NFRC CMA-PCP 2007 Ballot

NFRC CMA-PCP 2007 Ballot NFRC Ballot Comments through July 10, 2007 Ratings Committee and CMA (Ratings) Subcommittee Section Company Name, Rep Initials AZS Consulting and/or AC/NG AC Page # document throughout Comment/Alternate Language Formatting issues throughout the document noted Comment: Role of Specifying Authority - While a letter was sent to the AIA, BOMA and CSI in March 2007 in accordance with the motion from the spring meeting, no feedback was received from those organizations and I am not aware of any follow up from NFRC staff to solicit input. Recently Potomac on behalf of NFRC hosted a round table discussion with code officials. Given the importance of the role of the Specifying Authority feedback is critical from this stakeholder group. I propose that three round table discussions be scheduled with the AIA, BOMA and CSI similar to what was scheduled for the code officials. After gas content change “and” to “indicating” to read “…glazing gap width and gas content indicating percentage fill, if applicable.” IGMA NG IGMA NG 1.2.2 1.2.2.1 Specifying Authority shall: Comment: Section 1.2.3.2.1, Spacer Grouping references Section 5.6 of NFRC 100 for the grouping of spacers. This section in NFRC 100 has nothing to do with spacer grouping nor is spacer grouping as it pertains to the CMA program referenced anywhere in the NFRC 100 document. Similar incorrect references to spacer and other component grouping exists in Sections 2.2.1.A, 2.2.2.B and 2.2.3.B. Also there is reference to ACE training requirements in the NFRC LAP in 3.2.B. 1.2.3.2.1; 2.2.1.A, 2.2.2.B; 2.2.3.B; 3.2.B These specific and critical references need to be provided and approved prior to the appropriate balloting of this document. …(b) using raming system categories with pre-calculated performance values previously calculated in accordance with NFRC procedures. Rationale: existing wording implies there is some other method to obtain a frame rating than through NFRC procedures Edgetech NG AAMA NG 1.2.3.3.A. AAMA NG 1.2.4.C. WESTLab NG 1.2.5 1.3. Glossary and Terminology 1.3 Glossary and Terminology In the event that there is no NFRC-licensed IA available to perform the services to be provided by an IA, any such service may shall be provided by NFRC or NFRC's subcontractor. In the event there are no NFRC-licensed IA's, the word term "IA," as use herein, shall mean NFRC or NFRC's subcontractor. Fees for services rendered by NFRC or NFRC's subcontractor shall be reasonable and customary for the work being performed; a fee schedule shall be provided to the party requiring NFRC or NFRC's subcontractor services in advance of performance of the services. Rationale: this needs to be clarified and fees estableished before the services are rendered. It can't be a "blank check!" Comment: This section does not distinguish between independent and manufacturer ACEs and needs to make that distinction very clear. Comment: Approved Calculation Entity (ACE) - states that an ACE will be either Independent or Manufacturer but does not define the two types of ACEs and need to be here in the Glossary. Approved Calculation Entity (ACE) Add “the” before “Component Modeling Approach” to read “…calculations of fenestration products using the Component Modeling Approach”. WESTLab NG IGMA NG AAMA NG GANA NG Specifying Authority: the entity who specifies the fenestration products, systems and suppliers to be used on a project in order to meet the design and performance requirements. The Specifying Authority enters into a license agreement with NFRC. This entity may be but is not limited to an architect or engineer and confirms that the individual systems (glazing, spacer, and framing system) used to generate the whole product rating are those in the final assembly. The Specifying Authority is responsible for taking any corrective actions necessary if the final assembly does not conform to the 1.3 whole product rating. Rationale: this Glossary requirement is beyond the scope of NFRC's authority, and is and Terminology handled in the normal course of business. Glazing Bite: the dimension by which the framing system 1.3 overlaps the edge of the glazing infill." The coverage of the Glossary framing system from the edge of the glass to the sightline of and the IG unit. Comment: the first sentence properly Terminology addresses the needed definition. 