WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
April 24, 2019, 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. Eastern
Meeting Summary
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WaterSense program is considering revising
the WaterSense Specification for Showerheads and/or the WaterSense High-Efficiency
Lavatory Faucet Specification. The EPA organized this meeting with industry and manufacturer
partners as part of the revision determination process.
The main objectives for this meeting were as follows:
•	Present information the EPA has collected as part of its specification review.
•	Summarize issues and considerations the EPA must address if it decides to revise a
specification.
•	Review public comments received to date on the Notice of Specification Review, as they
relate to plumbing fittings.
•	Solicit additional feedback and information from manufacturer stakeholders.
The EPA did not intend to make a determination as to whether to move forward with a
specification revision during this meeting.
A PDF of this presentation can be reviewed on the WaterSense website at
www.epa.gov/watersense/product-specification-review. A full list of the attendees and a list of
presenters are provided in Appendix A. The presentation discussion and participant questions
and comments are summarized below.
1.0 Introduction
Stephanie Tanner, the EPA WaterSense program's Lead Engineer, welcomed everyone to the
meeting, clarified how to use the webinar software and reviewed the meeting agenda and
purpose. The purpose of this meeting was not to determine whether to revise the
specifications, but rather to present data and solicit feedback about whether the EPA has
collected enough information to make a determination.
The EPA intends to conduct the specification review analysis during summer 2019 and develop
recommendations by December 31, 2019. Therefore, feedback must be submitted by June in
order to be considered in the EPA's review. Ms. Tanner also requested that stakeholders refrain
from submitting comments or information that they have already brought to the EPA's attention.
2.0 Lavatory Faucet Specification Considerations
Robbie Pickering of Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), a WaterSense contractor,
summarized background on the WaterSense High-Efficiency Lavatory Faucet Specification,
including certification trends and the number of products certified to date. Mr. Pickering provided
an overview of the current lavatory faucet specification requirements. The WaterSense
EPA

WaterSense
1
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
specification allows a maximum flow rate of 1.5 gallons per minute (gpm) at 60 pounds per
square inch (psi). All faucets and faucet accessories must: conform to applicable requirements
within ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 Plumbing Supply Fittings; have a minimum flow rate of 0.8
gpm at 20 psi; and be marked with the maximum flow rate.
Water Efficiency and Performance Considerations
Mr. Pickering explained that, due to changes in the market and new regulations adopted by
various states and municipalities, the EPA is considering reducing the maximum flow rate
criteria below 1.5 gpm. The EPA has identified several savings studies to evaluate the water
savings potential of lowering the maximum flow rate of lavatory faucets. The EPA would
consider revising the minimum flow rate requirement, which may be more difficult to meet if the
maximum flow rate requirement is reduced. Lowering the minimum flow rate will likely drive
incorporation of pressure compensation rather than fixed orifice flow control.
Mr. Pickering reviewed outstanding questions the EPA would still like feedback on related to
lavatory faucets and invited participants to ask questions. No questions or comments were
submitted at this point.
Poll Questions
Ms. Tanner polled attendees on whether they believe WaterSense has enough information to
determine whether to revise its specification for lavatory faucets. The results are shown in
Figure 1.
Based on what has been presented, does
WaterSense have enough information to determine
whether to revise its specification for lavatory
faucets?
¦ Yes ¦ No
Figure 1. Poll Question #1
EPA

WaterSense
2
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
Ms. Tanner asked attendees to provide feedback about what information they think the EPA
needs to consider before moving forward with a determination. She polled attendees on whether
they think the EPA should revise the efficiency criteria of the WaterSense specification for
lavatory faucets. Results of the poll are shown in Figure 2.
In your opinion, should the EPA revise the water
efficiency criteria of the WaterSense Specification for
Lavatory Faucets?
¦ Yes -No ¦ Need more information
Figure 2: Poll Question #2
Ms. Tanner explained that, due to the recent shift in the market towards 1.2 gpm faucets, the
1.5 gpm WaterSense threshold no longer seems to serve a purpose. However, based on
feedback from this poll, it appears that stakeholders are generally unsupportive of a revised
specification. Therefore, it may be time to consider retiring the faucet specification. Ms. Tanner
said that this is something she would like to hear more feedback about from attendees.
Participant Questions and Comments
Q: What is the EPA changing exactly?
A: Ms. Tanner explained that at this point, the EPA has not identified any intended changes.
The purpose of this meeting was to examine existing data and determine whether more
information is needed before the EPA decides whether or not to revise the specifications.
