International Code Council Code Development Public Hearings
2009-2012 Code Development Cycle
Baltimore, MD
Update: Saturday, October 31, 2009
Filed by: Ron Burton
Vice President – Codes, Standards & Regulatory Affairs
BOMA International
Day 8 and halfway to completion of the ICC Code Development Hearings in Baltimore.
Since my last update on Wednesday, Tracks I and II have included changes proposed to the ICC Energy Conservation, Residential, and Administrative Codes. BOMA’s primary focus was on the Energy Code because changes with significant impacts on BOMA members were on the agenda. The big issues revolve around proposals to increase the stringency of the IECC by 30% over the 2006 edition. This covers both residential and commercial buildings and is the “30% solution” effort orchestrated by the Dept. of Energy over the past 3 years. It seemed there was no end to the number of energy & environmental groups and independent contractors with DOE stimulus funding working for approval of these proposals.
243 code change proposals were on the Energy Code committee agenda. After 3 ½ days and 54 hours of debate, here is a summary of actions taken on the most critical issues for commercial buildings and BOMA members:
• The big story is that the Dept. of Energy goal to reach 30% more efficiency than the 2006 IECC was realized with the majority of the major proposals gaining approval by the IECC code development committee. In addition to new building construction, many of these provisions impact existing building retrofits, tenant finish out projects, upgrades to HVAC, lighting, window and door replacement, and other issues impacting BOMA members.
• Multiple proposals to reach the 30% goal were submitted by the “30% Solution” coalition including DOE, AIA, the New Buildings Institute & other groups.
• The Energy Code committee approved proposals to rewrite the entire commercial building section of the code to reach the 30% more stringent level.
• Significantly more stringent building envelope requirements to reach the goals were approved by the committee. All elements of the envelope – walls, windows, etc. are covered in these new requirements.
• BOMA raised concerns about key elements in the 30% solution proposals. DOE and the New Buildings Institute have agreed to work with BOMA to resolve our concerns with the commercial building changes before the ICC Final Action Hearings next May.
Other changes of interest:
• Greatly expanded requirements for construction documents in order to secure permits and certificates of occupancy was proposed. BOMA urged disapproval and the committee agreed.
• A proposal to require automatic lighting control time switches on all light circuits was disapproved by Energy committee. BOMA led opposition testimony arguing that this would add significantly to the cost of tenant renovations and result in wholesale changes to electrical systems in some buildings.
• Expanded lighting replacement rules including bulb replacement not covered by permit requirements was rejected by Energy committee following BOMA testimony pointing out that this would cover replacement of just a few light bulbs.
• Efficiency requirements for all electric motors that would add significant costs for many applications were disapproved by Energy Code committee.
• BOMA opposed a proposal to expand building commissioning requirements prior to space occupancy, arguing that some of the proposed changes could not be enforced because the action required would take place after occupancy, and therefore outside the normal regulatory authority of the code authority. The Energy committee disapproved this change.
• New minimum efficiency requirements for water cooled chillers were proposed, including replacement units. This change was approved by the committee.
• A proposal requiring vestibules for ALL building entrances that could possibly be used by the public was narrowly approved by Energy committee. BOMA argued unsuccessfully for disapproval but was able to get an exception for revolving doors included in the approved language.
• DOE proposed mandatory on-site renewable energy to satisfy 5% of building energy use for all new buildings and buildings undergoing major renovations. BOMA and a host of other groups vigorously opposed this change, and the committee disapproved the proposal.
• The Energy Code committee disapproved a proposal that would require permanent projections (awnings, deflectors, etc.) on "poorly oriented" building facades – those deemed to be facing the wrong way to take advantage of solar design. BOMA led the opposition to this change.
• Proposals by the National Assn. of Home Builders and others to delete the reference to ASHRAE 90.1 energy standard that has been in the IECC for many years were hotly debated. As expected, the committee voted overwhelmingly to disapprove these proposals. BOMA supports the 90.1 reference in the IECC because it offers an alternative path to code compliance.
• BOMA opposed a proposal to raise the minimum equipment efficiency levels to comply with yet to be approved federal legislation, arguing that the committee should not base any decisions on legislation that has not been enacted into law. The committee agreed and denied this change.
• The Energy committee disapproved a change mandating zoned HVAC systems on each floor in residential occupancies. BOMA supported the vote to disapprove by the committee.
• A proposal to mandate highly efficient and costly windows regardless of how otherwise efficient the project design was disapproved by Energy committee.
• A code change proposal to add an appendix to the IECC including a "stretch" code far beyond IECC requirements was rejected. BOMA led opposition to this proposal arguing it was unwise to put this in the code given ICC’s effort to develop its own green building code now underway. We also asked for disapproval based on the fact that it was improper to include a stretch code document that had not been subject to any consensus code or standard development process.
You may think the Energy Code committee hearings were all serious and dour. However, in what proved to be a hilarious and somewhat embarrassing moment for Hilton Hotel staff, the electronic system that recorded the hearing room voting froze during the hearing Friday evening about 7:30. It seems the operator in charge of the equipment had fallen fast asleep. It’s incredible but it seems he was not at all enthralled by the gripping testimony that had continued non-stop for about 3 days at that point.
The ICC hearings are taking a 4-day break for the annual ICC Education Conference. We’ll resume code development hearings next Wednesday, November 4th. Remember to look for my daily summaries on Facebook and don’t forget to check out my daily “tweets” on Twitter. You can access my tweets through the Twitter link on the BOMA web site www.boma.org. I also want to remind you that a live webcast of all the ICC hearings can be accessed right at your desk at
http://bit.ly/J6huL .