This is a significant ASHRAE achievement and we do not mind saying so. The original University of Michigan standards advocacy enterprise (See ABOUT) began participating in ASHRAE 201 Facility Smart Grid Information Model as a user-interest from 2012 until the end of 2016. Other US-based accredited standards developers in electrotechnology — such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the National Electrical Manufacturers Association — compete in the “smart grid” space. We follow them too; commenting when we can, collaborating with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee.
As the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States, the education facility industry should contribute meaningfully (with data, insight, pilot-sites, faculty and staff support, etc.) to all standards developers to help them improve their products.
ASHRAE 201 is a solid product in a complex space (noteworthy for its technical specifics); its purpose reproduced below:
“FOREWORD. The effort to substantially modernize and transform the national electric grid and create what has become known as a “smart grid” is an enormous undertaking that reflects both the size and importance of the electric grid. Viewed in its entirety, it is an international effort involving hundreds of organizations and companies, and it will impact billions of people. The standards infrastructure that will be needed to support this transformation may include over one hundred standards by the time that it is fully in place. This standard is one part of that infrastructure.
Almost all electricity is consumed in a building of some kind – homes, retail establishments, offices, schools, factories, hospitals – the list goes on. This standard attempts to capture the breadth and diversity of these consumers by using the term “facility.” A facility is any kind of building or collection of buildings, and all of the electrical loads or local generation sources contained within them or controlled by the facility owner.
Historically, electricity consumption has been viewed as a collection of dumb loads at the end of a distribution system. There has been almost no interaction between the “loads” and those responsible for electricity generations and distribution. The vision of the smart grid changes this picture radically. In a smart grid world, facilities become full partners in supporting and managing the electric grid. Facilities become generators using local renewable or other generation capacity. Facilities moderate electrical demand in response to fluctuations in the price or [availability]sp of electricity. Facilities communicate and negotiate with energy providers, sharing information about the facility’s projected electrical demand or ability to respond to the energy provider’s needs for maintaining grid stability and reliability.
In some respects all facilities have common characteristics and needs with respect to interactions with a smart grid, regardless of whether the facility is a commercial, institutional, or industrial building, or a private home. The Facility Smart Grid Information Model (FSGIM) standard attempts to capture this commonality and standardize the content of the information that a facility manager needs to have, or, in some cases, needs to exchange with the energy provider, in order to manage the facility. Energy providers benefit from the FSGIM standard because it enables interaction with all different types of facilities in a common way. Facility owners benefit because products can be designed for use in multiple facility types and products designed primarily for one type of facility, a home for example, can more easily be used in another, say a commercial building.
An information model is an abstraction, not an implementation. This abstract representation is a way to account for the reality that the technology used to manage a facility may be quite different depending on the type of facility. It is intended that the FSGIM will be used to develop or enhance other standards that define technology and communication protocol specific implementations of the model for particular markets.
The FSGIM was developed in the context of a much larger framework of smart grid standards. It builds on some of those standards in a way that is intended to maintain consistency and harmony with established and developing standards that impact the information needed to managing the facility, while at the same time capturing all of the key information needed in one place.
If the smart grid is to become a reality there must be smart facilities of all types that interact with it. The considerable time and talent that went into developing the FSGIM was invested in order to lay a solid foundation upon which to fulfill this vision.”
Campus environmental automation units — building automation and control staff — take note. Today, we simply identify the opportunity to review the updated 837-page document whole cloth and encourage our colleagues running building environmental units to participate directly on ASHRAE Public Commenting platform, linked below:
Comments are due December 16th.
All ASHRAE consensus products are on the agenda of our monthly 11 AM/ET Mechanical Engineering and Energy standards teleconferences. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Category: Mechanical, Electrical, Energy, ICT, IoT
Colleagues: David B. Anderson, David Conrad, Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Larry Spielvogel, Ted Weidner
Snow and ice management is a significant enterprise in the education facility industry. One of the accredited consensus standards developer in this space is the Snow and Ice Management Association (SIMA) headquartered in Wisconsin where our colleagues know a little something about snow and ice. SIMA’s business model — membership conferences, manufacturer sponsorship, training, legislative advocacy etc. — is very familiar to us. We encourage workpoint experts – likely tens of thousands of facility managers involved in snow and ice management — to participate in its standardization program; the details of which are linked below.
