[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 10, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1964-1970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-742]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy


Building Energy Standards Program: Determinations Regarding 
Energy Efficiency Improvements in the 1998 and the 2000 International 
Energy Conservation Codes for Residential Buildings

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or Department) today determines 
that the 1998 version of the International Code Council (ICC) 
International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) would achieve greater 
energy efficiency in low-rise residential buildings than the 1995 
version of the Council of American Building Officials Model Energy Code 
( MEC). Also, DOE determines that the 2000 version of the IECC would 
achieve greater energy efficiency than the 1998 IECC. As a result of 
these determinations, in accordance with the provisions of the Energy 
Policy Act of 1992, States are required to file certification 
statements to DOE about how their own residential building codes 
compare to the IECC codes regarding energy efficiency. This Notice 
provides guidance to States on how the codes have changed from previous 
versions, how to submit certifications, and how to request extensions 
of the deadline to submit certifications.

DATES: Certifications or requests for extensions of deadlines with 
regard to the 1998 and the 2000 International Energy Conservation Codes 
are due at DOE on or before January 10, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Certifications or requests for extensions of deadlines 
should be directed to the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, Office of Building Research and Standards, Mail 
Station EE-41, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Envelopes or packages should be labeled, ``State Certification of 
Residential Building Codes Regarding Energy Efficiency''.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Early, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Forrestal 
Building, Mail Station EE-41, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0121, Phone: 202-586-0514, FAX: 202-586-4617.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 1965]]

I. Introduction
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Background
    C. DOE's Determination Statement
II. Discussion of Changes in the 1998 IECC compared with the 1995 
MEC
    A. Major Changes in the 1998 IECC that Improve Energy Efficiency
    1. Solar Heat Gain Coefficient for Glazed Products in Certain 
Climates
    2. U-Factor for Replacement Windows
    B. Minor Changes in the 1998 IECC that Improve Energy Efficiency
    1. Air Infiltration for Manufactured Doors and Windows
    2. Heat Traps for Water Heaters
    3. Use of Compliance ``Tools''
    4. Tables for Compliance by Prescriptive Specification
    5. Insulation of Skylight Shafts
    6. Access Openings in Floors, Walls, and Ceilings
    C. Changes in the 1998 IECC that Decrease Energy Efficiency
    1. Prescriptive Thermal Envelope Criteria for Certain Additions
    2. Revised Default U-factors for Glazed Products
    D. Conclusion
III. Discussion of Changes in the 2000 IECC compared with the 1998 
IECC
    A. Changes in the 2000 IECC that Improve Energy Efficiency and 
Compliance with the Code
    1. Protection of Above-grade Foam Insulation
    2. Solar Heat Gain Coefficient for Additions and Replacement 
Windows
    3. Construction Documents
4. Definition of Roofs and Skylights
5. Treatment of Partially Glazed Doors
6. Use of Prescriptive Specification Compliance Tables with Steel-
Framed and Masonry Walls
B. Changes in the 2000 IECC that Decrease Energy Efficiency
1. Increase in U-value for Replacement Skylights
2. Simplified IECC Chapter for Some Buildings
C. Conclusion
IV. Filing Certification Statements with DOE
    A. State Determination
    B. State Certifications to DOE
    C. State Determination Not to Revise Its Residential Building 
Code
    D. Requests for Extensions to Certify

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. ECPA, as amended, provides that when the 
1992 Model Energy Code, or any successor to that code, is revised, the 
Secretary of the Department of Energy 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). If 
the Secretary determines that the revision would improve energy 
efficiency then, not later than two years after the date of the 
publication of the affirmative determination, each State is required to 
certify that it has compared its residential building code regarding 
energy efficiency to the revised code and make 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. 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. 42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(C).

