costs associated with green buildings-----it’s more likely green buildings that don’t perform up to expectations and, in some cases, may experience significant failures.The increased costs of litigation and insur-ance that could result from underperform-ing green buildings will be absorbed by designers (in a highly competitive market-place), but in most cases will be passed onto building owners. These increased costs, along with the negative publicity on failed green buildings, could dramatically influ-ence building owners NOT to build green.Only recently has the marketplace begun to recognize the various contractual, le-gal, and technical risks that are inherent to green buildings. A growing number of experts have suggested that the first two steps to improved green building risk man-agement are to: 1) recognize the unique risks for green buildings. 2) Develop a set of guidelines that merge the unique regional challenges with green building guidelines, recognizing the lessons learned in lower risk buildings.The design and construction community must not assume that if one builds green, then one will be building regionally cor-rect or even lower risk buildings. Until the gaps between lower risk buildings and green buildings are addressed, the design community would be advised to prioritize the lessons of lower risk buildings already learned from the waterproofing, humidity control, and building forensics community. Without these priorities, poorly function-ing green buildings are the likely result, and this could be the ultimate killer for the green building movement, especially in de-manding climates.In our opinion the solution to good per-forming, lower risk green buildings are at least three-fold:

o Development of a set of Climate Design Criteria that integrates (and prioritizes) climate-specific criteria with current green building practices. Best practices for mois-ture control must take priority over green

building practices.o Development of a detailed Green Build-ing Risk Management Plan that provides guidelines for the design and construction team from concept through the 1-year warranty period. These guidelines would incorporate the best ideas of green build-ing specialists, moisture control special-ists, construction attorneys, and insurance companies.o Apply the lessons learned from past building successes and failures and make green building concepts subservient to these past lessons.

___Liberty Building Forensics Group, LLC (www.libertybuilding.com) is a firm that specializes in forensic building investigations and expert witness/litigation support. Its staff has led the correction and cost recovery for some of the largest building failures in the country, including the $60 million defect claims at Hil-ton Hawaiian Village in Honolulu and the $20 million Martin County Courthouse problems. Its staff has performed green building-related services on over $3 billion in new construction since the late 1990’s and has authored three manuals and over 100 technical publications.© Liberty Building Forensics Group

References1 U.S. Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/.2 Odom, J. David; Scott, Richard; and DuBose, George H. The Hidden Risks of Green Buildings: Avoiding Moisture and Mold Problems. Wash-ington, DC: National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), 2007.3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/ Office of Air and Radiation/ Indoor Environments Di-vision. Mold Remediation in Schools and Com-mercial Buildings. Washington, DC: EPA, March 2001.4 Odom, J. David and DuBose, George H. Mold and Moisture Prevention. Washington, DC: National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), 2005.5 LEED® for New Construction. U.S. Green Build-ing Council. www. usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220.6 Brand, Stewart. How Buildings Learn: What Happens After They’re Built. New York: Viking, 1994.

November 2009 - The Parameter 9

Sept. 15, 2009The Omni Hotel, Charlottesville, VAAttending: Attendees: Tracie Skipper, Duncan Macfar-lane, Mark Wingerd, Nida DeBusk, Ray Gaines, Laura Fiori, Adrienne Stronge, Tucker Shields, Patrick Wright, Ron Keeney, Meghan Johnston I. Call to order: 4:37pm II. Additions to the agenda: noneIII. President’s Report – Tracie SkipperMARC 2009 is fast approaching. As the host chapter I think it is important that all of the board of directors attend this event if possible. Also please plan to attend and volunteer for post. See Tucker Shields for the duty roster. Early bird deadline for reservations is 9/15/09. Please visit http://www.marc09.com/. After discus-sion, early bird deadline is extended for a week. i. Past President’s Report- Charles HendricksHarrisonburg ReportWe held a meeting on August 28th at our new venue, Clementine Restaurant. We had a small crowd of 11 people in attendance for a seminar on the new code requirements for wall bracing that VA is going to adopt. The speaker sponsored the meeting paying our fee at the restaurant. Our next Harrisonburg meetings are as follows:Sept 30th – Vegetated RoofOct 28th – Creating Healthy Indoor EnvironmentsIV. Secretary’s Report –Laura Fiori Minutes from the last meeting were approved as written. Moved: Mark Wingerd, Second – Adrienne Stronge.V. Treasurer’s Report – Ron KeeneyTreasurer’s report was reviewed and duly noted.VI. Committee Reports:

