Thread: CPSC and HUD Issue Updated Remediation Protocol for Homes with Problem Drywall

CPSC and HUD Issue Updated Remediation Protocol for Homes with Problem Drywall

Similar Threads:

• Back to the collar tie issue...
• Minnesota Requires Radon Mitigation In New Homes
• CPSC Recall: Floor Electrical Outlets
• Sears Catalog Homes
• Plaintiffs claim homes poorly constructed, sue for repair costs - Merced Sun-Star

Typical Government double speak.
On on hand they say:
...."long-term exposure of wiring and other electrical components to hydrogen sulfide gases does not indicate a safety hazard to a home's electrical systems."...

But they then say:
...." the remediation guidance for homes with problem drywall calls for the replacement of all:

• problem drywall;
• fire safety alarm devices, including smoke and carbon monoxide alarms;
• electrical distribution components, including receptacles, switches and circuit breakers; and
• gas service piping and fire suppression sprinkler systems." ......
  
  
  Which is it. Ok no problems or bad and rip it out ?
  
  Unless I read it wrong.
  

You didn't read it wrong, you just didn't read it all.

However, although no significant
degradation of the electrical connections to the devices was noted, extensive corrosion was present and
replacement of receptacles, switches, ground-fault circuit interrupters, and circuit breakers is recommended

out of an abundance of caution.

One reason to fix the electrical stuff is so the next inspector does not identify the home as still having a drywall problem.

Darrel Hood
DILIGENT PROPERTY SERVICES

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

You didn't read it wrong, you just didn't read it all.

However, although no significant
degradation of the electrical connections to the devices was noted, extensive corrosion was present and
replacement of receptacles, switches, ground-fault circuit interrupters, and circuit breakers is recommended

out of an abundance of caution.

Rick,
I took that as saying, it looks bad but is not causing any harm but just due to its appearance replace it. Replace on appearance.

I understand replace because of the unknown, but then why not replace everything based on the unknown?

If looking bad was a reason to replace something, my wife would have replaced me long ago.

"I took that as saying, it looks bad but is not causing any harm but just due to its appearance replace it. Replace on appearance."


To me, what they are saying is:
In the short time we had for testing, no degradation was discovered.
However, over the next several years or decades, we believe that problems are likely to be experienced. We also believe that replacing some components will lessen the likelihood of experiencing problems.