EIFSFACTS.ORG
The Real Facts About EIFS
- EIMA Lies and Contradictions -
"Facts are stubborn things" - James Madison
The number of lies, contradictions and mid-stream reversals made by EIMA and the large EIMA member manufacturers since the early nineties is quite astounding, The industry has run many deceptive advertisements and attacks in the press. The manufacturers have become fragmented in their claims about the benefits of EIFS as some have backed away from former positions, but other manufacturers have continued the claims. The following examples are not intended to be an all-inclusive list. Such a list is out of scope for this site and is best left to attorneys
History of EIFS
EIMA is quick to point out that "EIFS has been used successfully in Europe since the end of WWII" in a variety of advertisements. Dryvit says "Dryvit's systems are proven and have worked successfully in the U.S. for 25 years… and in Europe for 50." What they will not point out, however, is that in Europe EIFS is used almost exclusively on masonry structures. Structures that do not suffer rotting as a result of water-intrusion. EIMA will also tell you that EIFS has been used "successfully" in the U.S. since 1969. What they won’t tell you is that from 1969 until the early 80s the use of EIFS in this country was almost entirely on metal-framed and masonry commercial structures. They won’t tell you about ASTM 1187 which included "A study of 17 EIFS-clad buildings in Massachusetts", undertaken by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Communities and Development in 1985 that found "all projects had some cracks large enough to allow some water penetration, and buildings with only minor cracks has sufficient water penetration to cause internal damage, including damage to load-bearing wood studs".
Kenney, Russell J., and Piper, Richard S., "Proposed Materials and Application Standards for More Durable Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems", Development Use and Performance of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS), ASTM STP 1187, Williams, Mark F., and Lampo, Richard G., 1993
They will not tell you that barrier EIFS is not being used on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) projects because EIFS manufacturers refuse to warranty the product for a sufficient time period. They certainly will not tell you that there were no design changes to the systems to make allowance for their use in the residential construction market. A market that is almost exclusively based on wood-framing and wood, wood-product or gypsum sheathing.
Maintenance
Throughout the late 80s and the early part of the 90's EIMA and its member manufacturers advertised EIFS as a "maintenance free" exterior cladding. Then, as problems became known to the public in the mid 90's that claim was changed to "virtually maintenance free". Since 1996 the claims have been reduced to "low maintenance" and now, in 1998 / 1999, EIFS are being advertised as a cladding system that "requires the same periodic maintenance as other cladding systems".
"All walls require periodic maintenance to perform as designed and to keep your limited warranty in full force and effect.
The Dryvit wall must be inspected at least twice yearly (in the Spring and Fall) and after any severe storms. ...
All associative counter flashing, selants, metal work, equipment penetrations, window and entry penetrations and wall accessories, functioning in conjunction with the Dryvit wall, must be properly maintained at all times. ...
Dryvit feels that the preceding requirements will assist you, the building owner, in maintaining a watertight wall for many years. Please remember, the wall is an investment. To maximize your investment, maintenance is not only essential, but required."
Dryvit Systems Wall Care and Maintenance Program, Dyvit systems, Inc. July 22, 1996
There are serious discrepencies between EIMA manufacturers concerning the maintenance of EIFS. On EIMA's website under the description of EIFS, EIMA says that "thorough inspections and maintenance are required". Under maintenance EIMA also says "Periodic maintenance should include thorough checking of the flashing and sealing to ensure that the building envelope remains watertight" [a practical impossibility as detailed on our Maintenance page], while Pleko, an EIMA Member manufacturer, still contends that EIFS are "virtually maintenance free".
"Observe during the next rainstorm, by actually going outside in it, exactly how the water is hitting the window. Is it contacting the top of the frame and then running down the glass? Or is there an overhang that prevents the rain from getting up this far? If the rain never gets on top of the window, you've eliminated about 50 percent of the potential flashing leakage... You also might lean a ladder against the siding during a rain to examine up close exactly what the water does when it runs down the window. Is it catching on the window sill and then running back inside the window frame?" - Official EIMA Website
*** NOTE: EIFSFACTS.ORG definitely does not endorse EIMA's recommendation that home-owners stand on ladders outside in storms to inspect their homes.
