PageBlogs | Standards Michigan |

IBC 2021 | Electrical Room Design

Loading
loading...

IBC 2021 | Electrical Room Design

June 19, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

The location, size and operating characteristics of electrical service equipment is one of the first challenges that architects and engineers must resolve when a facility is designed — particularly in renovation projects in which legacy safety features must be “brought up to code”.    Design considerations must accommodate requirements for appropriate operation and maintenance.  Very often the consensus documents that govern architectural requirements — most frequently the International Building Code (IBC) and the National Electrical Code (NEC) — are not incorporated by reference into state and local public safety with the current version.   The IBC and the NEC are developed one-year out of step with one another (nominally) but state level adoptions may widen the out-of-step condition.

While it may be desirable for all consensus documents that govern building safety and sustainability to be revised in a coordinated fashion, the practical reality is that historical, cultural and technological differences restrain coordinated building code development.   Getting building safety and sustainability codes to harmonize more closely — and in step with one another — should be a national priority by federal agencies charged with oversight in the construction of buildings and infrastructure.  At the moment, there is no business model in government or in the private sector that supports close harmonization.

The IEEE Standards Association established Standards Coordinating Committee 18 (SCC-18) for liaison between the National Electrical Code Committees and other IEEE Committees (such as the committee that develops the National Electrical Safety Code).  There is no liaison between the IEEE and the International Code Council on electrical safety issues; however.   Optimal harmonization depends upon subject matter experts familiar with the action in both safety “universes”.  For the education facilities industry at least (the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States) liaison is conducted by the  IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets online 4 times monthly.   The E&H Committee meets twice today, for example.  (Click here)

In our April 11th post on this topic we identified electrical safety issues on the agenda of the IBC Group A technical committee:

2021 IBC Proposals for Electrical Rooms

In play are considerations for the size and orientation of the electrical room (assuming an interior substation); access to the room, how the room — inherently a high-risk space — is illuminated and cooled.  The proposed changes are largely correlation changes but carry the risk all-too-common in consensus document development that by being too specific correlation risk between the design disciplines will increase and/or make the requirements more difficult to enforce.

We now have the results of the Committee Action Hearings:

2018 Report of the Committee Action Hearings on the 2018 Editions of the Group A International Codes

The responses to proposals regarding coordination with architectural disciplines are noteworthy and require a careful reading.   Also noteworthy is the relatively narrow time frame for public participation in the development of the core electrical safety documents in the United States:

ICC 2021 International Building Code:  Public commenting  is due July 16th

IEEE 2022 National Electrical Safety Code: Public input is due July 16th

NFPA 2020 National Electrical Code: Public commenting is due August 30th

We have six weeks this summer to coordinate accepted good practice for electrical system design, construction and maintenance that will be available for incorporation by reference into public law at the state level.

All ICC, IEEE and NFPA documents are standing items on our weekly Open Door teleconference — every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern Time, which is accessible to everyone with login information below:

Contact

Issue: [17-234]

 

NSF 350 | Water Re-use systems

June 18, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

As one of the world’s largest consensus standards developers NSF International guides stakeholders in the discovery of leading practice in emergent technologies.   NSF 350 Onsite Water Re-use is a consensus product intended to meet market demand for best practice in the minimum material, design, and construction, and performance requirements for onsite residential and commercial water treatment systems,  In addition to their use in environmental air systems, the deployment of water re-use systems is gathering pace in university-affiliated hospitals, research laboratories, student residences, district energy plants, athletic venues and other facilities that consume water at commercial scale.   Water re-use technology is also a topic on the US education industry’s sustainability agenda and is included in academic sustainability programs. 

Now comes a revision to NSF 350 (Tracking #50i31r1) that recommends leading practice for water load tests.  The redline (strikethrough) is available in the link below:

ANSI Standards Action (PDF Pages 30-31)

Comments due July 8th.   Anyone may comment directly on the NSF Online Workspace and/or communicate directly with Jason Snider NSF International Tel: (734) 418-6660 E-mail: jsnider@nsf.org.  Send a copy of your comments to psa@ansi.org.

NSF International, owing to the need for speed in water, food and pharmaceutical safety, maintains its standards suite continuously — i.e. in revision cycles that run 30 to 45 days.  Action in NSF International standards generally track on this page: (Click here)

The NSF suite is a standing item of our weekly Open Door teleconferences every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern Time, which are open to anyone.  Click here to log in.