B. Background

    A previous Federal Register notice, 59 FR 36173, July 15,1994, 
announced the Secretary's determination that the 1993 MEC is an 
improvement over the 1992 MEC. 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.
    The Council of American Building Officials (CABO) has published the 
MEC since its first printing in 1983 through 1995. CABO was established 
in 1972 to provide a uniform approach and focus on certain building 
code matters for the three regional model code organizations in the 
United States. In 1994, the three regional organizations agreed to the 
formation of the International Code Council, or ICC. ICC's main task is 
to develop and maintain a single set of comprehensive and coordinated 
building codes for the United States, and potentially other nations, to 
replace regional codes.
    CABO transferred all rights and responsibilities of the MEC to the 
ICC, to better coordinate MEC requirements with the other international 
codes and to recognize the MEC's national scope. The ICC renamed the 
MEC as the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and first 
published it in 1998. The 1998 IECC contains all of the text of the 
1995 MEC, plus all revisions approved for inclusion in the MEC during 
the 1995, 1996, and 1997 code maintenance cycles. Similarly, the 2000 
IECC contains all of the text of the 1998 IECC, plus all revisions 
approved for inclusion in the 2000 IECC during the 1998 and 1999 code 
maintenance cycles. Therefore, the Department has determined that the 
1998 IECC is the successor to the 1995 MEC and the 2000 IECC is the 
successor to the 1998 IECC and both should be the subject of a 
Secretarial determination as required by ECPA, as amended. Today's 
notice provides the Secretary's determination on the 1998 IECC and the 
2000 IECC.

C. DOE's Determination Statement

    There are many differences between the 1995 MEC and the 1998 IECC 
that affect energy efficiency. Some changes directly improve energy 
efficiency. Many other changes to the 1998 IECC make the code simpler 
and easier for designers, builders, and code compliance officials to 
understand and use. Since the Department feels that buildings are more 
likely to contain all the energy efficiency features required by the 
code when the code is easy to use and interpret, these code changes 
tend to promote energy efficiency. Two changes are negative: they will 
not improve energy efficiency. Nevertheless, the beneficial changes in 
the 1998 IECC outweigh the negative impacts. Therefore, DOE has 
concluded that the 1998 IECC improves energy efficiency over the 1995 
MEC in low-rise residential buildings.
    There are also differences between the 1998 IECC and the 2000 IECC 
that affect energy efficiency. Some changes improve energy efficiency. 
Two changes have a small negative impact. Thus, DOE has concluded that 
the 2000 IECC will improve energy efficiency over the 1998 IECC.

II. Discussion of Changes in the 1998 IECC Compared with the 1995 
MEC

A. Major Changes in the 1998 IECC That Improve Energy Efficiency

1. Solar Heat Gain Coefficient for Glazed Products in Certain Climates
    Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) is a measure of the ability of a 
glazed product, such as a window, to screen out incoming solar 
radiation by virtue of the type of glass used in the window. Glass with 
a low SHGC prevents much of the incident solar radiation from entering 
the residences to elevate indoor temperatures. Solar heating of indoor 
environments is a particular problem in southern regions of the United 
States, increasing cooling loads and energy consumption.
    The 1995 MEC has no requirements for a specific SHGC for any glazed 
product. The 1998 IECC limits SHGC to a maximum of 0.4 for those 
residential buildings located in climates having fewer than 3500 annual 
Heating Degree

[[Page 1966]]

