PageBlogs | Standards Michigan |

Uniform Mechanical Code


Uniform Mechanical Code

August 19, 2019
No Comments

“Man and Machinery” | Diego Rivera (1933)

The IAPMO Group launched the 2021 revision cycle for the Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC); widely incorporated by reference into public safety law in many states.  The IAPMO product is different than the International Code Council product (International Mechanical Code); much of apparent overlap in scope due to the tenure of the IAPMO group before the International Code Council was formed in the early 2000’s.   History is not our business today, however.   From UMC prospectus:

BSR/IAPMO UMC 1-20xx, Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC). This code provides minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation and maintenance, or use of heating, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systems, incinerators and other miscellaneous heat-producing appliances. The provisions of this code apply to the erection, installation, alteration, repair, relocation, replacement, addition to, use, or maintenance of mechanical systems.

This document is developed so that its technical concepts correlate with the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC).  The UPC provides standards and requirements to safeguard life or limb, health, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation and maintenance or use of plumbing systems. The provisions of this code apply to the erection, installation, alteration, repair, relocation, addition to, use, or maintenance of plumbing systems.

Project Need: Designation of the UMC as an American National Standard has provided the built industry with uniform mechanical standards resulting in a reduction in training costs and product development costs, and in price reduction for consumers. This American National Standard provides consumers with safe mechanical systems while allowing latitude for innovation and new technologies. This project is intended to keep the code current.

Stakeholders: Manufacturers, users, installers and maintainers, labor research/standards/testing laboratories, enforcing authorities, consumers, and special experts. *

The Complete Monograph of proposed revisions for the 2021 Uniform Mechanical Code technical meeting in May was posted as linked below:

2019 Uniform Mechanical Code Technical Committee Monograph

We do not deal with all issues in this standard; choosing instead to focus only on those that affect #TotalCostofOwnership of education facilities.  We find a few concepts involving school lavatory ventilation rates and ground heat sources tracking in this revision but not much else that would not govern best practice for all facility classes.

More detailed information about how all stakeholders may participate is available this link: Public Comment Page.    You may communicate directly with IAPMO’s standards staff here: IAPMO (International Association of Plumbing & Mechanical Officials) 4755 E. Philadelphia Street Ontario, CA 91761 Office: (909) 472-4241 Gabriella Davis

We include the IAPMO suite on the standing agenda of our monthly Mechanical Engineering and Water standards teleconference; along with comparable consensus products from the International Code Council.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Since 2012 we have been tracking several IAPMO documents which govern the safety and sustainability concepts in education facilities; among them:

Uniform Solar Energy and Hydronics Code [Issue 15-15]

Cross-Connection Control Professional Qualifications Standard [13-75]

Uniform Swimming Pool Code [Issue 13-14]

Aluminum and copper plumbing fixtures [Issue 12-99]

Issue: [17-299]

International Plumbing Code

August 19, 2019
No Comments

The International Plumbing Code (IPC) is developed to harmonize with the full span of ICC’s family of building codes.  The IPC sets minimum regulations for plumbing systems and components to protect life, health and safety of building occupants and the public. The IPC is available for adoption by jurisdictions ranging from states to towns, and is currently adopted on the state or local level in 35 states in the U.S, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto Rico.  (CLICK HERE for the IPC Home Page)

SOURCE: CLICK ON IMAGE | Contact ICC for most recent IPC adoption map


The IPC is developed in the ICC Group A Code development framework and is mid-way through its revision cycle.  The complete monograph of the Group A Codes is linked below, with comments on IPC proposals starting on Page 1417 of this 1613 page document:

2021 IPC | Group A Public Comment Monograph

Because transgender issues are on the agenda of many facility managers we direct you to Page 1424 of the rather large document linked above.

As always, we persist in encouraging education industry facility managers (especially those with operations and maintenance data) to participate in the ICC code development process.  You may do so by CLICKING HERE.

