PageBlogs | Standards Michigan |

2021 International Energy Conservation Code


2021 International Energy Conservation Code

November 14, 2018
No Comments

It is not too soon to prepare  proposals for the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC); a consensus document widely incorporated by reference into local, state and federal energy conservation laws.  According to the International Code Counci Group B Code Development Schedule, proposals are due January 7, 2019.

The original University of Michigan standards advocacy enterprise began advocating in this document in the 2012 revision cycle and managed to secure some modest “code wins” that benefited the University of Michigan but also the education facilities industry as a whole.*   As so often happens, proposals that were rejected in the 2012 revision cycle acclimated the IECC technical committees to proposals made by other interests that were eventually accepted into the IECC in later cycles.

One such proposal recommended that the IECC recognize the international energy conservation consensus documents of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) which permitted performance — rather than prescriptive — approaches to education facility energy conservation.  We find that some jurisdictions are receptive to performance standards; others are not because it is more costly to ascertain conformity to energy conservation goals even though the results exceed the results produced by prescriptive requirements.  At least now the International Code Council recognizes the International Standardization Organization and may be inspired to develop more performance conformity paths.  Georgia Tech Energy & Environmental Management Center — with whom we have liaison through the American National Standards Institute — is ANSI’s US Technical Advisory Group administrator.


For the cycle ahead of us, our primary interest lies in energy conservation concepts for university-affiliated medical research and healthcare delivery facilities; particularly in the areas that involve operations and maintenance and Internet-of-Things (i.e. the emergent #SmartCampus covered here extensively).  A good place to start is to review the transcript of the 2018 IECC code development and to try to understand why our previous proposals failed.   Frequently, solid and well-meaning proposals simply fail because they do not meet a technical substantiation criteria.  Sometimes, some ideas are “too early” and, given the gathering pace of electrotechnology integration into educational facility systems — what we refer to as the emergent #SmartCampus — we may find that the industry is now ready for those ideas.  As always, our point of view may be different than the point of view of compliance, conformity and enforcement interests who participate in standards development in order to drive revenue to compliance, conformity and enforcement interests.

Our first breakout teleconference is scheduled for September 18th, 11:00 AM.  Ahead of this meeting we encourage our colleagues in the education industry — including education industry trade associations — to set up their own (free) ICC cpdACCESS account.   As always, once you have an account, we can walk you through the process of getting your idea onto the 2021 IECC agenda.  The ICC also provides instructional videos about how to participate in their process.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Architectural, Facility Asset Management, Space Planning

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


Link to Legacy University of Michigan Advocacy Project Workspace

ICC Group A Public Comment Monograph

Teleconference | 11:00 AM Eastern Time

November 14, 2018
No Comments

Bradley University

We have resumed our regularly scheduled weekly open agenda teleconferences — a practice begun in 2014 — during which time we sort through the “stream” of public commenting opportunities available to both the academic and business side of the education industry.   We display 9 to 18 opportunities for public comment every day that, in our judgement, present an opportunity to reduce #TotalCostofOwnership of the education facilities industry – a $300 billion industry — the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States.  These opportunities are presented by about 100 standards development organizations worldwide.  We summarize them once per week but are open for discussion every day at 11 AM Eastern time.  (Please feel free to use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page)

As we explain in our ABOUT, participation in consensus and open source standards development provides an opportunity to discover leading practice and to reduce the cost of education by reducing redundancy and destructive competition.   Anyone is welcomed to join these teleconferences from your computer, tablet or smartphone with the login information below:

You can also dial in using your phone. United States : +1 (408) 650-3123 Access Code: 718-914-669

We generally review comments on proposals submitted by other user interests as individuals or trade associations, or draft proposals and comments of our own.

We especially encourage user-interest subject matter experts affiliated with the many education industry trade associations to “click in”, mark up and submit comments on the codes and standards we track every day in order to make campuses safer, simpler, lower-cost and longer-lasting (See ABOUT).  Subscribers to our mailing list will have access to a detailed agenda and high priority content.   Please email for a detailed agenda.

Next open agenda teleconference: November 21st.   Note that we meet daily on specific policy, management and technical standards more or less on a daily basis at 11 AM Eastern time.   See CALENDAR.