Some specifications may not require changes due to the current market behavior, while
others may benefit from revisions. If the EPA decides that a revision is necessary, the
agency will move forward into the analysis stage, where decisions about specific changes
will be made and stakeholders will have an opportunity to provide additional feedback.
Q: Is the California information for water savings based on actual measurements, or is it an
estimate or calculated value based on assumption?
3
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
A: Mr. Pickering responded that the California Energy Commission (CEC) estimate is based on
assumptions. The CEC used some preliminary data from existing studies, but most of the
calculations are theoretical. WaterSense performed its own estimate and used a more
conservative approach to determine potential savings. However, there are no existing real-
world data to assess specific water savings from switching to 1.2 gpm or 1.0 gpm lavatory
faucets.
Q: I am confused about the data included in the specification review document and the chart
that Mr. Pickering presented. Is it not true that about 50 percent of WaterSense products are
still between 1.5 and 1.2 gpm? If so, how can you say that there has been market
transformation?
A: Mr. Pickering responded that more recently, most products are being certified at 1.2 gpm or
1.0 gpm, which is evidence that the market is beginning to shift in that direction. Ms. Tanner
also mentioned that the data only show the number of models being certified, not the total
number of products being purchased and shipped. Therefore, it is possible that 1.2 gpm
faucets are being sold at higher rates than 1.5 gpm (or vice versa). WaterSense does not
have this type of data.
Q: Eliminating the lavatory faucet specification would have a larger affect due to several
authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) requiring products be WaterSense labeled, not just
compliant with the maximum flow rate criteria. Does the EPA have a list of the AHJs
requiring this?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that the EPA does not have a list at the local level, but only receives
this information if the AHJs tell them specifically. Mr. Pickering said that beyond the state
level, there are a few municipalities in the metro Washington DC and Chicago areas, but it is
generally localized, so the EPA only hears about it by word of mouth.
One attendee commented that the study by Georgia only inspected retail stores. Manufacturers
have to change to 1.2 gpm because they can't control what gets shipped to California. The
commenter asked that EPA not make decisions based on this study.
Q: WaterSense criteria is voluntary. Is there any effort in making it mandatory?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that the WaterSense program is voluntary by nature, and the EPA
does not intend to make it mandatory. Also, this would require the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) to change its requirements, and the EPA has not received any indication that
the DOE is interested in doing so.
Q: The 2016 Residential End Uses of Water study indicated that water use barely changed and
water use for each event was 0.48 gpm. Given this data, is the specification even
A: Mr. Pickering clarified that 0.48 gpm was the average flow rate of most (62.6 percent)
events. However, there were still many events recorded at higher flow rates (31.9 percent of
events had an average flow rate of 1.39 gpm) where savings could be realized if
WaterSense lowered its maximum flow rate.
necessary?
4
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
Q: Did Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District's study take into account products
that are available at stores, online, or both?
A: Mr. Pickering responded that this was just an in-store assessment and acknowledged that
the online retail market may be different.
Scope Considerations
Mr. Pickering summarized the scope of the current WaterSense faucet specification, which
applies to bar sink and lavatory faucets and accessories in private use and excludes metering
faucets, lavatory faucets in public use and kitchen faucets.
i. Kitchen Faucets
Mr. Pickering explained that, due to changes in the market and inquiries from WaterSense
manufacturer and promotional partners, the EPA is considering expanding the scope of the
faucet specification to include kitchen faucets. Mr. Pickering then provided details about the
current market and existing water savings data that the EPA has collected regarding kitchen
faucets. In addition to establishing a flow rate threshold, the EPA would also identify
performance considerations (e.g. temporary override feature, minimum flow rate) to ensure
adequate functionality and customer satisfaction.
Participant Questions and Comments
Q: Can you confirm that the intent is for all modes to meet the 1.8 gpm target?
A: Mr. Pickering responded that, as Ms. Tanner had previously stated, the EPA is not deciding
on a threshold at this point. The intent of this meeting was to summarize the information that
the EPA collected regarding potential savings and the current state of the market.
Q: It was stated that most kitchen faucet models don't have an override function. Is this based
on manufacturer callouts on specification sheets or their websites?
A: Mr. Pickering responded that the EPA examined specification sheets, reviewed retail
websites and interviewed multiple manufacturers during the data collection process to draw
this conclusion. There are many products that do include this feature; however, research
shows that the large majority do not. Based on feedback from utility and manufacturer
partners, there has not been any significant user pushback regarding 1.8 gpm or 1.5 gpm
kitchen faucets.