1.3 Glossary Insulating Glazing (IG) Fabricator: an entity that assembles and the glazing, spacer the components to form an insulating Terminology glazing unit. Project Certificate: a document providing values calculated using the label certificate ratings of each fenestration system to be installed in a particular project. The project certificates 1.3 may also, but are not required to, list the area weighted Glossary average energy rating values for these labeled fenestration and systems. Comment: This is commentary and is not Terminology appropriate in the Glossary and Terminology. GANA NG GANA NG WESTLab NG 1.3 Glossary and Terminology GANA IGMA NG NG 2.2.3 Comment: Project Certificate - states that the project certificate may include the area weighted average energy rating values. This calculation is not defined by NFRC in any of our documents. 2.2.3. Specific Spacer, Specific Sealant, Detailed Spacer Geometry Method (Path III) [Default sealant canmay be used in place of specifc specific sealant]: 3.1 See comment for Section 1.2.2 above The Specifying Authority seeking to obtain a Label Certificate that contains the thermal and solar-optical performance ratings for fenestration products in a given building project using the Component Modeling Approach Fenestration Certification ProgramCMA-PCP may shall do so upon entering into a license agreement with the NFRC, in accordance with the requirements of this section. Rationale: Change from permissive to mandatory language. Remove “and” between “select” and “contract with” to read: “The Specifying Authority shall select, contract with and submit to an…” This is inconsistent with the current procedures since the calculation performed by a Manufacturer ACE must have the calculation verified by an IA prior to acceptance. AAMA NG 3.1.A IGMA NG 3.1.B IGMA NG 3.1.D. IGMA AAMA NG NG 3.1.D.ii IGMA NG “A Manufacturer / Other ACE is subject to IA review of the calculation in accordance with Section 5.1 prior to authorizing the Label Certificate to be issued to the Specifying Authority.” We do not agree that all submissions from a Manufacturer / Other ACE must undergo IA review without a decrease over time for proven compliance. This is driving up the cost of the program both from a direct financial impact but as well from a time cost standpoint. IGMA supports the procedure written and submitted by Tom Culp which provides for a decreasing level of IA review for proven compliance. 3.2 Approved Calculation Entity Obligations Rationale: 3.2 Consistency Comment: No requirements have been developed in the LAP for the ACE. Requirements need to be written and 3.2 approved prior to approval of this section. AAMA NG 3.2.A An NFRC license is attainable shall be obtained by an Approved Calculation EntityACE who desires to calculate the performance rating values of fenestration products using the Ccomponent -Modeling Approach whole product systems in accordance with NFRC procedures and standards, and using applicable NFRC-approved software tools. Rationale: Change from permissive to mandatory language. Birch Point Consulting NG 3.2.B. IGMA NG 4.1.3. A.i Specific requirements for ACE training, and qualifications, and eligibility for the statistical auditing program are set forth in the NFRC LAP. (See comments from negative.) Generation and Issuance of Label Certificates, Calculation Reports: See comment Section 3.1 Specifying Authority Obligations D ii. IGMA NG 4.1.3.C. AAMA NG 4.1.3.A.i Generation and Issuance of Label Certificates - Delete “certified” before identical products and systems may be” and replace with “used without the requirement to recertify”. Sentence will read, “Once listed in the NFRC Certified Products Directory (CPD), identical products and systems may be used without the requirement to recertify for additional applications and projects by additional users.” Calculation reports from a Manufacturer / Other ACE are subject to IA calculation review in accordance with Section 4.1.4.B.5.1. The label certificate shall not be issued until completion of the IA review. Rationale: This can be covered in 5.1.1.B and 5.1.2.B. ATI NG 4.1.3.B Comment: How is it proven that the product is "identical?" It should be through the same process