At the Winter Meeting in Dallas last month, ASHRAE reaffirmed that it has an obligation to consider health issues in its standards.

"Health concerns have always been an important part of ASHRAE standards, particularly those related to indoor air quality," said ASHRAE President Harley W. Goodman Jr. "The Board of Directors has reaffirmed the Society's position that health concerns will continue to play a key role in development of standards and position documents."

The health issue was raised after a petition approved last year by ASHRAE's membership recommended that standards not make claims for health, comfort or occupant acceptability. Goodman appointed a committee, headed by Lynn Bellinger, to examine the issue and present its findings. After reviewing precedents set by the Society, including standards, bylaws, the Code of Ethics and guidelines, the committee presented its findings, which the board approved as follows:

• Affirmed the implied policy that ASHRAE standards consider health impacts where appropriate.
• Reaffirmed ASHRAE's Indoor Air Quality Position Statement that was approved in February 1989. Although a new position may soon be submitted to the board, the committee agreed the existing statement should be reaffirmed. Committee members found that the statement's principles are consistent with current thinking.
• Initiated a review of all standards, guidelines and position papers to identify and eliminate inconsistencies.

In addition, the committee concluded that:

ASHRAE standards should and do consider health impacts when setting the criteria for acceptable indoor air environment. This includes setting minimum ventilation requirements and related measures, such as source control.

Standard 62.1 Committee Meeting

The committee responsible for revising Standard 62-1999, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality, recommended three addenda for public review.

The first addendum, 6C, adds requirements to assure that air distribution systems deliver outdoor air to occupied spaces. Committee Chairman Andrew Persily said the addendum addresses balancing, plenum mixing systems, exhaust duct location and documentation.

The second addendum, 6F, defines performance criteria for air stream surfaces in ventilation system equipment, ducts and plenums. Conformance with these criteria is intended to minimize the potential for microbial growth, according to Persily.

The third addendum, 6G, clarifies and adds requirements to assure that the building envelope does not contribute to IAQ problems. Condensation of humid infiltration air within the building results in wet materials and surfaces, causing an increased potential for microbial growth, according to Persily.

The addendum also calls for design features to minimize parking garage vehicle exhaust from entering occupied spaces.

Public review for these addenda is expected to be announced in the summer.

In other news, former chair Gene Tucker is now off the committee and will serve as a consultant. Scott Hansen of Farr Co. (air cleaning), Robert Rushing of Holaday-Parks Inc. (designer-builder) and Bernice Mattsson of the Wisconsin Department of Commerce have been added to the committee. Liz Baker is the committee's new staff liaison.

Persily introduced a chart of the status of all addenda to Standard 62.1. You can e-mail him at apersily@ nist.gov for a copy.

Persily announced that there was only one application submitted to join the committee as an organizational member. The committee was expected to start development of the next committee member roster soon.

Also introduced was a chart highlighting all of the 29 interpretations of the standard, all made for the 1989 version; all now apply to 62-99 unless modifications are made. With the approval of addendum 62f, Persily found some revisions necessary based on new CO2 requirements. The committee voted to approve all revisions, but one which was scheduled to be voted on in letter ballot.

Two new interpretations of the standard were brought to the committee. Charles Lane of Environmental Process Inc. in Minneapolis needed clarification of whether ventilation design in a school classroom was in violation of the standard, as it refers to Table 2.1 Outdoor Air Ventilation Requirements. A subcommittee's response was that there was nothing in the standard that would not allow the proposed design. So the committee voted to approve the interpretation.

A second draft of an interpretation on Table 2 and addendum 62e by Bud Offerman of Indoor Environmental Engineering in San Francisco. His interpretation was that ventilation rates in Table 2 assume no smoking, and if there is smoking in a space, the Indoor Air Quality Procedure must be used. However, one committee member said that the standard does not give information to answer the question so it doesn't mean that IAQ procedure should be used on ETS. Since committee members could not agree on a response to the interpretation, a vote was delayed to letter ballot.

Committee member Hal Levin presented a draft outline of Standard 62's Guideline for Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality.

As part of the first day meeting of the committee, a special presentation was made by William Fisk, co-author of the study, "Association of Ventilation Rates and CO2-concentrations with Health and Other Responses in Commercial and Institutional Buildings." The paper reviewed 20 studies that investigated the association of ventilation rates with human responses, and 21 studies on the association of CO2 concentration with these responses. Researchers found that as ventilation was increased and CO2 decreased, there was a decrease in the symptoms of sick building syndrome.