Issue: [18-61]

Category: Water, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel, Ron George

 


Posted March 7, 2018

As one of the world’s largest consensus standards developers NSF International guides stakeholders in the discovery of leading practice in emergent technologies.   NSF 350 Onsite Water Re-use is a consensus product intended to meet market demand for best practice in the minimum material, design, and construction, and performance requirements for onsite residential and commercial water treatment systems,  In addition to their use in environmental air systems, the deployment of water re-use systems is gathering pace in university-affiliated hospitals, research laboratories, student residences, district energy plants, athletic venues and other facilities that consume water at commercial scale.   Water re-use technology is also a topic on the US education industry’s sustainability agenda and is included in academic sustainability programs. 

Now comes a revision to NSF 350 that deals with the performance classification of these systems; the redline (strikethrough) is available in the link below:

ANSI Standards Action Pages 43-44

Comments due March 25th.   Anyone may comment directly on the NSF Online Workspace and/or communicate directly with Jason Snider NSF International Tel: (734) 418-6660 E-mail: jsnider@nsf.org.  Send a copy of your comments to psa@ansi.org.

NSF International, owing to the need for speed in water, food and pharmaceutical safety, maintains its standards suite continuously — i.e. in revision cycles that run 30 to 45 days.  Action in NSF International standards generally track on this page: (Click here).  The NSF suite is a standing item of our weekly Open Door teleconferences every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern Time, which are open to anyone.  Click here to log in.

Issue: [18-61]

Category: Water, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel, Ron George


NFPA 99 | Healthcare Facilities Code

June 18, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

It is not too early to begin formulating concepts for the 2021 revision of NFPA 99 Health Care Facilities Code.   Some of the concepts we are advocating in Article 517 for the 2020 revision of National Electrical Code (now being debated among several NEC working groups) may be more effectively placed in NFPA 99; though the concepts belong in either document is an issue over which good minds will disagree.

Several workgroups are already convening ahead of the Public Input meetings in Hiltonhead, SC in January 2018; one of which is examining proposals from Standards Michigan and the American Society of Healthcare Engineering for “rightsizing” the healthcare facility building power supply chain.  Access to the work in progress of those working groups is available at this link: 2020 NEC Concepts Landing Page

Public Input Closing Date is June 27, 2018.   We will continue collaboration with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets again twice Tuesday, November 21st.   Anyone is welcomed to join those teleconferences with the login information provided on the meeting agenda.

Issues: [12-18, [15-97] and [16-101]

Contact: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Robert Arno, Josh Elvove, Joe DeRosier, Larry Spielvogel

Previous public input and comment: NFPA 99 Public Input and Comment 2015 Edition Issue 15-97

 

McGill University Health Center | Montreal

ISO/TC 309 | Governance and Accountability of Organizations

June 18, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Click on image for more information

A relatively new ISO committee is developing an international consensus document that will set the broad contours of standardization in the field of governance relating to aspects of direction, control and accountability of organizations. (Click here for the TC 309 Homepage)  Admittedly, a broad scope but one that the US education industry should at least know about, if not be an an active participant.  The academic and business units of the US education sector must simultaneously collaborate and compete with the academic and business units of the education sector of other nations.

The strategic business plan is linked below:

Executive Summary ISO Technical Committee 309 (ISO/TC 309)

The US organization charged by the American National Standards Institute with administering US Technical Advisory Group (US TAG) is the InterNational Committee for Information Technology Standards (INCITS, see links to previous posts below).  The INCITS committee will operate under the ANSI-accredited procedures for US TAGS.   Click here for more information about joining the US TAG or other INCITS committees.

An organizational meeting will be hosted via Webex by INCITS on June 19, 2018 from 11:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern time.  The agenda, related documents and instructions for joining the WebEx meeting will be distributed to organizational representatives requesting membership on the new ISO/TC 309 US TAG. RSVPs for the meeting should be submitted to Jennifer Garner (jgarner@itic.org) as soon as possible.

All ISO standards relevant to the US education industry are on the agenda of our weekly Open Door teleconferences — every Wednesday, 11:00 AM Eastern time.  Anyone is welcomed to join them.  Click here to log in.

Issue: [18-157]

Category: Administration & Management, International, Finance, Academics, Informatics, Public Policy, Risk Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer


INCITS | Information Technology

INCITS | Artificial Intelligence


International Standards for the US Education Industry

College & University Libraries

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

The founding of many educational institutions throughout the world started with a church.  (See College & University Chapels).   After the church the library was the second building.

The image criteria of our WordPress theme does not permit many images of college and university libraries to be shown fully dimensioned on sliders or widget galleries.  We reproduce a few of the outsized images here and leave the complexities of financing, designing, building and maintaining of them in a safe and sustainable manner for another day.   Click on any image for more information.