1. Technical: Charles HendricksThe Cardinal Glass Tour is scheduled for Sept 18th. We have a group of 10 people traveling down to Vinton for this event.2. Membership: Duncan MacfarlaneMembership stands at 76New Members: Pennie Garber- Lineage Architects Renewals: 2 John Kerber -Dominion Development Company Irene Peterson- Charlottesville Gas Michael Shaner-Augusta Steel CorpMembership expires in the next 30 days: Roger Bryant-The Gaines Group PLC Adrienne Stronge-The Gaines Group PLC3. Product Expo: Tracie SkipperThis year’s expo will be held Tuesday February 2, 2010 at the Omni Hotel Charlottesville. The committee will meet Tuesday August 4, 2009 at Rapture (on the downtown mall) for a lunch meeting to set dead-lines. We are purposefully about a month behind. We did not want to over lap the Region Conference and they product show requests. There is already interest. The exhibitor invites should go out by the end of this month with a mid November early bird deadline. Is there someone (other than Adrienne, because she is busy with MARC) that could revised the floor plan. That is all I need to get the exhibitor invites out. Invites will go out the first week in October.4. Newsletter: Adrienne Stronge714 paper copies of the Parameter were sent out last month. The goal is for the Parameter to be paperless by the end of the year.5. Programs: Laura Fiori

November 17, 2009-Program Topic: Foam – What’s Hot and What’s NotFoam plays an important part in today’s construction projects. Hear how foam is made, what forms it comes in, and how Amvic, Superior Walls and Murus products benefit from the insulating properties of this versatile material. Also, foam will be looked at in terms of how it rates as a green building product on sustainability, indoor air quality and energy efficiency. Panel Discussion - Jim Avery with Superior Walls, , Deb Brown with Allied Concrete on Amvic ICFs, Chris Bloom with Murus on SIPs, Chris Parmele with Dow Building Solutions6. Region Conference: Raymond GainesConference Dates: October 8-11, 2009 Conference Theme: Sustaining Mr. Jefferson’s Legacy: Designing for the Future Financial matters (costs vs. sponsorships) were dis-cussed in detail. Options for keeping/releasing the block of rooms were discussed. Tucker will be contact-ing members about volunteering to help during the event.7. Hospitality: Tracie SkipperMeeting Schedule 2009-20109/15- Awards Omni Hotel10/20 No Meeting MARC 10/8-10/111/17- Omni Hotel12/15-Christmas Party Location TBA-Mountain Lumber?1/19- No Meeting Product Expo 2/22/16-Omni Hotel3/16-Omni Hotel

4/20-Omni Hotel5/18- Hard Hat Tour6/15- Year End Picnic Better Living Mill shop8. Awards: Adrienne StrongeOur chapter submitted for five regional awards. Win-ners will be announced Saturday at the Regional Con-ference. The group agreed to pay for Terry Herndon’s dinner as the winner of the Craftsmanship Award.9. Certification: David GroffNo Written Report10. Education: Freda McClungTracie was approached by PVCC Workforce and a lo-cal contractor about working to present a Green Ad-vantage workshop in the Charlottesville area. http://www.greenadvantage.org/.Please check this out and get your opinion to Tracie if this is something CSI may be interested in. 11. Historian: Raymond GainesNo Written Report12. Academic Liaison: Patrick Wright No Written Report13. Tellers / Nominating: Ron KeeneyNo Written Report14. Electronic Communications: David GroffWebsite will go live at the end of the week.VII. Old Business: NoneVIII. New Business: NoneIX. Next Board Meeting Date: Tuesday, No-vember 17, 2009 at 4:30 at the Omni..X. Adjournment: 5:36pm