The second day of the committee meeting began with proposed changes to 62n on ventilation rates. Most of the public review comments came from school officials who wanted more air into school buildings. Dave Butler, vice chair of the committee stated that 15cfm is excessive. Rates in flux because they changed from unadapted to adapted occupant. A motion to modify the rates currently in 62n was not approved. Also discussed in relation to 62n was additivity. Paul Cammer came up with a hybrid suggestion to have another column in table for Rb (buildings) +Rp (people) and you would eliminate the guess work. Dennis Stanke suggested taking people and buildings (two sources) and come up with one number (cfm), go with additivity and have two columns until we get the data necessary. The final motion was accepted for an alternative proposal: people and buildings would be in the table along with a simplified single cfm rate for the engineer to make the choice what to use.

The issue of listed unvented gas appliances was a hang-up for addendum 62p to go to publication. While David Bixby of the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association told members that all equipment is listed and covers IAQ issues, some members were not convinced. The motions to send 62p for publication failed twice. Persily directs the subcommittee to change language addressing unvented appliances (work with GAMA) and put out for limited 30 day public review. Should they include unvented appliances and how? Include ANSI info and test documentation. Persily points out that this same document was approved for public review at the last meeting. Can't choose right now what to do about unvented and vented appliances.

Addendum 62 6f was passed by letter ballot and the subcommittee made some changes based on comments. Added new items in section 5.6 and took out wording about cleanability because there's no measurable testing or products to use, same holds for biogradeable. Wayne Thomann expected a lot of public comments back on this. New materials would have to be tested prior to use. Vote to go out to public review with edit changes is approved.

Addendum 62o letter ballot did not pass so three changes made by subcommittee; amends the standard in four places. Hal Levin calls the definition of ETS inappropriate and in conflict with the common definition of ETS and may not be relevant to designers and not really what people are exposed to. In addition, he commented that changing the ETS definition will not be acceptable, he has problems with its use through the whole document, problems in Table 2, and thinks ASHRAE should be funding studies of ETS and ventilation rates. The motion to send 62o for public review fails. Persily will give direction to the subcommittee soon. He may go back to the board for advice on this subject.

For addendum 62r on outdoor air cleaning, the subcommittee made changes to forward and when ozone is required. Changes to scope reconcile with rest of the document. Dick Morris said the approach in this addenda punishes the building owner and not the polluter. Larry Schoen confirmed that BOMA was going to have a problem with particulate filtration requirements, because the equipment is not available yet. However, Dan Thayer said the equipment was readily available and about 15 of the manufacturers were exhibiting in Dallas. It was also not overly costly. The vote to send to public review fails. The main objection is what to do about ozone.

62.2P Committee Meeting

Fred Koloss of the SPLS addressed the committee first to give a recap on why the standard was approved for public review and then pulled back. He called the first vote last fall "hasty." The SPLS thought there would be a chance "for more strongly held consensus" among other groups that may be a problem.

Art McIvor, chair of ASHRAE's Standards Committee, advised members to track their consensus-making efforts so they can show the SPLS. Martha Hewitt added that substantial agreement had to occur within ASHRAE. She likened consensus to pornography: "You'll know it when it see it; you guys need to work a little harder to make sure that it happens."

Mark Diamond, secretary of the 62.2P Committee, asked, "How do you know that we don't have consensus?"

McIvor responded: "We need to reach middle ground on issues such as natural ventilation. We're not saying what you've done is wrong, but you need to seek a balance. People are putting heat on us. I'm fighting for this because the society deserves a residential standard."

One audience member said that there's never been any rationale for the details put in the standard. "While there's never been any official release of the document, everyone has heard something about it that they don't like about it," he said. "What's the whole house ventilation? Central fans would probably would work, but no one is falling over dying so the builders are going to react harshly to something that requires them to do more without sufficient rationale.

The meeting then continued into an open session where audience members were allowed to ask questions of the committee. Max Sherman, chair of 62.2P, kicked off the session by giving an overview of the standard and its timeline.

As of Nov 99, the 62.2 committee split for 62-89 in 1996, committee formed; committee completed first draft in January 1999, public review denied four times already; low-rise buildings (3 and lower); American houses have no "ventilation" systems; IAQ concerns rising; chemical, physical biological contaminants; not thermal comfort; minimum requirements needed for general population include:

• whole house mechanical ventilation
• exhaust fans in kitchen and bathrooms
• windows in other rooms
• source control
• "good" equipment (40 cfm minimum fan)
• requirements for intermittent ventilation
• system types allow for several types don't require anything (balanced, exhaust, supply)
• air distribution requirements- not room by room anymore, air distribution to each bedroom, also filtration requirements
• local ventilation requirements for source control such as kitchen, bathroom fans
• source requirements- clothes dryers exhausted outside; air handlers in garage must be sealed; CO sensors
• natural ventilation: rooms with no fans should have windows

A straw poll was taken to determine how many people here would oppose sending the standard out for the public review if the committee took up the changes that people proposed; the majority of people did not oppose the action. Dick Morris of NAHB did oppose during that poll.

Contentious issues that were left to resolve: How to ventilate, and what to use? Home builders had about 15 issues that were concerns.