University of Texas

Sustainable cities and communities

November 13, 2018
No Comments

The United States Technical Advisory Group (US-TAG), with oversight by the American National Standards Institute and 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.

Click here for the Business Plan.

Consensus documents emerging from ISO/TC 268 tend to be large, fast-moving and highly interdependent.  Drafts for US stakeholder comment and balloting arrive on a monthly as new workgroups are spawned from the core ISO TC/268 committees.  NFPA is in the process of developing a platform for managing the documents that must be reviewed, commented and balloted.


Owing to copyright restrictions upon ISO consensus documents we are unable to reproduce draft documents in their entirety beyond the balloting periods.  We limit our use of these documents to collaborations with subject matter experts in knowledge of, and concern for, the user-interest in the US education industry.

We are happy to review these documents any day at 11 AM Eastern time.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.   Mike Anthony is collaborating with a number of subject matter experts on the academic and business divisions in the education industry.  You may communicate with him directly at  You may also communicate directly with Robert Solomon ( and/or Linda MacKay ( at NFPA International, the US TAG Administrator for this project.


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 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. 

July 2018 Update:

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

ISO TC 268 City Maturity Model Presentation

An explanation of the broad contours of parent standard — with the Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR Groupas 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.

Power Over Ethernet Lighting

November 13, 2018
No Comments

University of Alberta

The emergent #SmartCampus will include building lighting systems that receive power and control over the same wiring systems.  It is a nascent application — one that resembles the first applications of variable speed drives and LED lighting — and safe and sustainable application will not be a straight line.  Subject matter experts writing the 2020 National Electrical Code are working on the fire safety specifics while the authors of IEEE 802.3 Standard for Ethernet are working through the details about how power-over-ethernet (PoE) will effect data transmission.  The authors of the power-over-ethernet (PoE) lighting standards come from two different cultures, however:

  • Building premise wiring fire safety experts who have written the electrical fire safety rules in Article 410 of the National Electrical Code discover and promulgate leading practice through NFPA’s consensus document process in which technology safety standards are developed by a due process that seeks a balance, openness and accountability.   At best it takes at least three years to change anything.
  • Best practice for low voltage wiring for data and signaling is the province of the IEEE which has a due process.  The IEEE Standards Association due process moves faster and, because many of the members of the technical committees are funded by multi-national industrial conglomerates with deep pockets for advocacy in global markets, the conversation about PoE takes place at a faster pace.  In other words, manufacturers of smart buildings are competing ferociously to set the standard.  This competition is normal and necessary for the campus electrotechnical transformation we keep pace with.

This difference between the NFPA and IEEE electrical technology cultures informs a great deal of electrotechnology in the United States.  We see it in the difference at higher voltages as well; the divergent cultures of the committees writing the National Electrical Code and the National Electrical Safety Code being the lead example.

At the moment education facility managers will be required to conform to state level adoption of the National Electrical Code.   We have gathered many relevant documents in the link below and we will be following the balloting of CMP-3, the technical committee writing NEC Article 725 — Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 Remote Control, Signaling and Power-Limited Circuitsparticularly Sections 725.121 and Section 725.144.  Balloting on the Second Draft Report of the 2020 is now taking place and will be endorsed by the NFPA Standards Council at the NFPA Safety and Expo, July 17-20, 2019 in San Antonio, Texas.   Usually by late summer/early fall 2019, state and local governments are free to incorporate it by reference into building safety legislation.

Even the most persuasive manufacturer PoE lighting sell sheet must acknowledge the requirement to conform to the National Electrical Code.

We are happy to inform education facility manager decision making on this technology any day at 11 AM Eastern time.   (Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page).  More specific standards action is determined by IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 18 (SCC-18); the IEEE committee charged with reconciling IEEE electrical concepts with NFPA fire safety concepts.   We also collaborate with the IEEE Education and Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets online twice on November 20th in European and American time zones and whose teleconferences are also open to the public.

The IEEE SCC-18 will meet for two days in Las Vegas (December 10-11) to formulate a position on various proposals for the application of power-over-ethernet cabling; a technology that is central to the rollout of the Internet of Things on the emergent #SmartCampus.   Contact Christel Hunter ( for the agenda and login credentials to remote attendance.


