Comment #1Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.1Comment Type: GeneralComment:Certificated Trainers 203.1 Achieving Certification As a certified Home Energy Rater, complete certified ratings on a minimum of twenty-five (25) homes. Requiring Training Providers to certify a certain number of houses puts us in direct competition with the people we are providing training for. The college I work for and the DOE wants us to provide training, not the actual service. We inspect houses when we teach a class, but not for an official inspection. Under the current economic environment, it would be hard to find 25 houses in a small community to inspect without seriously hurting local contractors. This is a bad idea.Justification for Change:Requiring Training Providers to certify a certain number of houses puts us in direct competition with the people we are providing training for. The college I work for and the DOE wants us to provide training, not the actual service. We inspect houses when we teach a class, but not for an official inspection. Under the current economic environment, it would be hard to find 25 houses in a small community to inspect without seriously hurting local contractors. This is a bad idea. Proposed Change:Allow college and universities an alternative method to show current "real world" inspections. Personally, I would rather attend a rater refresher course or audit another trainers course.
Certificated Trainers 203.1 Achieving Certification
As a certified Home Energy Rater, complete certified ratings on a minimum of twenty-five (25) homes.
Requiring Training Providers to certify a certain number of houses puts us in direct competition with the people we are providing training for. The college I work for and the DOE wants us to provide training, not the actual service. We inspect houses when we teach a class, but not for an official inspection. Under the current economic environment, it would be hard to find 25 houses in a small community to inspect without seriously hurting local contractors. This is a bad idea.
Allow college and universities an alternative method to show current "real world" inspections. Personally, I would rather attend a rater refresher course or audit another trainers course.
Comment #2Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Comment Type: GeneralComment:While I see a great benefit to a rater and/or field inspector having the knowledge base of the battery of Combustion Safety Testing, I am not wholly in favor of it being part of the minimum rater skill set. In our market, and under our providership, almost all of our rated homes are new construction and would not necessarily require that testing. Therefore, it might be requiring a new minimum skill to be acquired that may never be used.Justification for Change:See comment.Proposed Change:Eliminate Combustion Safety testing from the rating field inspector and the rater minimum skill set.
While I see a great benefit to a rater and/or field inspector having the knowledge base of the battery of Combustion Safety Testing, I am not wholly in favor of it being part of the minimum rater skill set.
In our market, and under our providership, almost all of our rated homes are new construction and would not necessarily require that testing. Therefore, it might be requiring a new minimum skill to be acquired that may never be used.
See comment.
Eliminate Combustion Safety testing from the rating field inspector and the rater minimum skill set.
Comment #3Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 1Comment Type: GeneralComment:"This enhances the goal of producing a nationally recognized and uniform program." I support a uniform nationally recognized certification program. However, I do not see how this goal can possibly be achieved when States such as Florida use their own proprietary rater 3,2,1 classification system and does not recognize ratings from RESNET raters from other states unless raters test with a recognized Florida Provider (I believe there may only be one) and use Energy Gauge software. As it stands now, if a Certified RESNET rater from another state wants to conduct business doing ratings in Florida, they will have to also become a "Florida Rater" before doing so. This is in addition to their previously earned "RESNET Rater Certification" that is recognized elsewhere across the nation. National training and certification should be consistent from state to state.Justification for Change:See comments.Proposed Change:RESNET should consider removing their name and recognition from places and organizations that in practice do not fully recognize or embrace the national RESNET certification as sufficient qualification to conduct home energy ratings nationwide.
"This enhances the goal of producing a nationally recognized and uniform program." I support a uniform nationally recognized certification program. However, I do not see how this goal can possibly be achieved when States such as Florida use their own proprietary rater 3,2,1 classification system and does not recognize ratings from RESNET raters from other states unless raters test with a recognized Florida Provider (I believe there may only be one) and use Energy Gauge software. As it stands now, if a Certified RESNET rater from another state wants to conduct business doing ratings in Florida, they will have to also become a "Florida Rater" before doing so. This is in addition to their previously earned "RESNET Rater Certification" that is recognized elsewhere across the nation. National training and certification should be consistent from state to state.
See comments.
RESNET should consider removing their name and recognition from places and organizations that in practice do not fully recognize or embrace the national RESNET certification as sufficient qualification to conduct home energy ratings nationwide.
Comment #4Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Comment Type: GeneralComment: I am supportive of clarification around continuing education and maintenance requirements of HERS Trainers. The proposed Chapter 2 is not clear in defining the renewal period for Certificated Trainers. While it is clear on Rater renewal (every 3 years), it does not specify a time period for trainers. What further concerns me is the requirement to teach 10 HERS trainings in order to stay current. Some training providers only have enough demand to teach one workshop a year. Our Providership has experienced great fluctuations in the demand for HERS trainings from one to seven courses a year. It is also not clear whether the trainer would be required to teach all or part of the HERS training, and if it is part, how many hours would suffice? I would propose that the requirement be reconsidered to require the trainer to teach a minimum of 8 hours of HERS instruction annually to allow for various training Providership models. Thanks for considering this comment.