Ease of Installation
Until the mid 90's EIMA also advertised the systems as "easy to install". This assertion has been refuted many times in expert testimony and depositions. Jay Graham stated on camera that at least one noted expert stated that "the installation of EIFS system details was so difficult that he knew of no completely correct installations anywhere in the country [United States]". Jay Graham also notes on the same video and in deposition that "the site fabrications of many EIFS details are extremely difficult to get right".
Jay Graham, "Stucco Litigation - A Complete Perspective", North Carolina Bar Foundation Continuing Legal Education (CLE), 17 April, 1998, Greensboro, North Carolina
Though they have not retracted the "easy to install" assertion, EIMA now says:
"To ensure long-term performance of EIFS, EIMA recommends that the following steps be taken on all EIFS jobs:
Durability
EIMA used to advertise EIFS as "As durable as brick or stone". These assertions have gone away over the last couple of years. EIMA now claims "The systems are designed to be very flexible, which makes them highly crack resistant. When walls expand or contract due to rising or falling temperatures, EIFS are resilient enough to "absorb" building movement and thus avoid the unsightly cracking problems that are so common with stucco, concrete and brick exteriors." Figure 1 shows a detail of the "durable" EIFS on a local 6 year-old home. This look is common locally in EIFS homes in the 5 - 7 year-old range.Most, or all of this, may come off with some effort, but we certainly don't see this on brick or siding in this area.
Figure 1: Six Year-Old EIFS Wall
Figures 2 and 3 show the "Sto" or the "Igloo" Effect. This is a darkening of the finish-coat along lines that follow the intersections of the EPS boards in the system. It is called the "Sto" Effect because it is only seen with Sto installations. You may have to view the high-resolution version of Figure 3 (click on it) to see the effect.
Figure 1: The "Sto" or "Igloo" Effect
Figure 2: The "Sto" or "Igloo" Effect
Design Flexibility
Until recently, the claim for EIFS was that its design possibilities were "limited only by the imagination". Although few would argue that, from an architectural standpoint, EIFS truly is one of the most flexible systems one could choose, EIMA forgot to mention one design limitation: EIFS should never be applied to a horizontal surface, as so many failed chimney chases prove.
Wilmington, N.C. (The Wilmington Flu)
When trouble first surfaced in Wilmington in 1995, EIMA rushed in to "investigate". They initially blamed the weather, claiming that an unusually active 1994 / 1995 hurricane season, with 4 hurricanes coming ashore in the N.C. / S.C. region combined with normal coastal conditions, explained the high moisture levels found in the homes. Dryvit still makes this claim. They also claimed that, because the problems were due to a freaky weather scenario, it was very unlikely that there were similar problems elsewhere.
After more investigation was done in the area, including comparative moisture readings of EIFS vs. other cladding systems, the story was immediately changed. The culprit was no longer the weather. It was the poor building practices, lax building codes and code enforcement and fly-by-night applicators working out of the "trunks of their cars". EIMA went so far as to take out full-page newspaper ads blaming the builders in the area and claiming "like everything else, there is a right way to do things and a wrong way". This is the story that EIMA got out to the rest of the country. EIMA ignored the fact that the homes that were inspected by the New Hanover County Department of Inspections were built by a mix of 19 builders and the EIFS on these homes were applied by 11 different applicators.
Jay Graham, "Stucco Litigation - A Complete Perspective", North Carolina Bar Foundation Continuing Legal Education (CLE), 17 April, 1998, Greensboro, North Carolina
Likewise ignored, and to this day totally denied by EIMA, was the fact that in-depth investigations were done that compared EIFS and non-EIFS structures built by the same contractors in the same subdivisions that showed moisture levels in EIFS some 10 times more prevalent than in other cladding systems.
