[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6316681,"mediaKeyId","2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67","parentId",2376251,"title","State building code council opens four-week comment period on 'site vs. source' energy debate, directs tags to use site energy pending decision","audioSeconds",1644,"startMs",152000,"endMs",1796000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67&start=152&end=1796","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67/thumbnail_152000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6316681/Washington/State-building-code-council-opens-four-week-comment-period-on-site-vs-source-energy-debate-directs-tags-to-use-site-energy-pending-decision","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316681-0c0c3241c35cbc1eb6aab2425c090ff0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144988&Signature=a8hq-JSoxmjXXvVe3Ca9uo7QkcAxfWvSVcdzSDHe332p5dswvK6x5XizWoQCl59JsJtHCZalQjY3F4UGQsEG39-sBhQkpSiT388KbxuLHvpDBqk65hQx7Mung4XAoO3z~C0vFoGaaZ8KCwZCGen8eGA6X5KDnLzC8Jgg9MOWwM5CRtP3vKSo4zWC6C0n4wecCOTHv~CsxdfrTYYgETiRqKqrh9BY2mVCwAeDLEum792Wi01uU51v9uzfsYMF-d1kjL9GyLllUeYJfXHW4YzqLlBl51iK2a-ED2wotOg5u3t0rP1LIKUsJ0VgqERHQtFEhZgnUg8iwB3vy3YtzVEb2A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Building Code Council","date","2025-02-22T03:18:36Z","article","The Washington State Building Code Council on Feb. 21 opened a four‑week written comment period and scheduled a March 21 public hearing on a petition that asks the council to change how the code measures energy use — commonly framed as a choice between \"site\" and \"source\" energy.

The council voted to begin the public comment window for the two options, with written testimony due before the hearing and time‑limited oral comments allowed at the March meeting. The council also directed the code tags to continue using site energy as the measurement basis until the council makes a final decision and asked the council’s attorney to advise whether using source energy would raise legal risks under the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA).

Why it matters: the choice between site and source energy affects whether the code favors electrification measures such as heat pumps or equipment that burns fuels on‑site. Proponents say source or carbon‑aware metrics better reflect greenhouse gas impacts; opponents say site metrics better align with federal EPCA limits on state appliance regulation and are easier for code administrators.

Proponent: Greg Johnson, who identified himself as affiliated with Avista and as the petition’s proponent, framed the issue for the council and urged members to research both approaches. \"I'm not going to be advocating for one choice or the other,\" Johnson said during his presentation, adding the proposal was written to be unbiased so the council could deliberate later.

Tag chair: Council member Kjell Anderson, commercial energy code tag chair, summarized the technical distinction: site energy counts energy delivered and used at a building; source energy accounts for generation and delivery losses across the grid. Anderson noted federal guidance and past legal decisions factor into the council’s options and said the topic affects both residential and commercial performance pathways.

Public comment: more than a dozen stakeholders spoke during the meeting’s public‑comment period. Supporters of a deliberative approach included Tony Uzavelli (retired state energy official), Deepa Sivarajan of Climate Solutions and Arvia Morris of the Climate Rail Alliance, who said energy efficiency and electrification are important for public health and resilience. Building industry and utility commenters urged clarity. Patrick Hanks of the Building Industry Association of Washington asked staff to confirm the special submittal window for 2021 petitions runs Feb. 10–April 7; staff confirmed the window is open for 2021 residential and commercial petitions related to the item.

Next steps: the council’s motion (as amended) opens the four‑week written comment period, prefers that written material be submitted in advance of the hearing so council members can review it, and schedules the hearing for the council’s March 21 meeting. The council asked the attorney general’s office to provide an opinion on whether adopting a source‑energy metric would place the council at legal risk under EPCA before the March hearing.

Council members and stakeholders said they expect substantial technical testimony and urged that written submissions be posted promptly so members and the public can review them before March.