Q: Why develop a kitchen specification that, it appears, would only duplicate the market?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that over the years, WaterSense has received many requests from
manufacturers and other partners to develop a WaterSense kitchen faucet specification.
Therefore, the EPA felt that the agency should investigate whether this would be a
worthwhile scope expansion, or if the market has shifted such that a kitchen faucet
specification is no longer necessary.
5
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
ii. Metering Faucets
Mr. Pickering explained that the EPA is also considering expanding the scope of the faucet
specification to include metering faucets. This consideration is driven by the fact that metering
faucets do not have a regulated maximum flow rate or cycle length, contrary to other public
lavatory faucets. Also, the EPA has received reports that WaterSense labeled aerators are
being used on metering faucets to claim that they are WaterSense labeled. Mr. Pickering then
provided details about the current market and existing water savings data that the EPA has
collected regarding metering faucets. In addition to establishing a flow rate threshold, the EPA
would also identify performance considerations (e.g. life cycle testing, minimum flow rate) to
ensure adequate functionality and customer satisfaction.
Mr. Pickering summarized comments received to date on the Notice of Specification Review
related to lavatory faucets, kitchen faucets and metering faucets. He also reviewed outstanding
questions the EPA would still like feedback on related to kitchen and metering faucets.
Participant Questions and Comments
Q: Do you have any thoughts on metering faucets now also being infrared controlled? In fact,
infrared for us is by far the largest market share.
A: Mr. Pickering responded that the WaterSense labeling criteria typically avoids stipulating
activation methods of products. If WaterSense were to develop a metering faucet
specification, it would encompass all modes of activation, including infrared.
Q: Thank you for showing the definitions from various sources and for pointing out that there
are some data points (ADA and LEED) for cycle time but no industry guidelines or accepted
hard information about cycle times. However, what should be considered is that the
definitions and their application still have an analog approach, meaning that they have a
traditional spring loaded or mechanical faucet that requires some type of user interface in all
of these approaches. That is old technology and an outdated approach, so if WaterSense
does look at adding these to an existing specification or a new one, the distinction between
these older technologies and new ones must be considered.
A: Ms. Tanner said that she agrees with that statement. Mr. Pickering responded that within the
ASME/CSA committee, there has been an ongoing discussion about refining definitions
related to metering faucets vs. self-closing faucets vs. other public lavatory faucet types.
There remains some confusion within the industry about the definition of these faucets, but
hopefully new definitions within the ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 standard help to resolve
it. If WaterSense were to pursue a metering faucet specification, the agency would work with
the industry to make that distinction.
Poll Questions
Ms. Tanner polled attendees on what product categories WaterSense should expand the scope
of its faucet specification to include. Results of the poll are shown in Figure 3.
6
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
Which product categories should WaterSense expand
the scope of its faucet specification to include?
7%
¦	Both residential kitchen faucets and metering faucets
¦	Only residential kitchen faucets
Only metering faucets
¦	Neither, leave the specification scope as is
Figure 3: Poll Question #3
3.0 Showerhead Specification Considerations
Kim Wagoner of ERG provided an overview of the current WaterSense Specification for
Showerheads and summarized information that WaterSense has collected regarding high-
efficiency showerheads in the current market. The current specification allows for a maximum
flow rate of 2.0 gpm and must also conform to performance requirements included in the ASME
A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 Plumbing Supply Fittings standard, including requirements related to
minimum flow rate, spray force and spray coverage. The EPA has not identified any areas for
potential scope expansion; however, there could be potential for water efficiency and
performance revisions.
Water Efficiency and Performance Considerations
Ms. Wagoner explained that, due to changes in the market and new regulations adopted by
various states and municipalities, the EPA is considering reducing the maximum flow rate below
2.0 gpm. Ms. Wagoner then summarized the savings studies that the EPA has identified to
evaluate potential water savings associated with lower showerhead flow rates. The EPA is also
considering revising the showerhead performance criteria. However, the agency has no data to
suggest that users are dissatisfied with the current performance of labeled showerheads. Ms.
Wagoner then reviewed potential health and safety concerns that have been associated with
lower flow showerheads (e.g., thermal shock, scalding).
EPA

WaterSense
7
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
Ms. Wagoner summarized comments received to date on the Notice of Specification Review
related to showerheads. She also reviewed outstanding questions the EPA would still like
feedback on related to showerheads.
