```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64924-64931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27050]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-DET-0057]
RIN 1904-AC59

Updating State Residential Building Energy Efficiency Codes

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary determination.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or Department) has preliminarily 
determined that the 2012 edition of the International Code Council 
(ICC) International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) (2012 IECC or 2012 
edition) would achieve greater energy efficiency in low-rise 
residential buildings than the 2009 IECC. Upon publication of an 
affirmative final determination, States would be required to file 
certification statements to DOE that they have reviewed the provisions 
of their residential building code regarding energy efficiency and made 
a determination as to whether to update their code to meet or exceed 
the 2012 IECC. Additionally, this Notice provides guidance to States on 
how the codes have changed from previous versions, and the 
certification process should this preliminary determination be 
finalized.

DATES: Comments on this preliminary determination must be provided by 
November 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by any of the following 
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: michael.erbesfeld@ee.doe.gov. Include RIN 1904-
AC59 in the subject line of the message.
     Postal Mail: Mr. Michael Erbesfeld, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Forrestal 
Building, Mail Station EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0121, Please submit one signed paper original.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Mr. Michael Erbesfeld, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 
950 L'Enfant Building, Room 6014, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, Washington, DC 
20024.
     Instructions: All submissions must include the agency 
name, Department of Energy, and docket number, EERE-2011-BT-DET-0057, 
or Regulatory Information Number (RIN), (1904-AC59) for this 
determination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Erbesfeld, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Forrestal 
Building, Mail Station EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 287-1874, e-mail: 
michael.erbesfeld@ee.doe.gov. For legal issues contact Kavita 
Vaidyanathan, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 
Forrestal Building, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585, (202) 586-0669, e-mail: kavita.vaidyanathan@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Background
    C. DOE's Preliminary Determination Statement
II. Discussion of Changes in the 2012 IECC
    A. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Increase Energy Efficiency
    B. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Decrease Energy Efficiency
    C. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Have an Unclear Impact on 
Energy Efficiency
    D. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Do Not Affect Energy Efficiency
III. Filing Certification Statements With DOE
    A. State Determinations
    B. Certification
    C. Request for Extensions
IV. Regulatory Analysis
    A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
    D. Review Under Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''
    E. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act of 1999
    G. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act of 2001
    H. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    I. Review Under Executive Order 13175
V. Public Participation

I. Introduction

A. Statutory Requirements

    Title III of the Energy Conservation and Production Act, as amended 
(ECPA), establishes requirements for the Building Energy Standards 
Program. (42 U.S.C. 6831-6837) Section 304(a) of ECPA, as amended, 
provides that when the 1992 Model Energy Code (MEC), or any successor 
to that code, is revised, the Secretary must determine, not later than 
12 months after the revision, whether the revised code would improve 
energy efficiency in residential buildings and must publish notice of 
the determination in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(A)) 
The Department, following precedent set by the ICC and the American 
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers 
(ASHRAE) considers high-rise (greater than three stories) multifamily 
residential buildings and hotel, motel, and other transient residential 
building types of any height as commercial buildings for energy code 
purposes. Low-rise residential buildings include one- and two-family 
detached and attached buildings, duplexes, townhouses, row houses, and 
low-rise multifamily buildings (not greater than three stories) such as 
condominiums and garden apartments.
    If the Secretary determines that the revision would improve energy 
efficiency then, not later than 2 years after the date of the 
publication of the

[[Page 64925]]

affirmative determination, each State is required to certify that it 
has compared its residential building code regarding energy efficiency 
to the revised code and made a determination whether it is appropriate 
to revise its code to meet or exceed the provisions of the successor 
code. (42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(B)) State determinations are to be made: 
(1) After public notice and hearing; (2) in writing; (3) based upon 
findings included in such determination and upon evidence presented at 
the hearing; and (4) available to the public. (See, 42 U.S.C. 
6833(a)(5)(C).) In addition, if a State determines that it is not 
appropriate to revise its residential building code, the State is 
required to submit to the Secretary, in writing, the reasons, which are 
to be made available to the public. (See, 42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(C).)

