The First Facility Management Blog

The AEDG for Small Hospitals and Healthcare Facilities is the sixth in the 30% Advanced Energy Design Guide (AEDG) series designed to provide recommendations for achieving 30% energy savings over the minimum code requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999.

“The recommendations in the Small Hospitals and Healthcare Facilities Guide provide good design practices for integrating energy efficiency in a healthcare environment, while maintaining indoor air quality and required airflow and pressurization relationships,” Shanti Pless, chair of committee that wrote the guide, said.

The Guide focuses on small healthcare facilities up to 90,000 square feet in size, including acute care facilities, outpatient surgery centers, critical access hospitals, and inpatient community hospitals. These buildings have intensive heating and cooling systems, which the Guide covers extensively; additionally, other important energy saving measures such as daylighting are included.

“The energy efficiency recommendations in the Guide were developed based on design experiences from members of a project committee made up of healthcare facilities design professionals, combined with the insight gained from modeling the energy performance of these specific recommendations,” Pless said.

Some tips that the Guide offers include:

• Providing an unoccupied air flow and temperature setback for spaces that are not used 24 hours a day, such as surgery suites;
• Installing high efficiency condensing boilers with an outdoor air temperature reset schedule for all climate zones to address the high amounts of reheat energy used by such facilities to control humidity;
• Carefully laying out lighting design to meet recommended lighting power density by space type;
• Maximizing the use of daylighting and daylighting-responsive controls through both side lighting and top lighting strategies in all space types that do not have air change requirements;
• Installing an insulated thermal envelope, with additional recommendations to address air barriers and continuous insulation strategies.

The recommendations allow contractors, consulting engineers, architects, and designers to achieve advanced levels of energy savings easily without having to resort to detailed calculations or analyses.

Also, case studies provide examples of advanced hospital and healthcare facility designs that demonstrate the flexibility offered in achieving advanced energy savings such as the 30% goal of the Guide.

The AEDG series has been developed in collaboration with these partnering organizations: ASHRAE, the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES), the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Since the Guides first began to be offered in early 2008, more than 200,000 have been downloaded. Other books in the series deal with small office and retail buildings, K-12 school buildings, highway lodging and small warehouse and self storage buildings.

For a free copy of the latest AEDG, send an e-mail to tfm@groupc.com with the words “AEDG Healthcare” in the subject line. For other versions of these guides, visit www.ashrae.org/freeaedg.

The Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) announces the publication of three revised American National Standards: ANSI/BHMA A156.3 -2008 for Exit Devices; ANSI/BHMA A 156.4 - 2008 for Door Controls – Closers; and ANSI/BHMA A156.16 - 2008 for Auxiliary Hardware.

ANSI/BHMA A156.3 for Exit Devices
This standard establishes requirements for exit devices and trim, automatic and self-latching flush bolts, removable mullions, coordinators and carry-open bars. Among the changes to ANSI/BHMA A156.3, the updated standard includes tightening the operational key torque value to 12 in-lbf; adding electrified exit device functions; and adding definitions for dogging, electric dogging, mullions and multipoint exit devices and unlatches. This publication is an update of an earlier 2001 version of the standard.

ANSI/BHMA A156.4 for Door Controls – Closers
This standard contains requirements for door closers surface mounted, concealed in the door, overhead concealed, and concealed in the floor. Also included are pivots for floor closers. Whole scale reformatting was done primarily to reduce cross references and clarify test sequences for each type of closer. Changes to ANSI/BHMA A156.4 include improving floor marking template diagrams; clarifying the door weight table by showing ranges; revising leakage failure criteria; adding a dead stop test procedure based on A156.8 for stops and holders; and clarifying the requirements for range of closing motion. This publication is an update of an earlier 2000 version of the standard.

ANSI/BHMA A156.16 for Auxiliary Hardware
This standard establishes requirements for auxiliary hardware. Among the changes to ANSI/BHMA A156.16, the updated standard includes updated product type illustrations; revised shower curtain rod test requirements and moving the location of the door stop in the cycle test to across the middle hinge. This publication is an update of an earlier 2002 version of the standard.

On June 1, 2009, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to mark ANSI’s acceptance as an Accreditation Body (AB) to participate in the EPA WaterSense Program.