Participant Questions and Comments
Q: Have you considered the amount of time related to soft water and hard water?
A: Ms. Wagoner responded that no, none of the studies have specifically looked at the impact
that water hardness has on shower length.
Q: Why doesn't WaterSense include body sprays?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that the EPA feels that body sprays are inherently inefficient devices
because they are a luxury product intended to supplement a typical showerhead; therefore,
the EPA does not intend to include them in the WaterSense program.
Q: There are significant savings opportunities available by saving the hot water that is wasted
during warm up. Has WaterSense considered adding those types of products to a
certification program?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that WaterSense is always looking for new products and that those
devices are a potential area of expansion. If attendees have any details or further
information on this topic, or want to submit a suggestion in written comments, that would be
appreciated. Mr. Pickering mentioned that, if the commenter is referring to thermostatic
shutoff valves, those can be integrated within the showerheads and are therefore eligible for
the current specification. However, standalone devices/add-ons are not currently eligible.
Q: One commenter suggested that the EPA look at Amazon reviews of 1.8 gpm showerheads
because there is a large number of people complaining about reduced performance or force.
A: Ms. Tanner responded that she has seen these reviews. User dissatisfaction is especially
concerning when people start removing restrictors from their showerheads to improve
performance, and this is a major concern of water utilities.
Q: The original concern regarding scalding still exists due to the replacement market. How will
the EPA alleviate those concerns if the flow rate is decreased?
A: Ms. Wagoner responded that the EPA would revisit harmonization efforts between the
fittings and automatic compensating valves standards, but that to our knowledge, there are
marking requirements within each standard to ensure a showerhead can be matched with a
compensating valve rated at the same flow rate. Ms. Tanner said that yes, this is a concern.
The valve standards are supposed to be tested at 45 psi, as are WaterSense labeled
showerheads. In theory, there may be valves at lower flow rates than 2 or 2.5 gpm.
Therefore, customers would still be able to match their showerhead with the valve when
they replace it. However, this would require replacement of the whole system, not just the
showerhead, which isn't always done.
8
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
Q: There is a large difference in the stated flow rate and actual flow rate. How does
WaterSense take this into consideration when looking at performance? For example, a 1.8
gpm showerhead flows more like 1.5 gpm. We are getting to a point where consumers are
not going to like their showers.
A: Ms. Wagner responded that when the showerhead is tested, it is required to be within a
range of its rated flow rate and properly marked. In the market, the showerheads might not
flow at 60 psi, which is why WaterSense established a pressure compensation requirement,
so that the flow rate at different water pressures is a certain percentage of the maximum in
order to guarantee a minimum level of satisfaction. Ms. Tanner said that WaterSense can
only set performance criteria to a certain extent. There is a wealth of other information that is
available to consumers (e.g., Amazon reviews), but is outside the scope of the WaterSense
performance requirements. Because people's preferences are individualized, it would be
very difficult to set criteria to ensure user satisfaction. WaterSense tries to include minimum
criteria within the performance requirements of the specification; however, there are many
performance aspects that are outside of WaterSense's control.
Q: Are you considering gunk build up? If you reduce the flow rate and then add to that the gunk
build up, wouldn't that be a concern because it will reduce the actual flow rate even more?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that yes, this is a possible outcome of lower flow rates. However,
even at the current flow rates, people have a responsibility to maintain their fixtures and
remove buildup when it starts to affect performance.
Q: How do you address educating the public about matching replacement shower heads/hand
showers to the original shower valves/faucets flow rates to avoid potential thermal shock or
anti-scald? There are standards that address this topic, but the general public is mostly not
aware of this issue.
A: Ms. Wagoner responded that WaterSense has tried to educate the public in the past and will
likely need to put more effort into this if the flow rate is lowered. Ms. Tanner responded that
this would be handled on the outreach side. The EPA has required that information about
matching valves be included on showerhead packaging. Lowering the flow rate would
require more coordination with utility partners regarding rebates and retail partners, as well
as more discussion with the industry about how to convey this information to the public
(particularly plumbers).
Q: For combination products (that included a fixed showerhead plus a handheld showerhead),
would it be possible to change the requirement for the handheld showerhead to have an
exception for the spray coverage test as long as the fixed showerhead would meet the spray
coverage requirement?
A: Ms. Wagoner responded that that is something WaterSense could consider if the EPA
decides to revise the specification. Ms. Tanner responded that some handheld showers are
sold separately from showerheads, so she would like to ensure that the handheld shower
does not get used in place of the showerhead and therefore fails to meet the WaterSense
showerhead requirements. In cases where the showerhead is removeable and becomes a
9
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
handheld device, the EPA would like for the handheld/showerhead to still meet all
performance criteria.