Issue: [16-102] [16-130]

Category: Electrical, #SmartCampus, Telecommunications

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Christel Hunter, Kane Howard, William McCoy


IEEE 802.3bt-2018 – IEEE Approved Draft Standard for Ethernet – Amendment 2: Power over Ethernet over 4 Pairs

SCC-18 Workspace

Standards Michigan Workspace (Send email to for access)

Ranchview High School | Irving Texas

Uniform Plumbing Code

November 13, 2018
No Comments

The IAPMO Group is a consensus standards developer accredited by the American National Standards Institute.  One of its regulatory products — the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) — has entered a revision cycle for the 2021 edition; which will be incorporated by reference into public water safety law in many states.  The provisions of the UPC apply to the erection, installation, alteration, repair, relocation, replacement, addition to, use, or maintenance of plumbing systems within this jurisdiction.  From the project prospectus, the scope of the UPC is shown below:

Includes all potable water, building supply, and distribution pipes; all plumbing fixtures and traps; all drainage and vent pipes; and all building drains, and building sewers, including their respective joints and connections, devices, receptors, and appurtenances within the property lines of the premises and shall include potable water piping, potable water treating or using equipment, medical gas and medical vacuum systems, liquid and fuel gas piping, and water heaters and vents for same. 

As with the Uniform Mechanical Code — covered here previously — the proposal phase of the 2021 UPC revision process has already taken place and the monograph of proposed changes is now open for public comment and linked below:

Uniform Plumbing Code Report on Proposals | 854 pages

Several proposals deal with the nature and number of water closets and venting systems in education facilities; school food preparation and sewage systems; and piping materials for all occupancy classifications.

Comments are due January 3, 2019.   

You may submit a comment directly at this link:

IAPMO Online Public Comment Home 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 will also place this standard, and all other water safety and sustainability standards on the agenda of a breakout teleconference scheduled for September 17th, 11 AM.  Use the login credentials at the top of our home page to join.

Issue: [12-59] and [17-299]

Category: Water

Colleagues: Ron George, Richard Robben, Larry Spielvogel,




Model Plumbing Code Adoption Map *

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]

*Contact IAPMO for latest revision map.




Emergency Power Switchgear

November 12, 2018
No Comments

Optimal worker safety is best accomplished when product, installation, operation and maintenance standards move together.  In the electrical power world, this is not easy considering the constellation of regulatory product developers* who claim some part of the building premise power chain:

  • International Electrotechnical Commission
  • Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
  • National Electrical Manufacturers Association
  • National Fire Protection Association
  • National Electrical Contractors Association
  • Underwriters Laboratory

There is subtle interdependency — and gaps — in technical documents developed by all of the foregoing list of organizations that claim some authority over the standard of care for the building premise power chain.   This condition complicates the work of the facility manager in the emergent Smart Campus who requires support for application of an integrated skill set to manage risk.

Now comes Underwriters Laboratory (UL) with a proposal for changes to its product standard — UL 1558 Standard for Metal-Enclosed Low-Voltage Power Circuit Breaker Switchgear  — on Page 32 of this week’s ANSI Standards Action.   The proposed changes drill into the details regarding the manufacture, installation, operation and maintenance of emergency power systems.

Comments are due November 18th.

You may obtain an electronic copy of UL 845 from:  You may send comments (with copy to to: Derrick Martin, (510) 319-4271,   We will refer this commenting opportunity to the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee which meets online 4 times per month to respond to candidate changes to all Underwriters Laboratory standards.  The next meeting is today, October 23rd — 15:00 in Europe and 3:00 PM Eastern time in the Americas.

Issue: [18-240]

Category: Electrical, Telecommunications, Public Safety, Risk Management, Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Kane Howard, Daleep Mohla



UL invites public participation in the development of all of its standards (CLICK HERE)

UL 1558 Emergency Switchgear STP Roster

*We use the term “regulatory product developer” to refer generically to ANSI-accredited and open source consensus document developers whose products — with substantial investment in administering intellectual property — are written to be incorporated by reference into public safety regulations.  