Ending: The council’s action does not change the code immediately; it establishes a public process and a timeline for the broader technical and legal debate over how Washington measures building energy in upcoming code work.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","SBCC Council Meeting - February 21, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Washington State Building Code Council on Feb. 21 opened a four‑week written comment period and scheduled a March 21 public hearing on whether the state should measure building energy using \"site\" or \"source\" metrics, while directing code tags to continue using site energy until the council decides.","taxTitle","Building Code Council, Governor's Office - Boards & Commissions, Executive, Washington","taxId",24233,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6316672,"SBCC adopts short website statement on I‑2066 and directs staff to post links, explains next steps for energy code petitions",1980,6960000,8940000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67&start=6960&end=8940","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67/thumbnail_6960000.jpg","/articles/6316672/Washington/SBCC-adopts-short-website-statement-on-I2066-and-directs-staff-to-post-links-explains-next-steps-for-energy-code-petitions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316672-8ff7ec69f27e3c556c152c1cd1c7f07c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144988&Signature=B5SoBOLqVs0-doQqW2YkP7xqDLgwXz7Q6GaGT-j3Eju7UOK9-uFYV03LljKsG4~IB1wZhxeV1HjdQj0TMMkNwOQIBGKjtk3iUwlDfP7f12zsXgBAT5RYsovUMNjho-0wY2eJtsVRWcwQyHsjO2VZVoZ2qVJuPC3e3h-E0u4CwfaOUp3TkY2kuN5kUvzkIn2YKMwlVaLwj9d5TU6rFmijwGyyLlzchpwrS7BYpbPIQUfm~s0u6YMwQ-8i7VaahcvMtU1qHgCZ4Huju22ggTQgd3Kpbv2as1RNgHKi-Kv2eEE~NMfZT6rAoKYMqGV0br6nrI94WzBAeth5-NeQtwqSJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Washington State Building Code Council on Feb. 21 adopted a website statement explaining its process for responding to Initiative 2066 (I‑2066) and related statutes.

The council approved a short front‑page statement noting that I‑2066 may affect code provisions and that the council is investigating whether changes are needed to bring the 2021 energy code and related rules into compliance. The SBCC directed staff to post the statement prominently on the council website, to provide links to the motion from the Nov. 22 special council meeting and to create a central page with supporting materials and links where the public can find litigation filings, rule‑making notices and the portal for submitting petitions.

Process clarifications discussed at the meeting included the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requirements and the agency’s CR‑101 filing to signal the start of any rule‑making work. Council staff confirmed a CR‑101 notice will be filed for the 2021 energy code if the council determines rule making is needed; council members noted a prior CR‑101 filed in December referenced the 2024 codes and staff said it would correct any clerical errors so the publication reflects the council’s intent.

Public commenters and council members debated whether the SBCC website should host litigation filings. Jim Lazar urged the council to post court documents as they become public to save repeated public‑records requests; Patrick Hanks of the Building Industry Association of Washington warned that summaries and context are important so active litigation does not create public confusion about compliance obligations.

The council asked staff to add a clear timeline, links to the petition submission window (staff confirmed a special submittal window for certain 2021 petitions is open Feb. 10–Apr. 7) and to make the central page a living resource, updated as legal and procedural steps occur.

