I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. <div><br></div><div>Bilizebub: could you point out the section in LEED or Std 90 that says that walls must both be layer by layer. Thanks.</div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:01 AM, Bruce Easterbrook <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bruce5@bellnet.ca">bruce5@bellnet.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<u></u>
<div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<font size="+1">I think what is being forgotten is "intent", and the
accuracy of your model. So for intent the desire of the powers
that be is that smart design be used to reduce the energy
consumption of buildings. You should not be manipulating the
"system" to take credit for something which is not really a
credit. Your model should be as accurate as you can possibly make
it with reasonable effort. U-value construction is not accurate,
all buildings have mass. Mass serves to shave peaks. When you
have a building modelled with no mass as soon as the sun hits it
you will have a cooling load. With U-value construction the heat
hitting the building is immediately loaded on to the cooling
system at 100%. This doesn't happen in reality and you will
oversize your cooling system. Therefore you have designed an
inefficient system, you are costing your client money because they
have to buy and operate a bigger cooling system than required.
Logic and good modelling dictate you account for mass. The
baseline is a "standard" building construction in use at this time
and that is defined, "lightweight steel construction". You don't
get credit for the mass of this building. However if you start
adding mass strategically to further load shift your peaks you
should be able to take credit for that. Besides U-value
construction is the old school, brute force technique when energy
was cheap and we used spread sheets and calculators. eQuest
allows us to accurately predict the mass effect of a building and
we have the computing power to run this program sitting on our
desk. A good modeller is required to use all the tools at their
disposal to create the best base model they can so that the
project people can assess different techniques to reduce the
energy usage of the building and the economic costs of doing
this. I think it is pretty obvious the evaluator will reject a
model not done layer by layer. They can't easily check the base
construction, the U-value method is not accurate and they are
overloaded. So it's file 13 and on to the next project.<br><font color="#888888">
Bruce Easterbrook P.Eng.<br>
Abode Engineering </font></font><br><div><div></div><div class="h5">
<br>
On 20/06/2011 09:03 AM, Bishop, Bill wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Like Pasha mentioned, if you use layer-by-layer
method in the proposed, you should use the same method in
the baseline, unless you want to argue that “lightweight” <i>requires
</i>the use of the U-value construction method. I don’t see
what advantage that serves, other than helping you avoid the
time of creating baseline envelope constructions. While
“lightweight” is not defined in 90.1, the baseline layer
materials and thicknesses are described in A3, so if you use
the layer-by-layer method for both baseline and proposed,
and if there is a difference in the overall mass of each
wall construction, the modeling output will reflect that
difference. Both baseline and proposed constructions will
have “mass”, and if the proposed construction is optimized,
there will be energy savings.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">The eQUEST help menu item for “EXTERIOR-WALL and
ROOF” states that using LAYERS rather than U-VALUE can
result in greater computational time, but gives more
accurate results. Computational time is at the bottom of my
eQUEST concerns. I have not compared modeling results of
LAYERS vs. U-VALUE. Delayed construction appears to be
required by Appendix G, is supposedly more accurate, and I
don’t see a good reason <i>not</i> to use it.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Billzebub<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><img src="cid:part1.07000408.05050501@bellnet.ca" alt="Signature in jpg form" height="123" width="496"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-right:medium none;border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt">
<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Pasha Korber-Gonzalez<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, June 18, 2011 4:39 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> eQUEST Users List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment on
U-Value Input Method<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Following the other comments on this, I
am confused and worried too that if they are requiring to
simulate mass in the baseline, then how could we use Mass
constructions as "passive" design strategies and take credit
for this type of ECM?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Directly from what I was reading in the
2007 code: Table G3.1.5-Baseline Building Enevelope<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><em>Opaque Assemblies. Opaque assemblies
used for new building or additions shall conform with the
following common, lightweight assembly types and shall
match the appropriate assembly maximum U-factors in Tables
5.5-1 through 5.5-8:</em><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Doesn't the reference to "lightweight"
assemblies mean that you don't have to account for thermal
lags (massing)? This has always been my interpretation.