Real asset managers for school districts, colleges, universities and technical schools in the Las Vegas region should take advantage of the opportunity to observe the ICC code-development process during the upcoming ICC Annual Conference in Las Vegas, October 20-23 during which time the Group B c Public Comment Hearings will take place.  Even though the IPC has moved farther along the ICC code development process it is still enlightening to observe how it work.   The Group B Hearings are usually webcast — and we will signal the link to the webcast when it becomes available — but the experience of seeing how building codes are determined is enlightening when you can watch it live and on site.

Issue: [16-133]

Category: Plumbing, Water, Mechanical

Colleagues: Eric Albert, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel




Neutral Public Bathroom Design

Air Conditioning Standards

August 19, 2019
No Comments

Ancient Air Conditioning | CLICK ON IMAGE

The Air Conditioning Contractors Association of America (ACCA) is an accredited consensus product developer for the design, maintenance, installation, testing, and performance of indoor environment systems.   We find its standards referenced in education facility design guidelines and construction specifications.  Some of its documents form the foundation for the technical curricula in trade schools.  Its consensus product library is linked below:


It welcomes original public input and public comment on its consensus products at the link below:

ACCA Standards Development Home Page

At the moment the ACCA has not released any of its own consensus products for public comment; but its suite is worth keeping an eye on during the summer months in North America.  We encourage our colleagues to interact directly with the ACCA standards team: Air Conditioning Contractors Association, 2800 Shirlington Rd, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22206, (703) 575-4477,

We are happy to discuss the ACCA suite any day at 11 AM Eastern time.  We also devote one hour per month to sweep through all Mechanical Engineering standards.  To a large degree the ACCA suite is highly interlocked with ICC, ASHRAE, NFPA, ASME and IEEE consensus products.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Facility Asset Management, Mechanical

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Larry Spielvogel, Richard Robben



Ventilation of Health Care Facilities

August 19, 2019
No Comments

“Ward in the Hospital in Arles” | Vincent Van Gogh (1889)

The American Society of Heating & Refrigeration Engineers (ASHRAE) has released another batch of addendum to its consensus product — Standard 170-2017 Ventilation of Health Care Facilities.  — of which the candidate revisions can be accessed at the link below:

Public Review Draft Standards / Online Comment Database


Addendum c provides guidance to users of Standard 170 on how to incorporate air classifications into their design of Standard 170 spaces if they are required to utilize them in conjunction with ASHRAE Standard 62.1.

Addendum h provides guidance to users of Standard 170 for considerations related to thermal comfort, with acknowledgment and limitations of the role of ASHRAE Standard 55 requirements and how to incorporate thermal comfort requirements into their design of Standard 170 spaces.

Addendum p incorporates updates to Table 7.1. Generally, the changes are as follows: Delete the requirements for Residential Health, Care, and Support spaces, which are being relocated to a new Table 9.1 in Addendum n. Relocate and update filtration requirements. Part of that effort revised the Filter Bank No. 1 entries to be “MERV 8” from the prior entry of “MERV 7”.  Include requirements for unoccupied turndown of the spaces. Revise the space name terminology, table organization, and subheadings to better correlate with the 2014 FGI Guidelines for Design and Construction of Hospitals and Outpatient Facilities.

Comments due September 15th.

We welcome real-time discussion on these and other energy conservation codes and standards proposals any day at 11 AM Eastern time.   The ASHRAE suite moves swiftly; often every 30 to 45 days.  If designers, contractors and facility managers want to keep pace with standards action for healthcare facilities it is wise click in.   Once a month we also walk through the status of all consensus products relevant to the mechanical engineering discipline — environmental air, piping, instrumentation & controls, elevators, etc.  — during our Mechanical Engineering teleconference.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Finally, to our colleagues in the Orlando, Florida region early next year, ASHRAE will host its Winter Conference February 1-5, 2020.  Most of the technical committees meet during the conference so you should find time to sit in on a few of the meetings.  Registration information is linked below.

