The SBCC must adopt and amend rules relating to embodied carbon emissions reduction standards.  In developing the rules, the SBCC is required to consult with appropriate state agencies, including the Department of Enterprise Services, the Department of Commerce (Commerce), the Department of Ecology, the University of Washington, and other interested parties.  The embodied carbon emissions reduction standards apply to all new construction, additions, and renovations of 50,000 square feet or larger.  The SBCC must convene an existing technical advisory group with relevant expertise to recommend modifications and limitations to the International Building Code regarding embodied carbon emissions reduction standards for residential and nonresidential buildings.

Building projects may comply with embodied carbon emissions reduction standards through one of three paths.

Path One—Existing Building Reuse.

Building projects that maintain at least 45 percent of an existing structure and envelope comply with the embodied carbon emissions reduction requirements.  A building project that complies under this pathway may not add more than 50 percent to the total area.  The SBCC is directed to adopt rules to determine how the 45 percent reuse will be calculated.

Path Two—Covered Products.

As an alternative to path one, all building projects subject to the embodied carbon emissions reduction standards must demonstrate that the embodied carbon emissions of covered products used for the project meet established reduction requirements.  The reduction is measured in terms of global warming potential for at least 90 percent of covered projects and summed up at the project level when compared to the project's summed industry average global warming potential.  The SBCC is directed to adopt rules defining how covered products are calculated.

A building's design professional of record must update quantity and embodied carbon emissions calculations based on product- and facility-specific environmental product declarations from procured products and attest that they are accurate and comply with project documents.  Calculations must be verified as accurate within the industry standard of care with a letter stamped by a design professional of record.  The SBCC is directed to create a template reporting form for consistent reporting on materials.

Path Three—Whole Building Life-Cycle Assessment.

As an alternative to paths one and two, a building project may demonstrate the embodied carbon emissions reductions using a whole building life-cycle assessment (WBLCA) as compared against a functionally equivalent reference building.  A WBLCA is an assessment covering specified life-cycle stages of a product or system to evaluate the environmental impacts of a building, including global warming potential.  The reference building must be of the same size, geographic location, function, type, and thermal performance.  The SBCC is directed to adopt rules to require compliance with a quantification standard for building life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions.  Alternatively, the SBCC may adopt rules to specify required building element metrics.

The design professional of record responsible for the embodied carbon calculations and reporting must be specified in construction documents.  The SBCC must provide a worksheet to be completed by project teams for consistent reporting.  The design professional of record must stamp an attestation that the designed building complies with WBLCA requirements.  The attestation must be submitted with the project permit and documents showing compliance.

Standard Reporting Form.

All embodied carbon emissions reductions data must be entered by the design professional of record on a standard form and public database.  Commerce is directed to establish the form and create and maintain the public database.  The database must include basic information about the project, the project area, which compliance pathway was selected, the approximate location, the primary structural system, the primary building use, and how the project met the standards for the selected pathway.  Commerce must also develop a public-facing website with educational resources to support implementation and must provide a list of software that may be used to comply with the embodied carbon emissions reduction requirements.  Each year Commerce must conduct random audits on 3 percent of projects.

State Building Code Embodied Carbon Emissions Reduction.

Construction permitted under the 2030 State Building Code must achieve a 30 percent reduction in embodied carbon emissions from a project-wide static baseline, not including building projects reusing an existing building structure or envelope under path one.  The SBCC must require product- and facility-specific environmental product declarations or whole building life-cycle assessment results and project reporting in the 2024 code cycle.  If, before the 2027 code is implemented, a product- or facility-specific environmental product declaration is not available, the applicable industry-regional environmental product declaration must be required.  The SBCC must adopt state building codes in the 2027 and 2030 code cycles that incrementally move toward achieving the 30 percent reduction in annual embodied carbon emissions.  The SBCC must report its progress beginning December 31, 2028, and every three years thereafter.  Commerce must report major findings from the database of projects and audits on the same timeline.