Therefore, when it comes to modeling the U-values for the
assemblies with the U-value method versus the layer method
would be acceptable for your baseline simulations. Where
there is no requirement to show any type of massing effects
it shouldn't matter if you choose to use the U-value input
method or the layer-by-layer method.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But--it is important for the simulator to
understand that when using eQuest (I can't speak for other
simulation tools); the input method has to be matched in
both the baseline and proposed. You can't choose U-value
input for the baseline and layer-by-layer for the proposed,
you have to use the "apples-to-apples" approach for both
models.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It will be a big issue if GBCI mandates
that we have to use only layer-by-layer inputs for
compliance where Appendix G is clearly stating that there is
no need to account for thermal lag in the baseline building
as it states "lightweight" construction. Any type of
thermal lag characteristics in lightweight construction are
negligible to the performance of such constructions as
required by Appendix G baseline inputs.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">pkg<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Carol
Gardner <<a href="mailto:cmg750@gmail.com" target="_blank">cmg750@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I'll bite. What extends it to the
baseline? I still see that it just says to credit it to the
proposed building. Wasn't this language created to guide
people to the fact that even if mass was added to a steel
framed building it still fell under the "steel framed"
category and not the mass? <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:07 PM,
Bishop, Bill <<a href="mailto:wbishop@pathfinder-ea.com" target="_blank">wbishop@pathfinder-ea.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Another piece of the puzzle. >From the
90.1 User’s Manual, section on Baseline Building
Opaque Assemblies (p.G14 in 2004 ed.):</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">“The baseline building is assumed to be
steel framed no matter what the construction of
the proposed building. If the proposed building
has thermal mass in the exterior construction
and this is a benefit in a particular climate,
then the mass is credited in the building
performance rating method.”</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">So delayed construction is the de facto
method for modeling the proposed envelope, and
by extension, the baseline.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)">Bill</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"><img src="cid:part1.07000408.05050501@bellnet.ca" alt="Signature in jpg form" border="0" height="123" width="496"></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;color:rgb(31, 73, 125)"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div style="border-right:medium none;border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt"> <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Carol Gardner<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, June 17, 2011 4:40 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Daniel Knapp<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] LEED
Review Comment on U-Value Input Method<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt">But the Simulation General Requirements
are for the simulation model itself and it's
capabilities, they do not address the
simulation inputs.<br>
<br>
I think this section of the code is what
governs this issue:<br>
<br>
Opaque Assemblies. Opaque assemblies used for
new buildings or additions shall conform with
the following common, lightweight assembly
types and shall match the appropriate assembly
maximum U-factors in Tables 5.5-1 through
5.5-8:<br>
<br>
But I disagree with Guarav's interpretation
for these reasons. The use of the word
assemblies might "suggest" the need to model
the whole structure but the use of
"lightweight" in the sentence, and it's
location after the word <u>shall</u>, is the
key. Those U-values in Tables 5.5-1 through
5.5-8 are for lightweight construction.