Days (HDD). Setting the maximum SHGC for glazing products to 0.4 in 
climates below 3500 HDD recognizes that low SHGC glazing is an 
effective cooling load reduction strategy in those parts of the country 
needing significant air conditioning. Bureau of Census data from 1992 
indicates that approximately 40% of all new housing starts were in the 
0-3500 HDD climate region. Therefore, this one change has the potential 
to positively impact a substantial portion of the new housing market.
2. U-Factor for Replacement Windows
    The 1998 IECC includes a new table of prescriptive criteria for 
insulation (R-values) and fenestration (U-factors) for certain 
additions and window replacements to single family residential 
buildings. The U-factors for replacement windows improve energy 
efficiency. U-factors describe heat gain and loss through windows. More 
stringent U-factors are required in colder climates to prevent heat 
loss.
    Under the 1998 IECC, when a window in an existing building is 
replaced in its entirety, including frame, seal, and glazing, the 
replacement unit must meet the U-factor requirement. The 1995 MEC does 
not address the subject of replacement windows in residential 
structures, thus allowing any window to be installed, irrespective of 
its U-factor. While the 1995 MEC does not preclude the possibility of 
installing a replacement window with good thermal performance (low U-
factor), the 1998 IECC effectively assures that a reasonably performing 
window will be installed in existing buildings.
    Because this new prescriptive criteria will reduce conductive heat 
losses from replacement windows, it will improve energy efficiency in 
existing residential buildings. The potential for energy savings from 
replacement windows is substantial. Recent residential housing surveys 
performed by DOE indicate that approximately 3.5 million American 
households replace at least some of their windows each year.

B. Minor Changes in the 1998 IECC That Improve Energy Efficiency

1. Air Infiltration for Manufactured Door and Windows
    The MEC and the IECC both require that manufactured doors and 
windows be limited in their rate of air infiltration in accordance with 
the industry's manufacturing standards. The requirement applies to the 
unit as it comes from the factory, and not to potential infiltration 
around the frame of the unit when actually installed.
    The 1998 IECC lowers allowable rates of air infiltration compared 
to the 1995 MEC. Since lower air infiltration decreases heating and 
cooling energy consumption, this change improves energy efficiency in 
residential construction.
2. Heat Traps for Water Heaters
    The 1995 MEC has no requirements for heat traps, while the 1998 
IECC does. A heat trap is a prefabricated device installed in the water 
heater inlet/outlet pipe at the time of manufacture, or an ``S''-shaped 
pipe trap fabricated during installation. It prevents cooling of hot 
water from ``thermosyphoning'' effects. Thermosyphoning occurs when a 
water heater is installed at a lower elevation (in a basement, for 
example) than the distribution piping of the residence. Water heated in 
the tank rises, due to increased buoyancy, into the distribution 
piping. The distribution piping has a large, often uninsulated surface 
area from which to radiate heat to the surrounding air and surfaces. 
Thus, the hot water cools before it is used, wasting energy. Heat traps 
help to prevent this unwanted heat loss by preventing hot water from 
rising above the horizontal level of the top of the hot water heater. 
This code change improves energy efficiency slightly.
3. Use of Compliance ``Tools''
    Over the last several years, various aids for demonstrating 
compliance with some of the MEC requirements have been developed by 
several organizations, including DOE. These compliance aids include 
workbooks, technical manuals, worksheets, forms, and computer software. 
The aids provide a standardized interpretation of the code 
requirements. Some of the tools have become the primary means for 
demonstrating compliance with the MEC because of their simplicity, ease 
of use, and standardized approach.
    The 1995 MEC is silent on the use of specific code compliance 
tools. The 1998 IECC includes the following provision:

    Compliance with specific provisions of this code shall be 
determined through the use of computer software, worksheets, 
compliance manuals, and other similar materials when they have been 
approved by the building official as meeting the intent of this 
code.