Q: I am a technical consultant in the plumbing industry and can tell you by firsthand experience
that most people will not know the flow rate of older valves, and I feel this topic is of great
importance, especially when a plumber or professional is not involved.
A: Ms. Tanner responded that she agrees with this statement completely.
Q: Most consumers do not know the rating of their shower valve, so decreasing the flow rate
will create more potential scalding situations. What is the EPA's position with respect to
product liability?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that she does not believe the EPA takes on additional product
liability; however, that's a question that she does not think she's able to answer. There are
plenty of products already in the marketplace at these low flow rates. Liability should not fall
to WaterSense when these flow rates are already in widespread use in the marketplace.
Q: Can you clarify your previous statement about handheld showerheads being sold in
combination packages?
A: Ms. Tanner summarized the previous question regarding potential performance requirement
relief for handheld showerheads sold as a bundle with fixed showerheads. She then clarified
her response to that question, stating that it is possible for those handheld showerheads to
be sold both in a combination package and individually. In this case, individually sold
handheld showerheads would need to meet all performance criteria to be WaterSense
labeled. Mr. Pickering clarified that in an instance where the handheld showerhead and fixed
showerhead are one product and cannot be sold separately, this device could be captured
as a multi-modal showerhead, in which case all modes (fixed showerhead and handheld
showerhead) must meet the maximum flow rate requirement, but only one mode (likely the
fixed showerhead) is subject to meet all of the performance requirements. Ms. Tanner said
that this depends on how the product is marketed and defined.
Q: Please clarify whether or not handheld showers are considered "showerheads" in the
WaterSense criteria.
A: Ms. Tanner confirmed that WaterSense does consider handheld showerheads to be
showerheads for specification and labeling purposes.
Q: One commenter suggested that it might be helpful to partner with manufacturers (not
including third-party certifiers) to sell a standardized version of the spray force test protocol
apparatus (see Figure 1 of Explanation of Performance Testing Under the WaterSense
Specification for Showerheads). Perhaps the material used on the individual parts affects
the testing result.
A: Mr. Pickering responded that the current ASME A112.18.1/CSA B125.1 standard includes
engineering design drawings for certifying bodies/manufacturers to use when creating the
10
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
testing apparatus. Ideally, these drawings will be followed precisely to ensure that testing is
consistent.
Poll Questions
Ms. Tanner polled participants about whether they think WaterSense has enough information to
determine whether to revise its specification for showerheads. Results of the poll are shown in
figure 4.
Based on what has been presented, does
WaterSense have enough information to determine
whether to revise its specification for showerheads?
¦ Yes ¦ No
Figure 4: Poll Question #4
Ms. Tanner requested that partners who think WaterSense does not have enough information
please reach out with comments and suggestions explaining what information the EPA needs.
One attendee suggested that the EPA consider the impacts of water hardness.
Ms. Tanner then polled attendees on whether they think the EPA should revise the water
efficiency criteria of the WaterSense Specification for Showerheads. Results of the poll are
shown in Figure 5.
EPA

WaterSense
11
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
In your opinion, should the EPA revise the water
efficiency criteria of the WaterSense Specification
for Showerheads?
63%
¦ Yes ¦ No ¦ Need more information
Figure 5: Poll Question #5
4.0 General Water Efficiency Considerations
Ms. Tanner summarized three studies that Plumbing Manufacturers International (PMI) brought
to the EPA's attention that examine how utilities adapted to reductions in water use and identify
potential health risks associated with declining water usage and flows. Ms. Tanner also
summarized a collaborative effort among WaterSense, the National Institute of Standards
Technology (NIST) and the Water Research Foundation (WRF) to organize a workshop in
August 2018 focused on research needs to inform premise plumbing design, installation and
maintenance. The workshop synthesis report was released in December 2018 and can be
viewed here: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/qcr/2019/NIST.GCR.19-020.pdf
Participant Questions and Comments
One commenter recommended that the EPA contact Gary Klein about the CEC's study Code
Changes and Implications of Residential Low Flow Hot Water Fixtures. Ms. Tanner responded
that that study has been recommended to WaterSense before; however, it has not been
published yet, so the EPA cannot draw any information from it.