SIMA has launched a new standardization project — SIMA 10 Standard Practice for Procuring and Planning Snow and Ice Management Services — which can hasten leading practice discovery and promulgation for those units in the education industry charged with getting school buses running in the morning, clearing ice and snow from campus pathways, parking lots, entrances and roofs. From the announcement in ANSI Standards Action:
SIMA 10-201x, Standard Practice for Procuring and Planning Snow and Ice Management Services
Project Need: Snow and ice management service providers and their customers need to have standardized ways and methods of planning and preparation for snow and ice storms. Current practices are actualizing into inconsistent terms, lack of clarity, and unmet expectations. During snow and ice events (winter storms), standardized methods of procurement and planning are needed to enhance public safety and transportation.
Stakeholders: Snow and ice service providers, property and facility owners and managers, legal, insurance, consumers of snow
and ice management services.
This standard of practice covers essential procuring and planning for snow and ice management services. Standards for procuring and planning are essential for business continuity and to improve safety for patrons, tenants, employees, and others in the general public. Knowing how to describe service requirements in a snow and ice management request for proposal (RFP) is an important component to providing effective services, particularly where winter weather is a variable. This standard practice provides guidance on the snow and ice management procurement and planning process to aid in the creation of RFPs, contracts, agreements, and monitoring procedures. This standard will not be submitted for consideration as an ISO, IEC, or ISO/IEC JTC-1 standard.
An exposure draft has been prepared. Comments are due December 23rd.
Download a free electronic review copy at www.sima.org/standards. Send comments (with optional copy to email@example.com) to: Follow the instructions for submitting a public review comment at www.sima.org/standards, You may contact Martin@sima.org or Ellen@sima.org directly.
We will place the emergent SIMA suite on our monthly Grounds & Landscaping teleconference. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Category: Grounds & Landscaping
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben
As we explain in our ABOUT, we are continuing the development of the cadre of “code writers and vote-getters” begun at the University of Michigan in 1993. We are now drilling down into state and local adaptations of nationally developed codes and standards that are incorporated by reference into public safety and sustainability legislation.
This post is a “test pancake” for generating discussion, and for developing a way forward for crafting state exceptions to nationally developed codes and standards. Every state will have to be managed according to its history, culture, governance regime, asset-base and network of expertise.
Standards Michigan will remain the “free” home site but state-specific sites such as Standards Nebraska will be accessible to user-interest code-writers and vote-getters. Please send firstname.lastname@example.org a request to join one of our mailing lists appropriate to your interest for #SmartCampus standards action in the State of Nebraska.
Today at 11 AM Eastern time we revisit the status of education industry trade associations. The surprising number of them is characteristic of an industry that is a “culture” as well as a a “business”. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
We have always taken a forward-looking approach to the National Electrical Code (NEC) because there is sufficient supply of NEC instructors and inspectors and not enough subject matter experts driving user-interest ideas into it. Today we start on the parts of the 2020 NEC that cover wiring safety for microgrid systems; a relatively new term of art that appropriates safety and sustainability concepts that have existed in electrotechnology for decades.
Turn to Part II of Article 705 Interconnected Electric Power Production Sources:
You will notice that microgrid wiring safety is a relatively small part of the much larger Article 705 Content. There were relatively minor changes to the 2017 NEC in Section 705.50 — but a great deal of new content regarding Microgrid Interconnection Devices, load side connections, backfeeding practice and disconnecting means — as can be seen in the transcripts of Code-Making Panel 4 action:
Keep in mind that the NEC says nothing (or nearly very little, in its purpose stated in Section 90.2) about microgrid economics or the economics of any other electrical installation. It is the claim about economic advantages of microgrids that drive education facility asset management and energy conservation units to conceive, finance, install, operate and — most of all — tell the world about them. In previous posts we have done our level best to reduce the expectations of business and finance leaders of dramatic net energy savings with microgrids — especially on campuses with district energy systems. Microgrids do, however, provide a power security advantage during major regional contingencies — but that advantage involves a different set of numbers.
Note also that there is no user-interest from the education facility industry — the largest non-residential building construction market in the the United States — on Panel 4. This is not the fault of the NFPA, as we explain in our ABOUT.
Public input for the 2023 National Electrical Code is due September 10th.
We collaborate with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facility Committee which meets online 4 times per month in European and American time zones. Since a great deal of the technical basis for the NEC originates with the IEEE we will also collaborate with IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 18 whose members are charged by the IEEE Standards Association to coordinate NFPA and IEEE consensus products.