    Thus the 1998 IECC explicitly recognizes the availability and use 
of various compliance tools. ``Approved by the building official'' 
means that the official has accepted the tool(s) as being adequate for 
demonstrating compliance with the code. The Department feels that 
inclusion in the 1998 IECC of language to encourage use of compliance 
tools promotes enforcement of the code, resulting in improved energy 
efficiency in buildings.
4. Tables for Compliance by Prescriptive Specification
    The 1995 MEC has criteria for the thermal performance of the roofs, 
ceilings, walls, floors, foundations, and other construction elements 
which enclose the heated or cooled spaces of residential buildings. 
There are several methods for determining the insulation requirements 
and thermal performance of windows, doors, and skylights that will meet 
the basic performance criteria. Building designers must understand how 
to apply the compliance methods to arrive at the accurate R-values and 
U-factors. An incorrect interpretation and application of a MEC 
compliance path could result in a building that is less efficient than 
the MEC actually requires.
    The IECC provides several new tables of required R-values for 
installed insulation and U-factors for glazing assembles (windows and 
skylights). The tables are presented as a function of residential 
building type (single-family dwelling, or multi-family dwelling 
building less than four stories in height), location by heating degree 
day, and window area as a percentage of the overall wall area. A set of 
rules for interpreting and applying the tables are also included in the 
IECC. This prescriptive compliance path provides a simple and 
technically accurate solution for identifying the critical R-values and 
U-factors.
    The new tables add no new requirements and are not mandatory but 
they are a simpler option. To the extent that the other methods have a 
greater potential for misinterpretation and miscalculation, the 
availability of the prescriptive specification tables will help to 
assure that floors, ceilings, walls, and windows are properly designed 
and meet energy efficiency requirements under the code, thus promoting 
energy efficiency.
5. Insulation of Skylight Shafts
    Sometimes skylights are installed in sloped roofs and separated 
from the living space by an attic space and flat ceiling. To transfer 
the light to the living space, an enclosed shaft, either vertical or 
sloped, is built between the skylight frame and the horizontal ceiling 
surface. These shafts are often overlooked entirely when evaluating 
thermal performance of the building. Even when recognized, the question 
remains whether the shaft should be treated as a vertical (or near 
vertical) wall, which has one insulation requirement, or as

[[Page 1967]]

part of the ceiling assembly, which has a different insulation 
requirement.
    In principle, both the 1995 MEC and the 1998 IECC require that the 
surfaces of the skylight shaft be insulated, because the shaft 
separates the conditioned living space from the unconditioned space of 
the attic. The 1995 MEC, however, does not explicitly mention skylight 
shafts. The 1998 IECC specifically imposes the requirement to insulate 
those skylight shafts that are over 12 inches deep. The IECC will 
therefore help to assure that this construction feature is not 
overlooked and is adequately insulated.
6. Access Openings in Floors, Walls, and Ceilings
    In both the MEC and IECC, the floor and wall have to meet an 
overall thermal performance value. If there are several different types 
of floors in one residential building, the area-weighted average of 
each floor's thermal performance must comply with the overall 
performance required by the code.
    Houses with crawlspace foundations normally comply with the energy 
code by insulating the floor between the crawlspace and the conditioned 
area. Most building codes require an access hatch to get to the under-
floor space and the access hatch is often built into the floor. When 
computing the insulating performance of the entire floor assembly, the 
1995 MEC is silent on the subject of access openings. The 1998 IECC 
specifically states that access doors or hatches are a sub-element of 
the floor assembly when performing the computation. This will prevent 
access hatches from being omitted from the calculations. Since access 
hatches are often uninsulated, their inclusion in insulation 
calculations will require increased insulation and improve energy 
efficiency slightly.

