On December 17, 2015, for civil contempt, Jared Sandman and DriTherm International, Inc. were ordered to pay a substantial compensatory sanction for violation of the federal injunction.
On August 25, 2015, United States District Court Judge, the Hon. Ronald S.W. Lew ruled that Jared Sandman and DriTherm International, Inc. were in violation of the injunction and found in contempt of the federal court order.
On May 29, 2014, United States District Court Judge, the Hon. Ronald S.W. Lew, ordered the entry of judgment for a stipulated permanent injunction (“the injunction”) against DriTherm International, Inc. and Jared Sandman, because of various marketplace misrepresentations that had been made regarding the product’s technical specifications, physical and performance properties. Significantly, the misrepresentations regarding the installed density of 60-62 lbs/ft3 -i.e. .8333 CF/Bag and thermal conductivity* of 0.58 at 100°F - 0.68 at 300°F and selling material at these false values.
In 1998, Phetteplace et al. during the only field study of the DriTherm product found that the installed heat losses of the DriTherm measured to be approximately 2.4 times greater then the published and advertised values of 60-62 lbs/ft3 and thermal conductivity of 0.58 at 100°F - 0.68 at 300°F.** Publishing data that grossly misrepresents the product's actual capabilities can significantly impact the heat losses (gains) of system.
The permanent injunction issued against DriTherm International, Inc. and Jared Sandman requires, among other things, that they may not represent the installed densities of its product to be less than 80 lbs/ft3 (or 76 lbs/ft3 for Illinois source) and may not represent the thermal conductivity* to be other than 0.99 at 100°F - 1.36 at 300°F (or 0.87 at 100°F - 1.25 at 300°F for Illinois source) without appropriate valid new testing.
Absent new valid testing, the only court approved representations regarding the installed density and thermal conductivity of the DriTherm product are the values set out in the injunction. Although DTI has the opportunity under the terms of the injunction to conduct new, valid testing to support representations other than the values specified in the injunction, any such testing must fully comply with the requirements of the injunction and the ASTM standards. These requirements must be adhered to for DriTherm to make representations of the physical and performance properties of the DriTherm material at values other than what is stated in the injunction.
Unfortunately, the significance of these findings is that for many years, many customers of DriTherm likely purchased a product that did not meet engineered specifications for the designs of their underground piping systems. Some of these end users purchased a product that had installed densities that were significantly higher than what DriTherm had represented with corresponding thermal conductivity values that were nowhere close to what was required.
In addition to the requirements of the injunction dealing with density and thermal conductivity, DriTherm is enjoined from representing any product performance property or characteristic that is not supported through valid and appropriate testing.
To review these provisions, a complete copy of the Judgment for Stipulated Permanent Injunction, click here.
* Thermal Conductivity units expressed in Btu-in/hr-ft2°F
**Phetteplace, G., Susan Kapp Monaghan, and G. Pedrick. 1998. Performance of Water Spread Limiting and Loose Fill Insulation Federal Agency Approved Heat Distribution Systems, proceedings of the Eighty-Ninth Annual Conference of the International District Energy Association, Volume LXXXVIX, 13-16 June 1998, San Antonio, TX, pages 181 –195.