Facility Management

November 12, 2018
No Comments

Click on image


The internationalization of the education industry continues at a brisk pace and so will the the enterprises that support the primary business of learning, teaching and discovering.   An update of our previous coverage is linked below:

ISO 41001 Facility Management Conformity Standard Approved

“…Another milestone in the profiling of Facility Management as a Strategic Professional Discipline is about to be achieved. ISO/IEC TS 17021-11 has finally been completed and approved. This Conformity Standard, when published, will now formally enable Certification bodies around the world to audit any in-house or outsourced FM organisation for compliance against the standards of ‘ISO 41001 Facility management – Management systems – Requirements with guidance for use’…”

This is the highest global level standard in this space, though there are many national non-profit trade associations claiming some part of the facility management space.   It establishes a vocabulary, a platform for apples-to-apples comparisons and a framework for conformance.

We have been following the action, and participating in the action, on about 20 international standards under development by the ISO, IEC and ITU.   We walk through the status of them every month and monitor the specific contributions of US trade associations to lowering the #TotalCostofOwnership of the emergent #SmartCampus.  Our next online teleconference is scheduled for October 18th, 11 AM Eastern time.   Feel free to join it with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Issue: [11-33]

Category: Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben


Facility management is a multidisciplinary profession.  This standard, more than any other that we can see, secures that claim.  Given the accelerating growth of the built environment, however, it should be no surprise that there are many trade associations that claim some part of the facility management profession.   Here are some links to previous coverage:

International Code Council International Property Maintenance Code

Office Facility Management

Methods of Building Measurement

Educational organization management systems

Management of HVAC Operations & Maintenance

Posted September 26, 2018

The original University of Michigan regulatory advocacy enterprise was catalyst for persuading selected institutions, subject matter experts and education industry trade associations to participate in international codes and standards development (See ABOUT).  With a spend running at about $300 billion the education facilities industry ought to be at the meetings where the standard of care was being discovered and promulgated.

In 2010 the need was especially acute in the square footage devoted to research; where a trend toward offshoring research — and a significant revenue source for large research universities — was gathering pace.  Two years earlier that enterprise had already commented on the scope of the ISO/TC 276 Biotechnology committee (administered by the Deutsches Institut für Normung)  to remove the facility component in the committee scope.  Taking facility management out of a biotechnology standard was important because research square footage is expensive.  Not all nations — and local safety enforcement authorities — have the same safety regulations that provides a level playing field for competitive market participants in biotechnology research.   (See: ISO 276 Biotechnology).

University of Glasgow

In 2010 a new committee was formed — ISO/TC 267 Facility management — led by the BSI Group, and an internationally oriented subject matter experts from many countries who had extensive experience in designing, building, operating and maintaining the built environment for private industry.  Why not convey the perspective and lessons learned from the private sector into the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States (see our monthly US Census Bureau coverage)?    Collaboration with ANSI and the prospective US Technical Advisory Group administrator – the International Facility Management Association (IFMA) — was the first step.

This month, ISO  TC 267 has released several new work products; one of which is noteworthy for its prospect of providing discipline to the facility management profession in the US education facilities industry:

Facility management — Management systems — Requirements with guidance for use

From the document prospectus:

ISO 41001:2018 specifies the requirements for a facility management (FM) system when an organization:

a) needs to demonstrate effective and efficient delivery of FM that supports the objectives of the demand organization;

b) aims to consistently meet the needs of interested parties and applicable requirements;

c) aims to be sustainable in a globally-competitive environment.

The requirements specified in ISO 41001:2018 are non-sector specific and intended to be applicable to all organizations, or parts thereof, whether public or private sector, and regardless of the type, size and nature of the organization or geographical location. 


Key Facilities Management

ISO TC/267 Landing Page

IFMA Announcement

International Property Maintenance Code

ASTM Office Facility Management Standard

All international standards are on the standing agenda of our weekly Open Door teleconferences every Wednesday, 11 AM Eastern time.  We also host a monthly teleconference on all the international standards with which we are engaged (i.e. mark up exposure drafts of draft revisions to standards with data driven ideas).  The next teleconference is scheduled for October 18th, 11 AM Eastern time.  Feel free to click in with the login information at the upper right of our home page.