The WaterSense program helps consumers to identify products that conserve water while maintaining high performance levels. Products certified by accredited certification bodies may carry a WaterSense label, giving consumers an easy way to identify quality, water efficient products.

As the first AB approved to perform accreditation services under the WaterSense program, ANSI is pleased to announce the launch of a new pilot accreditation program for EPA-licensed certification bodies. ANSI accreditation adds value to the certification process, assuring that certification bodies demonstrate compliance with the WaterSense product certification system and are capable and competent to carry out their responsibilities.

Applications for the pilot program will be accepted from June 1 to June 30, 2009. Applications received beyond the June 30 due date will be considered for accreditation following the completion of the pilot program.

“Managing water conservation continues to be a growing concern in the United States,” explains Lane Hallenbeck, ANSI vice president of accreditation services. “ANSI is proud to add value to EPA’s WaterSense program through independent, third-party accreditation, as it enhances market confidence for water-efficient products, programs and practices.”

Specifically, ANSI will assess the competence of certification bodies against the requirements set forth in:

• International Standard ISO/IEC Guide 65, General requirements for bodies operating product certification systems, developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC);
• International Accreditation Forum - Guidance on application of ISO/IEC Guide 65, and
• U.S. EPA’s own requirements as defined in the WaterSense Product Certification System.

ANSI understands and has demonstrated the importance of accreditation in supporting consumer safety and international trade. The Institute’s portfolio of accreditation services includes programs for all types of certification and verification bodies, including those for products, personnel, greenhouse gas emissions, as well as standards developers.

“ANSI is acknowledged for its long and successful track record in accrediting certification programs for a wide variety of products, personnel, and services,” continued Hallenbeck. “We are pleased to be the first Accreditation Body recognized by EPA under its WaterSense initiative, and we look forward to the continued growth of this exciting program.”

BICSI, the association supporting the information transport systems (ITS) industry, has announced the approval and publication of its ANSI/BICSI-001-2009. Information Transport Systems Design Standard for K-12 Educational Institutions. This is the first BICSI-exclusive standard that BICSI has produced as an ANSI-accredited standards development organization.

“The release of this standard is the first significant stride in recognizing one of the major goals set forth in the BICSI Strategic Plan—to be the trusted source of global standards and best practices,” said BICSI President Edward J. Donelan, RCDD, NTS, TLT. “At the core of this achievement is a tribute to the ITS industry experts who volunteered their time and resources to advance the knowledge and success of our members, their customers and the ITS industry.”

The standard is intended to enable K-12 ITS design in the building development process by contributing to architectural considerations and providing information that cuts across multidisciplinary design efforts. Adequate planning during building construction or renovation is significantly less expensive and less disruptive than after the facility is operational. K-12 educational institutions can benefit from an ITS infrastructure design that is planned in advance to support growth and changes that will be required to enhance the educational delivery system. This standard specifies minimum requirements and guidelines for the design of ITS infrastructure for K-12 educational institutions.

“There are currently no other standards like this one,” said Robert Faber, Chair of the BICSI Standards Committee. “It deals with safety in an educational environment; most importantly—the safety of children. Therefore, the standard goes beyond normal standards to assure safety including the use of specialized types of cabling.”

Work on this standard began in 2004 when TJ Roe, BICSI Standards Committee Chair at the time, appointed Terry Hochbein, RCDD, NTS, OSP, as the Chair of the K-12 Subcommittee. The mission of this subcommittee was to gather a number of industry experts to write the industry’s first ITS design standard for K-12 educational institutions. These industry experts have backgrounds as K-12 educational technology directors, ITS designers, technology equipment manufacturers, architects, engineers, and consultants. Hochbein selected John Kacperski, RCDD, OSP, to serve as the subcommittee secretary and Todd Taylor, RCDD, NTS, OSP, to serve as the document editor.

“As the director of technology design for a national architectural/engineering firm that specializes in K-12 education it was apparent to me that the TIA 568 Commercial Building Telecommunications Cabling Standard was focused on office buildings and did not address the diverse types of spaces found in K-12 educational facilities,” said Hochbein. “As a member of the BICSI Standards Committee in 2004, I proposed that we develop a telecommunications cabling design standard for K-12 education that specifically addresses their unique type of spaces.”