The Parameter - November 200910

by Sheldon Wolfe, RA, FCSI, CCS, CCCA What’s in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet William Shakespeare

On your next Institute ballot you will be asked to vote on elimination of the Profes-sional, Industry, and Associate Member categories. Other than a vague suggestion that the result “better reflects CSI’s core value of building teamwork” - a questionable proposition in itself - I’m not sure what the justification will be, but I don’t believe the benefits outweigh the cost. To put this issue in perspective, let’s take a look at the his-tory of CSI member categories. (To make things easier, I will refer to these three mem-ber categories as “full members” to distinguish them from Intermediate Members and Student Members, who are not allowed to vote or hold elective office. And to avoid having to continually express this exception, I acknowledge that member categories are used when discussing the makeup of CSI boards of directors and committees.) Today, CSI’s first members would be considered Professional Members; they were specifiers who formed an organization to improve construction documents. There were no Industry, Associate, Intermediate, or Student Members. However, even though CSI’s Certificate of Incorporation did not define any member categories, it an-ticipated the possible need for them and allowed their creation. It isn’t clear when CSI expanded its ranks to include Industry Members, but I think it’s fair to say that for many years they were not treated as well as they should have been. According to a reliable source, it wasn’t until 1966 that Industry Members were eligible for Fellowship; not until 1975 were members other than Professional Members allowed to vote; and it wasn’t until 1988 that an Industry Member was voted in as president-elect. When I became a member in 1987, virtually all of that was past history, a history I did not learn of for many years. When I submitted my membership applica-tion, I easily chose the appropriate member category; the fact that there were three categories of full members did not concern me. Later, when I became more active in my chapter, I saw the member categories as a convenience for achieving balanced rep-resentation on the board of directors, a balance I consider to be one of our strengths. Although we do have member categories, all full members have the same rights and responsibilities. In practice, there is no differ-ence, and there is nothing to suggest there is a difference. The terms Pro-fessional Member, Industry Member, and Associate Member do not ap-pear on business cards, nor are they used in publications. After joining CSI, a member is a member is a member. The only complaint I have heard about member categories came from a few Industry Members, who asked, “So we’re not profession-al?” It was not the existence of member categories that disturbed them, but the titles. Not long after hearing that question, almost twenty years ago, I began referring to “industry professionals” and “design profession-als”, a practice I continue today. Had our predecessors used these or similar terms, I doubt we would be having this discussion today. I won’t tell you how you should vote, but when you do, con-sider the following:

CSI is one of only a few construction industry organizations that em-•brace everyone in the construction industry and give all full mem-bers equal rights and responsibilities. In contrast, others, such as AIA, AGC, and NSPE, allow only specific members or groups to vote or hold office. Eliminating our member categories will have no prac-tical effect on members.If there is value in our existing requirements for representation of •different member types, the existing classification method is a ben-efit as it makes it easy to identify those who fit into the member categories. It’s much easier to say “Associate Member” than “those members whose primary function is to provide service, support, and assistance to the construction industry” or list a long series of occupation codes. The same thing could be accomplished by other means, but to change would require a large amount of administra-

tive work to create and define new terms to replace the ones we now use, and to change all the policies and documents that mention member categories. In its simplest form, the result might merely be using lowercase names, e.g., “profes-sional member” for “Professional Member.”Because member categories are not mentioned outside of membership forms •and those policies that are related to makeup of boards and committees, there will be no visible change in CSI’s general publications. Without a press release, few would know of the change, and fewer still would care about it.Although having a single member category for full members may more accu-•rately reflect the way we feel about teamwork, does it affect membership? Have we lost or failed to attract any members who were offended by the member cat-egories? If so, how many? If potential members are confused by the definitions of membership categories, perhaps a better explanation is enough to eliminate the problem. This change would affect not only Institute bylaws, but region and chapter by-•laws, as well as Institute, region, and chapter policies, all of which would have to be revised. Most members probably do not know that we have not yet finished making all the revisions required to conform to the last change in Institute by-laws.