I am supportive of clarification around continuing education and maintenance requirements of HERS Trainers. The proposed Chapter 2 is not clear in defining the renewal period for Certificated Trainers. While it is clear on Rater renewal (every 3 years), it does not specify a time period for trainers. What further concerns me is the requirement to teach 10 HERS trainings in order to stay current. Some training providers only have enough demand to teach one workshop a year. Our Providership has experienced great fluctuations in the demand for HERS trainings from one to seven courses a year. It is also not clear whether the trainer would be required to teach all or part of the HERS training, and if it is part, how many hours would suffice? I would propose that the requirement be reconsidered to require the trainer to teach a minimum of 8 hours of HERS instruction annually to allow for various training Providership models.
Thanks for considering this comment.
Comment #5Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.3 Mentored Field EvaluationsComment Type: GeneralComment: I propose that additional individuals be approved to oversee the field evaluations of a HERS Rater candidate. Proposed Change: Field evaluations allow a candidate to demonstrate their ability to perform certain tasks appropriate to their desired certification. Field evaluations are not graded but are performed under the mentorship of a certified traier, Qaulity Assurance Designee or other QAD appointed HERS Rater who verifies the candidate’s competency at performing certain tasks as defined in this standard.
I propose that additional individuals be approved to oversee the field evaluations of a HERS Rater candidate.
Field evaluations allow a candidate to demonstrate their ability to perform certain tasks appropriate to their desired certification. Field evaluations are not graded but are performed under the mentorship of a certified traier, Qaulity Assurance Designee or other QAD appointed HERS Rater who verifies the candidate’s competency at performing certain tasks as defined in this standard.
Comment #6Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 13Comment Type: GeneralComment: I am supportive of integrating the CHERS and HERS designations into one designation. My concern has to do with timing. I propose that RESNET provide 4 months of time between the Ammendment being formally accepted and the Ammendment taking effect to allow Training Providers the opportunity to adjust their training schedules and course pricing, and fill the newly combined HERS Rater training. We are estimating that our training will need to be extended by 2 days to allow for proper training and testing on the combustion safety testing. This extension and added exam costs will also cause us to adjust our course pricing. We are confident that with enough lead time, we will be successful at making this change. I am concerened that if we are too far into August by the time the final Ammendment is approved, training providers will have lost the opportunity to price, market and host courses for Jan and Feb 2013.
I am supportive of integrating the CHERS and HERS designations into one designation. My concern has to do with timing. I propose that RESNET provide 4 months of time between the Ammendment being formally accepted and the Ammendment taking effect to allow Training Providers the opportunity to adjust their training schedules and course pricing, and fill the newly combined HERS Rater training. We are estimating that our training will need to be extended by 2 days to allow for proper training and testing on the combustion safety testing. This extension and added exam costs will also cause us to adjust our course pricing. We are confident that with enough lead time, we will be successful at making this change. I am concerened that if we are too far into August by the time the final Ammendment is approved, training providers will have lost the opportunity to price, market and host courses for Jan and Feb 2013.
Comment #7Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: Througout documentParagraph / Figure / Table / Note: Throughout documentComment Type: EditorialComment: Be consistent with rest of RESNET standards Proposed Change: Replace bullets with subsection numbers
Be consistent with rest of RESNET standards
Replace bullets with subsection numbers
Comment #8Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 1Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 201.2.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Setting accreditation fees is a RESNET staff and Executive Committee responsibility Proposed Change: <Annual accreditation fees for Training Providers.>
Setting accreditation fees is a RESNET staff and Executive Committee responsibility
Comment #9Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 1Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 201.2.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Setting accreditation fees is a RESNET staff and Executive Committee responsibility Proposed Change: <Annual accreditation fees for Training Providers.>
Comment #10Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 1Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 201.2.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Standard sets rater professional development requirements – Committee selects areas covered – RESNET staff approves professional development applications Proposed Change: <Professional Development (PD) requirements for RESNET certified individuals> Subject categories that will be approved for Professional Development (PD) requirements for certified RESNET professionals
Standard sets rater professional development requirements – Committee selects areas covered – RESNET staff approves professional development applications
Comment #11Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 2Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 201.2.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: RESNET Board policy is that the committee chairman selects members of the committee Proposed Change: The Committee Chair appoints <nominates> individuals for committee membership. <Appointment of the committee member requires majority approval of the Board.>
RESNET Board policy is that the committee chairman selects members of the committee
The Committee Chair appoints <nominates> individuals for committee membership. <Appointment of the committee member requires majority approval of the Board.>
Comment #12Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 2Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.1Comment Type: EditorialComment: Misses a 'to" Proposed Change: The names of certified Rater Trainers it intends to teach classes.
Misses a 'to"
Comment #13Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 2Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Examination is RESNET National Rater Test – bullet not required Proposed Change: <Examination materials.>
Examination is RESNET National Rater Test – bullet not required
Comment #14Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 2Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Adhering to RESNET test proctoring requirements is a requirement Proposed Change: Add: Adhering to RESNET’s test proctoring procedures
Adhering to RESNET test proctoring requirements is a requirement
Add:
Comment #15Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Requirement that needs to be incorporated into standard Proposed Change: add: Accurately issue certificates of completion to Rater certification candidates
Requirement that needs to be incorporated into standard
add:
Comment #16Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Since the CAZ and work scope pieces of the standards going to be integrated into the rater course in the future then that needs to be listed in the third bullet. Proposed Change: Demonstrate mastery of the Home Energy Rating System knowledge and ability sets provided in Section 207 - Knowledge and Abilities. Mastery is demonstrated by passing the RESNET National Rater Training Competency Test and the RESNET Combusion Appliance Testing and Work Scope Development Test with a minimum score of 90%. Rater trainers that were certificated prior to the adoption of this amendment will have until January 1, 2014 to pass the RESNET Combusion Appliance Testing and Work Scope Development Test.