Changes to the purpose and scope of ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1 as well as new lighting requirements are being proposed through public review. ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, provides minimum requirements for the energy-efficient design of buildings except low-rise residential buildings.

Among the proposed addenda out for public review is addendum aq, which proposes changes to the purpose and scope of the standard. The proposed modification addresses applications not covered in the existing standard scope, such as requirements for laboratories, data center cooling, and kitchen exhausts. It would also permit the 90.1 committee to address technologies, such as computer equipment and refrigerated casework, and would extend existing requirements for envelope, space cooling, and lighting to a larger group of spaces where energy is consumed.

“ASHRAE is committed to substantially reducing energy use in buildings,” Mark Hydeman, vice chair of the committee, said. “This addendum is a critical step toward achieving that goal. For example, it requires all cooling and heating equipment that operates under standard conditions to comply with the existing minimum efficiencies of the standard regardless of the facility that they are in. Manufacturing and process environments often operate at much longer hours than office buildings and retail facilities, which served as the basis for the life-cycle cost analysis of the minimum efficiencies.”

Standard 90.1 currently addresses design and construction of buildings. The proposed addendum would add operation and maintenance, which allows incorporation of industry standards such as ASHRAE/ACCA Standard 180-2008, Standard Practice for Inspection and Maintenance of Commercial Building HVAC Systems.

The addendum also incorporates utilization of on-site, renewable energy resources. “By including on-site and renewable energy resources in the scope, an appropriate mechanism was created for future requirements as well as credits for these energy resources not currently provided in the standard,” Hydeman said.

Proposed addendum aq is open for public review until February 2, 2009.

Other Proposals
Four other proposed addenda–ar, as, au, and av–are open for review until January 19, 2009. A fifth addenda, at, is open until January 4, 2009.

Proposed addenda ar and av are related to lighting efficiencies. Proposed addendum ar revises an earlier version of the standard where expanded exterior lighting power limits were put in place but details were not included on calculating installed power and its comparison to the limits. Addendum av would require that in all spaces where alterations take place, all requirements of section 9 are met, not just the lighting power density requirements.

The proposed addenda to ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1 are available during their public review period. To read the addenda or to comment, visit www.ashrae.org/publicreviews.

NSF International Strategic Registrations (NSF-ISR), a North American leader in management systems registrations, today announced it has obtained Greenhouse Gas (GHG) accreditation from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

NSF-ISR is one of seven verification bodies to receive approval in ANSI’s pilot program to accredit GHG verification bodies.(1) The accreditation confirms that the GHG verifications performed by NSF-ISR are conducted to U.S. and international standards. GHG verification provides assurance that GHG emissions and removals are properly accounted for in organizational inventories.

“This accreditation from ANSI demonstrates NSF’s commitment to providing clients with the services they need to stay current with new regulations, while helping to protect the environment,” said Kevan P. Lawlor, President and CEO of NSF International, NSF-ISR’s parent company.

Scientific evidence suggests that the buildup of GHG in the atmosphere is raising the earth’s temperature and changing the earth’s climate. In 2002, President Bush set a goal to reduce the nation’s greenhouse gas intensity by 18%. The U.S. is seen to be on track for reaching that goal.(2)

Future policy for reducing GHG emissions in the U.S. may include a national “cap-and-trade” program. According to NSF, under cap-and-trade, companies that voluntarily achieve emission reductions are more competitive in the marketplace because they have a reduced need to acquire GHG emission allowances.

“With a federal cap-and-trade system for GHG potentially in the USA’s future, we project economic incentives to reduce GHG emissions, and emissions trading will become very common,” said John Shideler, NSF-ISR Greenhouse Gas Program Manager. “However, the credits that are being bought and sold in the market need to be verified by an accredited, third-party verifier, such as NSF-ISR, in order for the market to have credibility.”

Successful verification demonstrates that organizations are managing their GHG emissions diligently with energy efficiency in mind and an eye towards future regulatory requirements. A list of organizations whose emissions have been verified by NSF-ISR is maintained on its Web site.

—–

(1) American National Standards Institute, December 1, 2008, https://www.ansica.org/wwwversion2/ALLdirectoryListing.asp?menuID=200&prgID=20 0&status=4

(2) Environmental Resource Center, April 28, 2008, http://www.ercweb.com/resources/viewtip.aspx?id=7210

This exclusive article comes from Christopher Lawton, author of more than 50 business and trade publication articles and case studies. He is also the president of Pittsburgh, PA-based wecreate.