Dominican University

 


The Masters University

 


Texas A&M University

 


 

Ohio State University

 


 

University of Washington

 


Vilnius University Library

 


 

Biblioteca Centrală a Universității Politehnica Timișoara | Romania

 


 

University of Southern California

 


 

 

Københavns Universitet

 


 

 

Roskilde Universitet


 

Bowling Green State University

 


 

Universität Wien

 


 

 

新加坡管理大学 | Singapore Management University

 


 

上海大学 | Shanghai University Library

 


 

Universidade de Coimbra

 


 

University of Michigan Law School

 

More coming.

National Institute for Standards & Technology

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a measurement standards laboratory, and a non-regulatory agency of the United States Department of Commerce. Its mission is to promote innovation and industrial competitiveness.  It has several enterprises that support both the academic and the business side of the US education industry

ANSI | Standards Boost Business

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Noticed or un-noticed, standards are a part of our lives.  If you standardize everything, you dampen innovation. If you standardize nothing,  the result is non-interoperable clusters that are not easily integrated.   Redundancy and destructive competition results in a lower-quality “deliverable”.

The difficulty the education education industry the United States has had in controlling its costs through consensus standardization processes lies in its ambivalence about whether it is a “culture” or a “business”.  It is a little of each.    We believe that a great deal of the cost structure of the US education industry could be managed by participating in ANSI standards processes and conforming to the leading practice discovery that results.  Headwinds for fully realizing this possibility come from both the cultural and business side.

National Technology Transfer & Advancement Act | Part 2 of 2

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Christine Fischer | Originally posted July 21, 2015

We would like to circle back to our February 2015 coverage of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act because it forms a significant part of the foundation for technological self-determination of most US industries — including the education and health care industry.   This time we have the good fortune of having this topic enlightened by the time and expertise of Andrew Updegrove of Gesmer Updegrove, LLC — one of the leading names in global standards setting, promotional consortia and open source foundations.


Issue: [11-31]

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Christine Fischer, Rich Robben, Andrew Updegrove

Higher Education Act of 1965

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

“Pythagoras and the beautiful Theano” (1913) | Artist unknown

We track broad policy trends, but do not advocate our agenda, in the legislative precincts of the US federal government.   There is plenty of work to do in technical, management, safety and sustainability standards for the emergent #SmartCampus.  Education policy is a space crowded with “market incumbents”, so to say, as some of the related links below should reveal.   Sorting through the Orwellian fog, we see the broad contours of emergent legislation that will likely have some affect on the flow of money to the physical characteristics of our cities-within-cities.

On May 7th, Senate bill S 2791 – A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide grants for institutions of higher education to prevent substance abuse, and for other purposes — was logged into the US Senate’s legislative calendar.

A summary is now in progress and will be posted at this link: Congress.GOV

Related information:

Promoting Real Opportunity, Success, and Prosperity through Education Reform: Prosper Act 

Letter from Department of Education Inspector General to Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

Alexander, Murray Seek Input on Reauthorization of Higher Education Act

Will the Higher Education Act be Reauthorized in 2018?

GOP Begins Rewrite of Federal Aid Law

Dividing Lines Take Shape in Senate

Link to previous Standards Michigan coverage

Higher Education Reauthorization Act of 1998


December 1, 2017

We see how other industries apply technical and business standards to meet their organizational goals so it is natural for us to ask about the degree to which adoption of privately developed consensus standards accredited by the American National Standards Institute would be an effective tool for driving down the cost of higher education in the United States.   Education — about 4 percent of gross domestic product — is an industry which, arguably, is built upon a foundation standards and related accreditation enterprise.  A baccalaureate degree is, after all, a standard.

Even as the legislative activity on revising/reauthorizing the Higher Education Act of 1965 is already in motion* we see three related developments that might enlighten understanding about how standards support regulation, and how regulation determines cost:

Much has happened since 1965:

  • In 1985 the ISO 9000 suite of standards began rolling out in many industries that had revenue streams originating in other nations.
  • The National Technology Transfer & Advancement Act — the parent legislation for many industries to develop their own standards (rather than standards written by the federal government) — was passed in 1996.
  • The number of organizations accredited by the American National Standards Institute as accredited standards developers for documents suitable for incorporation by reference by federal, state and local agencies has grown steadily.

December 1, 2017 Update from the House Committee on Education and the Workforce: (Click here

Stdmi_Logo 90 90

The parent legislation for the US higher education industry is the Higher Education Act of 1965; available in its entirety at this link:

Public Law 89-329 | November 8, 1965

AN ACT:  To strengthen the educational resources of our colleges and universities and to provide financial assistance for students in postsecondary and higher education.