Maryland Casualty Video, "Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS): What You Need to Know, 1998
In the investigation conducted by the New Hanover County Inspections Department, county inspectors actually compared identical models of homes of identical age, built on adjacent lots by the same builders. Some of these homes had EIFS and others had siding. As described by Jay Graham, Director of the Department of Inspections, the EIFS "showed elevated moisture readings and had substantial damage" while the siding homes, though "expected to be wet", were "bone dry".
Jay Graham, "Stucco Litigation - A Complete Perspective", North Carolina Bar Foundation Continuing Legal Education (CLE), 17 April, 1998, Greensboro, North Carolina
These lies continue to this day. EIMA routinely states that the same moisture-intrusion problems happen with other cladding systems. The truth would quickly come out if an in-depth comparative study, involving diverse geographical areas, were undertaken. According to Tom Kenney, head of Technical Research for the National Association of Home Builders Research Center (NAHBRC), such a study was proposed in late 1996 and EIMA declined to participate. They also continue to preach that if barrier EIFS is installed correctly it will work. They do not mention that independent investigations by the EIFS Review Committee (ERC - a committee that included EIFS manufacturer representatives), the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), the Maryland Casualty Company and U.S. Gypsum (an EIFS manufacturer) concluded otherwise.
For example: "Some builders who have excellent records for quality in construction when building homes with other cladding systems have experienced problems with homes they built with barrier EIFS".
Caution Advised in Using EIFS Systems, Nation’s Building News, The National Association of Home Builders, November 30, 1998 Volume 14, Number 14
EIMA says "The moisture intrusion problems in North Carolina stemmed from leaking window frames, improper use or lack of sealants, and faulty installation of flashing". They ignore the New Honover County Inspections Department photographs showing major damage under properly backer-rodded-and-sealed code-compliant windows as well as US Gypsum's research at the Insitute for Research in Construction of the National Research Council of Canada (IRC - NRCC) that showed that the presence of closed-cell backer rodding reduced the rate of, but did not eliminate, water-intrusion.
There are even descrepencies concerning what constitutes "proper use" of sealants. Dryvit, Inc. says "Dryvit’s typical detail requires the presence of a 3/8" minimum joint between the Dryvit and the adjoining material. The gap should be filled with a closed cell backer rod and sealed with sealant". While EIMA says backer rod is not always necessary "EIFS compatible sealants can be used with a closed-cell backer rod where sealant was omitted. If the interface abuts tightly, an angle fillet bead of sealant can protect against moisture penetration".
"Wilmington is unique - the problems don't happen elsewhere"
Dryvit: "Despite isolated instances of moisture problems in other parts of the country, Dryvit and the EIFS industry are not aware of any other locations that have had the kinds of difficulty experienced in North Carolina."
Sto: "The 90% figure you quote is the original figure quoted by the housing inspector for the New Hanover County, N.C. study in 1995. No other area of the country has been studied because there is no indication of a similar situation anywhere else [underline emphasis by author]. Conditions in New Hanover County were unique, including four hurricanes / tropical storms in one year".
Letter from Ephraim Senbetta, Vice President of Marketing Services, Sto Corp. to Luray Williams, Santa Fe Stucco, June 8, 1998
Well, when we stop laughing at these statements we will refute this... O.K., let's see. After Wilmington, there was Raleigh, and then Charlotte and Greensboro, then Atlanta, and Chicago, Seattle and Vacouver, and now Memphis, Nashville, Savannah and D.C (NOVAHSOC).. We've also had multiple calls and e-mails from home-owners with problems in New York, New Jersey, Deleware, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Texas, Colorado, California and Oregon.
Dryvit still maintains:
"Numerous unique conditions may have contributed to the problem that surfaced in North Carolina. They include:
What Dryvit cannot explain, however, is why the same models of homes, built by the same builders, in the same neighborhoods, at the same time, using the same windows, in the same building boom, subject to the same weather, environment, building codes and inspections, but using other, traditional cladding systems, showed elevated moisture levels 10 times less frequently than EIFS.