The ability to hear properly, especially in pre-school and elementary school classrooms, is one of the most important factors in a child’s ability to process and learn new information. According to the Institute for Enhanced Classroom Learning, children in today’s classrooms have difficulty understanding 20% to 30% of what their teachers say, due to excessive ambient background noise, reverberation, and a poor signal to noise ratio (SNR).

Current solutions to the problem of classroom hearing, and the related technology associated with these solutions, often suggest using classroom amplification equipment to solve ambient noise problems. And while this approach can help, it is not the preferred approach, according to a position statement by the Acoustical Society of America (ASA). Ambient noise can include the students themselves, ceiling fans, hallway noise, the hum of lights and computers, outside lawn mowers, and HVAC equipment.

The SNR is the most important consideration within a classroom’s acoustical environment. Reverberation, the echoing of sounds off the walls in a room, is also relevant but can be compensated for, for a relatively low cost with minor environmental and/or structural changes, if overall ambient noise levels can be reduced.

In the case of a classroom, environment SNR is basically how much louder the teacher’s voice is above other noises within the room. In a classroom environment, the teacher is the S, or signal, in SNR. And if the teacher’s voice is at 65 decibels (dBA), a normal level for speaking, and all other background noises are at 55 dBA, the SNR is 10 dBA, or the difference between what is being taught to what is not. The higher the SNR, the better the environment for children to learn in.

Ambient noise and reverberation affect SNR. Increased ambient noise, including HVAC equipment, will lower the overall SNR making it harder to hear, teach and learn.

In any environment, children with normal hearing require an SNR of +15 dBA. Therefore, a teacher must speak at least 15 dBA louder than the ambient noise in the classroom in order for students to understand what is being taught.

In the aforementioned example, it means the teacher would have to speak very loudly (at a 70 dBA level) in order to be heard by the students. Speaking at this decibel level is a common source of voice fatigue for teachers.

One of the biggest contributors to a classroom’s ambient noise level has traditionally been a school’s HVAC system, regardless of whether it is roof or wall mounted. Most HVAC systems operate at ambient noise levels that are considered to be too high for most classroom instruction. But what if a school’s HVAC system could be removed as a factor in ambient classroom noise levels?

In 2002, due to the increasing realization of the problem regarding classroom acoustics, the American Standards Institute (ANSI) along with the ASA set out to create a lower overall ambient noise national standard for acoustics in the classroom. Their results became known as S12.60-2002, which set an acoustical standard of 35dBA for all background sound (ambient) levels.

Unfortunately, while ANSI’s new standard was significant when it came to new construction, it did not take into effect relocatable classrooms. These structures are harder to insulate and therefore can have more ambient noise, especially for older models still in operation.

Relocatable portable classrooms have been around and in use by school districts all over the country since the late 1960s. Factory built and often modular in size, they’re used to provide additional classroom space when there is a shortage of capacity.

Shortly after the 2002 ANSI standards were developed, there was an effort to develop a new HVAC unit that could meet the stricter ANSI acoustical standard. Although not a mandatory standard and therefore not enforceable, one company became convinced that the new equipment was both technologically possible and fulfilled a need that existed within the marketplace.

“Many in the industry thought that ANSI’s new standard would be nearly impossible to meet, especially with a vertical wall mounted unit,” said Irv Derks, vice president of engineering, Bard Manufacturing Company, Inc. Bard however, agreed with the intent of the standard which was to help improve the learning environment in schools. Therefore Bard embarked in the development of an acoustically improved HVAC system.

Shortly thereafter, in early 2004, Bard’s partner, Geary Pacific, organized a meeting of industry stakeholders, including representatives from the California Air Resource Board, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Department of Health Services, and the California Department of Education, in Sacramento, CA to discuss the idea of what features the next generation of classroom HVAC equipment should include.

So in conjunction with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Bard and Geary Pacific began a multifaceted approach to developing a quieter, more energy efficient unit with better ventilation capability and one that used next generation refrigerants – or “green” refrigerants – as its base. They decided that the unit had to not only work well with new construction but also had to retrofit easily into older construction, including portable classroom units.