Issue: [11-33]

Category: Facility Asset Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben

IFMA Contact: Casey Martin |

Learn more HERE:

Link to legacy workspace 

ISO Focus January 2015 Anthony-Robben – Education Enterprise pp 33-37

IFMA 2017 Update

Purdue University Presentation

Presentation to Federal Facilities Council

ISO/TC 267 Project Kickoff Meeting | Berlin 2012

*With all due respect to all the world’s standards developers: One must be mindful of the claim that “academia is involved”.  In nearly all cases, academic faculty are aligned more closely with the Producer and General Interest stakeholder category rather than the User.  In other words, many academic faculty (as subject matter experts with Ph.D’s) are funded by manufacturers, insurers, labor and the conformity/compliance interest — the stakeholders who are, by design, opposed to the user interest. 

Most standards developers struggle to recruit and retain pure user interests — whom we call the final fiduciary — on their technical committees.   As we explain in ABOUT, the fault does not lie with the standards developer — the fault lies with the education industry itself; the parabolic rise in the cost of education in the US being the proof. 





College & University Chapels

November 11, 2018
one comments

The founding of many educational institutions throughout the world was inspired by faith communities.   In many of them the place of worship was the very first building.   College and university chapels are central places of worship for students, staff and faculty, and provide a space for solitude and reflection.

There are several hundred technical standards, or parts of standards,  that govern how churches and chapels are made safe and sustainable.  Owing to innovations in construction, operation and management methods, those standards move, ever so slightly, on a near-daily basis and they are highly networked.  That movement tracked here as best we can within the limit of our resources.  (We manage a comprehensive catalog of school, college and university design guidelines and construction contracts for this facility class and all others.)

They are beautiful places.

The image criteria of our WordPress theme does not permit many images of college and university chapels 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.  There are a few links at the bottom of this page — if you can find the bottom of it – that may prove enlightening to our colleagues interested in technical specifics.

Click on any image for author attribution, photo credit or other information.

Sorbonne Université

West Point | US Army Cadet Chapel

Hebrew Union College

Tuskegee University Chapel


The Spring Hill College Chapel | Mobile, Alabama


Boston University

University of Tennessee at Chattangooga

Wake Forest University

Auburn University Chapel

University of the Incarnate Word

Davis & Elkins College


United States Navel Academy Chapel

University of Tulsa

Randolph College Chapel


Sewanee | The University of the South


King’s College Chapel | University of Cambridge

Hope College | Holland, Michigan

Duke University | Durham, North Carolina

Christ’s Chapel | Hillsdale College, Michigan

Basilica of the Sacred Heart | University of Notre Dame | South Bend, Indiana

Three Faith Chapels | Brandeis University

University of Wroclaw | Jesuit College | Wrocław, Poland

Alma College Chapel | Alma, Michigan

Stanford Memorial Church | Palo Alto, California

Universidad Adventista Templo | Buenos Aires, Argentina

St. Thomas of Villanova University Chapel | Villanova, Pennsylvania

St. Paul’s Chapel | Columbia University | New York City

Scotch College Chapel | Melbourne, Australia

Princeton University Chapel

United States Air Force Cadet Chapel | Colorado Springs

Chapelle Sainte-Ursule de la Sorbonne | Paris

Memorial Chapel | Glasgow University | Glasgow, Scotland

Alice Millar Chapel | Northwestern University

Bowdoin College Chapel | Brunswick, Maine

Loyola University Chapel | Madonna della Strada Chicago

Heinz Memorial Chapel | University of Pittsburgh

United States Naval Academy Chapel | Annapolis, Maryland

Madonna University Chapel | Livonia, Michigan

Vassar College Chapel | Poughkeepsie, New York

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Student Chapel | Cambridge, Massachusetts

Perkins Chapel | Southern Methodist University

St. Ignatius Church | University of San Francisco

Church of the Resurrection | Valparaiso University | Valparaiso, Indiana

Baughman Center | University of Florida

Exeter College Chapel | Oxford University


More coming.


