[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6291821,"mediaKeyId","2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc","parentId",2529280,"title","TAG rejects proposal to insert IECC ERI path into Washington integrated draft","audioSeconds",2474,"startMs",1892000,"endMs",4366000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc&start=1892&end=4366","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc/thumbnail_1892000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6291821/Washington/TAG-rejects-proposal-to-insert-IECC-ERI-path-into-Washington-integrated-draft","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291821-dd96081b362cb10af703b4a500a9af7e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770570387&Signature=QJTK5bWUkv4aKHf73~HT9AjFyQI-2FiacoBq6Toi1o3wPO2WuxgbqUouA8DN741MaYqrDLlfrXW0oHxmsg1X32JnUqXa34Qu26LIAtjdfDnLXfGC7N~-SgT5rW6V5Ti4Bg8tJEq31~8JlQW5sujc~1kR6c~sAdJLHsjityUwy8iZVkTmvoilyHOQ9qO3F4ZlqXMj21h5YYeziTQ3Bg9h~u3gWxPVimu8NTkb4v~eUFWOX6cnWi-9hM2OARxBCi3TIB38oOR5beLozMbDQb-9p0VAXzOIOWYD49jxClH-R6QhxkAZhxqwYR9Uqc8VC9GDapAWIuO3K9Fq6QZ68tTNAg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Building Code Council","date","2025-03-08T19:42:53.85Z","article","The Residential Energy Code technical advisory group for the Washington State Building Code Council voted down a motion to include the IECC 2024 Energy Rating Index (ERI) compliance path in the integrated draft used to accept code-change proposals.

The vote was 6 in favor and 7 opposed. The motion was made by Patrick Hanks, policy and research manager for the Building Industry Association of Washington, and seconded by Jason (surname not specified in the transcript).

The group's discussion focused on whether ERI would provide an equivalent level of energy performance to Washington's current prescriptive and credit-table approach. Supporters, including Hanks and builder Damon Doyle, argued ERI would give builders a simpler, more flexible performance metric and encourage use of ERI raters. Hanks said adding the path would make ERI an available compliance option and help the industry develop the rater pool that future code cycles might require.

Opponents said past modeling had not demonstrated equivalency. Dwayne Johnlin, energy code adviser for the City of Seattle, and others said prior code cycles had not produced convincing analysis that ERI yields the same aggregate efficiency as Washington's existing credit tables; they preferred to treat ERI as a formal code-change proposal that includes modeling and verification studies.

Staff and multiple members also discussed implementation questions: Krista (SBCC staff) explained the integrated draft shows existing state language in black and IECC insertions in red, and she noted that if the ERI path is less stringent than Washington's baseline, the ERI point values would need recalibration against the state baseline. Several members urged that any ERI adoption be accompanied by third-party modeling to set credit values so the new path does not reduce overall stringency.

Kjell Anderson, TAG chair and Building Code Council member, presided over the roll-call vote. The motion failed; the integrated draft remained without the ERI path.

The TAG discussed follow-up actions: some members proposed forming a technical work group to model and adjust ERI credit values before resubmitting ERI as a code-change proposal, while others insisted the burden of proof should remain with ERI proponents.

The TAG will accept formal code-change proposals during the public proposal period; ERI advocates were advised to submit a fully supported code-change package (including energy modeling and proposed table values) if they wish to revisit the path in this cycle.

Ending: With the ERI motion defeated, the TAG resumed review of the integrated draft, and members noted that future proposals could still add an ERI path if they supply the equivalency analysis the TAG requested.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","SBCC WSEC-R TAG Meeting - March 6, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Residential Energy Code technical advisory group voted against adding the IECC 2024 Energy Rating Index compliance path to Washington's integrated draft, citing a lack of demonstrated equivalency to the state's existing credit-based approach.","taxTitle","Building Code Council, Governor's Office - Boards & Commissions, Executive, Washington","taxId",24233,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6291810,"TAG declines to alter \"chapter\" phrasing for change-of-occupancy language in existing-buildings section",959,7605000,8564000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc&start=7605&end=8564","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc/thumbnail_7605000.jpg","/articles/6291810/Washington/TAG-declines-to-alter-chapter-phrasing-for-change-of-occupancy-language-in-existing-buildings-section","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291810-94b99e33655b114cff3d96a172c53892/orig.mp4?Expires=1770570387&Signature=EW~LlrNqNsaOr-kEt6vV5VOh8y4isndPcBRky6ptnt3aTWheQ1sguvpTuxgNoXXiV29TnPAo-7ZQlY6bgYqI64Pi2IvYGZ-oSOwzuyssmNPpKMpP4TvPD~WYBVmqLeb-X5om8hX2wfp-kMb6lljb2rF0tJGhE-9MpD0FLRR4Z3S0tqErGZ-~~ebNk09T468A3SdIXVUqjOtbYHSiNxoK1hMpa0TuZaJfKDGVdSgaNRJgYlmMrbTGRJDQXOePmp2iBqe8FF74cahhqEAm3W2sNUJV~8L21OOvjcXLXwzHGRdrBUi5OFA5wQm8MamQ0lo5R4n5WnH8q~8Tr0lKqgQNdA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The TAG reviewed proposed language in the existing-buildings chapter that affects when a change in occupancy or use triggers energy-code upgrades. The IECC 2024 phrased the provision using the word \"chapter,\" while Washington's prior 2021 state language used \"code.\"