Involvement by LBNL included a two step testing process of a prototype unit designed and constructed by Bard at the company’s manufacturing plant in Bryan, OH. “Over a series of many months, LBNL compared the energy efficiency and the ventilation capability and did the acoustical comparisons to a standard wall mount in an actual portable classroom at their facility,” said Derks.

What they found was that the new Bard unit – called the Quiet Climate II – was not only more energy efficient but it also ventilated better. From there, LBNL and Bard, in a concerted effort with Geary Pacific, employed a field test program in which 10 prototype units were shipped and installed by Geary Pacific in two different California schools: five in Fontana and the other five in Modesto. Ultimately, the field tests backed up the original results achieved by LBNL.

However, Bard was still not completely satisfied with the acoustical improvements and continued in the development of additional enhancements to drive the sounds levels down as far as technically feasible. Once developed, some of the 10 classrooms were retrofitted with the improvements, which resulted in significant additional reduction in the ambient sound level.

Around the same time that LBNL was wrapping up the field tests, Geary Pacific decided it needed to find out how the unit would function in a real-world portable classroom environment. Using space at the company’s branch in Riverside, CA, Geary Pacific acquired and set up an older, portable classroom, complete with desks and the other accoutrements found in a typical classroom. Then the company replaced the existing wall mounted HVAC unit with Bard’s new Quiet Climate II unit.

“We wanted to put in place an older classroom, like those developed around 1992, to demonstrate what the new unit could do in a practical application,” said Maury Tiernan, Geary Pacific’s Bard product manager. “The older classrooms are more typical of what’s in service at many schools, and so we wanted to demonstrate how the Bard unit would do when retrofitted to an older, existing classroom.”

Shortly thereafter, Geary Pacific decided to bring in two of the original co-authors of the ANSI standard to conduct their own tests within the classroom and see how the Bard unit performed acoustically. Louis Sutherland, who served as the Chief Scientist and Deputy Director for the Acoustic Research Group of Wylie Laboratories, and as the co-chair - along with David Lubman - of the large ANSI Working Group that wrote the Classroom Acoustics standard, was one of the acousticians who conducted tests within the classroom at Geary Pacific’s Riverside location.

“We took measurements at a number of selected positions of the ambient sound level before the air conditioning unit was turned on, and just as an anecdote, the reps from Geary Pacific said, ‘okay, now it’s on’, and I said ‘you’re kidding’, said Sutherland. The unit was on, and by my own hearing, I couldn’t tell any difference between when it was on and when it was off.”

Sutherland’s more scientific tests essentially backed up what he heard, or in this case didn’t. “When we reviewed our test results, they showed that the lowest ambient noise level with the HVAC system turned off was about 33 dBA,” said Sutherland. “When we then turned on the HVAC system at three different power levels of operation, the noise levels ranged from 35 to 39 dBA.”

What Sutherland quickly realized was that in most instances, Bard’s Quiet Climate II unit ultimately met the 2002 ANSI standard of 35 dBA. Geary Pacific’s success in a practical application test of the Bard Quiet Climate lead the company to convince Val Verde Unified School District in Perris, CA in the early spring of 2007 to purchase a unit for its audiology lab that tests students for hearing disabilities.

According to the school’s audiologist, Randy Lerner, the environment for testing and evaluating students has improved by 20% due to a considerable reduction in ambient noise from 58 dBA to 37 dBA. Said Lerner, “With the old unit, I used to have to turn it off during a testing session, because it was so loud. Now my students comment on how quiet the lab is, and that’s when the unit is on.”

Randy Lerner of Val Verde

Geary Pacific’s goal is to convince more school districts of the benefits of the new, Bard unit. “It’s difficult, because in some instances, many schools don’t have it within their budget to retrofit classrooms for the new units,” says Tiernan. “However, we feel the Quiet Climate II unit delivers two important benefits: it uses 44% less energy than standard units on the market today, and it’s 10 to 15dB quieter. These facts alone certainly are compelling enough reasons to reconsider that it’s the right time for a change.” The ears of students across the U.S. and the teachers who work so hard to educate would probably most certainly agree.

