|
ASHRAE Unveils Building Risk Guide In Case
Of Future Attacks, Bioterrorism
One of the highlights of this year’s ASHRAE Winter Meeting, held
January 12-16 in Atlantic City, was a public session and corresponding
paper titled “Risk Management Guidance for Health and Safety under
Extraordinary Incidents.” The document was developed by ASHRAE in
response to the September 11 terrorist attacks and subsequent anthrax
poisonings. It was prepared by a blue-ribbon panel of engineers and
building scientists assembled by ASHRAE President William Coad, P.E.
According to Coad, the September 11 attacks “derailed ASHRAE
activities” on several levels. The society watched events unfold
carefully, seeking to determine how it could best provide assistance
in the aftermath of the attacks. “There were a lot of anti-terrorism
messages on news programs with various ‘experts’ giving advice on
how to secure buildings. Some of that advice was dangerous,” Coad
told reporters.
ASHRAE put out the message that it was prepared to assist the
mainstream media on technical matters related to building science,
ventilation and safety, but the Society was largely ignored until
anthrax tainted letters arrived at national media offices and federal
buildings. During the height of the anthrax scare, ASHRAE members
watched as more bad advice was delivered through the popular press.
“So-called experts were advising to seal off fresh air intakes as an
anti-terrorism measure,” lamented Coad.
Frustrated by the lack of recognition and bad information, Coad
appointed a Presidential Study Group and tasked it with two
responsibilities. First, the group was directed to quickly put
together advice that ASHRAE could distribute to engineers, owners and
managers of existing buildings; and second, the group was tasked with
creating a roadmap ASHRAE could follow on how to study this issue in
the future.
Dr. James Woods was named chairman of the Presidential Study Group.
Persons appointed as members of the group included: William Blewett,
Jack Buckley, H.E. Barney Burroughs, William Coad, Ralph Goldman,
George Glavis, Andrew Kitchens, Andrew Persily and Robert Thompson.
This group has several building engineers and scientists, including
representatives from the U.S. Armed Forces, State Department, EPA and
NIST.
The Presidential Study Group began working on Nov. 12, 2001.
Because of the short time frame in which the group was asked to
complete its task, it worked in closed-door executive session. Their
guidance paper was presented to the ASHRAE Board at the beginning of
the society’s winter meeting, and was approved with modifications
for presentation at the public session held in Atlantic City a few
days later.
Section two of the guide document discusses “lessons learned.”
It recommends that openings into buildings that could allow airborne
aerosols to enter be, “capable of timely closure, located
sufficiently remote from any launch site, or equipped with adequate
filtration.” The guide points out that sensors or monitors to
forewarn of attacks are not reliable or available for many
contaminants. Enhanced filtration is cited as desirable, but it is
also recognized as an insufficient control strategy for airborne
contaminants. Rather, the guide calls for a complete strategy of “enhanced
filtration coupled with building pressurization of the building
interior relative to the outdoors.”
In the guideline section directed at building owners and managers,
three preliminary recommendations are given:
1) Understand the capabilities of your building and its
systems;
2) Assure that your building is performing as intended; and
3) Do not make changes to building performance unless the
consequences are understood.
Sub-sections for each of these recommendations elaborate on the
concepts they embrace.
Standard 62 Debated
ASHRAE held seminars and forums to discuss whether the society
should create separate ventilation standards for hospitality
facilities, industrial facilities and airplane passenger cabins. The
idea to create separate standard stems from the work that has been
accomplished on the proposed ASHRAE 62.2 standard for residential
dwellings.
In a public forum on ventilation standards for hospitality
facilities, both
sides of the issue came armed with their most persuasive arguments
and speakers. As one savvy participant commented, “you knew what
most of the speakers had to say before they said it.” Familiar faces
from previous ventilation debates dominated the microphone.
“You design a lot more ventilation systems for restaurants than
autopsy rooms,” quipped a hospitality industry representative at the
public forum. His point was that ASHRAE 62-2001 provides ventilation
recommendations for autopsy rooms, but not for restaurant smoking
areas. Indeed, a large part of the lobby on both sides of the separate
standard issue had tobacco smoke foremost in mind.
In the discussions on industrial facilities, it was noted that
because of the unique chemicals and processes in different
manufacturing plants, the creation of a single “industrial”
ventilation standard would be very difficult to achieve. Several
attendees voice affirmation to a comment that industrial ventilation
standards should be tied to TLVs published by the American Conference
of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH).
The fact that ASHRAE was even having these ventilation discussions
was contested. President Coad told IE Connections the society received
“hate mail” after announcements about the sessions and forums on
ventilation were announced. “ASHRAE won’t be stifled from holding
these discussions, despite the protests of special interest groups,”
Coad said.
Standard 62.2 Discussions
While most of the work on the ASHRAE Standard 62.2P on Residential
Ventilation for Low-Rise Buildings was completed at their meeting in
Florida in early December, the committee were expected to discuss
potential addendums to the standard once it’s published as final and
goes on continuous maintenance (as it is expected to do). One of the
addendum issues on the agenda focused on autos in attached garages as
a source of carbon monoxide in the home and proposed exhaust
ventilation as a remedy. An ad hoc workgroup of the IAQ subcommittee
will be named to review this issue.
|