utilitzed by the initial user. CMA allows for reuse of all components multiple times, so there is little advantage to allowing "additional users" to reuse ratings for "identical products." If the same "user" (i.e., Specifying Authority) has multiple projects with the same system (i.e., the 7-11 storefront scenario), that user should be allowed to reuse. Other users should be required to submit all information as was required by the initial user. This ensures that the product is truly identical and that all system checks and balances are kept in place. Recertification The NFRC label certificates shall be issued for products that are installed in a commercial building, and are may or may not be project specific. Therefore, n No recertification of these products shall beis required for products for which a label certificate is issued. A new Project Certificate shall be required for each project utilizing NFRC-rated products. Rationale: Clarification Comment: Recertification of the product as represented on the label certificate is unnecessary, but how is recertification of the components handled? This also raises issues with the reuse of systems noted in Section 4.1.3. The program must ensure that any changes to the components used in the system causes further use of the already listed system to end. AAMA NG 4.1.5 ATI NG 4.1.5 AAMA GANA NG NG 4.2.B.vi 4.2.B.vi AAMA NG 4.2.C.iii From Section 1.3.1 (page 12), listed here fore reference: Project Certificate: a document providing values calculated using the label certificate ratings of each fenestration system to be installed in a particular project. The project certificates may also, but are not required to, list the area weighted average energy rating values for these labeled fenestration systems. Edit as follows: may also include average area weighted Ufactor, SHGC, and VT; and..... Rationale: as average area weighted U-0factor, SHGC, and VT are not mandatory, re-word this for clarity. Comment: this section should be deleted as it is not a required reporting item. Component performance for the framing and edge of glazing for the four Best/Worst case options shall be calculated in accordance with NFRC 100 and reported for each characteristic cross-section. Rationale: This seems to be out of place. Delete this section (subsection A) and incorporate subsection B as 5.1.1.F with the following edits…. 5.1.2. Manufacturer / Other ACE A. The calculations associated with label certificates issued by a Manufacturer / Other ACE shall be subject to 100% IA review prior to the issuance of a certificate. F.B. If a submitted label and/or project certificate is subject to IA review, The a Manufacturer / Other ACE shall not issue the certificate until completion of the IA review. Birch Point Consulting NG 5.1.2 GANA IGMA NG NG 5.1.2 Mfr/Other ACE 5.1.2. Comment: As previously stated, we do not believe it is reasonable to reuqire that 100 percent of manufacturer ACE calculations be checked by an IA. We support the proposal developed by Tom Culp on behalf of the Aluminum Extruders Council (ACE) and in response to the CMA Ratings Subcommittee vote of 21-10-6, for the CMA task group to develop alternative criteria that would move from 100 percent review to a statistical auditing program. Re: The Manufacturer / Other ACE - See comment Section 3.1 Specifying Authority Obligations D ii. 5.1.1. Independent ACE Selection for IA Review A. The calculations associated with the first five (5) label and/or project certificates submitted by a specific Independent ACE, and the first fifteen (15) certificates submitted by a specific Manufacturer / Other ACE, shall be subject to IA review. B. Afterwards, if the ACE qualifies for the statistical auditing program in accordance with the LAP, the calculations associated with each label and/or project certificate submitted by the Independent ACE shall have a 1 in 10 chance of being selected for IA review, as determined by the software tool when the certificate is issued. C. If the ACE does not qualify for the statistical auditing program in accordance with the LAP, the calculations associated with each certificate shall be reviewed by an IA. D. If substantive problems or errors are encountered in multiple calculation reviews, NFRC retains the right to increase the percentage of