Maryland Casualty Video, "Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS): What You Need to Know", The Maryland Casualty Insurance Company, 1998
"You probably don't have a problem"
In its Consumer Tips section you will find the reasuring words of Stephan Klamke, Executive Director: "Based on EIMA’s experience, your home most likely does not have a water intrusion problem". EIMA obviously has no experience in testing EIFS-clad homes:
Charles Graham, an associate professor of construction science at Texas A&M University, has also researched the problem. According to a recent article published in the Louisville Courier Review newspaper, Graham stated that problems with these types of systems are not limited to humid states, but they tend to surface more quickly in such climates and cause more serious damage. According to the Louisville Review, Graham studied 17 barrier EIFS-clad houses in three states -- Texas, Illinois and Colorado -- and found that all had leakage. Several had rot and insects. Graham said it's a "statistical probability" that every house clad with synthetic stucco is going to incur water intrusion and that the problems with this water intrusion are likely to be more severe than with other systems".
"National databases of misture testing show that 94% of EIFS homes, randomly sampled, will have elevated moisture levels... So, if I was a betting man, I'd bet my money that a given [EIFS] home would have a problem. And nine out of ten times I'd win".
Jay Graham, "Stucco Litigation - A Complete Perspective", North Carolina Bar Foundation Continuing Legal Education (CLE), 17 April, 1998, Greensboro, North Carolina
Glen Cruzen, president of Nashville-based Master Stucco, an application and repair services company, also has seen the damages associated with barrier EIFS. Cruzen no longer will work on barrier systems without legal documentation that waives his liability for barrier systems he installs."I have done enough barrier applications in the past to get a good understanding of the disproportionate numbers of these systems that are failing," Cruzen stated. Likewise, in New Orleans, William Locke, of Wet Check, a local home inspection service, recently told a reporter from WDSU-TV News (the New Orleans NBC affiliate) that the majority of barrier EIFS homes he's inspected have some degree of moisture damage. "I have a couple hundred inspections under my belt and I'm still surprised everyday at what I'm finding," Locke stated. "Probably between 80 and 90 percent of the homes I test have water somewhere that needs to be addressed." - USG Web Site
"The Same Problems happen in other cladding systems"
EIMA: "Homes clad with EIFS are no more prone to water intrusion than homes clad with other materials." Well, depends on how you define "water intrusion". When water "intrudes" a barrier EIFS system, it comes into contact with the sheathing and structural components of the building. When water "intrudes" into other systems, it enters the drainage cavity and is allowed to drain out. There is still a layer of building wrap protecting the structure. This is an apples-to-oranges statement. True "water intrusion" in other systems could only occur if the building wrap were missing, damaged or improperly installed.
"If you caulk it up, it will dry out"
"We believe that EIFS homes with elevated moisture levels will dry out after caulking and flashing are applied to moisture entry points." - EIMA
"While incidental moisture that may get behind EIFS dries by vapor transmission, traditional EIFS are not designed to drain running water from other locations in the wall... The water resistant qualities of EIFS keep water from outside sources such as rain from penetrating the exterior skin while the vapor permeable qualities allow a building to "breathe" naturally, minimizing the entrapment of incidental moisture that may get into the wall assembly. " - Sto Corporation
However, in direct contradiction, the EIMA Class PB EIFS Installation Training Manual includes the following definition of Permeability on page 24:
"Permiability: The relative ability of a specific material to allow the flow of water vapor. EIFS generally have a low resistance to the flow of vapor, so they are considered to have low vapor permeability".
