HOUSE BILL REPORT

SB 6408

As Amended by the House

BYSenators Benitz, Bender, Newhouse, Vognild and Garrett

Revising provisions on the state energy code.

House Committe on Energy & Utilities

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment. (14)

      Signed by Representatives Nelson, Chair; Todd, Vice Chair; Armstrong, Barnes, Brooks, Gallagher, Hankins, Jacobsen, Jesernig, May, Meyers, Miller, Sutherland and S. Wilson.

House Staff:Fred Adair (786-7113)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 2, 1988

BACKGROUND:

The Washington State Energy Code prohibits local governments from enacting more efficient energy codes until January 1, 1989, unless the additional cost to the consumer is reimbursed with federal funds.  The State Energy Office is to report on the cost- effectiveness of the code in January 1988.

Although the Bonneville Power Administration has provided the required reimbursement to local jurisdictions in the past, its reimbursement program regionally beyond 1988 is not yet finally determined.

SUMMARY:

The prohibition on local adoption of more energy efficient codes without consumer reimbursement from BPA or a utility is extended for one year.  The reporting date on cost-effectiveness of the state code is delayed also for one year.  A scientific peer review panel is established to advise the director, state energy office concerning available data on the effectiveness of building energy efficiency measures.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Larry Sundquist, Building Industry Association of Washington and Seattle Master Builders; Marc Sullivan, State Building Code Council and Northwest Conservation Act Coalition.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Ted Bottiger and Tom Trulove, Washington members, Northwest Power Planning Council; Dick Casad, Commissioner, and Steve Aos, Utilities and Transportation Commission; Tom Mortimer, Washington Public Utility Districts Association; Dave Williams, Association of Washington Cities; Dick Watson, Director, State Energy Office (not opposed, but expressed concerns and provided information).

House Committee - Testimony For:    The building industry is a strong supporter of the University of Washington testing and study specified in 1985 legislation.  This work is not done, so the preemption should be extended and the state energy office report delayed.  The bill encourages continued Bonneville Power Administration financial support of model conservation standards.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      The bill sends mixed signals on legislative policy toward energy conservation.  Unqualified support for building energy efficiency measures and the model conservation standards should be legislative policy, especially in light of the shrinking electric energy surplus.  Conservation is by far the most economical way to make electric energy available to new customers.  Local governments should be free to adopt building energy codes that are higher than the state code.  New building construction that is less than optimum in efficiency represents a lost opportunity to avoid a greater than necessary energy demand.  Moreover, electric energy generating resources are increasingly difficult to get approved and built, making conservation all the more important.