certificates subject to IA review until NFRC determines that all issues have been resolved. E. If a submitted label and/or project certificate is selected for subject to IA review, the Independent ACE may issue the certificate prior to completion of the IA review, but shall be responsible for making any necessary corrections and notifications in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.1. Birch Point Consulting NG 5.1.1 Delete this entire section. Revise Section 5.1.1 to inlcude both Independent ACE and Manufacturer/Other ACE requirements so that the requirements are equal. Rationale: No need to distinguish between audit requirements for Independent and Manufacturer/Other ACE. AAMA NG 5.1.2 AAMA NG 5.2.B ...each certificate shall have a 1 in 20 chance of being selected for a Documentation Trail Audit. Audits shall not exceed 2 per year for each Specifying Authority. Rationale: This needs an upper limit. Comment: While the frequency makes sense if 10,000 certirficates are being issued, it is not enough at the current level of use (<100). A minimum threshold of DTA's should be maintained per year. I'd suggest (just for discussion) a sliding scale something like: If # of projects is 0-50, the review rate is 50% and total reviewed is 25; the next 200 certificates are reviewed at a rate of 10% and total reviewed is 20; and above 250 certificates, the review rate is 5%. In this scenario, if 500 certificates were issued, 58 would be reviewed. This would provide a reasonable level of assurance that the program was working, especially in the initial years, when usage will be light. Delete step in process stating, "Testing for Validation of Frames per NFRC 102" Rationale: Physical Testing is not required for valid results; in fact, NFRC's program is based on computer simulations and NOT on physical testing. ATI NG 5.2.B. AAMA NG Frame System ATI IGMA NG NG 5.3.A App. A "All costs related to the ACE Calculation Review shall be borne by the ACE." Comment: This creates a business relationship directly between the ACE and IA that makes me a little uncomfortable, especially since the IA is not chosen by the ACE. This doesn't seem like a very independent way for the parties to be associated. In this scenario, the ACE would have many reasons to suggest the use of a preferred IA to the specifying authority to help streamline the process. This is counterproductive to the checks and balances process. If the ACE is to bear this cost, it should be done in some process that is not a direct client/vendor relationship. Item 7, "Insulated Glass Unit" should be changed to read “Insulating Glass Unit.” "B.23 Revocation Based on Three Suspensions In the event that a Specifying Authority’s/ACE’s products are successfully challenged pursuant to this Section 6 so that such Specifying Authority’s/ACE’s products or components are subject to three suspensions in any year, the Board of Directors may revoke the Specifying Authority’s/ACE’s NFRC license and License Agreement. A Specifying Authority/ ACE may appeal such a revocation in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 hereof." Comments: It would be very difficult for even the worse ACE to be suspended three times in one year. Either reduce the # of suspensions to two or increase the time span to two or three years. Suspension won't come easily, but should have severe repercussions for repetitive actions. ATI NG App.B.23 GANA NG As stated in previous ballot responses, we believe the CMA fee structure will be a major factor in the acceptance of the program in the commercial construction market. The fee General structure presented by the Board of Directors will place Comments - undue burden upon the system manufacturers, add Fee unnecessary cost to building construction, and discourage Structure the use of custom window and curtain wall systems. We must again note that in response to the first, second, and third draft ballots and on numerous occasions in meetings and discussions with the NFRC Board of Directors, we have asked about efforts to reach out to registered design professionals, building owners, developers, building managers, general contractors, and glazing contractors to assess the needs and practices of the commerical construction industry. While letters to the American Institute General of