B. Background

    The ICC's IECC establishes a national model code for energy 
efficiency requirements for buildings. In 1997, the Council of American 
Building Officials (CABO) was incorporated into the ICC and the MEC was 
renamed to the IECC. A previous Federal Register notice, 59 FR 36173, 
July 15, 1994, announced the Secretary's determination that the 1993 
MEC increased energy efficiency relative to the 1992 MEC for 
residential buildings. Similarly, another Federal Register notice, 61 
FR 64727, December 6, 1996, announced the Secretary's determination 
that the 1995 MEC is an improvement over the 1993 MEC. Federal Register 
notice 66 FR 1964, January 10, 2001, simultaneously announced the 
Secretary's determination that the 1998 IECC is an improvement over the 
1995 MEC and the 2000 IECC is an improvement over the 1998 IECC. 
Finally Federal Register notice 76 FR 42688, July 19, 2011, announced 
the Secretary's determination that the 2003 IECC was not a substantial 
improvement over its predecessor, while the 2006 and 2009 editions were 
a substantial improvement over its predecessors.

C. DOE's Preliminary Determination Statement

    The 2012 IECC has a substantial variety of revisions compared to 
the 2009 IECC. Most of these revisions appear to directly improve 
energy efficiency that, on the whole, would result in a significant 
improvement in efficiency to homes built to the code. Therefore, the 
Department preliminarily concludes that the 2012 edition of the IECC 
should receive an affirmative determination under Section 304(a) of 
ECPA.

II. Discussion of Changes in the 2012 IECC Compared With the 2009 IECC 
Summary

    The 2012 IECC appears to improve residential energy efficiency with 
respect to the 2009 IECC. Based on DOE's preliminary analysis, a 
preponderance of major energy efficiency improvements more than offset 
a small number of changes which have unclear or negative impacts on 
energy efficiency. The major changes that are estimated to improve 
energy efficiency in new homes built to comply with the code in most 
climate zones include:

 Building thermal envelope improvements.
    [cir] Increases in prescriptive insulation levels of walls, roofs 
and floors.
    [cir] Decrease (improvement) in U-factor allowances for 
fenestration.
    [cir] Decrease (improvement) in allowable Solar Heat Gain 
Coefficient (SHGC) for fenestration in warm climates.
 Infiltration control: Mandated whole-house pressure test with 
strict allowances for air leakage rates.
 Wall insulation when structural sheathing is used.
 Ventilation fan efficiency.
 Lighting--Increased fraction of lamps required to be high-
efficacy.
 Air distribution systems--leakage control requirements.
 Hot water pipe insulation and length requirements.
 Skylight definition change.
 Penalizing electric resistance heating in the performance 
compliance path.
 Fireplace air leakage control.
 Insulating covers for in-ground hot tubs and spas.
 Baffles for attic insulation.

    Changes that appear to decrease residential efficiency in some 
situations include the following.

 Steel-framed wall insulation.
 Air barrier location.

    Changes whose effect is unclear:

 Fenestration SHGC requirement in climate zone 4.
 Interior shading assumptions in the performance compliance 
path.

    All of the changes that are estimated to positively or negatively 
impact energy efficiency are discussed in the following text.

A. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Are Estimated To Increase Energy 
Efficiency

Building Thermal Envelope Improvements
    Table R402.1.1 which specifies prescriptive envelope requirements, 
has been extensively modified in the 2012 IECC compared to the 2009 
IECC. This table represents the code's primary regulation of a home's 
envelope thermal resistance, or the resistance of the ceilings, walls, 
windows, and floors to the transfer of heat into or out of the home. 
The criteria are expressed as either R-values (Btu/h-ft\2\-F), which 
quantify a building component's resistance to heat flow, or U-factors 
(h-ft\2\-F/Btu), which are the inverse of R-values and represent a 
component's thermal conductance. A higher R-value or a lower U-factor 
represents an efficiency improvement. Table R402.1.1 also includes 
requirements for glazed fenestration solar heat gain coefficients 
(SHGC) in the southern and central climate zones. In a cooling-
dominated climate, a lower SHGC will almost always reduce a home's 
annual energy consumption.