Ending: The SBCC’s action establishes a short, public statement and a central online resource that staff will populate; any substantive code changes remain subject to APA rule making and future council action.","The Washington State Building Code Council approved a concise web statement describing its approach to Initiative 2066 and directed staff to post the statement and supporting links. The council asked staff to publish where to submit petitions and to correct and file CR‑101 notices for any necessary rulemaking related to the 2021 energy code.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6316676,"SBCC tables Airway Heights request to preapprove local residential sprinkler ordinance amid technical and process concerns",3900,7200000,11100000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67&start=7200&end=11100","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2376251-367b65c0864ff72231a38a98b52bcb67/thumbnail_7200000.jpg","/articles/6316676/Washington/SBCC-tables-Airway-Heights-request-to-preapprove-local-residential-sprinkler-ordinance-amid-technical-and-process-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316676-4a3eef6cb750b7ee69c477435b1d03ad/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144988&Signature=mb6rO5Ccy1kRqfH1JfR-JzF-oYY-DsGeE4gvcNOipiidSV8Gm0FhCGOVyHSLkClM5fqAlVzJtJEnKCByQLKsM7hxxj48~I1u~eHl~zyZ50masRnTMJNzvUjlFP~C6UXBJKKh8v7I1EfNh6RAvUgcCd2HixIeSy2jIBA0o9aZevG0zEbNiAVkBzw6uD48X6f0Hm70WKdjpXWnP8jQ9s-JoIPvRbs3Gz6ibHbX1YIY3iksekQOMGE1TBvxp4PiTqBNIHYcmHriT6NhNZx-~bUyaHw12XA~G17ztheKb9kAP3wcfo7K8ssqmnEgN1xVLppEpo1IGMJyE56U4SZCMgcnwA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Washington State Building Code Council on Feb. 21 tabled a request from the City of Airway Heights to preapprove a local code amendment that would require automatic residential sprinklers in new one‑ and two‑family dwellings, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and several forms of middle housing.

Airway Heights fire marshal Michael (Mike) Mikayla presented the proposal and said the city is planning for middle‑housing options under state law and wants its city council to have the option of requiring sprinklers for new construction. \"By having sprinklers in the home, it's like having a firefighter standing by on the nozzle ready to go all the time,\" Mikayla said, describing the city’s single‑engine fire department and the risk of multiple concurrent emergency calls.

Why the council tabled the item: council members and multiple industry stakeholders raised procedural and technical questions. Building industry representatives asked that the city complete its local public‑engagement process before the SBCC grants formal approval. Technical concerns included how sprinklers would be applied to unconditioned spaces (P2904 wet systems and freeze risk), whether Appendix AWV (the standard optional sprinkler appendix) already supplies authority for some jurisdictions, and how water supply and plumbing meters would be handled.

Key public commenters included Patrick Hanks of the Building Industry Association of Washington, who said local builders and residents had not been given adequate notice, and Isaiah Payne of the Spokane Home Builders Association, who urged robust community input before state action. Micah (commenter) and staff attorney Micah (AG office) raised questions about whether the amendment would change adopted P2904 language and whether the appendix AWV would already allow jurisdictions to adopt sprinklers without separate preapproval.

Council action: a motion to table the proposal passed by roll call vote, 9 in favor and 2 opposed. The council directed the proponent and staff to take feedback from the meeting and return the item in accordance with the SBCC’s review timeline.

Technical/administrative clarifications raised at the meeting:
- Airway Heights officials said each new dwelling would be on a separate water meter and the city buys water wholesale from the City of Spokane; the city has no private domestic wells for new residential service.
- Airway Heights described roughly 11,000 residents, a single fire station and about 2,500 annual calls, mostly EMS, and said the city relies on mutual aid for heavy call periods.
- Staff and council members pointed to procedural rules in WAC 51‑04 governing local residential amendments and noted that adopted local amendments must be submitted with findings of fact and cannot become effective until SBCC approval.

Next steps: council members encouraged the city to revise the draft language to address the technical issues discussed, complete local public engagement, and resubmit for SBCC review. Because the item was tabled, no local amendment took effect.","The Washington State Building Code Council tabled a proposed local amendment from the City of Airway Heights that would require sprinklers in new one‑ and two‑family dwellings, ADUs and certain middle‑housing types. The council requested additional local public process and technical revision before acting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

State building code council opens four-week comment period on 'site vs. source' energy debate, directs tags to use site energy pending decision

SBCC adopts short website statement on I‑2066 and directs staff to post links, explains next steps for energy code petitions

SBCC tables Airway Heights request to preapprove local residential sprinkler ordinance amid technical and process concerns