Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Envelope topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Technical experts urge SBCC to correct apparent residential envelope U‑value error before CR103
Summary
Multiple testifiers flagged an apparent mistake in Table R442.10.2 where an above-grade wall U‑value reads 0.056 though the tag voted for 0.045; experts warned the CR102's modeling and economic analysis used 0.045 and asked for correction before the next rule filing.
Former SBCC member Kjell Anderson and several code experts told the council that Table R442.10.2 in the CR102 appears to list an incorrect above-grade wall U‑value (0.056) and that the tag and modeling used 0.045.
Anderson said the tag vote to change the U‑value to 0.045 was unanimous and that the economic and energy models were built on that number; he urged the SBCC to align the CR102 with the tag vote before publishing CR103. "All modeling was done on the code was based on the 0.045 because that was what was voted into the CR 102," he said, asking for a correction to avoid downstream modeling discrepancies.
Other technical commenters confirmed the error and warned that inconsistencies between R- and U-path tables and blank credit values in the commercial credits table (C406) risk gaming or misapplication. The council will consider written technical comments and corrections as part of the official record ahead of final action.