Architects (AIA), BOMA Inernational, and the Construction Comments - Specifications Institute (CSI) have apparently gone outreach to unanswered, NFRC still claims to be reaching out to this other segment of the industry. We strongly believe NFRC must segments of consider the market needs before the introduction of the the CMA program and properly focus the effort to the segments commerical of the commercial construction industry that are currently not industry using energy efficient products. GANA NG Graham Architectural Products NG It is impossible to approve this document at this time until the missing components are drafted, reviewed, approved and made part of this document (e.g. glass certification language, frame grouping, frame component section in it’s entirety). Additionally Frame component testing is still listed in the flowchart, but I have yet to understand how this validation testing is supposed to work. Is General it validation of the frame comments - component or the whole product ?? If whole product then document why will frame mfgs bear the incomplete brunt of testing fees? IGMA NG This document cannot be approved as presented as it is not complete. Section 2.3 Framing System Approval is not ready for inclusion. Fee Schedule: IGMA cannot approve this document based on the current proposed fee schedule. We General believe the cost of the program will increase the cost of comments - energy efficient fenestration products and will document deter the use of these products rather than promoting them. incomplete See Table of Comments that follows for additional remarks. Obviously I cannot vote to Approve as the document is not General yet complete. However the work done to-date appears to be Comments - headed in the right direction. - See proposed revisions made document as tracked changes. I accepted all the original tracked incomplete changes before making my recommended edits. Pella NG Birch Point Consulting NG General Comments IA review of mfr/other ACE See Tom Culp proposal in Word doc attached with negative NG Negative Key: AC Approved w/Commen Resolution Editorial tabled Editorial Withdrawn until Technical Documents are approved Intent to stay within the pre-calculated values - editorial Discussed at BOD meeting withdrawn withdrawn Editorial non-persuasive Editorial Editorial Editorial Chair resolution to Rating Committee, to BOD, to TC Editorial tabled Editorial Editorial Persuasive - Reference section 4.1.3.A.i See Tom Culp negative #24 Editorial Persuasive - will not ballot LAP sections until LAP is approved Editorial Approve Tom Culp's proposed concept language #2 Addressed withdrawn - TG will discuss proprietary issue Editorial Addressed Addressed withdrawn; however…..We need to address that recertification of the component parts is not required and only when the component is modified. Editorial withdrawn - AAMA#31 withdrawn - Staff will check (editorial word processing error) Approve Tom Culp's proposed conceopt language #2 Addressed Addressed Addressed non-persuasive; pre-mature non-persuasive non-persuasive - Item for TG as working item In flowchart - non-persuasive Withdrawn Editorial persuasive - action item on motion form (2 suspensions in any 2year period-language changed) New Business New Business previously addressed Cost comments in writing and the Chair will provide BOD comments withdrawn addressed Negative Approved w/Comment NFRC CMA-PCP 2007 Ballot NFRC Ballot Results - as of 07/10/2007 Ratings Committee and CMA (Ratings) Subcommittee Last Name Koustas Rancourt King Wilson Vollmer LaBerge Tinonga Mewbourne Winckler Shillingford Riopel Raske Thompson Petermann Patzer Hunter Lewis Culver Kent Jonely Johnson Fisher Tofflemire Thoman Hill Schultz Harp Gerhardt Carlsen Gramlick Muessig Stewart Egle Black Jayson Ruggles Ritko Culp Smith Stone Pei Adirim Rygg Legros Larsen Bhandari First Name Alex Stephen Scott Paul Ronald Paul Jason Thomas J. Lisa Earlene Gilbert Dennis Chuck Nils Greg Stephen John W. Mike John G. Joe Steven M. Frank Mark Michael Rick Brad Steve David C. Daniel Tracey Patrick M. Arlene Kevin Jim Robert Ken Barry Thomas Ron Garrett A. Ming Ming Aaron Tony Pierre James Mahabir Company Name Approve ABC Window Contractors, Inc. Abritek Windows & Doors, Inc. Accent Windows, Inc. Accurate Dorwin Ltd. ADCO