CMA Ratings Subcommittee Comes to Decision

The Component Modeling Approach Ratings Subcommittee convened this afternoon. There were a number of ballot comments to review regarding the CMA PCP (NFRC 705) document.

“My goal is to resolve a number of these negatives,” said Subcommittee Chair Gary Curtis of the West Wall Group.

The discussion centered around a set of negatives that stated the group should not approve the program language until the other referenced documents are complete.

“The Certification Accreditation Program provides details for how IAs are to inspect manufacturers based on the language in the PCP,” said NFRC Executive Director Jim Benney. “So until the PCP is approved, we can’t move forward with the CAP and LAP.”

“From a precedence standpoint, we just did this with IG – we want to see the language before approving the document,” said Rich Biscoe of Architectural Testing, Inc. “We are not willing to move forward on a document we feel, in itself, is not complete. My definition of complete is every reference is complete.”

“I want to make progress and it seems there is a difference between holding it here and sending it to the Board,” said NFRC Regulatory Affairs & Marketing Committee Chair Garrett Stone. “If there are specific problems in the document, we need to fix them.”

A motion was then introduced by Stone to find the negatives non-germane. The motion failed 11-18.

The group also discussed exploring the option of removing references to the other CMA documents in the PCP. A motion was introduced by Tom Culp of Birch Point Consulting LLC, to find the negatives persuasive and substantive and that the PCP be re-balloted once all the accompanying reference documents are complete. It carried 17-11.

Curtis directed the NFRC staff to explore the possibility of removing references to other documents. The Ratings Committee will also bring the issue forward to the Board of Directors for guidance.

DOE Provides Update on ENERGY STAR Criteria

The Regulatory Affairs and Marketing Committee met this morning. DOE ENERGY STAR® Program Manager Rich Karney gave a brief status report on the ENERGY STAR criteria changes for fenestration.

Karney noted that DOE is still reviewing the draft analysis and report and will likely provide everyone a week to review it prior to the August 13 stakeholder meeting in Washington, D.C.

“The way the analysis has come out is we will be providing the two Northern Zones with trade-offs between U-Factor and SHGC,” said Karney.

DOE will accept comments on the draft report through the third week of September. According to Karney, DOE is hoping to put out the final criteria sometime this fall.

NFRC Members Gather for Dinner Reception

After a busy two days, the NFRC Membership Dinner was a welcome break for meeting attendees.

Members and participants gathered on the terrace of the Conrad Hotel for a festive, South American-style dinner.

More photos from Chicago will be available on the NFRC Meeting Page next week.

CMA Technical Discussion Turns Local

The Component Modeling Approach Technical Subcommittee convened this morning. On the agenda were reports from the CMA Validation Testing Task Group and the CMA Non-Standard Products Task Group, as well as reviewing comments on the following ballots:

- Generic CMA Frame Values – NFRC 100
- CMA Frame Grouping Rules – NFRC 100
- Generic CMA Frame Values – NFRC 200
- CMA Spacer Grouping Rules – NFRC 100

While discussion testing, the discussion quickly turned to a new fixture in the Chicago skyline – the Trump International Hotel & Tower. NFRC meeting attendees got a close-up view of the building during Tuesday’s membership dinner which took place on the terrace of the Conrad Hotel.

“Our conclusion was, based on what we could see, we would have no more than two simulations on that building,” said Marles McDonald of Quality Testing, Inc. “The total cost would be something of a thousand of a percent for all of the simulation and testing.”

According to Chicago Architecture Info, the 92-story skyscraper cost $750 million to construct.

Technical Committee Meetings Continue

Technical subcommittees continued this morning, starting with the Attachment Subcommittee. Chair Fred Higgins of Wayne Dalton, Corp., called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m.

Five task groups currently report to the Subcommittee:
- Storm Window
- Dynamic Attachments for Swinging Doors
- Exterior Attachments
- Interior Attachments
- Storm Door and Storm Panels

Starting off the task group reports, Thom Zaremba presented an update on the Storm Window Task Group. “The current review plan is to hold two conference calls and to explore the possibility that storm windows be rated on a stand-alone basis.”

Next, Dave DeBlock provided the report from the Dynamic Attachments for Swinging Doors. “We’ve resolved most of our ballots,” said DeBlock. “I think our work is pretty much under wraps and we will stay reporting but hopefully not have a lot of work to do.”

As chair of the Exterior Attachments Task Group, Higgins updated the group on the work that has been done since its formation last fall. “The Board gave us some direction and that has been positive.” Higgins noted that the group has been gathering additional product information. “We don’t want to leave any stone unturned and we’re looking at all exterior attachments – products that attach to fenestration products.”

Higgins also emphasized the importance of looking at what other countries are doing. John Gant of Glen Raven, Inc. gave a brief presentation on European Standards.

Michael Cienian of Hunter Douglas, Inc. reported on the Interior Attachments Task Group. “A lot of the work we’ve done so far is outreach so everyone knows what we’re doing.”

“The next steps are to decide on reference base case windows and complete the listing of products for inclusion in windows software.” Some of the products the task group is looking at include storm windows, applied films, venetian blinds, roller blinds, and sun screens.

The task group’s goal is to submit an interior attachment ballot for the spring 2009 meeting.