Since the CAZ and work scope pieces of the standards going to be integrated into the rater course in the future then that needs to be listed in the third bullet.
Comment #17Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: RESNET staff questions that the 25 ratings are really needed to be a good trainer. A field experience requirement of some kind may be a good idea. What if a college instructor that was very knowledgeable in building science wanted to offer the course to students but didn’t have experience as a rater? Delet requirement. Proposed Change: As a certified Home Energy Rater, complete certified ratings on a minimum of twenty-five (25) homes.
RESNET staff questions that the 25 ratings are really needed to be a good trainer. A field experience requirement of some kind may be a good idea. What if a college instructor that was very knowledgeable in building science wanted to offer the course to students but didn’t have experience as a rater? Delet requirement.
Comment #18Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Although RESNET staffs opposes this requirement, if it is left in, RESNET staff urges the following grand father language be included Proposed Change: Rater trainers that were certificated prior to the adoption of this amendment will have until January 15, 2015 to complete the required number of certified ratings.
Although RESNET staffs opposes this requirement, if it is left in, RESNET staff urges the following grand father language be included
Rater trainers that were certificated prior to the adoption of this amendment will have until January 15, 2015 to complete the required number of certified ratings.
Comment #19Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.1Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Although RESNET staff opposes the requirement of 25 ratings of a rater trainer, it the requirement is adopted, staff urges the language for a rater trainer be the same as that of a QAD Proposed Change: As a certified Home Energy Rater, complete confirmed ratings on a minimum of twenty-five (25) homes prior to becoming a QA Designee; As a certified Home Energy Rater, complete certified ratings on a minimum of twenty-five (25) homes.
Although RESNET staff opposes the requirement of 25 ratings of a rater trainer, it the requirement is adopted, staff urges the language for a rater trainer be the same as that of a QAD
Comment #20Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: The requirement is annual. Proposed Change: Certified Trainers must annually complete a two-hour annual RESNET roundtable on current information and also complete at least one of the following items:
The requirement is annual.
Certified Trainers must annually complete a two-hour annual RESNET roundtable on current information and also complete at least one of the following items:
Comment #21Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.3Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: Intentionally misrepresenting their training provider by training to curricula that differ from that submitted on the provider’s training provider application.
Editorial correction needed.
Comment #22Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Need to require adherence to RESNET test proctoring procedures and payment of annual accreditation fees. Add the following requirements. Proposed Change: Violating RESNET test proctoring procedures Non-payment of RESNET provider accreditation fee
Need to require adherence to RESNET test proctoring procedures and payment of annual accreditation fees. Add the following requirements.
Comment #23Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.1Comment Type: GeneralComment: Not proper standard language – If not required then should not be in standard Proposed Change: Though not required, training is strongly encouraged. Training provides certification candidates with the knowledge and ability sets appropriate to their desired certification
Not proper standard language – If not required then should not be in standard
Though not required, training is strongly encouraged. Training provides certification candidates with the knowledge and ability sets appropriate to their desired certification
Comment #24Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.1Comment Type: EditorialComment: Change ability sets to skill sets Proposed Change: Training provides certification candidates with the knowledge and skill ability sets appropriate to their desired certification.
Change ability sets to skill sets
Training provides certification candidates with the knowledge and skill ability sets appropriate to their desired certification.
Comment #25Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Needs to require adherence to RESNET proctoring procedures. Proposed Change: Examinations allow a candidate to demonstrate the knowledge required appropriate to their desired certification. RESNET online examinations are time-limited and open-book allowing any reference materials but excluding any form of communication with other individuals during the examination session. Written examinations are administered by RESNET and overseen by a RESNET certified trainer or their designated proctor. Approved proctors include BPI exam proctors, faculty and staff of libraries, trade schools, colleges, independent testing institutions, or others as approved by RESNET. Approved proctors shall follow RESNET proctoring procedures.
Needs to require adherence to RESNET proctoring procedures.
Examinations allow a candidate to demonstrate the knowledge required appropriate to their desired certification. RESNET online examinations are time-limited and open-book allowing any reference materials but excluding any form of communication with other individuals during the examination session. Written examinations are administered by RESNET and overseen by a RESNET certified trainer or their designated proctor. Approved proctors include BPI exam proctors, faculty and staff of libraries, trade schools, colleges, independent testing institutions, or others as approved by RESNET. Approved proctors shall follow RESNET proctoring procedures.
Comment #26Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Requiring all proctors at testing centers to sign an agreement is onerous Proposed Change: Approved proctors must agree to and sign a statement they will maintain security of the exam and its questions.
Requiring all proctors at testing centers to sign an agreement is onerous
Approved proctors must agree to and sign a statement they will maintain security of the exam and its questions.