    Table 1 below shows the changes in the code's required R-values and 
U-factors by climate zone. DOE has preliminarily determined that every 
change in the code's table represents an improvement in efficiency. 
Table 2 below shows the increase in required thermal resistance for 
each building component type weighted by climate zone.
    For the fenestration U-factor, the code has increased the required 
thermal resistance by an average of 26.7%. In climate zone 1, Table 
R402.1.1 appears to revert from a required U-factor of 1.2 to NR (no 
requirement). This, however, should have no effect on the energy 
efficiency of the code because the U-factor of a minimally efficient 
single-pane window meets the requirement of 1.2. Seen in this light, 
the change to NR is really a clarification, rather than an actual 
change. The U-factor requirements for skylights in the 2012 IECC would 
reduce allowable heat loss through skylights an average of 12.6% 
compared to the 2009 IECC.
    For glazed fenestration the allowable solar heat gain coefficient 
(SHGC) has been lowered, reducing solar heat gain by 17% in the 
cooling-dominated climate zones (1-3).
    Four climate zones (2 through 5) were affected by more stringent 
insulation requirements in ceilings. Required R-values increased by 27% 
to 29% in these zones. However, accounting for the thermal bridging 
effects of typical wood framing members, DOE has preliminarily 
determined that the changes in the code represent a weighted average 
increase of 12.2% in the thermal resistance of ceilings.
    For wood frame walls, the code allows a choice in some climate 
zones of a single value for insulation in the

[[Page 64926]]

cavity between wall studs, or two values: One for cavity insulation and 
one for additional continuous insulation applied to the interior or 
exterior of the wall. Accounting for thermal bridging effects, and 
choosing the least thermally resistive of the two options, the 2012 
code is estimated to improve thermal resistance of wood-frame walls an 
average of 13.7%. Mass wall (e.g., concrete, concrete block, log) R-
value requirements increased by an average of 33.4%. Basement wall and 
crawl space wall R-values increased by 14.5% and 17.6%, respectively.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19OC11.025

   Table 2--National Average Increase in Thermal Resistance for Lowest
             Required Insulation Level by Building Component
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Increase in thermal
             Building component                 resistance of required
                                                 insulation (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fenestration................................                       26.7
Skylights...................................                       12.6
Ceiling.....................................                       18.2
Wood Frame Wall.............................                       13.7
Mass Wall \1\...............................                       33.4
Basement Wall \1\...........................                       14.5
Crawl Space Wall \1\........................                       17.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are two R-value options in the IECC. The first R-value option
  is used for this comparison. For mass walls, this first value applies
  when less than half of the insulation is on the interior of the mass
  wall, the case for which the code allows a greater reduction in
  required R-value due to the beneficial effects of thermal mass. The
  second number is more similar to wood frame wall requirements. For
  basement and crawl space walls, this first value applies for
  continuous insulation on the interior or exterior of the wall, whereas
  the second value is for insulation in cavities between studs or
  furring strips. In this case the two values represent approximately
  similar overall thermal resistance.

    The 2012 IECC specifies that insulation R-values conform to the 
requirements of Table R402.1.1 even if the insulation must be 
compressed to fit within the available cavity. This clause primarily 
affects some nominal R-19 fiberglass batts that are designed for floor 
and/or ceiling applications where the available cavity is greater than 
the 5.5 inches typically available in a 2x6 wall. However, the 2012 
edition has no prescriptive requirements that exactly require R-19 in 
wall cavities, so it is expected that there is no direct impact on 
energy savings.
Infiltration Control
    Section 402.4.1.2 contains a new provision for a mandatory whole-
house pressure test to determine the envelope air leakage rate (the 
test was optional in the 2009 IECC). The maximum allowable air leakage 
rate is 5 air changes/hour when tested at a pressure difference of 50 
Pascals (5 ACH50) in climate zone 1 and climate zone 2; and 3 air 
changes/hour (3 ACH50) in climate zones 3-8. The 2009 IECC specified a 
maximum of 7 ACH50 when the optional test was used, or directed the 
building official to inspect the envelope

[[Page 64927]]

against a detailed checklist when the test was not used. The lower 
allowed leakage rate of the 2012 IECC is expected to save energy, and 
the mandatory test will likely result in improved energy efficiency in 
homes that would have had higher leakage rates as a result of leaks 
that would not be detected by visual inspection.