Lightweight construction is not delayed
construction. The Standard 90 committee even
gave us a variety of wall types to select from
on those tables so that we would have an <i>appropriate
assembly maximum U-factor</i> to use.<br>
<br>
Anyway, that's my interpretation.<br>
<br>
Carol<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, Jun 17,
2011 at 9:24 AM, Daniel Knapp <<a href="mailto:danielk@arborus.ca" target="_blank">danielk@arborus.ca</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
FYI, Simulation General Requirements as laid
out in 11.2 of the 90.1 User's Manual
specifically call for the treatment of
Thermal Mass Effects in the Minimum Modeling
Capabilities. (see 11.1.2.3 and as already
mentioned G2.2.1.c) and notes that "A
building's ability to absorb and hold heat
varies with its *type of construction* and
with its system and ventilation
characteristics. This affects the timing
and magnitude of loads handled by the HVAC
system. Simulation programs must be able to
model these effects".<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><br>
<br>
On 2011-06-16, at 7:15 PM, Mehta, Gaurav
wrote:<br>
<br>
> Michael,<br>
><br>
> Agreed, appendix G does not
specifically states that one needs to
model delayed construction. However,
going by the semantics used in Appendix
G, one can conclude that delayed
construction should be used. Consider
the following:<br>
><br>
> Table G3.1-5 Building Envelope,
under Baseline Building Performance,
part (b) Opaque Assemblies: states that
Opaque assemblies......shall confirm
with the following common, lightweight
assembly types and shall match the
appropriate assembly U-factors.....<br>
><br>
> **The use of the term 'assemblies'
suggests the need to model the whole
assembly rather than only the U-factor**<br>
><br>
> To answer your other question, how
do you know what comprises of the
baseline opaque assembly, I'll suggest
use Appendix A. For example, for steel
framed walls, see section A3.3.1
General, you'll find the assembly layers
that you can use to model the baseline
above grade walls. Similarly, you can
use respective sections for roof, floor,
etc. to determine the baseline assembly
layers.<br>
><br>
> If I remember correctly, somebody
in the past has been kind enough to post
the baseline assemblies that can be
copied to the inp file (or imported into
the inp file). Search the archives.<br>
><br>
> Furthermore, eQUEST has an
extensive library of materials that one
can use, which includes the thickens,
specific heat and density of the
material. You can create your own
materials by using the ASHRAE Handbook
of fundamentals, chapter 26 (2009).<br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks.<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
><br>
> Gaurav<br>
><br>
> Gaurav Mehta, LEED® AP BD+C<br>
> Sustainable Building Analyst<br>
> Stantec<br>
> 1932 First Avenue Suite 307<br>
> Seattle WA 98101<br>
> Ph: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-7779" target="_blank">(206) 770-7779</a><br>
> Fx: <a href="tel:%28206%29%20770-5941" target="_blank">(206) 770-5941</a><br>
> <a href="mailto:Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com" target="_blank">Gaurav.Mehta@stantec.com</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.stantec.com/" target="_blank">www.stantec.com</a><br>
><br>
> The content of this email is the
confidential property of Stantec and
should not be copied, modified,
retransmitted, or used for any purpose
except with Stantec's written
authorization. If you are not the
intended recipient, please delete all
copies and notify us immediately.<br>
><br>
> Please consider the environment
before printing this email.<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
On Behalf Of James Hansen<br>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 3:09
PM<br>
> To: Bishop, Bill; Michael Mantai; <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED
Review Comment on U-Value Input Method<br>
><br>
> Michael, I'd advise that you email
the project coordinator (or whatever
GBCI calls the "head" of a project
review team). Usually they will answer
relatively quick and easy questions so
that you don't have to risk improperly
addressing a comment.<br>
><br>
> Ask them where in Appendix G it
specifically requires the time delayed
method be used.<br>
><br>
> GHT Limited<br>
> James Hansen, PE, LEED AP<br>
> Senior Associate<br>
> 1010 N. Glebe Rd, Suite 200<br>
> Arlington, VA 22201-4749<br>
> <a href="tel:703-338-5754" target="_blank">703-338-5754</a>
(Cell)<br>
> <a href="tel:703-243-1200" target="_blank">703-243-1200</a>
(Office)<br>
> <a href="tel:703-276-1376" target="_blank">703-276-1376</a> (Fax)<br>
> <a href="http://www.ghtltd.com/" target="_blank">www.ghtltd.com</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Bishop, Bill<br>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:22
PM<br>
> To: Michael Mantai; <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Equest-users] LEED
Review Comment on U-Value Input Method<br>
><br>
> Michael,<br>
><br>
> My understanding has always been
that delayed construction should be<br>
> used, though I can't find exact
wording in Appendix G that requires it<br>