(In support) This bill continues the Buy Clean and Buy Fair Act's process.  Stakeholders were interested in multiple pathways to achieve the goals of that act.  Embodied carbon is the upfront carbon of materials used to build.  It also includes emission from how the building is built.  The bill offers three pathways to reduce embodied carbon.  Builders are already often evaluating embodied carbon.  The first pathway reduces embodied carbon emissions because it's reusing an existing building.  The second path reduces embodied carbon emissions through specific products.  The third is a holistic whole building life cycle assessment.  Wood has lower embodied carbon because it captures embodied carbon.  Steel can be reused.  This can be done right now.  Architects are already doing this.  The technology is available and manufacturers are already providing the required documentation.  This can be done with little to no additional cost.  The environmental and health cost to delaying this policy is too high.  This bill will drive economic activity.  Washington can be a leader.  There is an assumption that reducing embodied carbon will increase costs, which is false.  The bill calls for a 30 percent reduction in large commercial buildings with a six-year period to get there.  By 2050 over half of all emission form new buildings will be from embodied carbon.  We need a plan now to achieve Washington's emissions reductions goals.  The requirements of the bill allow for creativity and innovation in the design process.  This is feasible, appropriate, and implementable by the SBCC.

(Opposed) The concrete industry is supportive but one concern lies in the scalability of the materials themselves.  The other concern is that embodied carbon belongs outside of the State Building Code.  The cost is another concern.  There are already high standards from the State Building Code.  Existing standards already achieve the policy.

(Other) This bill lays out clear guidance.  The technical advisory group already looked at adding an appendix to the State Building Code.  The SBCC believes an existing technical advisory group can adequately address the code requirements in the bill.  There is a need for a date change from July 2026 to November 2026.

(In support) Representative Davina Duerr, prime sponsor; Mikhail Haramati, Natural Resources Defense Council; Chris Hellstern, American Institute of Architects, Washington Council; Roger Heeringa; Brandon Houskeeper, American Wood Council; Jessie Templeton; Amie Lewis, New Buildings Institute; and Jesse Walton.

The Committee on Capital Budget recommended exempting school district construction from the embodied carbon emissions reductions.  The size of the buildings needing to meet embodied carbon emissions reductions is increased from buildings that are 50,000 square feet or larger to buildings that are 100,000 square feet or larger.  The reference to an existing technical advisory group within the Department of Commerce is replaced with an existing technical advisory group in the State Building Code Council.  Multiple technical corrections are made. 

(In support) Architects and contractors already do this on every project, so this policy does not add cost to projects.  It does set out a time frame for market certainty, and for steel and concrete industries to set goals to lower embodied carbon and provide a market mechanism to reward lower carbon products.  Industries meet reductions of 15 to 30 percent for no cost today.  Washington already has low carbon density and manufacturers have lower carbon products, which are incentivized in this bill.

The bill includes a multi-pathway policy compliance approach that allows project teams flexibility in choosing the work that's best for them and the goals for their project.  This approach not only captures impacts from the manufacture of materials, but emissions associated with the transportation of materials to the site installation and maintenance and more.

The Buy Clean, Buy Fair work group is focused on identifying opportunities for barriers to the growth and use of production of low carbon materials and promoting high labor standards and manufacturing and preserving and expanding low carbon material manufacturing in Washington state.  This is a complementary policy that will build on the expertise that comes out of that work group.

The assumption that reducing embodied carbon will increase construction costs is false.  The requirements of this bill will drive a reduction of the embodied carbon and future structures, which is needed.  A sustainability-focused approach to structural design can and should result in a reduction in construction costs.  The bill is limited to large buildings, over 50,000 square feet per year, looking at past capital budgets that's three to five buildings owned by the state that are completed each year in that size range.  It does not impact the enterprise services contract or manual staff training.  The bill should cost much less to implement, and the fiscal note should reflect this.

(Opposed) The State Building Code Council needs additional guidance where these types of policies are better focused on a carbon metric that establishes goals for the whole building rather than focusing on specific materials.  School buildings are already required to meet high energy performance standards and it is unclear how this policy will interact with those requirements.  The State Building Code Council makes code related to the life and safety of the occupants of a building.  Embodied carbon does not belong in that lane.  With overregulation and policies such as this, it eliminates the ability for the industry to be creative and resourceful.  There is a concern in the scalability of some of the materials and a belief that there's more time needed to do research in the innovative lane that's happening within industry.

(Other) A single focus look at embodied carbon could lead to improper product selection, limit the availability of certain insulation materials for the use of state projects, and negatively impact the operational carbon use of the building.  This could also result in added cost to the state. 

(In support) Representative Davina Duerr, prime sponsor; Kjell Anderson; Todd Beyreuther, Mercer Mass Timber; Amie Lewis, New Buildings Institute; Roger Heeringa; Kate White Tudor, Natural Resources Defense Council; and Brandon Houskeeper, American Wood Council.