FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
2010 FLORIDA ENERGY CODE WORKGROUP
February
3, 2009
Crown Plaza
Melbourne; 2605 North A1A Highway, Melbourne
Florida; 800.980.6429
Meeting Objectives
ü
To Approve
Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda)
ü
To Review
Workgroup Procedures, Guidelines, and Decision-Making Requirements
ü
To Hear an
Overview of the Workgroup’s Scope, Charge, and Task Development Strategy
ü
To Discuss
Subtasks and Identify Information Development Needs
ü
To Consider
Public Comment
ü
To Identify
Needed Next Steps and Agenda Items for Next Meeting
All
Agenda Times—Including Public Comment and Adjournment—Are Subject to Change
Meeting Agenda
1:00 Welcome
and Opening
Agenda Review and Approval
Review
of Commission’s Workgroup Meeting Guidelines, Consensus-Building and
Decision-Making Process, and
Sunshine Requirements
Review of Commission’s Energy
Related Workplan Tasks and Workgroup Scope
Review of Workgroup’s Task
Development Strategy
Discussion of Project Subtasks
and Identification of Information Development Needs
General Public Comment
Review of
Workgroup Delivery and Meeting Schedule
Next Steps
Adjourn
Contact Information and Project Webpage
Jeff Blair: jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/2010-Florida-Energy-Code.html
2010
Florida Energy Code Workgroup
Steve Bassett, Rusty Carrol, Bob
Cochell, Phillip Fairey, Dale Greiner, Jeff Gross, Jeff Householder,
Larry Maxwell, Donny
Pittman, Paul Savage, Drew Smith,
Jeff Stone, and Rob Vickers.
OVERVIEW
AND PROJECT SCOPE
Governor Crist directed
the Commission to increase building energy efficiency requirements by 15% in
his July 2007 Executive Order 127. In addition, the 2008 Legislature through
passage of The Energy Act of 2008 created a suite of energy related
assignments for the Building Commission. The Energy Code provisions were a
major focus of the Commission during 2008, and the Commission increased the
thermal efficiency requirements for the Florida Energy Code by 15% and
integrated the enhanced requirements into the 2007 Florida Building Code. The
Commission reviewed energy related code amendments adopted in the 2007 Florida
Building Code Update to determine their cumulative level of increased
efficiency, and adopted additional amendments required to achieve Governor
Crist’s directive of 15% increased efficiency. During 2008 the Energy Code was
amended by administrative rule and then the revised Energy Code was adopted
into the 2007 Florida Building Code during the 2008 “glitch” cycle concurrently
with the March 1, 2009 effective date for the 2007 Florida Building Code. Working with
stakeholders using consensus-building workgroups, the Commission was able to
achieve the 15% increase in efficiency in buildings and implement code
amendments that are efficient, consistent, understandable and enforceable for
the full spectrum of Energy Code users.
The Commission’s Energy
Code Workgroup will develop recommendations regarding energy conservation
measures for increasing efficiency requirements in the 2010 FBC by 20% as
required by law.
Study Energy Conservation Measures
and Develop a Plan for 20% Increased Efficiency Requirement for 2010 FBC
Section 109, HB 7153
establishes a schedule for increases in building energy efficiency
requirements. This task expands the study of energy conservation measures for
residential buildings to investigation of efficiency options for commercial
buildings and the development of a plan to implement the requirements of the
new law. Section 553.9061 “Scheduled increases in thermal efficiency
standards.” was created to establish percent increases in efficiency to be
implemented in the 2010, 2013, 2016 and 2019 Code.
With the adoption of the
Glitch Amendments to the 2007 Edition of the Florida Building Code and the
revisions to Rule 9B-13 Thermal Efficiency Standards, the Commission
implemented a strategy for increasing the energy efficiency provisions of the
Code by 15%. The Commission’s Energy Code Workgroup and Energy TAC are working
with stakeholder to evaluate options for achieving an additional 5% increase
for the 2010 Edition of the Code, and for achieving
the progressive increases in efficiency required for subsequent editions of the
code.