Category: Electrical, Energy
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Kane Howard, Jose Meijer
The United States Technical Advisory Group (US-TAG), with oversight by the American National Standards Institute and project administration by NFPA International, is participating in the development of an International Organization for Standardization consensus document that will shape policy development for smart cities (sustainable cities and communities). The ISO Global Secretariat is ANSI’s French counterpart Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR) as shown in the map below.
As cities-within-cities, major international research universities are stakeholders in these discussions because of the town-gown infrastructure interface in the emergent #SmartCampus. We have been participants in this project since 2014:
Consensus documents emerging from ISO/TC 268 tend to be large, fast-moving and highly interdependent. Drafts for US stakeholder comment and balloting arrive frequently as new workgroups are spawned from the core ISO TC/268 committees. NFPA is in the process of developing a workspace for managing the documents that must be reviewed, commented and balloted. Until that time, we are using the workspace that may be accessed by CLICKING HERE:
Access to “commentable” draft documents is limited to US TAG members however ANSI has arranged for restrictions to be lifted for circulation among US stakeholders. Those who would like to participate should communicate directly with Robert Solomon (email@example.com) and/or Linda MacKay (firstname.lastname@example.org) at NFPA International, the US TAG Administrator for this project.
We are happy to review these documents any day at 11 AM Eastern time. Alternatively, you may click into our next International Standards teleconference; the next shown on our CALENDAR. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
4 December 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37165 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation by Non-cash Payment for Fare/Fees in Transportation and its Related or Additional Services. Comments due 18 December 2019
WG4 TR— Data exchange and sharing for community infrastructure based on Geoinformation. Comments due 18 December 2019
WG4 TR Smart Community Infrastructures Report of Pilot Project on the Application of SC1 Deliverables. Comments due 18 December 2019
4 November 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 37169 Smart Community Infrastructures –Smart Transportation by Run-Through Train/Bus Operation in/between Cities.
Comments due November 20th
ISO/NP 37168 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Autonomous Shuttle Services Using Connected Autonomous Electric Vehicles (eCAVs).
Comments due November 20th
ISO/FDIS 37155 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures – Recommendations for Considering Opportunities and Challenges from Interactions in Smart Community Infrastructures from Relevant Aspects through the Life Cycle.
Comments due November 20th
7 October 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37123 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Indicators for Resilient Cities.
Comments due October 29th
25 September 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 24609 Smart Community Infrastructures – Data and Framework of Digital Technology Apply in Smart City Infrastructure Governance.
Comments due October 3rd
10 September 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37105 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Descriptive Framework for Cities and Communities.
Comments due September 19th
2 August 2019 Update:
ISO/CD 37164 Smart community infrastructures — Smart transportation using fuel cell light rail transportation.
Comments due August 16th
ISO/DIS 37163 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Parking Lot Allocation in Cities.
Comments due August 19th
1 August 2019 Update:
ISO/NP 37167 Smart Community Infrastructures — Smart Transportation for Energy Saving by Intentionally Slowly Driving.
Comments due August 12th
July 28, 2019 Update:
ISO/CD 37155-2 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures- Part 2: Holistic Approach and the Strategy for Development, Operation and Maintenance of Smart Community Infrastructures.
Comments due August 1st.
June 25, 2019 Update:
ISO / DIS 37160 Smart Community Infrastructure – Measurement Methods for Quality of Thermal Power Station Infrastructure and Requirements for Plant Operations and Management.
Comments due July 12th
June 5, 2019 Update:
No commentable documents at this time.
May 22, 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37161 Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on Smart Transportation for Energy Saving in Transportation Services in Cities.
Comments due June 5th
May 16, 2019 Update:
No commentable documents at this time. We walk through all transportation-related standards action on May 16th.
April 29, 2019 Update:
ISO NP 37166 New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures. Specification of Multi-Source Urban Data Integration for Smart City Planning.
Comments due May 14th
March 14, 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37122 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Indicators for Smart Cities |
Comments due April 2nd.
February 19, 2019 Update:
ISO/FDIS 37104 Sustainable Cities and Communities – Transforming Our Cities – Guidance for Practical Local Implementation of ISO 37101 |
Comments due February 15th
ISO NP 23944 (N330) New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures – Guidance on smart Transportation by Non-Cash payment for Fare/Fees in Transportation and its Related or Additional Services |
Comments due February 15th
Ballot for ISO NP 23943 (N328) New Work Item Proposed: Smart Community Infrastructures – Smart Transportation using Fuel Cell LRT |
Comments due February 15th
January 24, 2019 Update:
ISO/DIS 37123 Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for resilient cities.