Research at the world renown Insitute for Research in Construction of the National Research Council of Canada, a research institute specializing in building envelope research, shows that this is not true:
"Following the moisture-intrusion testing, the research team took its study one step further by testing the time required for a barrier-type wall cavity to dry out. The team used LATENITE, a combined heat, air and moisture transport simulation program developed by NRCC, for the simulations. The procedure tested for various conditions, including temperature, humidity, wind, speed and precipitation rates over a simulated period of three years to reflect typical weather conditions in Wilmington, N.C. Results indicated that moisture performance can be strongly affected by the water vapor permeance of the interior finish. An interior finish with a low water vapor permeance, such as a polyethylene vapor retarder or gypsum board with a high quality paint, inhibited the drying of the wall. In contrast, a wall with untreated gypsum wallboard dried quickly. In general, barrier EIFS-clad walls in Wilmington, which typically used a low vapor permeance material, had low drying potential and promoted rot and decay. Computer simulations in the test procedure indicated that a barrier EIFS wall with high moisture intrusion around a window will never completely dry over a 3-year period."
Also not addressed is the issue of caulking up and allowing rotten wood to become dry rot.
"We new of no problems with water intrusion prior to 1995"
This line was repeated Ad Nauseam by EIMA after the problems in Wilmington first came to light. But, they obviously forgot to tell Buck Buchanon (former EIMA President):
Reporter: "Did the industry know about water-intrusion as a potential problem before North Carolina?"
Buchanon: "Uhhh, we have always, the answer to that is, yes. Water-intrusion has always been an issue. Our remedy, if you will, for that, is to keep the water out."
Fox 5 Atlanta Investigative Report, Aired 1997
Also, see Quotes by Experts and Remele.
"Second, the arguments that you assert in your letter are the same arguments that have been presented by these manufacturers for the same water intrusion issues that have plagued the industry since the1980s. If you are "quite familiar" with the situation as you claim, then you know that these exact issues have arisen in numerous locales in the United States and Canada and that the defective nature of the product was well known to these manufactures. For example, after the numerous instances of failed EIFS structures in Canada, Joe Lstiburek appeared at an ASTM conference in 1992 and insisted that a drainage plane be incorporated into the EIFS systems that are used with water sensitive substrates, such as plywood, OSB or gypsum sheathing because water intrusion into building structures is reasonably foreseeable and must be managed, in some way. The manufacturers knew this and we have found many internal documents that acknowledge the "inherent flaw" that you and they have continued to refuse to publically acknowledge. Others such as HUD, the military and others notified the industry of these problems to no avail. Code agencies such as BOCA, SBCCI and ICBO have continued to question the industry on the same problems and in fact, were addressing the issues in March 1988 when the industry basically acknowledged the problems and agreed to addess water intrusion through training, inspections and alternative designs. We have also uncovered public documents, such as the STO Patent for their Rain Screen System, which describes with amazing particularity, the defect in a barrier EIFS system."
Letter from Joel Rhine to Arthur H. Romer, Jr., Romer Associates, Inc., November 24, 1998
Other Contradictions and Propaganda
At a Northern Virginia Building Industry Association (NVBIA) Expo in September, 1998. Stephan Klamke, Executive Director of EIMA, presented a two-hour seminar entitled "EIFS – Fact and Fiction". Present at the seminar were at least two EIFS home-owners who had problems, a very experienced EIFS inspector, South-Eastern Regional Sales Manager for Dryvit Systems, Inc. Ed West, several representatives of U.S. Gypsum and a producer and sound/film crew of Dateline NBC. The filming of the seminar by NBC was unannounced. A number of contradictions were made by Mr. Klamke on film.
For example:
During a portion of a slide presentation discussing the benefits of EIFS, Mr. Klamke presented a slide showing a window in an EIFS home. There was no caulking around the window. As this part of the presentation was about the ability of EIFS to allow moisture to evaporate, the founder of NOVASHOC asked Mr. Klamke if EIFS would allow any water intruding into the system via the gap around the window to evaporate. Mr. Klamke responded "absolutely". The founder followed "even in coastal conditions?". Mr. Klamke replied "yes". Some 30 minutes later the presentation had turned to the problems in Wilmington. Mr. Klamke showed a slide that was nearly identical to the slide shown previously. A window in an EIFS home around which there was very little sealant. Mr. Klamke stated that the reason for the failure and water damage to this home was due to the applicator’s / builder’s failure to use adequate sealant. When asked why he had previously stated that the EIFS would allow the water to evaporate and yet blamed the failure in this case on a lack of sealant, Mr. Klamke had no answer and promptly took another question.
