Technical Committee Block Resumes Business This Morning

This morning, the Technical Committee block picked up where it left off yesterday afternoon. The subcommittees continued to make progress on their activities.

The U-factor Subcommittee resumed its business, spending much of its time discussing the NFRC 100 Attachments Ballot, which included many comments. Several comments were found to be substantive and persuasive. Among the motions passed:

• Strike all subsections referencing permeability and all other sections referencing TBD (The reference to ASTM D737 will remain)


• Delete Section 4.3.3.4 as it is contrary to the base case window product procedure that has yet to be established


• Direct the task group to complete the missing data for skylights


• Remove 1/4 and 3/4 lite sizes and only require equal to or less than 1/2 lite and greater than 1/2 lite sizes as ENERGY STAR has recently recognized

After reviewing a ballot comment stating that attachments should only be rated over worse-case reference windows, the group engaged in a lengthy discussion about base case windows. The comment was found to be persuasive and substantive and a motion passed to take the issue back to the Task Group to consider this negative when determining the base case window(s).

The next order of business involved reviewing comments to the NFRC 100 Ballot to accommodate WINDOW 6/THERM 6 software. The negative comments were found to be persuasive and substantive, and it was decided to send it back to the Task Group.

The Subcommittee concluded its business with the NFRC 100 – 2010 ballot. A motion passed to approve all the sections balloted with the exception of 5.2.5 and Tables 5-1 and 5-2 and move them forward to Technical Committee for approval.

Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) Subcommittee

Following the U-factor discussions, the SHGC Subcommittee conducted its business. With no reports and no unfinished business, the discussion quickly turned to ballots.

One ballot addressed the possibility of changing certain digit calculation requirements (from 3 to 6) to match current CPD 2.0 database requirements. The concern here was that the requirements should apply to all products, not just to products with applied films.

After considerable review and analysis, the members agreed to table the ballot and have it rolled into the ballot for the next round of NFRC documents.

Finally, the SHGC Subcommittee also deemed it prudent to encourage the formation of a working group to refine language addressing ratings for garage doors.