Ballots due February 8th
Some amount of the commentable material cannot be distributed and must be viewed online (a chronic problem). Click in to any of our daily 11 AM EST teleconferences if you would like to read and mark up with comments.
December 18, 2018 Update:
No commentable documents at this time
November 1, 2018 Update:
ISO / DIS 37155 Framework for Integration and Operation of Smart Community Infrastructures – Part 1: Opportunities and Challenges from Interactions in Smart Community Infrastructures from all Aspects through the Life Cycle.
* Owing to copyright restrictions you must send an email to email@example.com to access to the documents
Comments are due November 19th
October 1, 2018 Update:
Comments due October 5th:
14-101 ISO 268 Item ISO IEC 17021 Public Review Draft
September 18, 2018 Update:
Comments are due September 24th on the documents linked below:
14-101 ISO WD TS 37107 SEPT 2018 Sustainable Cities
14-101 ISO CD 37160 SEPT 2018 Sustainable Cities
September 16, 2018 Update:
The US TAG convened at NFPA Headquarters last this week. Since some of the material is copyright protected, we welcome education facility professionals to click in any day at 11 AM to review the commenting opportunities open to US stakeholders generally, and education industry professionals specifically.
Draft document now open for public review: Smart community infrastructures — Guidance on smart transportation for allocation of parking lots in cities. (ISO Stage 20.20)
Comments are due at NFPA on September 13th
US TAG meets at NFPA Headquarters in Quincy, Massachusetts September 12 and 13. Mike Anthony will be in attendance.
August 2018 Update:
Draft document now open for public review: Sustainable development in communities — Indicators for Smart Cities.
Comments are due at NFPA on August 27th.
Draft document now open for public review: Guidelines on Data Exchange and Sharing for Smart Community Infrastructures.
Comments are due at NFPA on August 24th
One draft document is now open for public review: Smart community infrastructures — Smart transportation for rapid transit in/between large city zones and the surrounding areas (ISO/DIS 37159).
Comments are due at NFPA on August 7th.
No new business items received from ISO Genève. US TAG will meet in at NFPA headquarters, September 12-13, 2018
June 2018 Update:
No new business items received from ISO Genève. The US TAG is planning a September on-site meeting at NFPA Headquarters in Boston.
May 2018 Update:
Balloting was completed by the US TAG on proposed ISO/FDIS 37120 Sustainable Development in Communities – Indicators for City Services and Quality of Life
April 2018 Update:
At the 2017 Paris meeting of TC/268, the UK suggested that it would be helpful to develop an overall maturity model for cities, drawing on the framework set out by SC1 in ISO/DIS 37153. The TC agreed, and WG4 was asked to work up proposals.
At its Berlin meeting in May, WG4 made good progress and recommended a way forward. But in plenary discussion with other working groups, there was concern that WG4 was moving too quickly and on too narrowly‐focused a basis
The purpose of a recent release by ISO TC/268 — an outline of city “maturity models” — is to respond to those concerns, proposing a broader framework for future work in this area across TC/268
An explanation of the broad contours of parent standard — with the Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR Group) as the Secretariat — is described in the videoclip below:
Issue: [14-101] and [18-5]
Category: #SmartCampus, Informatics, Administration & Management
Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Jack Janveja, John Kaczor, Richard Robben
* Permission is granted by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to electronically reproduce this draft International Standard for purpose of review and comment related to the preparation of the U.S. position, provided this notice is included. All other rights are reserved.
As we explain in our ABOUT, we are continuing development of the cadre of “code writers and vote-getters” begun at the University of Michigan in 1993. Code writers and vote getters are the true expert witnesses to the social negotiation of technical change. They are leaders in the reconciliation of the competing requirements of safety and economy in the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States.
We are now drilling down into state and local adaptations of nationally developed codes and standards that are incorporated by reference into public safety and sustainability legislation. This post is a “test pancake” for generating discussion, and for discovering the best way forward for crafting state exceptions to nationally developed codes and standards. Every state will have to be managed according to its history, culture, governance regime, asset-base and network of expertise.
Standards Michigan will remain the “free” home site but state-specific sites such as Standards Kentucky will be accessible to user-interest code-writers and vote-getters. Please send firstname.lastname@example.org a request to join one of our mailing lists appropriate to your interest for #SmartCampus standards action in the State of Kentucky.
There are so many energy-related legislative proposals now pending in the 116th Congress that may affect academic and business units in the education industry that we list them in a separate post. We walk through them during our monthly Energy Standards teleconference.