Wall Insulation When Structural Sheathing Is Used
    Footnote h to Table R402.1.1 allows certain reductions in the 
required R-value of continuous insulation on walls that use structural 
sheathing (e.g., plywood, OSB) for shear bracing. The footnote is 
relevant only when there is a mixture of structural and insulating 
sheathing on the wall(s). The 2009 IECC states: ``First value is cavity 
insulation, second is continuous insulation, so ``13+5'' means R-13 
cavity insulation plus R-5 insulated sheathing. If structural sheathing 
covers 25 percent or less of the exterior, insulating sheathing is not 
required in the locations where structural sheathing is used. If 
structural sheathing covers more than 25 percent of exterior, 
structural sheathing shall be supplemented with insulated sheathing of 
at least R-2.''
    The footnote has the effect of suspending the continuous R-value 
requirement for portions of the wall covered with structural sheathing, 
provided those portions represent 25% or less of the wall area. If 
structural sheathing covers more than 25% of the wall, the structural 
portions must be augmented with additional insulating sheathing of at 
least R-2. The 2012 IECC states: ``First value is cavity insulation, 
second is continuous insulation, so ``13+5'' means R-13 cavity 
insulation plus R-5 continuous insulation. If structural sheathing 
covers 40 percent or less of the exterior, continuous insulation R-
value shall be permitted to be reduced by no more than R-3 in the 
locations where structural sheathing is used--to maintain a consistent 
total sheathing thickness.''
    The 2012 IECC allows a larger fraction of the wall (40% rather than 
25%) to contain reduced continuous insulation but, unlike the 2009 
IECC, does not allow elimination of continuous insulation. The 2012 
IECC specifies substantially more continuous insulation layered on top 
of structural sheathing when the structural fraction exceeds the 40% 
threshold. It is estimated that the net effect is greater overall 
efficiency.
Ventilation Fan Efficiency
    When installed to function as a whole-house ventilation system, the 
2012 IECC specifies that mechanical fans meet the following 
requirements:
     Range Hoods and In-line fans: 2.8 cfm/watt.
     Bathroom (10-90 cfm): 1.4 cfm/watt.
     Bathroom (>90 cfm): 2.8 cfm/watt.
    Because the 2012 IECC places upper limits on the energy 
requirements for these fans where there were no such limits in the 2009 
IECC, this change is expected to improve overall efficiency in 
residences.
Lighting
    The requirement for high efficacy lamps has been increased from a 
minimum of 50% of the lamps in permanently-installed fixtures to a 
minimum of 75%. Further, the high efficacy lamp requirement has been 
changed from prescriptive to mandatory, meaning the specification 
cannot be lessened in trade for efficiency improvements elsewhere in 
the home. This change also addresses an aspect of the 2009 IECC under 
which the use of high-efficacy lamps is not specified when a building 
achieved compliance via the simulated performance compliance path. This 
is expected to improve the energy savings in the 2012 IECC by reducing 
lighting energy use. The 2012 IECC also added an option for calculating 
the high-efficacy fraction based on a count of fixtures instead of 
individual lamps, a change not expected to change overall efficiency.
    Section R404.1.1 in the 2012 IECC contains a new provision that 
bans continuously burning pilot lights on fuel-fired lighting. While 
the potential energy savings are limited due to the fringe application 
of this type of lighting, where applied, this rule would tend to 
increase energy savings by cutting standby energy use of the pilot 
light.
Air Distribution System
    There are three key changes to requirements for air distribution 
systems that improve energy efficiency:
     A change to section R403.2.2.1 that places a limit on air 
leakage from air handlers. The change is to ensure that the air handler 
delivers the vast majority of the supply air downstream to the rest of 
the distribution system.
     Section R403.2.2 reduces maximum allowable levels of duct 
leakage in the distribution system compared to the 2009 IECC (from 12 
cfm per 100 ft \2\ of conditioned floor area to 4 cfm/100 ft \2\ for 
tests done on completed buildings, and from 6 to 4 cfm per 100 ft \2\ 
for tests done at the rough-in stage of construction).