> other than G2.2.1(c). For other
components/layers of steel-framed walls,<br>
> look to A3.3.1, and to Table A3.3
for assembly U-Factors for different<br>
> stud spacing. You should be pretty
close to the required U-Factor if you<br>
> use the correct materials and
thicknesses from A3.3. Yes, you may need<br>
> to tweak a layer or two to get the
construction to match the U-Factor<br>
> exactly. As described in other
posts, once you create these<br>
> constructions for the baseline,
copy them for future models.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Bill<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
> [mailto:<a href="mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Michael<br>
> Mantai<br>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:00
PM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org" target="_blank">equest-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a><br>
> Subject: [Equest-users] LEED Review
Comment on U-Value Input Method<br>
><br>
> We received the following comment
on recent LEED review:<br>
><br>
> "The simulation input screenshots,
provided in the EAc1 modeling<br>
> narrative<br>
> report, indicate that the exterior
wall and roof constructions were<br>
> modeled<br>
> as QUICK surface type (U Value
Input specification method), which does<br>
> not<br>
> account for the time delayed heat
flow through the constructions as<br>
> required<br>
> by Section G2.2.1(c). Revise the
Proposed and Baseline models so the<br>
> exterior walls and roof surface
types are modeled as DELAYED (Layer<br>
> Input<br>
> specification method) with the
thermal mass effects of the
constructions<br>
> taken into consideration. In
addition, provide a revised LV I report
for<br>
> each model reflecting the changes."<br>
><br>
> Section G2.2.1(c) describes
modeling software requirements, but I
don't<br>
> see<br>
> anywhere else in Appendix G that
specifies that thermal mass effects<br>
> have to<br>
> be included in the baseline model.<br>
><br>
> Previous review comments on other
projects have led me to believe that<br>
> U-value input was the correct
method to set up the baseline model.<br>
><br>
> If I revise the model to input each
layer, what layers do I input?<br>
> 90.1-2007 Appendix G states to use
steel-framed walls, and the Tables<br>
> provide minimum R-value for
insulation and overall assembly U-value.<br>
> But it<br>
> does not appear to provide such
other items as stud spacing, sheathing,<br>
> or<br>
> even what material is on the
outside of the building (for exterior<br>
> walls).<br>
> Has anyone else had this type of
comment before or are you using the<br>
> layer<br>
> input method for baseline models?
It seems that if I need to specify<br>
> layers, the resultant U-value
should equal exactly the minimum U-value<br>
> per<br>
> the 90.1 tables. That would lead
me to believe that there might be<br>
> different combinations of layers
that result in the same U-values but<br>
> result<br>
> in different energy use in the
baseline, and obviously I would want to<br>
> have<br>
> the highest energy use for LEED
purposes.<br>
><br>
><br>
>
_______________________________________________<br>
> Equest-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing
list send a blank message to<br>
> <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
>
_______________________________________________<br>
> Equest-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing
list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
>
_______________________________________________<br>
> Equest-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing
list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
><br>
>
_______________________________________________<br>
> Equest-users mailing list<br>
> <a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing
list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><br>
><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">—<br>
Daniel Knapp, PhD, LEED® AP O+M<br>
<a href="mailto:danielk@arborus.ca" target="_blank">danielk@arborus.ca</a><br>
<br>
Arborus Consulting<br>
Energy Strategies for the Built Environment<br>
<a href="http://www.arborus.ca/" target="_blank">www.arborus.ca</a><br>
76 Chamberlain Avenue<br>
Ottawa, ON, K1S 1V9<br>
Phone: <a href="tel:%28613%29%20234-7178%20ext.%20113" target="_blank">(613) 234-7178 ext. 113</a><br>
Fax: <a href="tel:%28613%29%20234-0740" target="_blank">(613) 234-0740</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Equest-users mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list
send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
Carol Gardner PE<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(136, 136, 136)">--
<br>
Carol Gardner PE<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Equest-users mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message
to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<pre><fieldset></fieldset>_______________________________________________
Equest-users mailing list
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG" target="_blank">EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Carol Gardner PE<br>
</div>