Page 61 - Green Builder March-April 2020 Issue
P. 61
www.greenbuildermedia.com/code-arena
CODE ARENA
The Latest Rules, Regulations and Codes Impacting Sustainable Construction
Energy Efficiency Advocates:
Win the Battle But Lose the War?
BY MIKE COLLIGNON
HE INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE
(IECC) went through its triennial revision process dur-
ing the course of 2019. When the dust settled, energy
e ciency advocates felt the 2021 IECC made signi-
T cant eciency gains, especially compared to the 2015 and
2018 editions. Online vote totals were not available as of press time,
but voter turnout was tilted towards the sustainability constituency
unlike anything the code arena has ever seen.
The outcome of the nal vote was so overwhelming, and in some
instances the exact opposite of earlier voting rounds, that it has
others questioning the online voting process. Will the 2021 IECC
become synonymous with the 2012 International Residential Code
(IRC), where re ocials voted en masse to adopt re sprinkler
requirements, only to have local and state builder associations lobby To be continued. The 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
them out of nearly every jurisdictional code? If the 2021 IECC is not makes huge strides over its 2008 and 2015 predecessors, but State and
adopted at the state and local level, how will the anticipated eciency local officials could veto any efforts.
gains ever be realized? 8-3 and 8-1, respectively. NAHB is claiming that these proposals should
This will be the rst in a series of articles on the 2021 IECC. This have been considered under the International Mechanical Code£(IMC)
entry features a table showing the voting outcomes at dierent stages and/or IRC, so this might be another situation where we see a scope
of the code development process, as well as a view into where the challenge. However, both the public comment hearing voters and the
two most inuential stakeholders stood on a variety of common online voters upheld the committee’s decision, so this will be politically
proposals. dicult for ICC to reverse the vote of their own members.
While the table on page 60 reects proposals that were featured in RE162 – The consent agenda is for proposals that are approved by
the two main voting guides, there were other outcomes that deserve the code development committee, and receive no public comments.
a mention: This is one of those proposals, because it made sense to all involved. It
RE126 – This proposal calls for reduced water heating energy use earned a unanimous vote of approval from the committee, and is now
by requiring more-ecient water heating systems. RE126’s passage is in the model energy code. It gives credit to hot water distribution sys-
of note, because it a) was unanimously disapproved by the commit- tem design that shortens the run from the water heater to wet rooms.
tee, b) the nal outcome can’t be “blamed” on the energy eciency This, in turn, reduces energy devoted to heating water and structural
community’s voting guide, since it wasn’t included, and c) will most (water) waste. Credit to Gary Klein for this very logical code change.
likely be challenged due to scope. That’ll be a dicult challenge, RE166 – Like RE126, this was a proposal about water and falls under
since the International Code Council (ICC) Board already ruled that the purview of the IECC. However, it was unanimously approved by
domestic hot water (and water eciency) falls under the purview of the committee, and was approved at the public comment hearing.
the IECC. Also of note: The proposal’s author led a public comment, Unfortunately, it was in the bullseye of the energy eciency com-
seeking to modify the original proposal. That was also disapproved munity, with its inclusion in their voting guide, and the subject of
by the public comment hearing voters, so the online voters approved a public comment requesting disapproval. Apparently, the online
the original proposal. voters agreed, much to the dismay of water eciency advocates.
RE132 PARTS 1 AND 2 – These proposals require mechanical CE217 PART 2 – This proposal was known as the EV-ready pro-
ventilation in all dwellings. Depending on the ACH50 of the home posal. It included a table that prescribed, based on the total number
(sub 5), this was already a de facto requirement for respectable indoor of parking spaces, how many EV-ready and EV-capable spaces were
air quality. The proposals were modied by the committee, then passed needed. For lots with 26 or more spaces, two EV-ready spaces would
www.greenbuildermedia.com March/April 2020 GREEN BUILDER 59
59-61 GB 0320 Code Arena.indd 59 4/8/20 5:13 PM