It was not until the National Technology Transfer & Advancement Act of 1995 and the issuance of Office of Management & Budget Circular A-119: Federal Participation in Consensus Standards shortly thereafter that the October 7, 1998 reauthorization of the 1965 parent legislation that we first see requirements to use voluntary consensus standards accredited by the American National Standards Institute for financial management.

Public Law 105–244 | October 7, 1998

AN ACT: To extend the authorization of programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965, and for other purposes.

The sections of interest to us are highlighted below:

‘‘SEC. 143. ADMINISTRATIVE SIMPLIFICATION OF STUDENT AID DELIVERY.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the student aid delivery system, the Secretary and the Chief Operating Officer shall encourage and participate in the establishment of voluntary consensus standards and requirements for the electronic transmission of information necessary for the administration of programs under title IV.

‘‘(b) PARTICIPATION IN STANDARD SETTING ORGANIZATIONS.— ‘‘(1) The Chief Operating Officer shall participate in the activities of standard setting organizations in carrying out the provisions of this section. ‘‘(2) The Chief Operating Officer shall encourage higher education groups seeking to develop common forms, standards, and procedures in support of the delivery of Federal student financial assistance to conduct these activities within a standard setting organization. ‘‘(3) The Chief Operating Officer may pay necessary dues and fees associated with participating in standard setting organizations pursuant to this subsection.

‘‘(c) ADOPTION OF VOLUNTARY CONSENSUS STANDARDS.—Except with respect to the common financial reporting form under section 483(a), the Secretary shall consider adopting voluntary consensus standards agreed to by the organization described in subsection (b) for transactions required under title IV, and common data elements for such transactions, to enable information to be exchanged electronically between systems administered by the Department and among participants in the Federal student aid delivery system.

‘‘(d) USE OF CLEARINGHOUSES.—Nothing in this section shall restrict the ability of participating institutions and lenders from using a clearinghouse or servicer to comply with the standards for the exchange of information established under this section.

‘‘(e) DATA SECURITY.—Any entity that maintains or transmits information under a transaction covered by this section shall maintain reasonable and appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards— ‘‘(1) to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of the information; and ‘‘(2) to protect against any reasonably anticipated security threats, or unauthorized uses or disclosures of the information.

‘‘(f ) DEFINITIONS.—

‘‘(1) CLEARINGHOUSE.—The term ‘clearinghouse’ means a public or private entity that processes or facilitates the processing of nonstandard data elements into data elements conforming to standards adopted under this section.

‘‘(2) STANDARD SETTING ORGANIZATION.—The term ‘standard setting organization’ means an organization that— ‘‘(A) is accredited by the American National Standards Institute; ‘‘(B) develops standards for information transactions, data elements, or any other standard that is necessary to, or will facilitate, the implementation of this section; and ‘‘(C) is open to the participation of the various entities engaged in the delivery of Federal student financial assistance.

‘‘(3) VOLUNTARY CONSENSUS STANDARD.—The term ‘voluntary consensus standard’ means a standard developed or used by a standard setting organization described in paragraph (2).’’. (b) REPEAL OF OLD GENERAL PROVISIONS.—Title XII (20 U.S.C. 1141 et seq.) is repealed. PUBLIC LAW 105–244—OCT. 7, 1998 112 STAT. 1617 (c) REPEAL OF TITLE IV DEFINITION.—Section 481 (20 U.S.C. 1088) is amended— (1) by striking subsections (a), (b), and (c); and (2) by redesignating subsections (d) through (f ) as subsections (a) through (c), respectively.

We provide a link to an overview of the American National Standards Institute in the link below.

* Originally posted May 2016

International Organization for Standardization

June 17, 2018
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

We live in an amazing world full of incredible opportunities and endless possibilities. But it can also be a complex and overwhelming place. When things don’t work as they should it often means that standards are absent. But when ISO standards are applied, life is just so much richer.

ISO standards help to make the world a safer, cleaner and more efficient place: from food safety to computers, from health care to new technologies. There are many challenges facing our environment, economy and society.

ISO can make a positive difference to all our lives, utilising a wealth of international experience and wisdom. In today’s ever changing world ISO standards help create growth, open up global markets and make trade fairer, including for developing countries.

ISO standards can help tackle global challenges like climate change, road safety, energy and social responsibility. ISO standards touch almost everything we do, keeping us connected and entertained, making us more productive, more creative, sharing ideas, promoting innovation and keeping us safe and healthy. ISO is the world’s largest developer of voluntary International Standards. With over 18,000 standards for nearly every aspect of technology and business.

For over 60 years, a network of standards bodies in 163 countries, working in partnership around the world and right here at home. ISO builds confidence: for today, for tomorrow and for the future.

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background