International Building Code Group A Assembly Occupancies

Lighting of cathedrals and churches

Code for the Protection of Cultural Resource Properties – Museums, Libraries, and Places of Worship

Acoustic of Worship Buildings

Lighting for the Built Environment: Places of Worship

Church Heating and the Preservation of the Cultural Heritage 




Federal Participation in Consensus Standards

November 10, 2018
No Comments

Library of Alexandria

The White House Office of Management and Budget released a revision of OMB Circular No. A-119, Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities.  According to the announcement:

OMB has issued a revision of Circular A-119 in light of changes that have taken place in the world of regulation, standards, and conformity assessment since the Circular was last revised in 1998.  OMB’s revisions are meant to provide more detailed guidance to agencies to take into account several issues, including the Administration’s current work in Open Government, developments in regulatory policy and international trade, and changes in technology.

The revised Circular is available at the link below:

The response by ANSI is available at the link below:

ANSI Response OMB A-119 050614

The degree to which leading practice can be discovered and promoted by industries themselves is a policy issue upon which good minds will disagree.   Few nations disagree that innovation is faster and more enduring from the workpoint (or the point of consumption) up, but markets are not perfect instruments for discovering the greater good.  At a speech given at the University of Michigan in 2014, S. Joe Bhatia, CEO of the American National Standards Institute, expands upon this point in the short videoclip below:


Issue: [16-18]

Contact: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben

Category: Public Policy


Standards Incorporated by Reference

School Security Standards

November 10, 2018
No Comments

“The Country School” | Winslow Homer

There are now so many standards relevant to risk to educational communities — and so many trade associations competing to set the standard of care —  that legislators have a strong case for developing top-down federal legislation rather than incorporate by reference privately developed standards which are given preferential treatment in Office of Management & Budget Circular A-119.  While far from perfect, the private standards system administered by ANSI’s due process requirements provides access, balance and transparency.  Admittedly, the preference of conformity/compliance/enforcement.risk management interests tend to dominate the discussion — but not always.

A large part of the streaming discussion about school security is driven by the event and continuing education enterprises of non-profit trade associations and insurgent ad-hoc open-source interests that seek to make markets in security products and services.   We limit our interest to the consensus documents that are most likely to set a standard of care that is practical so that government agencies responsible for school security have a privately developed standard of care.   We have the experience of the federal government stepping into the energy conservation space 20-odd years ago as an example of what happens when competition among market participants is too fierce to be efficient.

To get a sense of the near-daily action in leading practice discovery, some of the most recent action within the more familiar standards suites is linked below:

School Security Concepts

Preparedness & Response to Active Shooter and/or Hostile Events

Door Locking Systems


Guide to Premises Security

ASIS WVPI.1 | Workplace Violence Prevention and Intervention

Incident Handling

Posted October 1, 2018

This is a timely, subtle and complicated issue for the education industry.   The overwhelming question — upon which good minds will disagree — is this: How much of this can be resolved by the federal government versus resolution at the state, local and institutional level?

Market incumbents (whom we identify in our ABOUT) want to develop regulations at the national level because they have the financial resources to operate in Washington, D.C where so many education industry trade associations are domiciled and have their influence.   In other words, they will seek a politically visible “top-down” solution that they write and administer that may supersede state, local or institutionally developed standards*.

On the other hand, school districts, colleges and universities may prefer local adaptations of regulatory products developed by ANSI accredited standards developers with which their front line subject matter experts in building, fire, electrical and public safety codes are already trained.  Standards developed at this level — and, ideally incorporated by reference by federal agencies, offer the greatest degree of transparency and stakeholder involvement.  Unfortunately, much of the leadership of the education industry is not involved in the US standards community.  (See videoclip below)

Since our business model does not depend upon revenue from membership, publication royalties, conference attendance, continuing education credits for conformity assessment credentials we are relatively free to operate as a watchdog on the standards action of all the incumbents (and newcomers) in this space.

Education facility security standards are a standing item on our weekly Open Door teleconference — every Wednesday 11 AM Eastern time.  We are also hosting a breakout teleconference today, October 16th, 11 AM EDT to walk through the entire sweep of rapidly moving school security standards.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Public Safety, Public Policy

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Richard Robben

S. Joe Bhatia | CEO American National Standards Institute | University of Michigan Ross School of Business | October 2015


* Partial Bibliography:

NIST Public Safety Communications Research Division

Loyola Marymount University Emergency Preparedness Program

Preparing for an Active Shooter Incident Duquesne University

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