C. Changes in the 1998 IECC That Decrease Energy Efficiency

1. Prescriptive Thermal Envelope Criteria for Certain Additions
    The 1998 IECC contains a new table of insulation R-values and 
fenestration U-factors for certain residential additions. It is an 
alternative compliance path that can be used in place of the other 
compliance methods in the code. No such table exists in the 1995 MEC. 
To qualify for the additions table in the 1998 IECC, the addition must 
be less than 500 square feet in floor area and must have a fenestration 
area no more than 40% of the gross wall and roof area of the addition. 
The new table was derived from table 502.2.4(3), ``Prescriptive 
Building Envelope Requirements Type A-1 Residential Buildings, Windows 
Averaging 15 Percent of Exterior Wall Area.'' Houses with more 
fenestration typically use more energy. For that reason, the code has 
more stringent energy efficiency requirements for houses with higher 
ratios of window area to wall area.
    Houses with larger areas of fenestration have more stringent 
standards for windows and insulation in both the 1995 MEC and the 1998 
IECC. The new compliance table allows additions with window area up to 
40% of exterior wall area to be constructed to the less energy 
efficient fenestration and insulation code requirements specified for 
buildings with window area only 15% of exterior wall area.
    Although residential construction improvements are a multi-billion-
dollar per year industry, no reliable data exists on the number of 
additions constructed and the amount of glazing installed. It is 
therefore difficult to estimate the specific impact that application of 
the IECC additions table would have on energy consumption in the United 
States. As an example of the possible impact, a 500 square foot 
addition with a window area equal to 26% of the wall area and complying 
with the additions table will experience an increase in total heating 
and cooling loads of 3-8%, depending on the geographic location, 
compared to an addition which meets the 1995 MEC. The presence of the 
``additions table'' in the 1998 IECC will likely decrease energy 
efficiency in some residential construction.
2. Revised Default U-factors for Glazed Products
    To evaluate whether installed glazed products comply with the 
overall thermal performance criteria of the MEC or the IECC, glazed 
products should be tested in accordance with procedures developed by 
the National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC). The recognition of the 
NFRC test procedures for determining U-factor of glazed products first 
appeared in the 1995 MEC although neither the MEC nor IECC mandates 
NFRC testing. NFRC testing results in assigning a reliable, accurate U-
factor to each glazed product. A high U-factor means a poorly 
performing product (high heat loss through the window or other glazed 
assembly); a low U-factor means a well-performing window (low heat 
loss).
    The 1995 MEC contains tables which provide the MEC user with 
default U-factors that could be used if the glazed product had not 
actually been tested by using the NFRC procedure. These default tables 
were revised in the 1998 IECC. Over three-quarters of the revisions are 
lower U-factors. Effectively, many glazed products are re-graded as 
better energy performers because the product has a lower U-factor under 
the 1998 IECC than it had under the 1995 MEC.
    The use of revised default U-factors could have a negative impact 
on energy efficiency. As an example, under the 1995 MEC, window Model 
ABC (unrated) could have had a default U-factor assigned and been 
included in the design of a particular residence. Under the 1998 IECC, 
assigning a lower default U-factor (efficiency ``improvement'') to this 
same window Model ABC in this same design may allow a slight decrease 
in efficiency in some other portion of the house (for example, reducing 
insulation in walls). The house would still comply with the 1998 IECC, 
but use more energy than the same house designed for the 1995 MEC.
    We cannot estimate the magnitude and frequency of the negative 
impacts of using the IECC's revised default values, but there are 
significant numbers of windows which are still not NFRC-tested. Some 
manufacturers of inefficient glazed products may opt to withhold their 
test results (high U-factors) and use the default values instead. Use 
of these default values, in place of actual NFRC testing and rating of 
glazed products, may decrease energy efficiency in residential 
construction.

D. Conclusion

    Most of the changes between the 1995 MEC and the 1998 IECC will 
improve energy efficiency in residential construction and make the code 
easier to use and interpret. Two changes will not improve energy 
efficiency but the benefits of the changes in the 1998 IECC outweigh 
the negative impacts. Therefore, the 1998 IECC improves energy 
efficiency in low-rise residential buildings.

III. Discussion of Changes in the 2000 IECC Compared with the 1998 
IECC

A. Changes in the 2000 IECC That Improve Energy Efficiency and 
Compliance With the Code

1. Protection of Above-Grade Foam Insulation
    The 2000 IECC has a new provision for protection of above-grade 
foam insulation from deterioration. Rigid foam insulation is often 
applied to the exterior, exposed surfaces of slab-on-grade foundations, 
basement walls, and, on rare occasions, crawl space foundations. As 
used in residential construction, all of these foundation types often 
extend above the ground.

