New residential construction compliance: Evaluation of the Washington State Energy Code program

Abstract

In 1990, the Washington State legislature passed a residential energy efficiency code to be effective July 1, 1992. The Bonneville Power Administration {Bonneville) supported passage and implementation of the code ~ to ensure that new electrically heated residences in the State of Washington were as energy efficient as possible. Bonneville contracted with the Washington State Energy Office {WSEO) to provide code implementation support to the building industry and code enforcement jurisdictions through the Washington State Energy Code {WSEC) program. Support under the WSEC program includes training and other activities to provide builders and building inspectors with knowledge of the energy efficiency features of the code to ensure high levels of code compliance. Participation of builders and subcontractors in training needs to be increased; a certification process might increase participation. The WSEC needs to be revised to simplify implementation and to adapt it to building code revision cycles. Bonnev1ille should review the role of energy efficiency codes as resource acquis~tion mechanisms and adopt a clear policy regarding this role. Energy efficiency should continue to be promoted to ensure market demand for energy-efficient homes and high levels of code compliance. Code compliance can be evaluated and savings projected using quantitative measures.

Utility residential new construction programs: Going beyond the code. A report from the Database on Energy Efficiency Programs (DEEP) Project

“…We are aware of statewide analyses of code compliance in three states (California, Oregon, and Washington) that indicate the amount of noncompliance with state building codes (Frankel and Baylon 1994;Valley Energy Consultants 1994;Warwick et al 1993). The Washington and Oregon analysis also included an estimate of the energy savings impacts from noncompliance which provides needed information for assessing the value of noncompliance.…”

“…The Washington and Oregon analysis also included an estimate of the energy savings impacts from noncompliance which provides needed information for assessing the value of noncompliance. While there was some noncompliance (3%) with the Washington code, the impact on thermal performance of typical homes was estimated to be minor (Warwick et al 1993). …”

Residential building code compliance: Implications for evaluating the performance of utility residential new construction programs

“…For example, in the evaluation of building compliance in Washington, data were translated into indices that reflected the fraction of savings achieved for each construction element in terms of whole house heat loss (Warwick et al 1993). …”

“…While most of the studies in our sample examined building compliance from a "whole building perspective," one study evaluated compliance from a "building component perspective" (Warwick et al 1993). In Washington, data were collected for major construction activities and graded compliance on a four-point scale,…”

“…Unless clearly indicated by the building code, building officials prefer not to enforce workmanship (e.g., improperly supported floor insulation), deeming it too subjective and sometimes politically delicate to enforce. In the study conducted in Washington, the quality of the installation of some energy measures was found to be "poor" in some site inspections (e.g., compacted insulation around ductwork, loose insulation in floors, lack of insulation support in underflooring, and insulation gaps at ducting boots and elbows) (Warwick et al 1993). In many cases, however, the authors found through site inspections that the quality of an installation did not appear to be at variance with the code and, therefore, was not identified as an item needing repair.…”