Some members argued \"chapter\" narrows the requirement to chapter 5 (existing buildings) rather than to the entire code, which could reduce the number of situations requiring full-code compliance when a change of occupancy occurs. Others said the difference was largely semantic because subsequent paragraphs already reference full compliance where appropriate. Members asked staff whether the revised language intended to limit applicability; staff explained the IECC phrasing focuses the requirement on the existing-buildings chapter and that a separate sentence already requires full-code compliance when conditioned spaces are converted to dwelling units.

The TAG voted on a motion to revert the IECC wording back to the Washington state language using \"code.\" The roll-call vote failed (motion did not pass). As a result, the integrated draft retained the IECC wording using \"chapter.\" Several members indicated they would prepare code-change proposals if they felt the model-code language later caused unintended reductions in stringency during the proposal review process.

Ending: The existing-buildings language remains the IECC phrasing in the integrated draft; members may submit targeted code-change proposals later in the public proposal window if they want to change that wording.","The TAG considered a model-code edit that replaced the residential code's word \"code\" with \"chapter\" in the existing-buildings change-of-occupancy provision. After debate and a roll-call, the motion to replace the model-code wording with the prior 'code' phrasing failed; the TAG retained the model-code 'chapter' wording in the integrated draft.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6291815,"TAG approves integrated draft and forwards it for public code-change proposals; staff to include reports",3704,6556000,10260000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc&start=6556&end=10260","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2529280-25fb8248953c23eb6c9bc9ba984b3dbc/thumbnail_6556000.jpg","/articles/6291815/Washington/TAG-approves-integrated-draft-and-forwards-it-for-public-code-change-proposals-staff-to-include-reports","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6291815-bba66f3e3b04f7c1420c6549df996df0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770570387&Signature=ma3kQvXZ1IWjuupDO-OyCBiL50ERCoI8aJ8bCBSMM0He08uoomiM0uHwZnmWN-u1dtWqJLRxE6OVi-1LVenAS5-bKDal7tQX36UVxrBngn0Rn5Ss18imw0URtPi2XxGBwsY3mE0Pt367UF9croIMuGQXNCVKY2Pz0klbq5qyL8DxsZRIUwNlC9RZLOGlC03jMQpmtJ7udnNONP5GThtFRi~WqD6H4Y1rUfhi0BmfvvYeMRmFFpuExCryv5IlpAl0CYwUJ5w~M~zHA8nLDiInZFf6zoMdeWmajNXoGh1AZSzeUZ8FI1mbKT6ADZRPxoIREtSgA7wfhHHkTsG-tC-vww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Residential Energy Code technical advisory group voted to approve the integrated draft it had reviewed and modified and to forward the document to the committee and council for the public code-change process.

The motion to approve the integrated draft passed on roll call with 12 votes in favor, 1 opposed and 1 abstention. TAG members stressed that approving the draft is a procedural step to create the document that will be published for the public to file code-change proposals. TAG members and staff discussed producing companion reports summarizing (1) significant changes in the new model code versus the prior model code, (2) existing state amendments proposed for modification or removal, and (3) TAG-suggested amendments; staff confirmed those reports would be prepared for the committee package.

The TAG also voted earlier in the meeting to adopt the IECC 2024 residential appendices in place of Washington's older appendix tables for the integrated draft. That motion was approved in the meeting's later stage: the TAG agreed to use the IECC 2024 appendices as the starting point for default assembly U-values and related tables to be published in the integrated draft. Staff noted the commercial-code appendix proposal is under separate consideration on the commercial TAG docket and that the residential toolset (C3/calculation tool) will require recalibration if the appendix reference changes.

Finally, the TAG agreed to make the IECC 2024 model code available by reference as an additional option for proposers (the meeting recorded a subsequent vote to include a reference to IECC 2024 as an option in the package). Staff explained that full IECC text can be referenced but cannot be redistributed by the TAG due to publishing/copyright practices; the TAG will include the IECC by reference so interested parties can prepare proposals targeted at that model text.

Ending: With the integrated draft approved and the appendices choice made, the TAG will reconvene to review arriving public code-change proposals and any technical reports staff produces on significant changes.","After editing the integrated draft during the meeting, the Residential Energy Code TAG voted to approve the document for the next stage of rulemaking and requested accompanying reports summarizing significant changes and state amendments. The TAG also voted to include the IECC 2024 appendices as the residential appendix reference.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

TAG rejects proposal to insert IECC ERI path into Washington integrated draft

TAG declines to alter "chapter" phrasing for change-of-occupancy language in existing-buildings section

TAG approves integrated draft and forwards it for public code-change proposals; staff to include reports