Insulation industry news from Global Insulation
Owens Corning HQ gains gold award
07 June 2011US: The global headquarters of Owens Corning in Toledo, Ohio, has become the third existing building in Ohio to earn the prestigious gold certification under the US Green Building Council's (USGBC) Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) Existing Building (EB) programme.
To achieve the award, the building's design and operation has met stringent standards as an energy-efficient, environmentally responsible and healthy place to live and work. The building was first recognised for silver certification under the LEED-EB program in 2007.
The LEED certification of an existing building is a significant achievement because it is generally easier to design these features in new construction. The Owens Corning global headquarters building has already earned an Energy Star rating, which ranks it among the top 25% of energy-efficient buildings in the United States.
"The gold-certified LEED-EB status of our global headquarters building in Ohio is an iconic representation of Owens Corning's deep commitment to sustainability and energy efficiency," said Chief Sustainability Officer Frank O'Brien-Bernini. "It's also an example of the operating cost advantages that are achievable through sustainable building practices. There are significant economic and environmental benefits to ensuring that new and existing buildings exceed today's energy efficiency standards through the use of insulation, air-sealing solutions and many other energy-saving technologies."
AMD Industries to Pay a Penalty of US$1.2m
01 June 2011US: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had imposed a penalty of US$1.2m on Cicero-based AMD Industries, because it failed to protect its workers effectively from loose asbestos fibres during a 2010 abatement process.
The Assistant Secretary of Labour for Occupational Safety and Health Dr David Michaels notified that the asbestos exposure to humans can be deadly and blamed AMD for negligence. The company was aware of its lethal effects but had failed to offer the most basic safety precautions. Further, he accused the company of not providing efficient respirators or even any warnings to the workers about the health disorders that could be encountered. The material removed at the site was particularly hazardous because the material removed was up to 50% asbestos.