5.0 Future Stakeholder Meetings and Next Steps
Ms. Tanner reviewed the schedule for upcoming product-specific industry webinars scheduled
in May and June 2019 and noted that these meetings are open to everyone, but they are each
targeted for specific audiences. Attendees are welcome to register at
www.epa.gov/watersense/product-specification-review#webinars.
12
April 24, 2019

-------
EPA
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
WaterSense
Ms. Tanner reminded attendees to submit comments, data and questions on this product review
process to watersense-products@erq.com. She asked that attendees try not to repeat old
comments or suggest studies that were already discussed during this meeting.
Participant Questions and Comments
Q: In estimation, when will the changes, if any, take place?
A: Ms. Tanner responded that the EPA will decide in December 2019 whether to revise any of
the WaterSense specifications. If necessary, the revision process would begin in early 2020
and would include further discussions with industry and promotional partners. The revised
specifications could be completed as early as December 2020, though this may be an
optimistic timeline, and WaterSense would establish a transitional period to allow
manufacturers to shift their products to the new criteria.
Ms. Tanner adjourned the meeting by encouraging those with outstanding questions to contact
the WaterSense Helpline at watersense@epa.gov or (866) WTR-SENS (987-7367) and
thanking everyone for their participation.
13
April 24, 2019

-------
WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
for Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
Appendix A: Meeting Participants
Attendee
Organization
Jordan Acton
American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA)
Jacob Adili
Underwriters Laboratories (UL LLC)
Abbie Batog
National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) International
John Bertrand
Fortune Brands Global Plumbing Group
Arthur Binder
EcoSense Solutions
Debra Burden
Citrus County, Florida Utilities
Terry Burger
NSF International
Celeste Calhoun Johnson
Sloan
Maribel Campos
International Code Council Evaluation Service (ICC-ES)
Olivia Caracostea
Moen
Frederick Desborough
Technical Consultant with Plumbing Manufacturers International
(PMI)
Kevin Ernst
OS&B
Donna Estrada
International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials
(IAPMO) Research and Testing (R&T) Lab
Gene Faasse
T&S Brass and Bronze Works, Inc
Frank Foster
Symmons Industries
Fred Fraisse
Neoperl
Jeff Gerbick
Delta Faucet Company
Mark Gibeault
Kohler Co.
Daniel Gleiberman
Sloan
Tom Graves
Water Pik, Inc.
Fred Grewen
Mateo-No rca
Larry Himmelblau
Chicago Faucets
Katie Hayes
Gerber/Danze
Jonathan Hole
Masco Canada
Brian Jennings
Waterworks
Parker Johnson
T&S Brass and Bronze Works
Kevin Kennedy
Niagara Conservation
Keiko Koami
Lota USA
John Koeller
Koeller and Company
Louis Ku
Foremost Groups, Inc.
Robert Laflamme
L'lmage Home Products inc.
Duncan Liang
CSA Group
Sean Liu
Pioneer Industries
Kurt Markshausen
BITS Smart Strip, LLC
Mark Malatesta
Lixil Water Technology
EPA

WaterSense
14
April 24, 2019

-------
4
EPA —	WaterSense® Specification Review Webinar
Water Sense	f°r Plumbing Fittings Manufacturers Summary
Attendee
Organization
Jon Manoj
NCH Corp
Matthew Marble
NSF International
Martin Marsic
Waxman Consumer Products
Ramiro Mata
American Society of Plumbing Engineers (ASPE)
Chris McDonald
Fortune Brands - Global Plumbing Group
Cambria McLeod
Kohler Co.
Andrew Morris
Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District
Abraham Murra
Abraham Murra Consulting
J. David Musselwhite
International Accreditation Service (IAS)
Bob Neff
Delta Faucet Company
Ron Orlowski
Component Hardware
Ada Poon
Delta Faucet Company
Wendy Pratt
Zurn Industries, LLC
Carrie Roberts
IAPMO
Stephanie Salmon
PMI
J'aime Salvatore
Neoperl
David Schwartzkopf
Willoughby Industries
Danira Serrano
Pfister
Farhad Shahriary
Acorn Engineering Co.
Troy Sherman
Evolve Technologies
Matt Sigler
PMI
Vince Vu
Brasstech Inc.
Abby Williams
Kearns Improvement District
Tracy Wilson
Symmons Industries
Roberto Zanola
CSA Group
Presenter
Organization
Stephanie Tanner
U.S. EPA
Amanda Forsey
ERG
Robbie Pickering
ERG
Kim Wagoner
ERG
15
April 24, 2019

-------