[[Page 1968]]

Where the insulating foam is exposed to air it deteriorates from object 
impacts and chemical deterioration from sun, wind, and water which 
decreases its insulating ability.
    The 2000 IECC requires protection of exposed insulation. While the 
new language does not mandate a specific material or technique, it does 
stipulate that the protective material be rigid, opaque, and weather-
resistant. When applied, the protective material must cover all of the 
exposed insulation and extend at least 6 inches below the ground 
protecting it and keeping it from losing its insulating ability.
2. Solar Heat Gain Coefficient for Additions and Replacement Windows
    The 1998 IECC institutes a limitation on the solar heat gain 
coefficient (SHGC) for glazed products in warm climates, sets maximum 
allowable U-factors for replacement windows, and provides thermal 
envelope criteria for certain additions under 500 square feet. The new 
requirements for additions and replacement windows were placed in a 
different chapter of the 1998 IECC than the SHGC requirement and so did 
not absolutely clarify that the SHGC requirement applies to replacement 
windows and additions. In warm climates replacement glazing and glazing 
in additions subject to the 1998 IECC could be installed without this 
important cooling load control feature.
    The 2000 IECC has new, specific language that makes it clear that 
all replacement fenestration and fenestration in additions are subject 
to the SHGC requirement. This provision ensures energy efficiency 
improvement in residential buildings and additions in warm climates.
3. Construction Documents
    The 2000 IECC clarifies the type of information that must be 
submitted on construction documents submitted for review with a request 
for a building permit. Plans must be drawn to scale and may be 
submitted in an electronic format. The exact location, nature, and 
extent of the work to be done must be clearly shown. U-factors of 
doors, windows, and skylights; R-factors of insulation; and U-factors 
of overall envelope assemblies must be clearly shown. This expanded 
provision helps inspectors determine IECC compliance at the plan review 
stage, thereby promoting energy savings.
4. Definition of Roofs and Skylights
    The 1998 IECC and its predecessors have never explicitly stated 
whether a sloped wall is a wall or a roof, or whether a sloped window 
is a window or a skylight. This is important because walls typically 
have different insulation requirements from roofs and windows have 
different thermal requirements from skylights. The 2000 IECC revised 
the definition of ``roof assembly'' to include all roof or ceiling 
assemblies that are sloped less than 60 degrees from the horizontal. 
The revised definition also provides many more examples of residential 
construction that typically are considered a roof such as the roof of a 
bay window and sloped glazing that faces conditioned space. The 
definition also stipulates that any sloped assembly 60 degrees or 
greater from the horizontal is to be considered an exterior wall, which 
has different thermal performance requirements under the code. A 
skylight is newly defined as any glazed assembly with a slope of less 
than 60 degrees from the horizontal.
    These clarifying definitions ensure that sloped walls and roofs are 
treated consistently in building energy efficiency calculations for 
IECC compliance, ensuring that the appropriate insulation requirements 
are applied.
5. Treatment of Partially Glazed Doors
    The 1998 IECC has confusing and conflicting approaches toward 
treating partially glazed doors when evaluating compliance of wall 
assemblies. An expanded definition of glazing area in the 2000 IECC is 
more specific. If the door has a glazed area that is less than 50% of 
the overall door area then the actual glazed area must be used in 
compliance calculations. If the door has glazing amounting to more than 
50% of the door area, the entire door is considered glazed in the 
calculations.
    The new and revised definitions in the 2000 IECC help building 
designers and code officials ensure the code is properly applied.
6. Use of Prescriptive Specification Compliance Tables With Steel-
Framed and Masonry Walls
    Section II.A.2 describes the new tables for compliance by 
prescriptive specifications that were introduced into the 1998 IECC. 
The tables were developed for, and can be used only for wood-framed 
construction. Some other residential construction materials are gaining 
in popularity, such as steel framing in walls and masonry, concrete, 
and other high mass materials used in some above-grade load-bearing 
wall designs.
    To extend the utility of the prescriptive tables, the 2000 IECC 
includes several new tables that address these wall construction 
techniques. The new tables are based on requirements existing elsewhere 
in the IECC; consequently, they add no new limitations. They make it 
easier for people to use the code which improves energy efficiency.

