GANA Technical Update

NFRC Update - The Point of Frustration
In preparing for the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC) 2008 spring meeting, Insulating Glass Manufacturers Alliance (IGMA), Executive Director Margaret Webb and Glass Association of North America (GANA), Technical Director Greg Carney decided not to respond to the latest round of ballots related to the NFRC Component Modeling Approach (CMA) program targeted for commercial construction. Frustration had set in over the fact that industry voices are not being heard and consensus development is not being exercised.

For the last several years Webb and Carney, along with other industry representatives from the American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) and Aluminum Extruders Council (AEC), have actively participated in CMA related task group efforts; spent countless hours on conference calls; repeatedly responded to ballots voicing concerns; attended a minimum of three, four-day meeting a year; and actively voiced the concerns of the industry. On a number of occasions, after listening to the explanations of concerns for the program direction NFRC meeting participants have overwhelming voted in support of the industry positions. Despite industry positions and membership support, items of concern continue to resurface in the development of the CMA program and the software tool.

In calling the NFRC Component Modeling Subcommittee (Ratings) to order during the spring meeting (March 3-6, 2008 in Nashville) Subcommittee Vice-Chair Gary Curtis with The West Wall Group cited that the number of only three negatives to the most recent CMA Product Certification Program ballot was a sign of success for the program. Earlier in the week both Webb and Carney had gone to the microphone and expressed their frustration and reasons for not responding to the ballots. Members from the floor of the meeting expressed that the lack of ballots should not be taken as a positive and stressed the lack of support by the commercial industry. Debate then ensued on items repeatedly discussed including the spacer system terminology, sealant dimensions, development of additional product / material libraries and their inclusion in the software development despite previous votes. Controversy also remains regarding oversight of manufacturers as approved calculation entities and the development of frame grouping rules. Dr. Tom Culp representing the Aluminum Extruders Council (AEC) continued to express the critical need for framing system grouping procedures as a path for certification of common framing systems such as flush glazed storefront applications. AAMA, GANA and IGMA spoke in strong support for the frame group program.

Newly elected NFRC Chairman Joe Hayden with Pella Corporation approached industry representatives with concern over the position of not responding to the ballots and to discuss the commercial construction industry perspectives. In the April 2008 issue of the NFRC Insider, Hayden said, "I truly believe that for CMA to be as successful as it can, we need all parties to remain fully engaged in the process, providing thoughtful and critical input as we move forward." He also noted, "There will, of course, continue to be disagreement on certain aspects, but I feel it's vital that we all work together to achieve our common goal."

Despite the words of encouragement while stressing the importance of working together, industry representatives remain frustrated with the NFRC development process. As reported in a recent USGlass News Network (USGNN) story, Margaret Webb noted, "While the NFRC membership has voted repeatedly on the same issues supporting proposals from the organizations representing the commercial industry, it is my opinion that the final results have not reflected the consensus of NFRC's total membership, specifically the commercial side." Webb added, "It appears that NFRC is poised to finalize its CMA program by January 2009 even without the support of the industry."

Carney recently advised Hayden that during an April 2008 GANA conference for commercial fenestration project managers, the repeated question was "What's it going to cost?" The subject of rating and certification costs have frequently been raised in NFRC meetings since an original NFRC goal was that the program be "cost effective." Reference to program cost have resulted in heated discussions based on strong statements from Gary Curtis that the program cost factors are not an item for discussion at the membership level and should only be discussed by the organization's Board of Directors.

While NFRC paints their picture with NFRC Insider article headlines "Positive Advancement and Communication Highlight the Latest with CMA" to describe the most recent meetings, industry questions and frustration remain. Such as Webb's question, "What benefit will the program serve if industry ignores it, just as they have the present site-built program?"

Additional NFRC Notes:
- The latest new frontier for NFRC appears to be in developing a program to accredit insulating glass certification programs. NFRC recently released a draft "Accredited Insulating Glass Certification Program" and a seven page licensing agreement. The draft program includes the application for initial accreditation; independence criteria and procedures; quality control program and quality control manual, a final assessment report; annual periodic reviews; grounds for revocation of licensing; and the all important "Annual Fee" to be an NFRC Accredited Insulating Glass Certification Program.

