Architectural Sizes in CMA Debated

During the U-Factor Subcommittee meeting, there was discussion surrounding the negatives received on the NFRC 100 - Architectural Sizes Ballot that was distributed to the membership prior to the meeting. The ballot would create two model sizes in the Component Modeling Approach program.

The majority of ballot responses had to do with the fact that the parties did not want two sizes in the document. Many of the negatives mentioned that two sizes would add complexity and confusion to the CMA program. Others pointed out that it could lead to incorrect rating comparisons.

Following the discussion, a motion was brought forth to make all negatives persuasive and substantive – essentially killing the ballot. The motion passed.

“I do believe as an organization we need to consider what prompted the ballot and that’s really a disparity in the information we’re putting on products,” said Chair Mike Thoman of Architectural Testing, Inc. ““We should think long and hard about how we want to provide real, true energy numbers.”