B. Changes in the 2000 IECC that Decrease Energy Efficiency

1. Increase in U-value for Replacement Skylights
    The 2000 IECC increased the allowable U-value for replacement 
skylights from 0.35 and 0.40 (in climate zones with heating degree days 
greater than 4000) to 0.50. The IECC allows the change for the 
practical reason that typically even high preforming skylights cannot 
achieve the lower U-values. Skylights with higher U-values are less 
energy efficient because they allow heat to escape more easily. The 
effect of this modification on energy efficiency is relatively small 
because the U-value change is small. In addition, the change is 
appropriate since the more stringent requirement cannot be met. 
Overall, skylight replacements represent a small portion of building 
construction, thereby minimizing the impact of this change.
2. Simplified IECC Chapter for Some Buildings
    Notwithstanding the many improvements made to the residential code 
since 1992 to promote understanding and reduce complexity of the code, 
many designers, builders, and code officials want to improve its ease 
of use. The response to this need appears in the 2000 IECC as new 
chapter 6, ``Simplified Prescriptive Requirements for Residential 
Buildings, Type A-1 and A-2.'' As a shorter and simpler alternative to 
the main portion of the IECC, it applies only to a limited set of 
buildings and offers them fewer compliance options for insulation and 
fenestration.
    Chapter 6 is intended to be equivalent in overall energy efficiency 
for those residential types it covers. In becoming shorter, however, 
two minor energy efficiency requirements were left out. Lighting 
efficiency requirements for multi-family non-dwelling areas such as 
laundry rooms and outdoor areas, which are mandatory in section 505.2 
of the 2000 IECC, are omitted from chapter 6. The number of buildings 
and area of lighting affected, however, are very small and therefore 
the impact on energy efficiency is small as well.
    Also, the new chapter fails to include the maximum air leakage 
rates for windows that exists in section 502.1.4.1. Since most, if not 
all, windows are manufactured to easily meet the leakage

[[Page 1969]]

limits, the impact of the missing allowable leakage rates is 
negligible.

C. Conclusion

    Most of the changes between the 1998 IECC and the 2000 IECC promote 
compliance with the code and help conserve energy in low-rise 
residential buildings. Although a few changes might cause marginal 
increases in energy consumption, they do not alter DOE's determination 
that the 2000 IECC improves energy efficiency.

IV. Filing Certification Statements with DOE

A. State Determinations

    On the basis of today's DOE determinations, each State is required 
to determine the appropriateness of revising the portion of its 
residential building code regarding energy efficiency to meet or exceed 
the provisions of the ICC International Energy Conservation Code, 1998 
edition and the 2000 edition. EPCA section 304 (a)(5)(B) and (C). If a 
State completes its determination on the 2000 IECC and certifies to DOE 
that it has done so, it does not have to do a separate determination 
for the 1998 IECC.
    The determinations must be made not later than two years from the 
date of today's notice, unless an extension is provided. The State 
determination shall be: (1) Made after public notice and hearing; (2) 
in writing; (3) based upon findings and upon the evidence presented at 
the hearing; and (4) made available to the public. States have 
considerable discretion with regard to the hearing procedures they use, 
subject to providing an adequate opportunity for members of the public 
to be heard and to present relevant information. The Department 
recommends publication of any notice of public hearing in a newspaper 
of general circulation.
    The Department recognizes that some States do not have a State 
residential code or do not have a code that applies to all residential 
building new construction. If local building codes rather than a State 
code regulate residential building design and construction, the State 
must determine whether it is appropriate for each of its units of 
general purpose local government to revise the provisions of its 
residential building code regarding energy efficiency to meet or exceed 
the 1998 IECC and 2000 IECC. States may base their determinations on 
reasonable preliminary determinations by units of general purpose local 
government. Each such State must still hold an adequate public hearing 
to review the information obtained from the local governments and to 
gather any additional data and testimony for its determination.
    States should be aware that the Department considers high-rise 
(greater than three stories) multi-family residential buildings and 
hotel, motel, and other transient residential building types of any 
height as commercial buildings for energy code purposes. Residential 
buildings include one- and two-family detached and attached buildings, 
duplexes, townhouses, row houses, and low-rise multi-family buildings 
(not greater than three stories) such as condominiums and garden 
apartments.
    States should also be aware that the determinations do not apply to 
Chapters 6 and 7 of the 1998 IECC and Chapters 7 and 8 of the 2000 
IECC, which address commercial buildings as defined above. Therefore 
States must certify their evaluations of their State building codes for 
residential buildings with respect to all provisions of the IECC except 
for those chapters.