Comment #27Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.1.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Should require more than mentoring. Mentoring can be conducted as part of training. Testing is required for certification. RESNET staff urges to require testing. Proposed Change: Mentored Field Evaluations Field evaluations allow a candidate to demonstrate their ability to perform certain tasks appropriate to their desired certification. Field evaluations are not graded but are performed under the mentorship of a certified trainer who verifies the candidate’s competency at performing certain tasks as defined in this standard. Practical Application Test Candidates for certification must complete a practical test approved by RESNET that will demonstrate the candidate’s ability to perform the tasks defined in this standard as appropriate to their desired certification.
Should require more than mentoring. Mentoring can be conducted as part of training. Testing is required for certification. RESNET staff urges to require testing.
Mentored Field Evaluations Field evaluations allow a candidate to demonstrate their ability to perform certain tasks appropriate to their desired certification. Field evaluations are not graded but are performed under the mentorship of a certified trainer who verifies the candidate’s competency at performing certain tasks as defined in this standard.
Practical Application Test Candidates for certification must complete a practical test approved by RESNET that will demonstrate the candidate’s ability to perform the tasks defined in this standard as appropriate to their desired certification.
Comment #28Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Need to make clear that a accredited rating provider is the party that certifies raters. Proposed Change: All candidates must be certified by a RESNET-accredited Rating Provider. Prior to being certified by a RESNET Rating Provider, certification candidates must complete at a minimum the following tasks appropriate to their desired certification within a 12-month period. Rating Providers may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidate’s certification. Rating Providers shall verify that requirements are met, and they may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidates certification.
Need to make clear that a accredited rating provider is the party that certifies raters.
All candidates must be certified by a RESNET-accredited Rating Provider. Prior to being certified by a RESNET Rating Provider, certification candidates must complete at a minimum the following tasks appropriate to their desired certification within a 12-month period. Rating Providers may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidate’s certification. Rating Providers shall verify that requirements are met, and they may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidates certification.
Comment #29Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 4Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: Prior to being certified by a RESNET Rating Provider, certification candidates must complete at a minimum the following tasks appropriate to their desired certification within a 12-month period. Rating Providers may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidate’s certification.
Prior to being certified by a RESNET Rating Provider, certification candidates must complete at a minimum the following tasks appropriate to their desired certification within a 12-month period. Rating Providers may require additional training as needed to address their specific program, climate, software, or administrative requirements prior to issuing the candidate’s certification.
Comment #30Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: A rating field inspector needs to be mentored by the certified rater or QAD. Proposed Change: Complete at least five probationary Rating Field Inspections observed by a certified HERS rater or a quality assurance designee. The certified HERS Rater or QAD may choose for these tasks to be performed in a hands-on environment, or through RESNET approved computer simulations.
A rating field inspector needs to be mentored by the certified rater or QAD.
Complete at least five probationary Rating Field Inspections observed by a certified HERS rater or a quality assurance designee. The certified HERS Rater or QAD may choose for these tasks to be performed in a hands-on environment, or through RESNET approved computer simulations.
Comment #31Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.2.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Single-point or multi-point differination not appropriate Proposed Change: Perform single-point or multi-point building envelope leakage testing in accordance with the airtightness testing protocols contained in Chapter 8 – Performance Testing and Work Scope and interpret results.
Single-point or multi-point differination not appropriate
Comment #32Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.2Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: Complete at least five probationary Rating Field Inspections observed by a certified HERS rater or a quality assurance designee. The certified HERS Rater or QAD may choose for these tasks to be performed in a hands-on environment, or through RESNET approved computer simulations. The probationary Rating Field Inspections must comprise at a minimum the following tasks.
Comment #33Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.3Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: Demonstrate competency at certain tasks mentored by a Certified Trainer by completing two training ratings. These ratings must not contain any errors identified by RESNET approved rating software. Both ratings must have a reasonably acceptable level of accuracy when compared to the trainer’s independent ratings of the same houses or building plans. The Trainer may choose for these tasks to be performed in a hands-on environment, from house plans, or through RESNET approved computer simulations. However, at least one of the two training ratings must be a confirmed rating conducted in-person with a certified trainer on a real house, a RESNET approved training facility, or using RESNET approved computer simulations. The candidate must perform the following procedures during the confirmed training rating.
Comment #34Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 205Comment Type: TechnicalComment: These requirements should not apply to Rating Field Inspectors and Home Energy Survey Professionals Rating Field Inspectors should rather have a continuing education requirement Proposed Change: These requirements should not apply to Rating Field Inspectors and Home Energy Survey Professionals - To renew certification Home Energy Survey Professionals, Rater Field Inspectors, and HERS Raters, must complete at least one of the following requirements every three years. To renew certification Home Energy Survey Professionals and Rater Field inspectors must complete 18 hours of continuing education assigned by their accredited provider every three years
These requirements should not apply to Rating Field Inspectors and Home Energy Survey Professionals
Rating Field Inspectors should rather have a continuing education requirement
These requirements should not apply to Rating Field Inspectors and Home Energy Survey Professionals - To renew certification Home Energy Survey Professionals, Rater Field Inspectors, and HERS Raters, must complete at least one of the following requirements every three years. To renew certification Home Energy Survey Professionals and Rater Field inspectors must complete 18 hours of continuing education assigned by their accredited provider every three years
Comment #35Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 205 and througout documentComment Type: EditorialComment: Must is not standard language replace with shall – throughout document Proposed Change: Replace must with shall
Must is not standard language replace with shall – throughout document
Replace must with shall
Comment #36Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206Comment Type: EditorialComment: Not in standard language, standards language; it needs to alignment completely or not mentioned. Proposed Change: Certified individuals must have certain capabilities to perform the work required under their certification. The categories listed in this section are in rough alignment with the procedures contained in Chapter 3 – National Energy Ratings Technical Standards, Chapter 8 - Performance Testing and Work Scope, and Appendix A - On-Site Inspection Procedures. Certification candidates must demonstrate proficiency at these capaibilities through successful completion of certification requirements specified in Section 204 - Certification Candidates. Training providers should ensure that their curricula effectively cover these items.