     Section R403.2.3 now specifies that building framing 
cavities may not be used as supply ducts or plenums, which would 
eliminate the potential for air leaks into adjacent framing cavities 
and/or attics, crawlspaces, or unheated basements. This may also lessen 
the chance of an unbalanced distribution system.
    DOE has preliminarily determined that all of these changes will 
increase the energy savings of the 2012 edition of the IECC by 
delivering more of the conditioned air to where it is needed via a more 
efficient distribution system.
Hot Water Pipe Insulation and Length Requirements
    Section R403.4.2 contains new specifications for noncirculating 
service hot water distribution systems that should reduce energy losses 
from ``stranded'' hot water and conduction of heat out of the pipes. 
The 2012 IECC specifies that all such pipes to be insulated unless they 
have sufficiently low volume as defined by a combination of their 
length (measured from the tank or distribution manifold to the point of 
use) and diameter. This change is expected to reduce the amount of hot 
water that cools off in the pipes and is thus wasted as users wait for 
sufficiently warm water to reach the fixture. Also, for circulating hot 
water systems, the required insulation has been increased from R-2 to 
R-3 and therefore should increase efficiency. A final change in the 
2012 IECC requires that piping insulation be protected from the 
elements. Although primarily a durability concern, this change may save 
energy by reducing the incidence of damaged and/or missing insulation.
Skylight Definition Change
    Previously, skylights were defined as any glazed fenestration at 
less than 75 degrees from horizontal. That definition has been changed 
in the 2012 IECC to be less than 60 degrees from horizontal. The effect 
of this change is to classify more glazing as vertical fenestration 
rather than skylights. Although the number of skylights in this slope 
range is small, because the U-factor requirements for vertical 
fenestration are more stringent than for skylights, this change is 
expected to improve the energy savings of the 2012 IECC.
Electric Resistance Heating in the Performance Path
    Under the performance compliance path (Section R405), the 2012 IECC 
has modified the reference design for buildings with electric heating 
systems that do not use a heat pump, requiring that a heat pump be 
assumed in the

[[Page 64928]]

standard reference design. Because of the efficiency of heat pumps as 
compared to other electric heating technologies, this code change is 
expected to increase the energy efficiency of the reference design, 
which would have the effect of specifying that the proposed design to 
be more energy efficient if it is to comply via this section and the 
proposed design has an electric heating system that is less efficient 
than a heat pump. Although this affects only homes with electric 
resistance heating, its effect is expected to be an improvement in 
efficiency if such homes comply via the performance method.
Fireplace Air Leakage Control
    The 2012 IECC specifies that all fireplaces have tight-fitting flue 
dampers and gasketed doors (the 2009 IECC requires such only for wood-
burning fireplaces). This is expected to result in very air-tight 
fireplaces which would improve a home's air leakage characteristics. 
Therefore, this is deemed an improvement in efficiency for homes with 
fireplaces.
In-Ground Hot Tubs and Spas
    Section R403.9 has been updated to include in-ground hot tubs and 
spas under the purview of the code, where previously only swimming 
pools were included. The change effectively requires hot tubs and spas 
to have insulating covers, which should lower energy losses. To the 
extent that these devices typically already have insulating covers this 
may have limited impact in terms of efficiency.
    The 2012 IECC now specifies that log walls meet the requirements of 
ICC-400, a separate standard for log wall construction. Although this 
does not change the thermal requirements, it may result in better 
quality construction of log walls, which would improve energy 
performance by reducing air leaks and thermal bypasses.
Baffles for Attic Insulation
    Section R402.2.3 now requires a wind wash baffle for vented attics. 
For air-permeable insulation, this should improve the effective 
insulation value of the ceiling by reducing wind-driven air movement 
and may in some cases prevent blown-in insulation from being displaced 
by wind. Therefore, this is an improvement in efficiency for attics.

B. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Are Estimated To Decrease Energy 
Efficiency

Steel-Framed Wall Insulation
    The 2012 IECC modifies the IECC code's tables of steel-framed wall 
U-factor equivalences with wood-frame walls of various R-values in such 
a way that less efficient steel-framed walls will be deemed equivalent 
to a corresponding wood-frame wall in many cases. In the 2009 IECC, 
there was no distinction between homes with different steel stud 
spacing. In the 2012 IECC, there are now separate U-factor equivalences 
for studs with 16'' and 24'' spacing. The 16'' stud spacing 
requirements have two categories that are directly comparable to the 
2009 IECC requirements: walls with wood-frame R-values of R-13 or R-21. 
According to Table A3.3 of ASHRAE 90.1 2007, the 2009 IECC-required R-
factors represent an equivalent U-factor for the wall assembly of 0.077 
to 0.080 Btu/hr-ft\2\-F, depending on the compliance option. This has 
been changed in the 2012 IECC to a range of 0.059-0.089 Btu/hr-ft\2\-F. 
The average compliance option based on R-13 wood-frame walls represents 
a 5.4% higher U-factor. For R-21 wood-frame walls, the steel frame 
options previously represented U-factors of 0.054, whereas in the 2012 
code, they represent U-factors of 0.056, a 3.1% increase.
    Insulation equivalences in the 2012 IECC for steel walls with 24'' 
stud spacing are slightly more lax, reflecting the decreased thermal 
bridging effects, compared with 16'' stud spacing. Because the baseline 
for comparison for 24'' stud spacing in the 2009 IECC is still the 
general requirements that did not distinguish based on stud spacing, 
these new requirements represent higher increases in assembly U-factors 
than for 16'' stud spacing. Specifically, there is a 9.1% increase in 
assembly U-factors among the various insulation options for R-13 and an 
11.8% increase for R-21. The steel-wood framing equivalences of the 
2009 IECC and the 2012 IECC are compared below in Table 3. In this 
table, the first value is cavity insulation and the second is 
continuous insulation. For example, R-13+5 is R-13 cavity insulation 
plus R-5 continuous insulation.
    Note that while the steel/wood equivalences have changed such that 
steel-stud walls may be less efficient than before in comparison to a 
particular wood-frame R-value, the base R-value requirements (expressed 
in terms of wood-frame walls) have substantially increased in climate 
zones 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 which would result in energy savings in these 
zones even for steel framed walls. Because the number of homes with 
external walls with steel framing is small compared to wood-frame 
homes, this change is not expected to result in substantial overall 
efficiency losses in zones 1, 2, and 5.

               Table 3--Comparison of Steel-Frame Wall Requirements Between the 2009 and 2012 IECC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steel frame spacing............             16'' stud spacing
                                            24'' stud spacing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood-Frame Requirement.........  R-13                 R-21                R-13                R-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 IECC Options..............  R-0+10 or R13+5 or   R-13+10 or R-19+9   R-13+5 or R-15+4    R-13+10 or R-19+9
                                  R-15+4 or R-21+3     or R-25+8           or R-21+3 or R-     or R-25+8
                                                                           0+10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 IECC Options..............  R-0+9.3 or R-13+4.2  R-0+14.6 or R-      R-0+9.3 or R-13+3   R-0+14 or R-13+8.3
                                  or R-15+3.8 or R-    13+9.5 or R-        or R-15+2.4         or R-15+7.7 or R-
                                  19+2.1 or R-21+2.8   15+9.1 or R-                            19+6.9 or R-
                                                       19+8.4 or R-                            21+6.5 or R-
                                                       21+8.1 or R-                            25+5.9
                                                       25+7.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average U-factor (2009) \1\....  0.079                0.054               0.063               0.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average U-factor (2012)........  0.083                0.056               0.07                0.045
Average U-factor Increase......  5.4%                 3.1%                9.1%                11.8%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Calculated using ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Table A3.4.

[[Page 64929]]

Air Barrier Location
    The 2012 IECC changes Table R402.4.1.1 by removing a requirement 
that air-permeable insulation be located inside the air barrier, 
allowing the insulation to be outside of the air barrier in the 
exterior envelope construction. By allowing air-permeable insulation to 
be located outside the air barrier this change may result in increased 
levels of outdoor air infiltration in the interstices of the insulation 
material. This would tend to reduce the effectiveness of the 
insulation. The magnitude of impact for this change, however, is 
expected to be minimal because an interior air barrier will still be 
effective at reducing air movement through the envelope and because the 
2012 IECC's new mandate for a whole-house pressure test will ensure 
that total air leakage through the building envelope be kept at a low 
rate.
