The NAHB Research Center has just announced its “Green Approved” certification for product manufacturers, and the first seal of approval has been issued to Weyerhauser for its iLevel structural wood products. This is an interesting development that comes hot on the heels of the ANSI-approved National Green Building Standard, also a product of the Research Center and a group of industry professionals.The press releases are flying out the door on this, but there isn’t a lick of info on it at either the Research Center or NAHB websites. Maybe the NAHB is just running behind in updating them, but I am concerned that this label is hitting the market without any information about what it actually means. It seems to me that if it has the time to certify a product and send out a press release on it, the least the organization could do is tell us in the industry what it actually means.New and approved!It appears that, in this case, the NAHB is following the “mushroom theory” — feed us full of manure and keep us in the dark. Tell us it’s approved, but don’t tell us what “approved” means.In a slight contrast to the Research Center, Underwriters Laboratories (UL) has just announced its own “environmental services programs,” which is described this way: “Manufacturers may submit their products for UL testing and environmental claims validation. This validation enhances and supports the credibility of sustainability claims, helping to end confusion and giving manufacturers who choose UL validation a competitive edge.” No products or criteria are listed on the program’s website yet, but I am hopeful that they will come up with a strong, effective third-party system.And let’s not forget the other programs out there — GreenGuard, Carpet and Rug Institute, FSC, SFI, Floor Score, to name a few. It seems that, like the plethora of local and national green building programs out there, we have a big selection of product certifications to wade through, but few methods for comparing or validating one over the other. I feel my head starting to ache.Product certification that works, most of the timeFor product validation, I think I prefer the Energy Star model. When I see an Energy Star appliance, I pretty much understand that it has met certain stringent requirements for energy and sometimes water efficiency. Interestingly, Energy Star recently took away its ratings on several appliances made by LG when it came out that the company’s testing procedure was understating energy usage. On top of this, LG has agreed to reimburse all the appliance owners for the amount of energy they would have saved if the equipment was as efficient as claimed. I like that type of accountability and would like to see an equivalent at the Research Center and UL. I’ll give them a little time to get their acts together and let us know exactly what “approved” means, but I won’t hold my breath.I can’t wait to hear what my buddy Michael Anschel thinks about this — if you think I’m a cranky guy, check out his musings on the subject!
00:00 00:00 spaceplay / pause qunload | stop ffullscreenshift + ←→slower / faster ↑↓volume mmute ←→seek . seek to previous 12… 6 seek to 10%, 20% … 60% XColor SettingsAaAaAaAaTextBackgroundOpacity SettingsTextOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundSemi-TransparentOpaqueTransparentFont SettingsSize||TypeSerif MonospaceSerifSans Serif MonospaceSans SerifCasualCursiveSmallCapsResetSave SettingsSAN DIEGO (KUSI) – A court hearing is scheduled Monday for four juveniles accused of taking part in assaulting and robbing a teenager at a South Bay restaurant last week, leaving him with a broken wrist.The four defendants, along with Aldrin Uy, 19, and Kent Bernard Pasunting, 18, are accused in the April 11 attack on the 16-year-old victim at Cotixan Mexican Food in Chula Vista. It allegedly stemmed from an ongoing feud originating from a dispute on social media between the victim and one of the juvenile suspects, police said.Uy and Pasunting pleaded not guilty to assault and battery charges Thursday afternoon and were being held in lieu of $100,000 bail each. The four minor defendants are scheduled to appear in San Diego juvenile court this morning for a detention hearing — the juvenile court equivalent of an arraignment.The victim was with his girlfriend at the eatery in the 1300 block of East Palomar Street when he was confronted, beaten and robbed, Capt. Phil Collum said.The boy was unable to positively identify his assailants, Collum said.“A video of the attack was shared on social media and gained significant media attention,” Collum said. “All six suspects were identified, in part, by the video.”School officials and the management of the restaurant also helped police track down the suspects, according to Collum.On Tuesday, investigators arrested Pasunting and Uy for their alleged roles in the crime. Both had attended Mark Twain High, a continuation school with a campus at Morse High School.The other four suspects, who range in age from 15 to 17, also were taken into custody Tuesday. They all attended Morse High School prior to being suspended following the fracas at the restaurant.Their names were withheld because they are minors.The crime “appeared to be related to an ongoing online dispute between the victim and one of the juvenile attackers,” Collum said. “The dispute began last month, when the victim and suspect got into a heated exchange on social media over comments made to one of the victim’s friends.”RELATED: Six suspects arrested in restaurant assault on teen Updated: 9:07 AM KUSI Newsroom, April 22, 2019 Categories: Local San Diego News FacebookTwitter Posted: April 22, 2019 Four juveniles due in court for alleged Chula Vista restaurant assault KUSI Newsroom