2020 American Society of Heating & Refrigeration Engineers Winter Conference

Issue: [Various]

Category: Mechanical, Electrical, Energy, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues:  David Conrad, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel




ARCHIVE / ASHRAE 170 Ventilation of Health Care Facilities




Elevator Safety Code

August 19, 2019
No Comments

“Hudson River Waterfront” | Colin Campbell Cooper (1913)

Elevator and escalator systems are among the most complicated systems in any urban environment, no less so than on the emergent #SmartCampus in which many large research universities have 100 to 1000 elevators to safely and economically operate, service and continuously commission.

Some university elevator O&M units use a combination of in-house, manufacturer and standing order contractors to accomplish their safety and sustainability objectives.   We are now seeing an expansion of the requirement to include software integration professionals to coordinate the interoperability of elevators, lifts and escalators with building automation systems for fire safety, indoor air quality and disaster management.

In the United States the American Society of Mechanical Engineers is the dominant standards developer of elevator and escalator systems.  It partitions safety discovery and promulgation into about 30 committees below:


The parent document for the entire span of ASME elevator safety codes — ASME A17.1 Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators — is now deep into a new revision cycle.  Related, breakout consensus products are continually evolving  however and public commenting opportunity on a technical report is linked below:

TR A17.1-8.4, Guide for Elevator Seismic Design

Note that the redline is a downloadable document so we advise conformity to all ASME fair-use requirements.   One of the reasons we meet online every day is out of respect for the legitimate conditions that ANSI-accredited standards developers place upon the use of their public review drafts.   Somehow we have to get workpoint ideas, data and war stories to the technical committees but not at the risk of compromising ASME’s competitive edge in producing intellectual property.

National University of Singapore | Because elevator technology is both capital-intensive and site specific, it is driven largely by multi-national manufacturers.

We always encourage our colleagues to participate directly in the ASME standards development process.   We find most of the ASME public review drafts on the page linked below:

ASME Consensus Documents Open for Public Review

We always encourage direct participation by elevator mechanics, shop foremen, specifying engineers and architects to become involved in the ASME process.   CLICK HERE to get started.

All ASME standards are on the agenda of our monthly Mechanical Engineering and Elevator & Escalator teleconference.  See our CALENDAR for the next online teleconferences; open to everyone.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.


Issue: [11-50]

Category: Electrical, Elevators, #SmartCampus

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel



ARCHIVE: Posted September 27, 2018

Many colleges, universities, academic medical research and healthcare delivery campuses have hundreds of elevators whose design, construction, operations and maintenance is highly regulated by local and state level public safety agencies.   More than a few large research universities have thousands of elevators and, at cost upwards of $100,000 per floor just to build them (apart from the cost of running a certified in-house maintenance and contractor management staff) elevators represent a significant component of the #TotalCostofOwnership of education facilities. 

The deadline for submitting comments on the redline posted by ASME has since passed but it is possible to submit your ideas to the ASME A17 committees by attending the ASME “Elevator Week” in Austin, Texas, October 1 – 4 at the Holiday Inn Riverwalk in Austin, Texas.  More information is available in the link below:

ASME Elevator Week 2018

We will investigate whether any of the technical committee meetings are accessible online and open to the public.   In any case, the ASME A17 suite of documents is on our standing agenda.  Feel free to click in any day at 11 AM Eastern time to view the proposed changes to this, or any other, code or standard.

LIVE Daily 11:00 AM EDT

The ASME A17 Maintenance, Repair and Replacement Committee Meetings will take place at the National Association of Elevator Contractors Conference September 25th in Atlantic City — an apparent Producer Interest according to ANSI stakeholder criteria.  Colleges and Universities in the Atlantic City region are encouraged to attend as a User Interest.   There may be an opportunity to present #TotalCostofOwnership concepts to the incumbent interests on the committee.    CLICK HERE for more information.

Posted July 9, 2018

Many colleges, universities, academic medical research and healthcare delivery campuses have hundreds of elevators whose design, construction, operations and maintenance is highly regulated by local and state level public safety agencies.   More than a few large research universities have thousands of elevators and, at cost upwards of $100,000 per floor just to build them (apart from the cost of running a certified in-house maintenance and contractor management staff) elevators represent a significant component of the #TotalCostofOwnership of education facilities. 