    There is an additional change in the 2012 IECC that may reduce the 
energy efficiency of the code. In the 2009 IECC, the common wall 
between dwelling units of a multifamily or two-family structure was 
required to be air-sealed. In the 2012 IECC, this requirement has been 
removed. In practice, these common walls can provide a route for air 
leakage to the outdoors if they are coupled to attics, basements, 
crawlspaces, or other unconditioned spaces. Because multifamily 
represent a small fraction of low-rise residential dwelling units 
(about 15%) and because this change creates the potential for only an 
indirect air movement path, DOE does not consider this change to be 
significant.

C. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Have an Unclear Impact on Energy 
Efficiency

Fenestration SHGC in Climate Zone 4
    As presented in Table 1, the 2012 IECC changes SHGC specifications 
for climate zone 4 from no requirement (NR) to 0.4. Because climate 
zone 4 contains locations where the energy savings from increased solar 
heat gains in winter may more than offset increased energy use for air 
conditioning in summer, it is possible that a lower SHGC would increase 
energy use in some parts of the zone. However, the specified 
fenestration U-factor of 0.35 in both the 2009 and 2012 IECC usually 
implies the use of windows with low-emissivity coatings that have an 
SHGC of 0.4 or below even in the absence of a specific SHGC 
requirement. Therefore, DOE expects this change to have minimal impact 
either in terms of energy savings or energy losses.
Interior Shading Assumptions in the Performance Compliance Path
    The 2012 IECC modifies internal shade fractions required as inputs 
to the performance compliance path. The 2009 IECC specified the 
following internal shade fractions for the reference design: Summer--
0.70, Winter--0.85. These have been replaced in the 2012 IECC with the 
following equation for calculating interior shade fraction (ISF):

ISF = 0.92-0.21 [middot] SHGC

    The impact of this change on the energy consumption of homes 
complying via the performance path is nuanced and difficult to 
generalize, but is expected to be small. Its primary impact is to 
modestly change the relative importance of cooling- and heating-
oriented energy-saving features.

D. Changes in the 2012 IECC That Do Not Affect Energy Efficiency

    Several changes were made to the IECC that do not directly affect 
energy efficiency. Table 4 details these changes, listing the section 
of the 2009 IECC to which the change was made, a description of the 
change, and an explanation why overall energy efficiency is not 
affected.

                          Table 4--Changes to IECC That Do Not Effect Energy Efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Code Section                                Change                              Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R202..................................  Clarifies that residential buildings      This change is only a
                                         covered by chapter 4 are one- and two-    clarification.
                                         family dwellings, townhouses and multi-
                                         family residential (R-2) not over 3
                                         stories in height above grade.
R202..................................  Definition of a whole-house ventilation   Because whole-house
                                         system.                                   ventilation systems are not
                                                                                   yet required by the code,
                                                                                   this new definition effects
                                                                                   no real change to the code's
                                                                                   requirements.
R401.3................................  Results of an air leakage test must be    This change only affects the
                                         documented on the certificate.            transparency of code
                                                                                   compliance.
R202 and R303.1.3.....................  Introduction of ``Visible                 The table only provides
                                         Transmittance''(VT) for fenestrations.    default VT values for certain
                                         Default ``Visible Transmittances''        window types. VT is not
                                         defined in Table.                         directly regulated by the
                                                                                   code.
R402.4.4..............................  Clarification that recessed lighting      This is only a clarification
                                         must be labeled as having a leakage       of previous text.
                                         rate to ceiling cavity of or (2) a statement that the 
State has appropriated or requested funds (within State funding 
procedures) to implement a plan that would respond to the requirements 
of Section 304 of ECPA. This list is not exhaustive.