Develop Rule for Energy Code Cost
Effectiveness Test
Section 109, HB 7153 directs the Commission develop a rule for
determining cost effectiveness of energy conservation measures to be considered
for inclusion in the Florida Energy Code. The rule must be completed and
applied to the update of the energy provisions of the for the 2010 Florida Building
Code.
“(3) The Florida Building Commission
shall, prior to implementing the goals established in subsection (1), adopt by
rule and implement a cost-effectiveness test for proposed increases in energy
efficiency. The cost-effectiveness test shall measure cost-effectiveness and
shall ensure that energy efficiency increases result in a positive net
financial impact.”
The
Commission will be working with stakeholders during 2009 to develop cost
effectiveness test criteria to be applied to justification for increased
residential building energy efficiency requirements. The Commission will
conclude rule making in time for the adopted rule to be effective prior to the
2010 Code adoption process.
Identify Specific Building Options to Achieve the
Energy Efficiency Improvements
The Energy Act of 2008 (HB 7135) directs the Commission to include, as
a minimum, certain
technologies for achieving enhanced building efficiency targets
established by the Act in the Florida Energy Code. The Building Code Act of
2008 (HB 697) directs the Commission to facilitate and
promote the use of certain renewable energy technologies.
The
Commission’s Energy Code Workgroup will work with stakeholders beginning in
early 2009 on a comprehensive evaluation of options for achieving energy
efficiency initiatives for the Florida Building Code including: mandated
increases in energy efficiencies for subsequent editions of the Code, criteria
for cost effectiveness test for increases in energy efficiency, studying energy
conservation measures for replacement of air conditioning equipment,
investigating humidity and moisture control problems for hot and humid
climates, and evaluating rainwater collection and reuse and waste water
recycling techniques.
Develop Design Criteria for Energy Efficient Pool Systems
The Energy act of 2008
(HB 7135) directs adoption of pool pump efficiencies in the 2010 Code. During discussions with
the Florida Spa and Pool Association regarding energy efficiency requirements
for pool pumps members suggested improved efficiency could be achieved through
criteria for pool hydronic system design. This initiative would be conducted in coordination
with the national industry and other state’s initiatives currently underway.
Investigate Humidity Control Problems for Hot and
Humid Climates
At the recommendation of the Energy TAC, the Commission convened a
Regional AC Efficiency Workgroup since the USDOE now has authority to develop
and adopt regional AC efficiency standards. The Workgroup was charged with
developing recommendations on whether the Commission and DCA should recommend
to the United States Department of Energy (USDOE) regional AC efficiency
standards for the hot and humid climate, and if determined a
regional standard is a good strategy, then to develop recommendations for the
technical requirements. The Workgroup investigated the feasibility of a
hot-and-humid climate regional efficiency rating for air-conditioner and
heat-pump systems, and recommended that the Commission should develop recommendations regarding AC equipments’
role in controlling humidity and moisture in buildings.
Following
the first meeting, the scope of the Workgroup was changed to develop
recommendations regarding AC equipments’ role in controlling humidity and
moisture in buildings in a hot and humid climate. The Workgroup is tasked with
considering a range of issues and options regarding the manufacturing, design
and installation of AC equipment in controlling moisture and preventing mold
and mildew in the hot and humid Florida climate.
In addition, air conditioning contractors raised
the concern that building energy efficiency optimization, commodity grade air
conditioning systems and mechanical systems construction practices are
combining to cause indoor humidity control problems.
Study Energy Conservation Measures for Replacement
of Air Conditioning Equipment
This task is a recommendation of the Commission’s
Energy TAC resulting from consideration of Energy Code amendment proposals
regarding replacement air-conditioning systems at the October 2008 meeting.
FLORIDA ENERGY CODE WORKGROUP PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES
PARTICIPANTS’ ROLE
ü
The Workgroup
process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an
idea does not necessarily imply support for it.
ü
Listen to
understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don’t agree.
ü
Be focused
and concise—balance participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime.
ü
Look to the
facilitator(s) to be recognized. Please raise your hand to speak.
ü
Speak one
person at a time. Please don’t interrupt each other.