Products, Inc. Advanced Glazings Limited Aegis Window & Door LLC AFG Industries, Inc. AIMCAL - Window Film Committee 1 Airgas, Inc. Air-Ins, Inc. All Metal, Inc. All New Glass, Inc. Alliance to Save Energy Aluminum Extruders Council (AEC) Aluminum Products of Cape Cod, Inc. American Architectural Manufacturers Association (AAMA) Amerimax Building Products, Inc. AMS, Inc. (Administrative Management Systems, Inc.) Amsco Windows Andersen Corporation Arcadia, Inc. Architectural Glass and Aluminum Co. Architectural Testing, Inc. - PA Arkema, Inc. Associated Laboratories, Inc. 1 Associated Materials, Inc. 1 Atria Building Products, Inc. Atrium Companies Inc. Australian Fenestration Rating Council (AFRC) Azon USA, Inc. AZS Consulting, Inc. B&B Engineering Corp. Bekaert Specialty Films, LLC Bendheim Wall Systems, Inc. Berdick Mfg. (Pacific) Ltd. Best Window & Door Co., Inc. Birch Point Consulting LLC BMC West Brickfield, Burchette, Ritts, & Stone, P.C. C.R. Windows Inc. California Deluxe Windows California Energy Commission 1 CANADA WINDOWS & DOORS Cardinal Glass Industries, Inc. CARLI, Inc. Haglund Kerry Huston Ed Arcati John L. Jones Don Cunningham B.J. Hite Allan Richter Stephen T. La Fevre Michael Pennell Bill Kostelecky Jason Deupree Carlos Hetzel Joseph R. Vanderbrugghen Hank Ives John Stuart Charlie Evans Rob Baylon David Rogers Tracy Rosenstock Steve Estrada Lou Noziska Howard Beach Bob Hanam Morgan Funk Isbrand Domocos Ovidiu Maher Bill Jan Anis Williams Ed Flyen Garrett Politi Dan McCluney Dr. W. Ross Wilhelm Dick Freedman Robert Paredes Ivan Trapp Bill Gibson Dolores Andrade Michael Cochran Rollie Carney Greg Croak Bruce Huebner Louis "Buddy" Gorry Henry A. Elias Brian Ricke Larry Kim Jongil Fry Nick Adams Nancy Colon Jose O'Rourke Beth Dube Sylvain Webb Margaret Smith Darrell Center for Sustainable Building Research CertainTeed Corporation Champion Window & Door Champion Window and Patio Room Company Coastal Industries, Inc. Comfort Line, Inc. CrystaLite, Inc. Custom Window Systems, Inc. CW Ohio, Inc. Dak-Cal Glass, Inc. DBA Mid West Glass & Aluminum Dallas Millwork Inc. DASMA (Door & Access Systems Manufacturers Assoc. International) Dayside Industries Ltd Del Storm Products, Inc. Draco Windows Dynamic Windows & Doors, Inc. Ecotope, Inc. Edgetech I.G. Inc. Edison Electric Institute Elite Solar Systems, Inc. Encompass, Inc. Energy Saving Products of Florida Enermodal Engineering Limited Euroline Windows Inc. EuroWind LLC FarNorth Windows & Doors Fenestration Simulation Engineering Fenetherm Fen-Tech Five Star Building Products Florida Solar Energy Center FMA (Fenestration Manufacturers Association) Focus Point Windows and Doors General Aluminum Corporation George W. Trapp Company Gibson Millworks Gienow Windows & Doors Gilwin Company Glass Association of North America (GANA) Graham Architectural Products Great Lakes Window, Inc. Guardian Industries Corp. Hansons Window & Siding Company Inc. Heartland Windows Manufacturing Co. Home-Guard Windows, Inc. Hometime WIndow Inc. Hunter Douglas, Inc. Hurricane Test Laboratory, LLC Ideal Window Manufacturing, Inc. INEX Spacer Inc. Insulating Glass Manufacturers Alliance (IGMA) International Window Film Association DiMarco Gates Maly Strawn Davidson Lybbert Klaus Bartlett Wetmore Falke Kudva Wilcox Selkowitz Emerson Niggli McNiven Roise Linford Kosiver Panarisi Shaner, Jr. Krahn Leslie Mathis Mercer Morris Cochran Bezubic Ward Franson Vilhauer Odegard Abubeker Gunara Murray Durand Yudenfriend Pitts Channell Carter Curran Reid Pecorella Allaire De Block Wright Eilert Flanigan Burks Hayden Lyons Temple Mike Martin Lance Steve Scott Scott Jeff Jeff Chuck Marcia Krish Kenneth G. Steve Randal Larry Scott Geoff Duane "Mac" Michael Paul David C. James C. Roger R. Christopher David W. Dee Gerald Bill Alecia Jeff Kevin Brad Elias Edward Robbie Sharon Herb Roland Scott Tim Dave Phil Robert M. Benoit David A. Richard Patrick Sean David Joe Peter Roland Interstate Building Materials J&M Glass Company, Inc. J.J.J. Specialty Company Jeld-Wen, Inc. Johnson Laminating & Coating, Inc. Jones Paint & Glass, Inc. K&C Industries, Inc. KDL Enterprises, Inc. (Western Skylights) Kensington Windows Inc. Keystone Certifications, Inc. Kinro, Inc. Kolbe & Kolbe Millwork Company, Inc. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory LbL Windows and Doors, Inc. Leslie Skylights Lindal Building Products Lindsay Window & Door Linford Glass Co. Lockheed Window Corp. Madico, Inc. Malta Wood Windows, Inc. Marvin Windows & Doors Matthews Millwork, Inc. DBA ThermaBuilt MC SQUARED Mercer Industries, Inc. Metal Window Corporation Metals USA Building Products L.P. MI Windows and Doors Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance Mikron Industries, Inc. Milgard Manufacturing, Inc. Minnkota Windows Monda Window & Door Corp. Mulia, Inc. Murray Millwork, Inc. National Accreditation & Management Institute (NAMI) National Institute of Building Sciences National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) National Vinyl Products, Inc. New Morning Windows Newpro Manufacturing North East Windows Northern Building Products, Inc. Novatech Glass, Inc. ODL Incorporated Oldcastle Glass, Inc. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) Paradigm Window Solutions Paragon Door Designs, Inc. Pella Corporation Peter Lyons & Associates PGT Industries 1 1 Duly David Loomis Nicholas Blyveis Jason Kaliner Adam Adams Danny Jacobsen Cheryl Ward Mike Van Voorst Randal Fugitt Richard Foster David Surace Kevin Miller Robert Kairetz Jerry Sottile Ph.D. Gregory Rogers Christopher Zaremba Thomas S. King Noel E. Efthymiou George Waits Greg Hayes Chuck Hogan John Emmerich Dan Vresilovic Peter Carmichael Sam Shipp Craig Audsley Rick Anderson Chuck Ruel Jean-Francois Jaster Paul Schimmelpenningh Julia Wines Richard Meade John Maki Glenn Gallagher Tom Sprouse Jeff Fabian Art Bochiaro Vincent duPont William Feudner Jim Richter Karl Crouley Richard Huston Edward Tait David B. Jhaveri Milind Curtis Gary Dean Dan Chun Peter Leeds Randy Bean Michael Farley Gene Manteghi Mike Kypreos John Pilkington North America, Inc. Pittsburgh Corning Corporation Polar Seal Window Corp. Power Windows & Siding Premiere Millworks Inc. Prima Products, Inc. - Polybau Windows & Doors Public Supply Company Quality Testing, Inc. Quality Window Manufacturing, Incorporated Quantum Windows & Doors, Inc. Quiet Solution LLC/QuietHome Windows RAM Industries, Inc. Reliance Windows Limited Research Frontiers Incorporated Robert Bowden, Inc. Roetzel & Andress Royal Mouldings Limited Royal Windows Manufacturing Corp. Russell Millworks, Inc. Sage Electrochromics, Inc. Seattle Dept. of Planning and Development Semling-Menke Company, Inc. DBA Semco Windows and Doors Seven D Industries, Inc. Shelter Superstore Corp. Shwinco Industries, Inc. Sierra Pacific Windows Simonton Windows Solaris International Inc. Solatube International, Inc. Solutia, Inc. Southland Windows, Inc. Southwall Technologies Specialty Wholesale Supply Spectra Gases Sprouse Building Products Starline Windows (2001) Ltd. Suburban Building Products Sunergy Consulting Sun-Tek Manufacturing Inc. Superior Seal Corporation SureGuard Vinyl Windows Sycamore Creek Consulting Tait Solar Company, Inc. Technoform The West Wall Group, LLC The Window Factory Thermo Industries, Inc. Thermo-Tite Windows Torrance Aluminum Torrington Lumber Co., Inc. TRACO Tri-State Window Factory Corp. 1 Grech Martin Rose Howard Maniaci John C. Naylor Marcus LeBrun Roger Seba John McGill Marion Shoots R. Joseph Brown Ronnie Strickland Gordy Doerger-Roberts Laura Garceau Timothy White Orlando Wacek Daniel McFalls Roxanne Waldenmeyer U. Jay Valentz Art Sylvester Randy Higgins Fred King William Atkinson Scott Baker Jeff Edgemon Tracy Doegg Keith Shah Bipin Jasewic Bruce Wirthgen Wolfgang Lowinski Jeff Simpkins Steven Madha Jay Turner Mike Turkstra Industries Ltd. United Window & Door Manufacturing, Inc. Unlimited, Inc. Valley Glass Corporation VELUX-America Inc. Ventana USA Viceroy Homes Ltd. Vinyl Design Corporation Vinyl Window Technologies, Inc. VinyLite Windows LLC Vinylmax, LLC Vinyl-Pro, Inc. Vinylume Products, Inc. Viracon, Inc. Viwinco, Inc. VOS Window & Door, Inc. VTech Industries Walsh Building Products Wayne Dalton Corporation Weather King Windows & Doors, Inc. Western Window WESTLab Westwood Millwork, Inc. Wheeler's WinBuild, Inc. WinDoor Incorporated Win-Dor, Inc. Window and Door Manufacturer's Association Window Craft, Inc. Windoworld Industries Inc. YKK AP America, Inc. 1 8 Approve w/Comment Do not Approve Abstain 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 14