I have no objection to a single member category, only to the effort required to implement for the small impact it would have. If we had but a single member cat-egory, I would have the same objections to a change to multiple categories. It may well be that there are compelling reasons to change to a single member category, reasons that make all the work required to change bylaws, policies, and other documents worthwhile. If that is the case, we need to know what those reasons are well before the ballots are issued. It will be easy to say “yes”, but it will take a lot of time and effort to finish the job. We have enough to do in addressing far more significant issues; we don’t need to spend time on things that will have little effect.© 2009, Sheldon Wolfe

Curmudgeon’s Corner: A rose is a rose…

November 2009 - The Parameter 11

PRESIDENT Tracie Skipper Pella Windows & Doors 434-531-0158 tskipper@pella386.com

VICE-PRES W. Duncan Macfarlane Macfarlane Homes, Inc. 434-361-0081 machomes@aol.com

TREASURER Ron Keeney, RA, CDT, NCARB Keeney & Co., Architects PLC 434-978-2000 ron@keeneyarchitecture.com

SECRETARY Laura Fiori, LEED AP Macfarlane Homes, Inc. 434-361-0081 laura@coolgreenspaces.com

IMMED PAST PRES Charles Hendricks, AIA, CDT, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 540-437-0012 cbhendricks@thegainesgroup.com

DIRECTOR Meghan Johnston, CDT University of Richmond 804-287-6379 mmcloone@richmond.edu

DIRECTOR Adrienne Stronge, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 434-979-5245 astronge@thegainesgroup.com

DIRECTOR R. Tucker Shields, RA, CCCA R. Tucker Shields, Architect. 540-885-8192

DIRECTOR Patrick Wright Luck Stone Corporation 434-985-8830 pwright@charlesluck.com

DIRECTOR Mark Wingerd, CDT Window & Door Pros 434-296-0050 mwingerd@wdpros.com

DIRECTOR John Kerber Dominion Development Co. 434 975-1166 johnk@dominion-development.com

DIRECTOR Nida DeBusk, Intl. Assoc. AIA, CDT, LEED AP Martin Horn Inc. 434-220-7790 nida@martinhorn.com

DIRECTOR Freda McClung, CDT 434-466-4478 frito226@comcast.net

STUDENT ADVISOR David Groff, CDT Virginia Tech 434-977-4480 dgro5@hotmail.com

TECHNICAL Charles Hendricks, AIA, CDT, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 540-437-0012 cbhendricks@thegainesgroup.com

MEMBERSHIP W. Duncan Macfarlane Macfarlane Homes, Inc. 434-361-0081 machomes@aol.com

PRODUCT EXPO Tracie Skipper Pella Windows & Doors 434-531-0158 tskipper@pella386.com

NEWSLETTER Adrienne Stronge, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 434-979-5245 astronge@thegainesgroup.com

PROGRAMS Laura Fiori LEED-AP Macfarlane Homes, Inc. 434-361-0081 laura@coolgreenspaces.com

HOSPITALITY Tracie Skipper Pella Windows & Doors 434-531-0158 tskipper@pella386.com

AWARDS Adrienne Stronge, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 434-979-5245 astronge@thegainesgroup.com

CERTIFICATION Charles Hendricks, AIA, CDT, LEED-AP The Gaines Group, PLC 540-437-0012 cbhendricks@thegainesgroup.com

EDUCATION Freda McClung, CDT 434-466-4478 frito226@comcast.net

HISTORIAN Ray Gaines, RA, CDT The Gaines Group, PLC 434-979-5245 rgtect@thegainesgroup.com

