sc lyva ope__ corn Ar) un f601/4A--1 0 ccfn 

2-5©1--0232 

Testimony of Shari Shapiro, Esq. on behalf of the International Code Council 

Environmental Protection Agency Hearing on August 1, 2014 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

My name is Shari Shapiro, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of 

the International Code Council (ICC). 

The International Code Council (ICC) was established in 1994 as a non-profit organization 

dedicated to developing a single set of comprehensive and coordinated national model construction 

codes, known as the International Code (I-Codes). The I-Codes are used in all fifty states and the District 

of Columbia at the state or jurisdictional level to set the minimum legal standard for building 

construction. Stakeholders representing diverse interests participate in the development process, and 

the final decision on what to include in the I-Codes is made by code officials from across the country. 

The I-Codes includes the International Energy Conservation Code or IECC, which addresses 

energy use in commercial and residential buildings. ASHRAE also publishes a commercial energy code 

known as ASH RAE-90.1, which is incorporated by reference into the I-Codes. The IECC and ASHRAE 90.1 

(the "Energy Codes") are updated every three years, and reviewed and adopted by states and 

jurisdictions as law. 

These Energy Codes have an unparalleled track record in achieving cost-effective energy savings 

and carbon emission reductions. Therefore, while ICC does not take a position on the merits of the 

Environmental Protection Agency's regulation of carbon emissions, if the EPA decides to enact the Clean 

Power Plan regulations, ICC urges the EPA to specifically include adoption of and compliance with 

energy and resource saving building codes as allowable components of State Implementation Plans. 

First, Energy Codes are able to reduce energy use by buildings at a crucial moment—when they 

are being designed and built. Buildings can last thirty to fifty years or longer, but the energy 

performance level is essentially locked at the time of construction. Like the difficulty and cost 

associated with adding carbon control mechanisms to existing power plants, it is much easier and less 

expensive to include energy efficient features like insulation and building envelope design during 

building construction than as a post-construction retrofit. 

In addition to the Energy Codes, the family of I-Codes now includes the International Green 

Construction Code (IgCC), a model codification of green building practices that jurisdictions can adopt 

and enforce, just like more traditional building codes. The IgCC can achieve even greater energy and 

carbon emission savings at the time of construction, through, for example, energy and carbon reduction 

targets, building siting and land use strategies, specific equipment applications, lifecycle costing tools 

and use of on-site renewable energy. 

Second, building codes have a track record of more than two decades of effectively reducing 

energy use and carbon emissions. Currently, the IECC is in use or adopted in 47 states. In 2013, Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratory, on behalf of the DOE, assessed the energy, carbon and cost savings 

from Energy Codes. Based on this history, PNNL predicts that by 2040 Energy Codes can yield as much 

as 48 quads of full fuel cycle energy savings, and reduce carbon emissions by 3.7 billion metric tons. 
Third, in addition to saving energy and carbon emissions, the Energy Codes help Americans save 

money. The Department of Energy estimates that homes built to the 2012 IECC here in Pennsylvania 

will save homeowners an average of $515.00 per year on energy costs, and $8632.00 over the course of 

a thirty year mortgage. On a national scale, DOE projects an additional $185.7 billion in energy cost 

savings through 2040. 

Finally, unlike developing new programs, the states and jurisdictions already have the necessary 

legal, educational and enforcement mechanisms in place to regulate buildings through building codes. 

No additional regulatory mechanisms are required in the vast majority of states to realize the energy 

savings and carbon reduction benefits of up-to-date energy codes. 

Despite these clear benefits, most states do not count energy code savings in their utility 

ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs. Instead, these programs have focused on techniques that 

save energy in individual buildings or using specific equipment, like light bulbs. This makes some sense 

in the context of ratepayer programs, where the goal is to achieve a dollar-for-dollar match between any 

increase in an individual ratepayer's energy bill to pay for the programs and the amount that ratepayer 

can save by participating in the programs. 

However, these constraints are not applicable to Clean Power Plan compliance plans. 

Consistent with the EPA's goal to allow states flexibility in their approach to energy savings, relying on a 

diverse set of strategies, states should be encouraged to pursue the large amounts of energy efficiency 

investment and resulting emissions avoidance that occur outside of utility ratepayer programs in their 

SIPs, using strategies like Energy Code adoption and compliance. Therefore, ICC asks EPA to specifically 

reference energy and resource saving building codes in the list of acceptable state strategies for 

compliance with the Clean Power Plan regulations. 

In the Proposed Rule, EPA expressed concern as to whether there are sufficient measurement 

and verification (M&V) protocols available to accurately capture the energy and carbon savings from 

building energy codes. I want to address this concern directly. 

I direct EPA's attention to the work performed by PNNL and DOE to assess the savings 

attributable to DOE's Building Energy Codes Program, which was published in October, 2013. In 

addition, ten states have included building energy code programs in their utility energy efficiency 

programs, with different M&V protocols. Finally, there have been several research-based M&V 

protocols for building energy codes, including two recent ones from the Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory and a joint study by the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships, the Edison Foundation and 

the Institute for Market Transformation. 

In conclusion, building energy and resource codes are a proven way of achieving energy, carbon 

and resource savings cost effectively, using legal and enforcement processes that already exist 

throughout the country. Therefore, we urge the EPA to specifically include adoption of up to date 

building energy and resource codes as a strategy for states to comply with the Clean Power Plan carbon 

reduction targets. I welcome any questions you may have about my testimony. 

2