Got this in an email this afternoon, with someone challenging the right of a non profit organization to certify (or allow a client to self certify) environmental quality and then take any kind of credit for it. I would say "only in America" if not for this thread.......
Class Action Suit Accuses USGBC of Fraud, Criticizes LEED
Green is good, right? Well these days, it depends on whom you ask. But first, a little history:
The U.S. Green Building Council, or USGBC, came to be during a time when heightened awareness about environmental welfare led to a widespread shift toward utilizing construction methods designed to lessen the impact of buildings on the environment and human health. And yes, this is a good thing—buildings account for roughly 40 percent of the total energy use in the U.S. (more than the entire transportation sector).
Founded in 1993, the USGBC is a private, non-for-profit organization whose LEED (or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) program has become the benchmark for green building certification. Thousands of LEED-certified buildings can be found across the U.S., and myriad design and construction professionals have pursued training to become LEED Accredited Professionals or Green Associates. One man, however, will not be among them.
Going against the Green
In October LEED critic and president of Gifford Fuel Saving, Inc. Henry Gifford filed a class action lawsuit against the USGBC and founders David Gottfried, Richard Fedrizzi and Rob Watson on behalf of all “…consumers, taxpayers, and building design and construction professionals,” alleging misconduct with regard to the USGBC’s LEED rating systems and accusing the organization of trying to monopolize the green building market through, among other things, deceptive trade practices and false advertising.
Fraud, Deception and Racketeering, Oh My
The General Allegations of the suit, as outlined in the official complaint, include claims that the current LEED rating systems are flawed for several reasons, including imputations that LEED certification is based on projected energy use rather than real data; that LEED does not require any verification of the data submitted; and that the USGBC “essentially allows applicants to self-certify,” thus benefiting their reputation in the green building industry while misleading consumers and discrediting non-LEED-certified companies who may, in fact, be using effective energy-saving methods.
The suit also challenges the USGBC claim that LEED buildings are “25-30% more energy efficient than non-LEED buildings,” arguing that the March 2008 New Buildings Institute study from which the figures were derived utilized data from only a small percentage of LEED-certified buildings. Further, it implies that the owners of those buildings had voluntarily provided the information used in the study and that LEED-certified buildings have a “vested interest in boosting the value of the LEED certification for which they paid a substantial premium”.
And as if fraud and deception were not enough, also included in the suit is a RICO claim—that’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act for those unfamiliar with the lingo. Originally enacted to prosecute organized crime members (read: the mafia), the current RICO Act covers a broad range of illegal activity relating to commerce. With regard to the USGBC suit, the plaintiffs claim the organization made false statements about the validity of the LEED rating system and purposely tried to sell LEED certification and accreditations based on those fraudulent misrepresentations. Clearly Gifford is a man on a mission.
The Ripple Effect
Since it was filed with the United States District Court on October 8, Gifford’s lawsuit has prompted much discussion—and not just among those in the design and construction industry. The ambitious nature of the class action suit has caught the attention of the legal world as well. For example, there are a few key criteria that need to be met when filing a class action suit, one of which is that the affected parties must suffer the same harm from the alleged misconduct of the defendant (in this case USGBC). And, as one attorney puts it, did the false statements cause any harm at all to these plaintiffs? Only time and a thorough investigation will tell.
How Will the USGBC Respond?
In response to the class action suit the USGBC has remained relatively quiet, stating simply that they will review the allegations and respond in due time. There is no mention of the litigation on their website and upon questioning, representatives—including co-founders Rob Watson and Michael Italiano (notably absent from the list of defendants)—stand behind the USGBC and the value of the LEED certification program, saying that the goal of the program is to provide the tools necessary for positive change.
Indeed, for nearly two decades the high standards employed by the USGBC have set the benchmark for energy-efficient and environmentally responsible design, underscoring the organization’s deep commitment to a prosperous and sustainable future through green building. For those interested, their website provides an extensive LEED Projects & Case Studies Directory where visitors can view specific LEED projects and locate LEED Accredited Professionals