IV. Regulatory Analysis

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

    Today's action is not a significant regulatory action under section 
3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' 
(58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993)). Accordingly, today's action was not 
subject to review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
(OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the 
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule 
that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency 
certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required 
by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in 
Agency Rulemaking,'' (67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002)), DOE published 
procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the 
potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly 
considered during the rulemaking process (68 FR 7990). DOE has made its 
procedures and policies available on the Office of General Counsel's 
Web site: http://www.gc.doe.gov. If today's action on the preliminary 
determination of improved energy efficiency between IECC editions is 
finalized it would require States to undertake an analysis of their 
respective building codes. Today's action does not impact small 
entities. Therefore, DOE has preliminarily certified that there is no 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    DOE has preliminarily determined that today's action is covered 
under the Categorical Exclusion found in DOE's National Environmental 
Policy Act regulations at paragraph A.6 of Appendix A to subpart D, 10 
CFR part 1021. That Categorical Exclusion applies to actions that are 
strictly procedural, such as rulemaking establishing the administration 
of grants. Today's action impacts whether States must perform an 
evaluation of State building codes. The action would not have direct 
environmental impacts. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared an 
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.

D. Review Under Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''

    Executive Order 13132, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), imposes certain 
requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or 
regulations that pre-empt State law or that have federalism 
implications. Agencies are required to examine the constitutional and 
statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the 
policymaking discretion of the States and carefully assess the 
necessity for such actions. DOE has examined today's action and has 
determined that it will not pre-empt State law and will not have a 
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Today's 
action impacts whether States must perform an evaluation of State 
building codes. No further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) generally 
requires Federal agencies to examine closely the impacts of regulatory 
actions on State, local, and Tribal governments. Subsection 101(5) of 
Title I of that law defines a Federal intergovernmental mandate to 
include any regulation that would impose upon State, local, or Tribal 
governments an enforceable duty, except a condition of Federal 
assistance or a duty arising from participating in a voluntary Federal 
program. Title II of that law requires each Federal agency to assess 
the effects of Federal regulatory

[[Page 64931]]

actions on State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 
to the private sector, other than to the extent such actions merely 
incorporate requirements specifically set forth in a statute. Section 
202 of that title requires a Federal agency to perform a detailed 
assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of any rule that 
includes a Federal mandate which may result in costs to State, local, 
or Tribal governments, or to the private sector, of $100 million or 
more. Section 204 of that title requires each agency that proposes a 
rule containing a significant Federal intergovernmental mandate to 
develop an effective process for obtaining meaningful and timely input 
from elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments.
    Today's action impacts whether States must perform an evaluation of 
State building codes. Today's action would not impose a Federal mandate 
on State, local or Tribal governments, and it would not result in the 
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. 
Accordingly, no assessment or analysis is required under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

G. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
of 1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a 
Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family 
well-being. Today's action would not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
preliminarily concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family 
Policymaking Assessment.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
of 2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for agencies to review most 
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines 
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by 
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and 
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has 
reviewed today's action under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has 
preliminarily concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies 
in those guidelines.

I. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to the 
OMB a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy 
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an 
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a 
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy, or (3) is designated by the Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy 
action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must 
give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, 
distribution, or use, should the proposal be implemented, and of 
reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on 
energy supply, distribution, and use.
    Today's action would not have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy and is therefore not a 
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 
Statement of Energy Effects.

J. Review Under Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175. ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000)), requires DOE to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal implications'' 
refers to regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or 
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government 
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' Today's regulatory 
action is not a policy that has ``tribal implications'' under Executive 
Order 13175. DOE has reviewed today's action under executive Order 
13175 and has determined that it is consistent with applicable policies 
of that Executive Order.

V. Public Participation

    The public is invited to submit comments on the preliminary 
determinations. Comments must be provided by the date specified in the 
DATES section of this notice using any of the methods described in the 
ADDRESSES section of this notice. If you submit information that you 
believe to be exempt by law from public disclosure, you should submit 
one complete copy, as well as one copy from which the information 
claimed to be exempt by law from public disclosure has been deleted. 
DOE is responsible for the final determination with regard to 
disclosure or nondisclosure of the information and for treating it 
accordingly under the DOE Freedom of Information regulations at 10 CFR 
1004.11.

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 13, 2011.
Henry Kelly,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-27050 Filed 10-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```