Not in standard language, standards language; it needs to alignment completely or not mentioned.
Certified individuals must have certain capabilities to perform the work required under their certification. The categories listed in this section are in rough alignment with the procedures contained in Chapter 3 – National Energy Ratings Technical Standards, Chapter 8 - Performance Testing and Work Scope, and Appendix A - On-Site Inspection Procedures. Certification candidates must demonstrate proficiency at these capaibilities through successful completion of certification requirements specified in Section 204 - Certification Candidates. Training providers should ensure that their curricula effectively cover these items.
Comment #37Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 7Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.1.16Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editoria correction needed Proposed Change: Identify types, model numbers, and locations of systems.
Editoria correction needed
Comment #38Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 10Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.2.6Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: Collecting F f ield D d ata (including photo documentation)
Collecting F f ield D d ata (including photo documentation)
Comment #39Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 11Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.2.12Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial correction needed. Proposed Change: •dentify glass-area of exterior doors as and windows.
Comment #40Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 11Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.2.12Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial change needed. Proposed Change: Identify combustion heating system types (gas fueled, open combustion, condensing). Identify control types (standard thermostats, programmable thermostats, multi-zone controls).
Editorial change needed.
Comment #41Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 11Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.2.16Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial change needed Proposed Change: Identify air leakage mechanisms and drivers, energy and comfort implications, and health and & safety issues.
Editorial change needed
Comment #42Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 12Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.3.1Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial change needed. Proposed Change: Understand and be familiar with local climate conditions, housing stock, and climate-specific practices.
Comment #43Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 12Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.3.2Comment Type: EditorialComment: Editorial change needed. Proposed Change: Communicate the benefits of the Home Energy Rating System to homeowners, builders, finance and real estate agents, and to cultivate partnerships between those individuals.
Comment #44Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 13Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.3.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Most broaden to include more than ENERGY STAR Proposed Change: o Qualifications for programs such as ENERGY STAR®, federal tax credits and other financial incentives, DOE Building Challenge, LEED for Homes and NAHB’s Green Building.
Most broaden to include more than ENERGY STAR
o Qualifications for programs such as ENERGY STAR®, federal tax credits and other financial incentives, DOE Building Challenge, LEED for Homes and NAHB’s Green Building.
Comment #45Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 13Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.3.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: Most broaden to include more than ENERGY STAR Proposed Change: Qualifications for programs such as ENERGY STAR®, federal tax credits and other financial incentives, DOE Building Challenge, LEED for Homes and NAHB’s Green Building.
Comment #46Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: variousComment Type: EditorialComment: Overall: whereas all other secions of the RESNET standards contain individual numbered line items, this one contains bullet points. I prefer this, but it is beste if the standards stick with a style. Sec 203.1 There should be more details under what sorts of courses will be acceptable for adult education. Will the trainings have to be pre-approved? Will the training organizations who administer such courses need to pay RESNET? Will current RESNET trainers be grandfathered in for the training requirements? Will the "RESNET National Rater Training Competency Test" be the same as the QAD test? If not, will current QADs be grandfathered in? Sec 203.2 Should state Affordable comfort institute 204.2.2 RESNET RFI exam needs specific standards of what is going to be covered that should be more specific to the work that RFIs need to know. The RFI exam right now is more challenging than the Rater exam, in large part because the exam simply excludes quesitons about EEMs and the RESNET Standards that are included in the Rater exam, and instead replaces them with more complex building science questions. Although building science is important for RFIs to know, they don't need to have an exam that is heavier on building science than raters. Instead it should have more questions onactual field practices, such as assessing minimum rated features, grading insulation, measuring buildings, running diagnostic tests, etc I strongly believe that a minimum of 1 of the mentored Field Inspections needs to be conducted by by a QAD and/or trainer I also strongly believe that a minimum of 2 of these inspections need to be in the field (ie not 5 simulated inspections) Furhermore these are the training requirements for an RFI... this brings up the idea of whether RFIs should have a probationary mentorship period through a Rating Provider just like certified Raters. Currently the RFI designation is kind of weird... no direct supervision of quality assurance by providers, nor records required to be maintianed by the provider. I think this leads to a lot of problems that could be easily solved if a RFI had to join a provider and have their records maintained by a provider the same as Raters. The specific requirements of testing a RFI's knowledge of Chapter 8, CAZ testing, etc seem like it is requiring a BPI-like field exam. If this is true, RESNET should set specific criteria for how this is performed, or else it is going to run into similar problems as what BPI experienced with different testing organizations taking liberties in defining how they applied (or did not apply) standards for field exams. 204.2.3 Although i'm a fan of technology in the classroom, I do not agree that using a computer simulation shyould be allowed in lieu of having 1 mandatory in-field rating for Rater trainings. Same thing as above for RFI. RESNET needs to specify if this is an individual Rater Field Exam, or somethign that could be applied in a group setting, etc. When you generalize, you leave it up for the slackers and crooks to take the path of least resistance and cut corners. Proposed Change: See comments above.