The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) is the developer of the most widely adopted consensus standard incorporated by reference into public safety law for this core technology.  The redline (“strike-and-bold”) of candidate changes for next revision of the parent document — ASME A17.1/CSA B44 Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators — is now available for public comment.  You will find it on the ASME Codes & Standards web page linked below:

ASME Consensus Documents Open for Public Review

Comments are due August 8th.   You may comment directly to ASME through Geraldine Burdeshaw, (212) 591-8523, with a copy of your comments to

The original University of Michigan infrastructure standards advocacy enterprise advocated #TotalCostofOwnership concepts across the entire A17.1 suite for several cycles.  That work continues here (see ABOUT).   Some facts and observations about that experience with the ASME A17 suite are listed below:

  • The A17 suite is broken down into many sub-disciplines (CLICK HERE for overview of the entire suite)
  • The technical committees are composed almost entirely by market incumbents* who are able to finance the cost of their participation into the price of the product they sell to the user-interest as identified in Section 2.3 of ANSI’s Essential Requirements
  • The absence of user interests is not the fault of ASME — it is the fault of the user interest; in our case the education facilities industry (the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States.
  • Candidate changes are developed largely by the members of the technical committee; though other stakeholders may submit their suggestions to the technical committee chairman through the ASME administrative staff identified above at any time.  Keep in mind that A17.1 is on a 5-year revision cycle.
  • Only the changes are shown in the public review document.  A full understanding of the context of the changes will require purchase of the entire document through ASME; or through access to the public edition of the code through state regulatory agencies.
  • The technical committees meet face-to-face 4 to 5 times a year so many of the proposed changes have been vetted well before the A17.1 is released for public review.
  • The 45-day public review period is permitted by ANSI but is a very narrow window of opportunity for the user interest.

We will host an online review and comment development teleconference on July 19th, 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM Eastern time which is open to everyone.   The entire ASME codes and standards suite is on the standing agenda of our weekly Open Door teleconferences — every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern time.   CLICK HERE to log in.

Issue: [11-50]

Category: Architectural, Mechanical, Electrical, Telecommunications, Public Safety, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Richard Robben, David Flint, Larry Spielvogel

Link to Legacy Workspace

* Market incumbent.

Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems

August 19, 2019
No Comments

Design, construction, operation and maintenance of environmental air, piping and drainage systems is one of the largest cost centers in education facilities.  We find subtle tradeoffs between fire safety, energy conservation and indoor air quality goals.   Those tradeoffs are reconciled by technical committees administered by three ANSI-accredited standards developers:

American Society of Heating and Refrigeration Engineers (ASHRAE)

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)


National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)

American Waterworks Association

Today we focus on the leading safety practice of NFPA 90A Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems.  From the NFPA 90A prospectus:

[NFPA 90A] shall cover construction, installation, operation, and maintenance of systems for air conditioning and ventilating, including filters, ducts, and related equipment, to protect life and property from fire, smoke, and gases resulting from fire or from conditions having manifestations similar to fire. A.1.1 An air duct system has the potential to convey smoke, hot gases, and flame from area to area and to supply air to aid combustion in the fire area. For these reasons, fire protection of an air duct system is essential to safety to life and the protection of property. However, an air duct system’s fire integrity also enables it to be used as part of a building’s fire protection system. Guidance for the design of smoke-control systems is provided in NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems. Pertinent information on maintenance is provided in Annex B. Maintenance of fire dampers, ceiling dampers, smoke dampers, and combination fire/smoke dampers requirements can be found in NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, and NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives.

We advocated in NFPA 90A up until the 2015 edition — giving duct detector application and maintenance requirements a high priority  — then went on hiatus after the 2016 University of Michigan reorganization (See ABOUT).   NFPA 90A is now back on our radar and back on our advocacy agenda.