B. State Certifications to DOE

    As a consequence of today's determination by DOE, Section 
304(a)(5)(B) of ECPA, as amended, requires each State to certify to the 
Secretary of Energy that it has reviewed the provisions of its 
residential building code regarding energy efficiency and determined 
whether it is appropriate to revise the code to meet or exceed the 1998 
IECC and the 2000 IECC. A certification to the 2000 IECC obviates the 
need for a certification to the 1998 IECC.
    The certifications must be in writing and submitted within two 
years from the date of publication of this notice. If a State intends 
to certify that a residential building code already meets or exceeds 
the requirements of the 1998 IECC or 2000 IECC, it is appropriate for 
the State to explain the basis for the certification. The Department 
believes that it is appropriate for the chief executive of the State 
(the Governor) to designate a State official, such as the Director of 
the State energy office, State code commission, utility commission, or 
equivalent State agency having primary responsibility for residential 
building codes, to provide the certification to the Secretary. Such a 
designated State official could also provide the certifications 
regarding the codes of units of general purpose local government based 
on information provided by responsible local officials.
    A previous DOE determination (61 FR 64727, December 6, 1996) 
required States to file a certification statement regarding the 1995 
MEC by December 6, 1998. States that have not submitted the 
certification but have made substantial progress in reviewing the 
energy efficiency provisions of their residential building codes with 
respect to the 1995 MEC may wish to complete their review and submit 
the certification before considering the 1998 IECC and 2000 IECC.
    If a State certifies to the 1998 IECC, certification to previous 
versions, such as the 1995 MEC, is not required. Similarly, a 
certification to the 2000 IECC makes certifications to the previous 
versions of the code unnecessary.
    When submitting any certification documents in response to this 
notice, the Department requests that the original documents be 
accompanied by one copy.

C. State Determination Not To Revise Its Residential Building Code

    Section 304(a)(4) of ECPA, as amended, requires that if a State 
makes a determination that it is not appropriate to revise the energy 
efficiency provisions of its residential building code, the State must 
submit to the Secretary, in writing, the reasons for this 
determination. The statement of reasons should summarize the rationale 
for the State's conclusion. If local building codes are applicable in 
the absence of a State code, the State may rely on reasons provided by 
the units of general purpose local government. Upon receipt of the 
statement of reasons, the Department will place a copy in its Freedom 
of Information Reading Room in the Forrestal Building in Washington, 
D.C., so that members of the public may inspect it.

D. Requests for Extensions To Certify

    Section 304(c) of ECPA, as amended, requires that the Secretary 
permit an extension of the deadline for complying with the 
certification requirements described above, if a State can demonstrate 
that it has made a good faith effort to comply with such requirements 
and that it has made significant progress toward meeting its 
certification obligations. Such demonstrations could include: (1) A 
plan for response to the requirements stated in section 304; (2) a 
statement that the State has appropriated or requested funds (within 
State funding procedures) for a plan that would respond to the 
requirements of section 304; and (3) a notice of public hearing.
    If a State has not met the December 6, 1998, deadline for 
certifying to the 1995 MEC, it should do so or file a request for 
extension immediately.
    If a State intends to certify to the 1998 IECC or the 2000 IECC but 
cannot do so

[[Page 1970]]

within two years of the date of this notice, it must file a request for 
extension as soon as practicable but not later than the two year 
deadline. Such a request should include a statement regarding the 
State's intentions and estimated time frame to certify.

    Issued in Washington, D.C., on January 4, 2001.
Dan W. Reicher,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 01-742 Filed 1-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P