Last week (7/17/08), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Appeals Board Panel dismissed the latest appeal brought by the Construction Industry Employer Coalition, a coalition of five trade associations of U.S. construction interests, to withdraw the adoption of the approved voluntary consensus standard “reduction of Musculoskeletal Problems in Construction” (ANSI/ASSE A10.40-2007), which aims to reduce musculoskeletal problems/disorders (MSDs) in the construction industry. This was the last appeal allowable under the ANSI appeals process.

In late 2006, the ANSI/ASSE A10 Accredited Standards Committee (ASC) on Construction and Demolition Operations approved the standard. Following the approval of the standard by the Committee, the Coalition filed an appeal challenging the standard’s adoption, and a hearing was held on May 1, 2007 to hear the formal complaints.

On May 25, 2007, the appeals panel found unanimously that the appeal complaints were without merit and that the Secretariat, the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE), complied with the ANSI due process requirements in developing the standard. ANSI’s Board of Standards Review (BSR) approved the standard on July 23, 2007 after extensive review of the procedures and the record.

During Fall 2007, the Coalition filed a request with ANSI to retract the approval of the standard temporarily, but the BSR decided not to rescind the approval of A10.40 as a consensus standard while an appeal was pending on October 16, 2007. The Coalition appealed the BSR decision on November 9, 2007. The ANSI BSR held the hearing for the appeal on February 7, 2008. The BSR determined after the appeal hearing on March 14, 2008 that its original action to approve the A10.40 as an American National Standard stands. The Coalition appealed again on May 5, 2008, their last appeal under ANSI procedures.

According to the ANSI Appeals Board Panel, the appeals statement and record filed by the Coalition did not establish a prima facie case against the BSR’s earlier decision to uphold the approval of the standard. Therefore, another appeals hearing will not be held.

The ANSI BSR denied the previous appeal on the grounds that insufficient evidence was provided by the Coalition in support of its appeal to demonstrate that the ASC 10 Committee failed to obtain a consensus of materially affected interests with respect to the A10.40 Standard, that the Committee was unbalanced or dominated by one interest group, that the Committee failed adequately to respond to comments or that any procedural requirements were violated or overlooked.

“National consensus standards, such as A10.40, reflect the insights of the final users and the opinions of professionals who work at all levels of public and private sectors in technology development, safety and health, manufacturing, training, financial analysis, personnel and academia,” said A10 Committee Chair Richard King, CSP, CRSP. “This balanced perspective enables standards to be crafted in a manner that benefits and protects standard users.”

Some of the potential solutions in the standard aimed at reducing incidence of MSDs include risk elimination, substitution, use of engineering controls, administrative changes, training, use of protective equipment and assessment of individuals’ physical capabilities.

The standard also notes that construction workers and supervisors should be trained to recognize risk factors and ways to reduce the risk of MSDs through proper work techniques. Employee participation and injury management program are also discussed in the standard. A10.40 also includes a risk assessment guide, a construction MSD problem checklist, a return-to-work checklist, a list of resources, key terms and definitions and a list of non-occupational risk factors associated with work-related MSDs such as age, strength and gender.

For more information on how to reduce the risk of MSDs in construction visit the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health for its booklet titled Simple Solutions: Ergonomics for Construction Workers. Click this link for ASSE’s position statement on ergonomics.

The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) announced it has been awarded accreditation by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as a standards developing organization.

“ANSI accreditation adds value to our standards development process by confirming that our procedures meet ANSI’s essential requirements for openness, balance, consensus, and due process,” said AHRI President Stephen Yurek. “In order to maintain accreditation, AHRI is required to consistently adhere to a rigorous set of requirements and procedures.”

Many of AHRI’s standards outline technical procedures for uniformly measuring the performance of heating, ventilation, air conditioning and commercial refrigeration (HVACR) equipment. Through the use of these standards and voluntary participation in the industry’s performance certification programs, consumers can be assured manufacturers’ performance claims are verified and rated uniformly to enable fair comparisons.

“The rigor of ANSI accreditation makes it widely recognized as a valid measurement of a standards program’s credibility and competency by federal and state governments and governments outside the United States,” said Yurek. “It also enhances the integrity of AHRI’s industry certification programs, and improves consumer confidence in the performance of heating, cooling and commercial refrigeration equipment and components both domestically and abroad.”