The Blog turns 2 and the NFRC is still here...

Big day here at the blog, as we celebrate our 2^nd birthday…. Amazing. While the first year was spotty, the 2^nd year has been pretty darn good and I thank you for that. Actually I should thank everyone from EFCO and Pella who seemingly still check this blog often, even after their deal has been done. Anyway, its been fun and we’ll keep it going, but I warn you, this blog could be a like a real 2 year old child and go through its “Terrible Two’s” so look out…

Elsewhere….

** WARNING- The next few paragraphs are NFRC related, so if you are one of those people who do not care for this stuff, please skip below**

Big meeting coming in a few weeks at NFRC. In advance of that meeting, Glass Magazine has an interesting piece on the whole commercial effort and the timeline of what’s been happening. To read it CLICK HERE. Nice to see them jump into the fray, just 2 years+ after I wrote my first piece on it. Anyway, it is a good primer on what’s happened and what is going to happen. But of course there were certain parts of the article I had to make comment on and here they are: (quotes in bold, my comments under)

Participants have said it’s hard to make decisions about the usability of a software program before it’s completed. To give users something they can “touch and feel” before the program launches, the NFRC plans to release a lite version of the CMA software in the form of a bidding tool, Benney says. The software will have the rating program without the certification.

This shows you how comical this whole “fight” is. While we fight on the oversight (more on that below) and other things, the program depends on a piece of software that’s NOT COMPLETED YET! Yes and we all know how new software works, never any bugs, never any problems, works smooth huh?

One major compromise would allow manufacturers to serve as an approved calculation entity, reducing costs and an additional level of testing, albeit with a requirement of 100 percent review from an inspection agency. Although the NFRC membership voted overwhelmingly at the spring meeting in Austin, Texas, to allow manufacturer ACEs without total IA review, the board reversed the decision. (underline and italics mine)

And you wonder, ladies and gentlemen, why I fight this. This statement says it all. The membership saw this MADE SENSE. The membership who have to deal with these issues and actually understand the pressures and the industry, made its recommendation to the board who promptly REVERSED the decision. Why?

Because

A: They Can! They are a 501c3 and they can do whatever they want, even invade Iraq too if they want.

and

B: The people who make money off of their NFRC memberships would lose out in a deal like this. If a manufacturer could do his own calculations, what would that to do the business of all of the labs and consultants who MAKE MONEY from stuff like this? So the board, in trying to protect their own, went against an overwhelming vote. Believe me they’ll breakout the argument of third party certs and “trust” but if the labs, consultants, and IA’s weren’t making money off of this it would be approved. Oh and you would think that the DOE would wake up and take notice of this? Nah, they are completely and pathetically snowed.

Falke agrees NFRC has not had enough communication with industry players but says it is a top priority for the board. “We’re working on a marketing plan and know we need to do a better job. We need to get the word out, and we probably should have been doing it earlier,” she says. Possible outreach efforts the board is considering include attending meetings and trade shows, holding demonstrations and focus groups, and taking directly with AIA members and code officials, Falke says.

Hey I got an idea, let’s create a program for an industry that we know nothing about, and ignore their input and offerings (like a tour of Viracon) and let’s go from there! Yes, it should be noted that the NFRC was offered and the DOE endorsed a tour and session at Viracon when the NFRC was having their meetings in Minnesota. And like everything else- it was ignored. So it's lip service in my opinion when they want to “reach out” because they only want to “reach out” to save a program that makes, in its current form, no sense. So have fun reaching out guys…. And as for focus groups, I hope they do them again as it was high comedy seeing them interview people from towns that don’t have a building bigger than 1 story.

Although many issues remain unresolved, the CMA sausage is about done and ready to be served, whether the industry is ready or not.

And you know what, the fun will really begin, because there is no way this industry will take it lying down… at first it will be ignored, but when the NFRC works the code angle, then it will be fought, and I am pretty sure taken to court if necessary, if it turns out to be the completely biased program some want it to be. And that’s just glass and aluminum industry- the architects will absolutely ignore.

The bottom line is, and I have said it many times, our industry embraces and welcomes efficiency. We want to sell and manufacture value added products (even though some NFRC members have poisoned the minds of the DOE telling them, we don’t like to produce Low E!) and we are all for a fair, simple and credible system to rate whole systems.

What we are against is the blatant profit motive of those involved. Like the example above, they prove that their goal is to make money, not create a workable program.

And I must note, there are people I respect on the other side of this issue, and they bring up many good points on some of the needs of a program like this. But at the end of the day it gets lost in the BS that this has spawned. It’s a shame because done right, a program like this would really do a lot of good, but with too many people in profit mode, it will never happen here.

OK moving on….

-- I do show my frustration with DOE, but hopefully the DOE does the right thing on another issue. Sage EC is in the running for monies from the DOE for their product development, and to me it’s the ultimate no brainer. The Sage product meets the specifications set by DOE and is truly a cutting edge piece. Let’s hope they get the money to keep that technology rolling. If a company like Sage with the product they have can’t get money from DOE and groups like NFRC do, there is seriously something wrong with that.

-- While I am Mr. Negative, Good Morning America had a piece on a California subdivision that had more than ½ of its houses up for auction. And the prices were at ½ the original prices. What a disaster. The housing market is getting uglier by the day, and even with people offering to pay insurance and taxes and so on, homes are not moving. Add in the foreclosures- 300 this year in my community alone and folks it is not pretty.

-- Registration for BEC and Glassweek are now open, spots will fill fast, so get registered today.

-- From the football side, its 3 in a row for me as San Fran barely covered the spread vs Baltimore last week, and should’ve won outright except for a missed FG. Anyway we go for 4 in a row with the Jets at home getting 3 from Philly. The Jets have been bad, but I think Philly has issues and I just don’t trust McNabb… so we’ll see if the streak can continue.

-- Baseball wise, I guess my hunch on Steinbrenner and the Yanks was wrong… So now I am going with Red Sox… and in the NL, my D Backs are still alive and I like them to end the Rockies Cinderella run.

Sorry no video this week… I am clearing hard drive space for that snazzy new bug free NFRC CMA software…