ACADEMIC LIASON Charles Hendricks, RA, CDT, LEED-AP, Assoc. The Gaines Group, PLC 540-437-0012 cbhendricks@thegainesgroup.com

NOMINATING Ron Keeney, RA, CDT, NCARB Keeney & Co., Architects PLC 434-978-2000 ron@keeneyarchitecture.com

WEBMASTER David Groff, CDT Virginia Tech 434-977-4480 dgro5@hotmail.com

ADVISOR George Gercke, CCCA Gercke Brothers, Inc. 434-974-1330 ggercke@comcast.net

ADVISOR Ray Gaines, AIA, FCSI, CCS The Gaines Group, PLC 434-979-5245 rgtect@thegainesgroup.com

CVCSI Leadership Roster

Membership Committee - Duncan MacFarlane

Chapter Meetings are held monthly. Chapter meet-ings provide an excellent opportunity to network with other in-dustry professionals. Chapter meetings consist of a social hour, dinner, and a program on an industry topic, followed by an open, informal discussion. All are welcome. Dinner reservations are necessary, please specify specific dietary needs. Those re-serving who do not attend must pay for the dinner prepared for them. Payment is expected at the door. Please support your local chapter by attending dinner meetings!

Hospitality Committee - Tracie Skipper

The Parameter is the chapter’s newsletter and is mailed to members and interested parties all over the country. Outside opinions, technical articles, articles on individual proj-ects, and local news reports are strongly encouraged. Please submit any articles by the 20th of the month preceding pub-lication. Opinions expressed are those of the editor or con-tributers and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, policies or practices of the Chapter or the Institute, Copyright 2008 Central Virginia Chapter CSI.

Newsletter Editor - Adrienne Stronge

Advertising rates for 10 issues of The Parameter in print-ed version and as published on our website (www.csicentralva.org) are as follows: Single Issue Ten IssuesBusiness Card Size $25 $175One Quarter Page $75 $525One Half Page $125 $875Full Page $250 $1750

The Parameter is mailed to over 700 construction professionals

Newsletter Editor - Adrienne Stronge

Meeting Sponsorships are encouraged at the general meetings. Whole meeting sponsorship includes 10 min-utes to talk before the featured speaker, a business card size ad in the newsletter, a table top display on each table at the meeting, and a 6’ x 6’ exhibit space at the meeting.

Meeting $300 Annual Picnic (3 Available) $300 Annual Holiday Party (3 Available) $300

Hospitality Committee - Tracie Skipper

PRSRT STDUS POSTAGE

PAIDCHARLOTTESVILLE VA

PERMIT #422

MAILING LISTc/o Keeney & Co., Architects1413 Sachem Place, Suite OneCharlottesville, VA 22901-2497

CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED

Mailing ListALL PARAMETERS WILL BE SENT ELECTRONICALLY UNLESS A PAPER COPY IS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED.

Address changes, e-mail updates, or paper copy requests may be filled out at:tinyurl.com/cvcsiPARAMETERe-mailed to:astronge@thegainesgroup.comor faxed to:434.978.7438

SAVE THE DATE Please visit www.csicentralva.com for more information

CENTRAL VIRGINIA CHAPTER OF THE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS INSTITUTEThe Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) is a national professional society promoting the advancement of construction technology through communications, education, and service. www.csinet.org

The Central Virginia CSI Chapter (CVCSI) is a local group of construction-interested persons, including design profession-als, general contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers and manufacturer representatives, meeting regularly to improve our in-dustry by openly discussing project interaction, general construction problems and possible solutions. We are committed to the free exchange of information and experiences in the local construction industry. Membership is on an individual basis for $245 annually. ($210 national dues, $35 CVCSI local dues). Discount fees are offered to students and young professionals. www.csicentralva.org

Nov 16CVCSI

Dinner Meeting

Nov 18CVCSI VALLEYLunch Meeting

Dec 15CVCSI

Holiday Party

Feb 2CVCSI

Product Expo

Feb 16CVCSI

Dinner Meeting