Overall: whereas all other secions of the RESNET standards contain individual numbered line items, this one contains bullet points. I prefer this, but it is beste if the standards stick with a style.
Sec 203.1
Sec 203.2
204.2.2
204.2.3
See comments above.
Comment #47Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Comment Type: EditorialComment: P. 6 of the document includes language that is unclear (similar language occurs for the Field inspector on p. 5). "...must perform the following procedures during the confirmed training rating. 1. Use pressure differential diagnostics to identify intermediate buffer zones including (but not limited to) attics, garages, or crawlspaces. 2. Identify insulation defects and account for them in energy analysis tool inputs. 3. Identify insulation types, thickness, and alignment with air barriers. 4. Measure operational air leakage imposed by the home and its equipment. 5. Perform single-point and multi-point building envelope leakage testing in accordance with the airtightness testing protocols contained in Chapter 8 – Performance Testing and Work Scope. 6. Perform duct leakage testing in accordance with the duct testing protocols contained in Chapter 8 – Performance Testing and Work Scope and interpret results. 7. Identify room and zone pressure imbalances caused by lack of ducted return air or pressure relief mechanisms such as transfer grilles or jumper ducts. 8. Use combustion gas sensing equipment and recommend methods of fixing leaks. 9. Perform CAZ, spillage, and CO testing in accordance with Worst-Case Depressurization and Combustion Appliance Testing protocols contained in the RESNET interim guidelines." ---------------------------------------------------------- The major issue I have is why are we loading up the confirmed rating with so much additional activity? I worry that students will lose focus with so many different additional activities thrown at them. For example, regarding bullet 1, a HERS rating does not require a zone pressure diagnostic test be performed, so why is this required? Bullets 2 and 3 are already part of rating - no problem with these. Bullet 4 is completely ambiguous (and I have surveyed coworkers and other HERS raters) on exactly what we are supposed to be measuring - is this worst case depressurization? Is this required even if the house is all electric? How will this information be used in a rating? If this is WCD, then this should be only included in the combustion protocol. Bullet 5 mentions multipoint blower door testing. If multipoint testing is not required for a HERS rating, this requirement should be eliminated Bullet 6 is fine and should already be a part of a rating. Bullet 7 is a great diagnostic concept but how is this information entered into a rating? Perhaps there is a performance spec that the home must meet (e.g., <3 Pa)? Bullet 8 is fine but should probably be considered part of bullet 9. Bullet 9 - is the RESNET protocol the only acceptable protocol? What about BPI BA combustion protocol? what if HERS students are already BPI BA - would they need to follow RESNET protocol in this confirmed rating? I realize that we are adding to the scope of what must be performed in a comprehensive rating but I believe we are actually doing a disservice by overly complicating what is already a challenging activity - namely a confirmed field rating. Please consider that we don't need to teach HERS students everything we know, and consider what are truly the minimum skill sets and activities for a rating to be done properly. Performing zone pressure difference testing is one of many valuable techniques; so is pressure pan, flow balancing, measuring static pressure, and so on. But are all known techniques necessary for a HERS rating? thank you, mike barcik
P. 6 of the document includes language that is unclear (similar language occurs for the Field inspector on p. 5).
"...must perform the following procedures during the confirmed training rating.
1. Use pressure differential diagnostics to identify intermediate buffer zones including (but not limited to) attics, garages, or crawlspaces.
2. Identify insulation defects and account for them in energy analysis tool inputs.
3. Identify insulation types, thickness, and alignment with air barriers.
4. Measure operational air leakage imposed by the home and its equipment.
5. Perform single-point and multi-point building envelope leakage testing in accordance with the airtightness testing protocols contained in Chapter 8 – Performance Testing and Work Scope.
6. Perform duct leakage testing in accordance with the duct testing protocols contained in Chapter 8 – Performance Testing and Work Scope and interpret results.
7. Identify room and zone pressure imbalances caused by lack of ducted return air or pressure relief mechanisms such as transfer grilles or jumper ducts.
8. Use combustion gas sensing equipment and recommend methods of fixing leaks.
9. Perform CAZ, spillage, and CO testing in accordance with Worst-Case Depressurization and Combustion Appliance Testing protocols contained in the RESNET interim guidelines."
----------------------------------------------------------
The major issue I have is why are we loading up the confirmed rating with so much additional activity? I worry that students will lose focus with so many different additional activities thrown at them.
For example, regarding bullet 1, a HERS rating does not require a zone pressure diagnostic test be performed, so why is this required?
Bullets 2 and 3 are already part of rating - no problem with these.
Bullet 4 is completely ambiguous (and I have surveyed coworkers and other HERS raters) on exactly what we are supposed to be measuring - is this worst case depressurization? Is this required even if the house is all electric? How will this information be used in a rating? If this is WCD, then this should be only included in the combustion protocol.
Bullet 5 mentions multipoint blower door testing. If multipoint testing is not required for a HERS rating, this requirement should be eliminated
Bullet 6 is fine and should already be a part of a rating.