The First Draft Report is linked below:

First Draft Ballot / Final Results

A cursory review of the proposed revisions reveal typical correlation administration and strong statements about remote inspection.   The committee meets again online on August 13th.  Login information for interested parties is available at the link below:

Second Draft Meeting Notice  

The results of the Second Draft balloting will be released no later than 22 January 2020.  We will keep an eye out for them.

NFPA 90A — with its origin dating back to 1899; driven by leading practice discovery in building blower and exhaust systems — is heavily referenced in an interlocking matrix of related fire safety consensus products but it is not very lengthy document.   We include it on the standing agenda of our monthly Mechanical and Fire Safety codes and standards teleconference.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting.


Issue: [13-118]

Category: Fire Protection, Mechanical

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel



Rainwater Catchment Systems

August 19, 2019
No Comments

Boston University / New Balance Field

The American Society of Plumbing Engineers has released public review draft of its consensus product — ASPE 63 Rainwater Catchment Systems.   The scope of this standard covers requirements for the design and installation of rainwater catchment systems that utilize the principle of collecting and using precipitation from a rooftop and other hard, impervious building surfaces. This standard does not apply to the collection of rainwater from vehicular parking or other similar surfaces.

Click on the link below to view the candidate revisions in full:

Second Public Review Draft / Pages 52-53

Comments due September 15th,  Send them directly to Gretchen Pienta ( with an optional copy to

You will note that the proposed changes are largely administrative in this revision but the document, on the whole, should be of interest to the campus sustainability community interested in safely implementing a rainwater catchment system using precipitation from rooftops and other hard, impervious surfaces for use for irrigation, laundry, hygiene, or even potable water applications if the appropriate treatment and materials have been certified for the specific end use.

The ASPE Standards Home Page is linked below:

ASPE Standards Development

Note that many of them are co-developed with NSF International, IAPMO and the American Rainwater Catchment Systems Association, among others.

Rainwater Harvesting Garden / University of Pretoria

We place the ASPE suite on the standing agenda of our monthly Mechanical Engineering and Water teleconferences.  See our CALENDAR about when and how to log in; always open to everyone.

Issue: [13-61]

Category: Water, Mechanical

Colleagues: Jack Janveja, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel

Standards Florida

August 19, 2019
No Comments

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 Florida will be accessible to user-interest code-writers and vote-getters.   Please send a request to join one of our mailing lists appropriate to your interest for #SmartCampus standards action in the State of Florida.

HVAC Set Point Interventions for Energy Savings in Buildings

August 19, 2019
No Comments

Occupant-based HVAC Set Point Interventions for Energy Savings in Buildings

Dimas Ardiyanto
PT PLN (Persero), Jakarta, Indonesia
Manisa Pipattanasomporn & Saifur Rahman
Virginia Tech – Advanced Research Institute, Arlington, VA, USA
Nanang Hariyanto & Suwarno
School of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia


Abstract:  Energy savings and occupant thermal comfort are the two most important factors in controlling heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) operation in buildings. Typically, it is found that thermal comfort is not always met in buildings. Hence, there is still an opportunity to improve indoor thermal comfort, and at the same time save energy by controlling HVAC set points. The objective of this paper is to propose a method to obtain energy savings by adjusting HVAC set points based on occupant comfort measured using Predicted Mean Vote (PMV) and occupancy information. The idea is to calculate hourly PMV values based on real-time occupancy information, indoor temperature set points and humidity in a building. Then, a new set of temperature set points that can maintain occupant comfort, i.e., PMV = 0, is derived. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed method, a building model is developed in eQUEST using the information from a real-world building located in Alexandria, VA. Research findings indicate that HVAC electrical consumption savings of 14.58% is achieved when the proposed set point adjustment method is implemented as compared to that of the base case. To study the impact of adding occupancy information on HVAC energy savings, another scenario is simulated where HVAC set point is increased when the building is unoccupied, e.g., during lunchtime or holidays. Research findings indicate that additional HVAC electrical consumption savings of 8.79% is achieved when taking into account occupancy information in HVAC control.


