Austin September 16 2011 Report

Trip Report: September 16 2011, Austin, Texas
Submitted by: Mark Lessans, Program Associate, Building Codes Assistance Project
Meetings Held
September 16, 9:00 AM 12:00 PM CST
Participants: BCAP: Mark Lessans, Maria Ellingson, Mike DeWein (via phone) Texas State Energy Conservation Office (SECO): Felix Lopez, Dub Taylor Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Public Outreach: Alison Nathan
Purpose: To meet with the Texas State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) to begin development of the Strategic Compliance Plan for the state of Texas, using the recently complete Texas Gap Analysis report as the first step in considering tactics to achieve 90 percent compliance with the IECC 2009 code by 2017. Summary: We reviewed the 12 recommendations in the Gap Analysis Report, and discussed the importance and feasibility for realistically helping to achieve the goal of 90 percent compliance with the 2009 IECCC by 2017. Each recommendation was discussed in relation to its purpose in the strategic plan, and the structure of the report was discussed further. Meeting notes: The flow chart and report outline appear to be a good start and viable model. Many of the recommendations from the gap analysis not addressed would require legislative change at the state level, so they would need to be passed off to advocacy organizations that have the capability to lobby (SECO does not). Energy Codes Compliance Coalition A good idea and doable solution, but it is imperative to include all stakeholders, especially the Texas Association of Builders (TAB). TAB has been relatively supportive of energy codes in the past. Currently, an advocacy group headed by Tod Wickersham, Beneficial Results (see Additional Notes) meets regularly with Dub Taylor from SECO, and they are open to evolving into the coalition and including the necessary stakeholders. Securing Funding Pre-ARRA funding, Texas used other funding for codes (some SEP, state funds (state appropriates funding to SECO for program activities, one of which is building code training)); they also secured some grant funding to supplement that.
The timing of ARRA was good as they jumped from 2001- to 2009 version codes with help from ARRA funds. The fallback for funding without ARRA would be at a reduced level. Prior to ARRA, SECO partnered with other organizations (such as TAB) to minimize costs for training. Outreach and training could be maintained by SECO regardless of utility and ARRA funding. The real need is enforcement within cities and is underfunded. This is the opportunity for sustained utility funding. SECO would greatly appreciate knowing details on how other states (such as WA or IL) have structured their funding to provide for energy codes work. We agreed to put some information together for them as part of their strategic plan. Measurement and Verification SECO has not completed any M&V studies, but Texas A&M Energy Systems Laboratory (ESL) has developed a compliance software program that contains M&V components. Theyve pilot tested the software, and although the PNNL checklist is cumbersome, the software seems to work well, and would allow SECO to track energy code compliance across multiple jurisdictions if code officials were to use this software. Entries made by code officials in the field would be entered into a master database at the state level. This software seems quite innovative and could revolutionize the way states collect data from on-site visits. The stall in moving forward lies with the rights to the software the software developer feels they own the rights and wants to make money from the product. It is unclear what percentage of state funding went into developing this software. Dub Taylor and Felix Lopez will follow up with the software developer to determine whether or not they can move forward, how the contract reads (whether state has ownership), and determine the next steps. SECO was interested in other states compliance study efforts, and BCAP agreed to send them current studies as soon as they became public. Consumer and Professional Outreach Texas has not taken on a consumer energy code outreach program, and Alison Nathan was concerned that the state may be too big to effectively reach out to everyone. That being said, everyone in attendance was very interested at the possibility of a consumer outreach campaign. BCAP staff offered recently created consumer materials which can be altered and used for state-specific resources, and will put Alison in contact with Consumers Union if interested. Alison agreed that utilizing the associations of counties, cities, and municipalities would be an ideal way to reach local governments and ideally, consumers. Training SECO is currently sponsoring a large number of trainings, which is being completed by Apple Energy Group (AEG) with BCAP assistance. These trainings are being offered in many different cities and towns throughout Texas, and video content from trainings will be posted online for greater access by others. Regardless, Code Ambassadors appears to be a viable option, as long as SECO can find funding for it. Additional Notes Construction outside of city lines are not subject to building codes compliance of any kind, as the counties do not have jurisdiction to enforce codes. It is estimated that this makes up <10% of the states
total construction, though no analysis has been completed. Enabling counties to enforce codes would require legislative change, something that has been attempted in the past. Felix suggested that advocating for county enforcement, and any necessary construction analyses, be taken on by RECA. SECO currently has 10 blower door testers, 10 duct blasters, and 10 infrared air leakage testers in its possession, bought with ARRA funds. The original intent of their purchase was to loan them to building departments for use with 2009 IECC compliance testing, however this may be too much of an administrative hassle. SECO is considering using them for 3rd party rater training instead, and is evaluating other options with what to do with the tools. Mark Lessans and Maria Ellingson also met with Tod Wickersham of Beneficial Results while in town. Todd has begun to create a group of businesses to develop a collective voice in support of energy efficiency businesses. He is open to expanding the topic to building codes. SECO is also open to the idea of considering this group as a potential energy codes advocacy group in the future.

Austin September 16 2011 Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Austin September 16 2011 Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Austin September 16 2011 Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Trip Report: September 16 2011, Austin, Texas

You might also like