Page 9 - CodeWatcher Spring 2017 Issue

STATE WATCH Here’s what’s happening
around the nation.

BY MIKE COLLIGNON

Oklahoma–Previously we reported on House Bill 1168, which would place Maine–LD 873/HP 622 proposes the addition of “tiny house construction”
the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission (OUBCC) back under the into the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code’s (MUBEC) list of permissible
administration of the Construction Industries Board (CIB). Mike Means, “nontraditional or experimental construction,” alongside straw bale and earth
Executive Director of the Oklahoma State Home Builders Association, pointed berm construction. A tiny house would be defined (by Maine) as a dwelling of
out that the two entities have different missions (OUBCC develops codes; CIB less than 400 s.f. in floor area, excluding the area of any floor level located
licenses and conducts training). He also noted that the restructuring would above the main floor (e.g. a lofted space). The bill would also direct the
create a conflict of interest by putting the contractors who are required to Technical Building Codes and Standards Board to adopt standards for tiny
follow state codes in charge of developing those codes. Read more here. house construction consistent with the Tiny House Appendix of the 2018
IRC. If adopted, this would go into effect no later than January 1, 2018. The
Georgia–The State has a task force working on the adoption of the 2015 IECC. bill is currently in committee.
They are considering a 12-page list of residential amendments (starts on
page 6) submitted by product manufacturers, builders and energy efficiency Maryland–HB 970 would require a home builder working on a development
advocates. The Task Force will meet in mid-April, and the Energy Rating Index of 11 or more homes (by the same builder) to provide homebuyers with
and Duct Envelope Tightness (ERI/DET) subcommittee will meet (for the 2nd written information on energy efficiency options. The bill states: “Prior to the
time) one week later. The tentative effective date for the 2015 IECC and execution of any contract for the initial sale of a new home, a registrant shall
ASHRAE 90.1-2013, with any necessary supplements and amendments, provide the purchaser with written information about any energy-efficient
is January 1, 2018. options, including a statement that tax credits may be available related to
the energy-efficient options, that are available for installation in the home
Washington–SB 5500 would extend the State’s code cycle to six years. The before the construction of the home is complete.” The bill would take effect
bill does preserve the state building code council’s ability to enact emergency October 1, 2017, if passed.
statewide amendments to the state building codes under certain conditions,
such as critical life and safety needs. Apparently, Washington didn’t pay New York–In mid-March, AB 6676 was proposed, and it would significantly
attention to neighboring state Wyoming’s fling with this update schedule. impact the State’s energy code. First, they are calling for enforcement that
Wyoming briefly went to a 6-year code cycle before switching back to the achieves a minimum of 90% compliance (though, like most states that do
standard 3-year cycle. Read the full story here. this, they do not put forth any consequences). Next, they are looking to
remove the economic component of the energy code, meaning that it would
Hawaii–HB 1508 calls for the State’s Department of Transportation to work no longer have to be economically reasonable, nor would the code council
with the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism to: have to “consider whether the cost of materials and their installation... would
“Conduct an analysis of the cost and benefits of adopting the building energy be equal to or less than the present value of energy savings that could be
efficiency designs incorporated into the building or facility, including the expected over a 10-year period in the building in which such materials are
fiscal consequences to the State and the related cost savings from energy installed.” Read more here.
efficiency. The department shall include payback periods of investment,
taking into account the cost savings of the program.” California–The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission is sponsoring
The analysis is due to the legislature prior to the start of the 2020 regular SB 740, which would require the State Water Resources Control Board
legislative session. The ultimate purpose is to assist the state in reaching (SWRCB) to establish a comprehensive statewide framework for oversight
net zero emissions. The bill passed the House, and was sent over to the and management of onsite non-potable water systems. Although increasing
Senate in early March. numbers of onsite water treatment systems are being installed across
California for non-potable use, current standards are limited and do not
Iowa–On March 1, Senate File 388 (SF 388) was introduced. This legislation address ongoing oversight, management, and monitoring requirements to
is based on Senate Study Bill 1126, which would allow jurisdictions to utilize protect public health.
the 2009 IECC instead of the statewide residential energy code, which is Counties and municipalities frequently lack risk-based guidance to develop
the 2012 IECC. 30 days later, SF 388 was referred to the State Government regulatory frameworks that allow for the use of treated alternate water
Subcommittee. This appears to be a backdoor way to change the State’s sources. In particular, guidance is needed on setting appropriate performance
energy code implementation to something more along the lines of a home criteria and developing appropriate structures to manage, monitor, and permit
rule system.
onsite systems. The bill would direct SWRCB to offer local governments a
South Carolina–Senate Bill 579 was introduced in late March, and it’s eye- framework for regulating the treatment of alternate water sources consistent
opening. It proposes to have South Carolina Building Codes, not model codes, with public health standards.
as “the only codes binding upon a state or local governmental entity or agency SB 740 is currently in the Senate Environmental Quality Committee, and
which adopts the building and safety codes authorized or required by this will have a hearing in early April. If passed, the framework would have to be
chapter.” Furthermore, Section 3 of SB 579 lists all the enforceable state established by December 1, 2018. It’s also important to note that a local
codes, but proposes removing “energy” and “energy efficiency” from that jurisdiction would not be required to adopt the practices set forth in the
list. This means that jurisdictions wouldn’t have to enforce the energy code framework. The framework would merely be a tool for any jurisdiction to
anymore. Interestingly, in that same section, it’s being proposed that “the use, if they so choose.
enforcing authority shall enforce only the national building and safety codes
as promulgated in accordance with this chapter.” Read the full story here. Mike Collignon is the executive director of the Green Builder Coalition.

www.codewatcher.us Spring 2017 / CodeWatcher 9