Document Sections
I. Introduction
II. PMV as an Index for Thermal Comfort
III. Experiment Set Up To Capture Occupancy Information
IV. Building Model Development in Equest
V. Energy Savings From Comfort Adjustment And Occupancy Information

CLICK HERE for ordering Information for this article

Cambridge Center for Smart Infrastructure & Construction

August 19, 2019
No Comments

“Clare Hall and King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, from the Banks of the River Cam” / Joseph Mallord William Turner (1793)


Smart Infrastructure: Getting More From Strategic Assets

Dr Jennifer Schooling, Director of CSIC;

Dr Ajith Parlikad, CSIC Co-Investigator and Senior Lecturer;

Mark Enzer, Global Water Sector Leader,

Mott MacDonald; Keith Bowers, Principal Tunnel Engineer, London Underground;

Ross Dentten, Asset Information and Configuration Manager, Crossrail;

Matt Edwards, Asset Maintenance and Information Manager, Anglian Water Services;

Jerry England, Group Digital Railway Director, Network Rail;

Volker Buscher, Director, Arup Digital.


Smart Infrastructure is a global opportunity worth £2trn-4.8trn. The world is experiencing a fourth industrial revolution due to the rapid development of technologies and digital abundance.

Smart Infrastructure involves applying this to economic infrastructure for the benefit of all stakeholders. It will allow owners and operators to get more out of what they already have, increasing capacity, efficiency and resilience and improving services.

It brings better performance at lower cost. Gaining more from existing assets is the key to enhancing service provision despite constrained finance and growing resource scarcity. It will often be more cost-effective to add to the overall value of mature infrastructure via digital enhancements than by physical enhancements – physical enhancements add `more of the same’, whereas digital enhancements can transform the existing as well.

Smart Infrastructure will shape a better future. Greater understanding of the performance of our infrastructure will allow new infrastructure to be designed and delivered more efficiently and to provide better wholelife value.

Data is the key – the ownership of it and the ability to understand and act on it. Industry, organisations and professionals need to be ready to adjust in order to take advantage of the emerging opportunities. Early adopters stand to gain the most benefit. Everyone in the infrastructure sector has a choice as to how fast they respond to the changes that Smart Infrastructure will bring. But everyone will be affected.

Change is inevitable. Progress is optional. Now is the time for the infrastructure industry to choose: to be Smart.



Cambridge Centre for Smart Infrastructure and Construction

Perspective: Since this paper is general in its recommendations, we provide examples of specific campus infrastructure data points that are difficult, if not impossible, to identify and “make smart” — either willfully, for lack of funding, for lack of consensus, for lack of understanding or leadership:

    1. Maintenance of the digital location of fire dampers in legacy buildings or even new buildings mapped with BIM.  Doors and ceiling plenums are continually being modified and the As-Built information is usually not accurate.  This leads to fire hazard and complicates air flow and assuring occupant temperature preferences (i.e. uncontrollable hot and cold spots) 
    2. Ampere readings of feeder breakers downstream from the electric service main.  The power chain between the service substation and the end-use equipment is a “no-man’s land” in research facilities that everyone wants to meter but few ever recover the cost of the additional metering.
    3. Optimal air flow rates in hospitals and commercial kitchens that satisfies both environmental air hazards and compartmentalized air pressure zones for fire safety.
    4. Identification of students, staff and faculty directly affiliated with the campus versus visitors to the campus.
    5. Standpipe pressure variations in municipal water systems
    6. Pinch points in municipal sewer systems in order to avoid building flooding.
    7. How much of university data center cost should be a shared (gateway) cost, and how much should be charged to individual academic and business units?
    8. Should “net-zero” energy buildings be charged for power generated at the university central heating and electric generation plant?
    9. How much staff parking should be allocated to academic faculty versus staff that supports the healthcare delivery enterprises; which in many cases provides more revenue to the university than the academic units?
    10. Finally, a classical conundrum in facility management spreadsheets: Can we distinguish between maintenance cost (which should be covered under an O&M budget) and capital improvement cost (which can be financed by investors)


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