Bullet 7 is a great diagnostic concept but how is this information entered into a rating? Perhaps there is a performance spec that the home must meet (e.g., <3 Pa)?
Bullet 8 is fine but should probably be considered part of bullet 9.
Bullet 9 - is the RESNET protocol the only acceptable protocol? What about BPI BA combustion protocol? what if HERS students are already BPI BA - would they need to follow RESNET protocol in this confirmed rating?
I realize that we are adding to the scope of what must be performed in a comprehensive rating but I believe we are actually doing a disservice by overly complicating what is already a challenging activity - namely a confirmed field rating. Please consider that we don't need to teach HERS students everything we know, and consider what are truly the minimum skill sets and activities for a rating to be done properly.
Performing zone pressure difference testing is one of many valuable techniques; so is pressure pan, flow balancing, measuring static pressure, and so on. But are all known techniques necessary for a HERS rating?
thank you, mike barcik
Comment #48Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 2Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 202.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Maintain curricula that aligns with the most up-to-date RESNET standard." RESNET does not currently alert Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, or Rater Trainers when a "new" version of the standards is released. It is currently up to them to track "effective dates" during the comment process to know when to go to the RESNET site to download updated versions of the standards. RESNET should be required to alert Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, and Rater Trainers when new versions of the Standards are published so that the curricula can be aligned with the most up-to-date standards and have a 90 day window to update the curricula. Proposed Change: Add a 90 day window from RESNET's release of a new standard to update curricula. Add RESNET will alert via email Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, and Rater Trainers when new versions of the stanards are available on the RESNET website.
"Maintain curricula that aligns with the most up-to-date RESNET standard."
RESNET does not currently alert Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, or Rater Trainers when a "new" version of the standards is released. It is currently up to them to track "effective dates" during the comment process to know when to go to the RESNET site to download updated versions of the standards.
RESNET should be required to alert Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, and Rater Trainers when new versions of the Standards are published so that the curricula can be aligned with the most up-to-date standards and have a 90 day window to update the curricula.
Add a 90 day window from RESNET's release of a new standard to update curricula.
Add RESNET will alert via email Rating Providers, Rater Training Providers, QADs, and Rater Trainers when new versions of the stanards are available on the RESNET website.
Comment #49Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 3Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 203Comment Type: EditorialComment: "Certificated" - this is actually a word according to dictionary.com, but seems quite clumsy when most of us are used to the word "Certified". Proposed Change: Replace "Certificated" with "Certified".
"Certificated" - this is actually a word according to dictionary.com, but seems quite clumsy when most of us are used to the word "Certified".
Replace "Certificated" with "Certified".
Comment #50Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: 2nd bullet..."or through RESNET approved computer simulations." Are there any RESNET approved computer simulations for field inspections, and if not, will there be any ready and approved by 1-1-13? Computer simulations do not demonstrate that a Rating Field Inspector candidate can use the tools of the trade in the real world. Proposed Change: If computer simulations are to be allowed to demostrate ability, limit them to no more than three of the five probationary field inspections.
2nd bullet..."or through RESNET approved computer simulations."
Are there any RESNET approved computer simulations for field inspections, and if not, will there be any ready and approved by 1-1-13?
Computer simulations do not demonstrate that a Rating Field Inspector candidate can use the tools of the trade in the real world.
If computer simulations are to be allowed to demostrate ability, limit them to no more than three of the five probationary field inspections.
Comment #51Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.2; 204.2.3; 206.2.16Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Measure operational air leakage imposed by the home and its equipment." This is a vague and poorly worded statement. Is the intent to measure air leakage imposed on a home by its operating equipment such as air handlers, exhaust or supply fans, and combustion equipement? Or, is the intent to measure the home's impact on its surrounding environment? A fumigation bubble surrounding the home could be used for this. Proposed Change: Reword to: "Meaure the air leakage and/or pressure change imposed on a home by its equipment." This statement encompasses CAZ testing, duct testing, and supply and exhaust testing.
"Measure operational air leakage imposed by the home and its equipment."
This is a vague and poorly worded statement. Is the intent to measure air leakage imposed on a home by its operating equipment such as air handlers, exhaust or supply fans, and combustion equipement? Or, is the intent to measure the home's impact on its surrounding environment? A fumigation bubble surrounding the home could be used for this.
Reword to: "Meaure the air leakage and/or pressure change imposed on a home by its equipment."
This statement encompasses CAZ testing, duct testing, and supply and exhaust testing.
Comment #52Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.2; 204.2.3; 206.2.14Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Use combustion gas sensing equipment and recommend methods of fixing leaks." Products of combustion (combustion gas) are generally not as flammable as the fuels (combustible gas) used to create combustion. Methods of fixing gas leaks are beyond the scope of most Raters and if not performed properly, are dangerous and carry a heavy liability. If a leak is found, a certified technician should repair it. Proposed Change: Reword: "Identify gas leaks using combustible gas sensing equipment. If a leak is found, recommend that a certified technician repair the leak."
"Use combustion gas sensing equipment and recommend methods of fixing leaks."
Products of combustion (combustion gas) are generally not as flammable as the fuels (combustible gas) used to create combustion.
Methods of fixing gas leaks are beyond the scope of most Raters and if not performed properly, are dangerous and carry a heavy liability. If a leak is found, a certified technician should repair it.