And:
At the beginning of the question and answer session an audience member referred to EIMA’s statements that they knew of no failures prior to 1995. The questioner then asked Mr. Klamke if he was aware of ASTM 1187 "Development, Use, and Performance of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS), Williams, Mark F. and Lampo, Richard G.". Mr. Klamke responded that he was not familiar with it and thus could not address it. After the seminar, when NBC’s lights and cameras were off, Mr. Klamke looked at the book the questioner had and said "Oh, yes, I’m familiar with this".
Character Assasination and Slander
During a Northern Virginia Building Industry Association (NVBIA) Builder’s Expo in September, 1998, Ed West, South-Eastern Regional Sales Manager for Dryvit Systems, Inc. made the following statement to the founder of NOVASHOC: "Jay Graham [Director of Inspections for New Hanover County, N.C.] has a testing company he runs on the side. If that isn’t a conflict of interest, I don’t know what is". Alan Goldan (Jay's assistant) was made aware of this via e-mail. The following day the founder was contacted by the New Hanover County Attorney’s office and was asked to make a statement confirming the information. He was told by the Assistant County Attorney that "Mr. West’s statement was but one in a series of slanderous assertions made against the county employees and that the county was considering bringing slander charges".
Purjury
See Tome Remele's statements in the Mayer trial.
Water-Managed EIFS
U.S. Gypsum lead the industry in moving toward water-managed, or drainable, EIFS after their own research concluded that "barrier-EIFS wall construction and maintenance is impractical and EIFS performance is unreliable".
U.S. Gypsum Press Release, March 1996
Although EIMA, and its member manufacturers, have subsequently "caved" and moved to a water-managed position, they refuse to admit that U.S. Gypsums conclusion were correct. They will tell you that water-managed EIFS simply offers "an extra level of protection" that is necessary because of the lax standards of construction in the residential construction industry. They will tell you that this extra level of protection is provided because water-managed EIFS provides a mechanism to drain away "incidental moisture". Incidental moisture is EIMA's term for water that shouldn't, couldn't, but inevitably does, get behind the exterior cladding system. So, if there is this concept of inevitable "incidental moisture", why wasn't it allowed for many years back before barrier EIFS was applied to wood structures?
Sto says:
Sto Corp.'s Finish Systems Division has developed two different systems for the drainage of incidental water which might get behind its traditional exterior insulation and finish (EIF) cladding systems.
"These systems were developed in response to market demand, not as a wholesale replacement for our time proven, rigorously tested EIF systems" says Ephraim Senbetta, vice president of Marketing Services at Sto Corp., the Atlanta-based U.S. subsidiary of Sto AG, Weizen, Germany. We recommend their use in those climates with frequent wind-driven rain."
Press Release, "Sto Finish Systems Division develops two EIF drainage systems ", Sto Corporation, Atlanta, GA, 1998
Don't most storms have wind-driven rain??
The Greatest Contradiction of All
Dateline NBC interviewed Stephan Klamke, Executive Director of EIMA in the Fall of 1998 and asked the following:
Dateline NBC: "Do you think most of the manufacturers will eventually ease out of the old system?"
Stephan Klamke (EIMA): "Absolutely not. Absolutely not."
In mid-January (1999) EIMA and its member manufacturers reversed their position. They no longer recommend the use of barrier EIFS on one and two-family residential structures.
Some Final Thoughts
"It doesn't pay to be dishonest or disingenuous, obviously." - Steven Ferry, free-lance writer, as quoted on the official EIMA website.
"While there is nothing illegal in truthfully pointing out weaknesses or problems with a competitor's product, a federal law--the Lanham Act--makes false or misleading advertising illegal. Moreover, there are state unfair competition laws that make it illegal to falsely represent a thing or person". - the official EIMA website.
