Case Studies - Washington State Energy Code

Energy Code Privatization - The Utility Code Group Story

Executive Summary

In 1991, Washington State began the process of revising its non-residential energy code. The non-residential code at the time had been adopted in 1985 and was based on the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Energy Design Standard 90-80. The update to the code was largely driven by the desire of the region`s utilities and the Northwest Power Planning Council (NWPPC) to increase the energy efficiency of new commercial buildings by raising the energy code up to the model conservation standard developed by the NWPPC.

There was resistance to the energy code revision process from the building industry and building code officials. The entire revision process was very political in nature from the initial legislation authorizing the State Building Code Council to revise the energy code in 1991, to the approval of the new code in September 1993 (with an effective date of April 1994, see Table 1). An Implementation Plan was developed during the revision process that specified how the energy code would be implemented. The plan contained many of the compromises that were reached to satisfy all the parties involved.

Table 1: Timeline for the Non-Residential Energy Code Revision

Action	Date
Legislature authorizes code revision	April 1991
State Building Code Council petitioned to start revision process	September 1991
Technical Advisory Group formed to draft code	January 1992
Draft Code Rejected by Council	July 1992
Simplification Committee delivers new draft energy code	March 1993
Implementation Committee delivers Implementation Plan. State Building Code Council adopts code	September 1993
Utility Code Group formed	December 1993
Effective date of the energy code	April 1994

The Utility Code Group (UCG) was created to fund, manage, and coordinate the Implementation Plan for the 1994 code. It was a non-profit corporation formed by the state`s electric and gas utilities. A board of utility representatives provided oversight. The goals of the UCG were:

to establish a comprehensive training program that reaches a diverse audience across industry lines,
to raise awareness about the non-residential energy code,
to increase energy code compliance through training and enforcement innovation,
to cost-effectively implement the code, and
to transfer and institutionalize implementation of the energy code to private industry.

To achieve its goals, the UCG carried out the following key functions:

develop and implement a training program,
oversee the disbursement of funds for the training plan,
market energy code information and training to industry audiences,
cooperate with code officials and fund the development of the Special Plans Examiner and Inspector Program,
manage a quality assurance and evaluation program to track progress, and
coordinate with all stakeholders to assure the successful implementation of the code.

The implementation of the code was funded by electric and natural gas utilities. The amount contributed by each utility was based on their energy sales in Washington State. Revenue from sales of products and services and other funding sources was less than two percent of the funding. Over the three and a half year life of the program, total expenditures are expected to be a little less than five million dollars. Education and training accounted for approximately two thirds of the total expenditures.

Achievements

Did the UCG meet its goals? Achievement of each of the group`s goals listed above is summarized in the text below.

Establish a comprehensive training program that reaches a diverse audience across industry lines: The UCG developed a comprehensive training program on key aspects of the energy code targeted to different industry groups, training over 7,500 participants. In addition, there were 910 participants in brown bag trainings targeted to key architecture/engineering firms. A hot line responded to 2,700 calls. A variety of information products (technical manuals, field guides, compliance forms) were developed and distributed. There was broad representation across the various building industry groups in the training program.

Raise awareness about the non-residential energy code: An awareness survey conducted approximately one year after the effective date of the revised code showed that almost three-quarters of the individuals surveyed were aware the code had changed in the last two years. More than one-third of the respondents had participated in some code informational activity. Participation and awareness was highest among building officials. A follow up survey will be conducted in January 1997 to assess awareness of the code and use of Utility Code Group (UCG) services by the building industry. Anecdotal evidence suggests awareness is high across all groups.

Increase energy code compliance through training and enforcement innovation: One of the major successes of the non-residential energy code implementation effort was to show that high levels of energy code compliance are possible. While it is too early to tell what the compliance levels will be (the code compliance study will be done in February 1997), preliminary analysis suggests compliance will be significantly higher than levels prior to implementation of the revised code. A preliminary analysis of 36 buildings showed 94 percent compliance in cases where a special plans examiner or inspector was used and 55 percent in all other cases (previous compliance levels were about 50 percent). A survey of local jurisdictions shows that over 80 percent were enforcing the code.

Cost-effectively implement the non-residential energy code: A goal of the utilities was to implement the non-residential energy code at a cost that was significantly less than residential energy code implementation. They achieved this goal. The cost for code implementation was an order of magnitude less than the residential energy code. Since the residential energy code has proven to be cost-effective, it is likely that the code implementation effort was very cost effective. Although analysis has yet to be performed, the cost to the electric utilities for code implementation will likely produce electricity savings at a cost of less than 0.1 cents/kWh.

Transfer and institutionalize implementation of the energy code to private industry: The UCG has worked very hard to develop products and services that will be attractive and valuable to industry. The group has been actively soliciting private industry to take over energy code training. So far, out of 20 organizations contacted, 8 have agreed to offer energy code training and products. It is too early to tell how successful this transfer will be.

The UCG is scheduled to sunset in March 1997. There is a strong desire among all the parties involved, including UCG staff, to keep this commitment. However, there is recognition that the goal of transferring energy code implementation to private industry has not been fully achieved. At a minimum, it seems that some kind of entity to facilitate this transfer is necessary. Some believe there needs to be a minimal level of on-going technical assistance available to support effective long-term enforcement of the code as well as an organization responsible for maintaining and advocating for an effective energy code.

Lessons Learned

The success of the Utility Code Group (UCG) was dependent on the willingness of the stakeholders to make non-residential implementation happen. Some of the key lessons learned from the UCG experience include:

Funding for energy code implementation and a commitment from all the partners is critical.
Select partners that are truly interested and committed to implementing the non-residential energy code. Nurture these relationships. Avoid, if possible, alliances driven by politics with organizations that do not share similar goals. Make sure that agreements with partnership organizations clearly state roles and expectations.
Get started 12 to 18 months before the effective date of the energy code, so that products and services are available prior to the effective date of the code.
Plan with the end results in mind. Think about sustainability early on and nurture the relationships that will carry on the energy code.
An effective marketing program is key for success. Develop an overall marketing strategy and develop and market products and services to meet specific needs of particular market segments.

Evaluation and quality assurance are essential. This helps maintain and improve program quality and it keeps the stakeholders informed and satisfied that their resources are being used effectively.