Reword: "Identify gas leaks using combustible gas sensing equipment. If a leak is found, recommend that a certified technician repair the leak."
Comment #53Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "These ratings must not contain any errors identified by RESNET approved rating software. Both ratings must have a reasonably acceptable level of accuracy when compared to the trainer's independent ratings of the same houses or building plans." What is "reasonably acceptable"? 5%, 10%, or 15% for lenghts, areas and volumes? Plus or minus 3 HERS points? A combination of the two? Incorrect washing machine and dryer inputs can sway the HERS Index dramatically, but the software will not flag that as an error. Proposed Change: Replace "reasonably acceptable" with a measurable level of accuracy for lengths, areas, volumes, and HERS Index. The standard should be objective, not subjective.
"These ratings must not contain any errors identified by RESNET approved rating software. Both ratings must have a reasonably acceptable level of accuracy when compared to the trainer's independent ratings of the same houses or building plans."
What is "reasonably acceptable"? 5%, 10%, or 15% for lenghts, areas and volumes? Plus or minus 3 HERS points? A combination of the two?
Incorrect washing machine and dryer inputs can sway the HERS Index dramatically, but the software will not flag that as an error.
Replace "reasonably acceptable" with a measurable level of accuracy for lengths, areas, volumes, and HERS Index. The standard should be objective, not subjective.
Comment #54Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 5Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "These ratings must not contain any errors identified by RESNET approved rating software. Both ratings must have a reasonably acceptable level of accuracy when compared to the trainer's independent ratings of the same houses or building plans." What is "reasonably acceptable"? 5%, 10%, or 15% for lenghts, areas and volumes? Plus or minus 3 HERS points? A combination of the two? Incorrect washing machine and dryer inputs can sway the HERS Index dramatically, but the software will not flag that as an error. Proposed Change: Replace "reasonably acceptable" with a measurable level of accuracy for lengths, areas, volumes, and HERS Index. The standard should be objective, not subjective.
Comment #55Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Use pressure differential diagnostics to identify intermediate buffer zones...." This should have a caveat for non-destructive testing only testing. Proposed Change: Add: "Non-destructive testing only."
"Use pressure differential diagnostics to identify intermediate buffer zones...."
This should have a caveat for non-destructive testing only testing.
Add: "Non-destructive testing only."
Comment #56Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 6Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 204.2.3Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Perform CAZ, spillage....in accordance with...RESNET interim guidelines." Chapter 8 (adopted) has the CAZ protocols. Is there another RESNET interim guideline? Proposed Change: reword: "....protocols contained in RESNET Chapter 8."
"Perform CAZ, spillage....in accordance with...RESNET interim guidelines."
Chapter 8 (adopted) has the CAZ protocols. Is there another RESNET interim guideline?
reword: "....protocols contained in RESNET Chapter 8."
Comment #57Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 11Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.2.13Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Identify combustion heating system types (gas fueled, open combustion, condensing). This is a limiting statement. It excludes oil, wood, coal, pellet.... Is the goal to obtain the proper information about the system type? If so, list the properties that need to be identified: fuel type, burner type, venting type, distribution type, and efficiency. Proposed Change: Reword: "Identify heating system properties: fuel type, burner type, venting type, distribution type, and efficiency."
"Identify combustion heating system types (gas fueled, open combustion, condensing).
This is a limiting statement. It excludes oil, wood, coal, pellet....
Is the goal to obtain the proper information about the system type? If so, list the properties that need to be identified: fuel type, burner type, venting type, distribution type, and efficiency.
Reword: "Identify heating system properties: fuel type, burner type, venting type, distribution type, and efficiency."
Comment #58Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 13Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: 206.3.2Comment Type: TechnicalComment: "Maintain standard operating procedures and office administration." Is RESNET requiring that a specific standard be followed? Proposed Change: RESNET should provide the name and link to the standard operating procedures and office administration document that they are requiring conformation to.
"Maintain standard operating procedures and office administration."
Is RESNET requiring that a specific standard be followed?
RESNET should provide the name and link to the standard operating procedures and office administration document that they are requiring conformation to.
Comment #59Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: 14Paragraph / Figure / Table / Note: last bulletComment Type: EditorialComment: "Revised the HERS Rater Professional Development requirements." Proposed Change: change to: "Revise"
"Revised the HERS Rater Professional Development requirements."
change to: "Revise"
Comment #60Amendment: Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)Page Number: General CommentParagraph / Figure / Table / Note: on Comment SubmissionComment Type: GeneralComment: It is quite time consuming to have to type all the "header" information (Commenter, Location, Contact Information) each time a comment is to be submitted. This is the computer age and computers are supposed to make our lives easier. Proposed Change: Add a button that comes up after you hit "Submit Comment" with "Submit Another Comment" which will repopulate the standard data, so all you have to fill in is the comment screen.
It is quite time consuming to have to type all the "header" information (Commenter, Location, Contact Information) each time a comment is to be submitted. This is the computer age and computers are supposed to make our lives easier.
Add a button that comes up after you hit "Submit Comment" with "Submit Another Comment" which will repopulate the standard data, so all you have to fill in is the comment screen.
Return to Proposed Amendment on Revising RESNET Rater Training and Certification Standard (Chapter 2)