- Remaining 2008 NFRC membership meetings include the summer meeting July 28 - 31, 2008 in Chicago and the fall meeting November 3 - 6, 2008 in Jacksonville, Florida.

- Dates for the 2009 meeting have been set for Spring - March 2 - 5; Summer - July 27 - 30; Fall - November 2 - 5. Meeting locations have yet to be determined.

- The NFRC Board of Directors has approved "the exploration of moving from three membership meeting per year to two, starting in 2010."

ASTM International Update
Committee E06 on Performance of Buildings
Subcommittee 06.51
ASTM E 1996 Annex A Fenestration Substitutions, was approved on April 1st, 2008.

Annex A allows substitutions related to impact and cycling performance as stated in ASTM E 1886 and E 1996 of the following fenestration types only.

• Sliding Windows
• Sliding Doors
• Storefront Framing
• Fixed Windows
• Mullions
• Projected or Hinged Windows
• Dual Action Windows and Doors
• Hinged Doors
• Curtain Wall
• Skylights and Roof Windows

ASTM E 06.51.17 – Impact Resistance
The E06.51.17 Task Group formed a working group to begin addressing inconsistencies between ASTM E 1996 and the Florida Building Code High Velocity Hurricane Zone that Miami Dade County uses.

For additional information regarding ASTM and membership on glass and glazing industry committees, visit the ASTM International website (www.astm.org).

Mirror Standard to be Re-Balloted
During the most recent balloting of revisions to ASTM International document C 1503-01 - Standard Specification for Silvered Flat Glass Mirror negative ballots were received related to the measurement of associated distortion in mirrors. Proposed revisions to the standard have been developed to address the negatives and the standard will again be balloted concurrently by Subcommittee C 14.08 on Flat Glass and Committee C 14 on Glass and Glass Products. ASTM will conduct the re-ballot this summer. For information regarding the standard and re-balloting, contact GANA Technical Director, Greg Carney - Phone: 228.896.7643, E-mail: cgcarney@glasswebsite.com.

GANA Supporting Upcoming BEST 1 Conference
The Glass Association of North America (GANA) is supporting the Building Enclosure Science & Technology (BEST) 1 Conference June 10 - 12, 2008, in Minneapolis as a plenary sponsor for a session on Fenestration Research presented by Steve Selkowitz with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

The conference is presented by the Building Enclosure Technology and Environmental Council (BETEC) in collaboration with the Building Enclosure Council (BEC) BEC of Minnesota and supporting organizations the American Institute of Architects (AIA), AIA Minnesota, the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The conference will present three themes:

- BUGS MOLD AND ROT IV - Do We Know What We Don't Know About Fungal Growth, Corrosion and Decay in Building Materials?

- ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDINGS - Where Are We and Where Should We Be Going?

- FFENESTRATION - Optimizing Glass as a Solution to Energy Concerns

In addition to the GANA-sponsored session by Steve Selkowitz, additional building envelope and fenestration presentations of potential interest to GANA members include:

- Trouble Shooting Envelope Performance During Architectural Design - Mark Lawton
- Thermal Performance of Building Enclosures - David Yarborough
- Glass is a Solution, Not a Problem - Stanley Yee
- Managing Moisture - Cladding - Donald Onysko
- Glass Matters - Herb Yudenfriend

For additional information on the conference visit www.thebestconference.org.

Busy Season for GANA Technical Staff
The months of May and June will be busy with business travel for GANA technical staff members as they represent our membership and the industry in the following activities:

- Insulating Glass Certification Council Meeting - Boston - May 13 & 14, 2008
- American Institute of Architects - AIA Expo - Boston - May 15 - 17, 2008
- Glazing Industry Code Committee Meeting - Baltimore - May 20 & 21, 2008
- Industry Effort in Washington, DC - Washington - May 22 & 23, 2008
- American Architectural Manufacturers Association Summer Meeting - Hershey, PA - June 1 - 4, 2008
- Building Enclosure Science & Technology (BEST) 1 Conference - Minneapolis - June 10 - 12, 2008
- Insulating Glass Manufacturers Alliance Summer Meeting - Whistler, BC Canada - June 16 - 19, 2008

 

Copyright, GANA