ü
Focus on
issues, not personalities. Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks.
ü
To the extent
possible, offer options to address other’s concerns, as well as your own.
ü
Participate
fully in discussions, and complete meeting assignments as requested.
ü
Serve as an
accessible liaison, and represent and communicate with member’s constituent
group(s).
FACILITATORS’ ROLE (FCRC Consensus Center @ FSU)
ü
Design and
facilitate a participatory workgroup process.
ü
Assist the
Workgroup to build consensus on a package of recommendations for delivery to
the Florida Building Commission.
ü
Provide
process design and procedural recommendations to staff and the Workgroup.
ü
Assist
participants to stay focused and on task.
ü
Assure that
participants follow ground rules.
ü
Prepare and
post agenda packets, worksheets and meeting summary reports.
GUIDELINES FOR BRAINSTORMING
ü
Speak when
recognized by the Facilitator(s).
ü
Offer one
idea per person without explanation.
ü
No comments,
criticism, or discussion of other's ideas.
ü
Listen
respectively to other's ideas and opinions.
ü
Seek
understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion.
THE NAME STACKING PROCESS
ü
Determines
the speaking order.
ü
Participant
raises hand to speak. Facilitator(s) will call on participants in turn.
ü
Facilitator(s)
may interrupt the stack (change the speaking order) in order to promote
discussion on a specific issue or, to balance participation and allow those who
have not spoken on an issue an opportunity to do so before others on the list
who have already spoken on the issue.
ACCEPTABILITY RANKING SCALE
During the meetings,
members will be asked to develop and rank options, and following
discussions and
refinements, may be asked to do additional rankings of the options if requested
by members and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific refinements or
changes to address your reservations. The following scale will be utilized for
the ranking exercises:
WORKGROUP’S
CONSENSUS PROCESS
CONSENSUS
The Florida
Building Commission seeks to develop
consensus decisions on its recommendations and policy decisions. The
Commission provides a forum for stakeholders representing different interests
to participate in a consensus-building process where issues affecting the
construction industry are discussed and evaluated on their technical merits and
cost-benefits to the citizens of the State of Florida. In order to achieve the best possible decisions,
the Commission relies on its workgroups, ad hoc committees, technical advisory
committees, and program oversight committees to develop consensus
recommendations on project specific issues.
Definitions
Consensus is a process, an attitude and an outcome. Consensus processes have the potential of
producing better quality, more informed and better-supported outcomes.
As
a process, consensus is a problem
solving approach in which all members:
o
Jointly
share, clarify and distinguish their concerns;
o
Jointly
develop alternatives to address concerns; and then
o
Seek to adopt
recommendations everyone can embrace or at least live with.
In
a consensus process, members should be able to honestly say:
o I believe that other members understand my point
of view;
o I believe I understand other members’ points of
view; and
o Whether or not I prefer this decision, I support
it because it was arrived at openly and fairly and because it is the best
solution we can achieve at this time.
Consensus
as an attitude means that each
member commits to work toward agreements that meet their own and other member
needs and interests so that all can support the outcome.
Consensus
as an outcome means that agreement
on decisions is reached by all members or by a significant majority of members
after a process of active problem solving.
In a consensus outcome, the level of enthusiasm for the agreement may not
be the same among all members on any issue, but on balance all should be able
to live with the overall package.
Levels of consensus on a committee outcome can
include a mix of:
o Participants who strongly support the solution;
o Participants who can “live with” the solution; and
o Some participants who do not support the solution
but agree not to veto it.
WORKGROUP’S CONSENSUS PROCESS
The Workgroup will seek
to develop a package of consensus-based recommendations for submittal to the
Florida Building Commission. General
consensus is a participatory process whereby, on matters of substance, the
members strive for agreements which all of the members can accept, support,
live with or agree not to oppose. In instances where, after vigorously
exploring possible ways to enhance the members’ support for the final decision
on a recommendation, and the Workgroup finds that 100% acceptance or support is
not achievable, final decisions will require at least 75% favorable vote of all
members present and voting. This
super majority decision rule underscores the importance of actively developing
consensus throughout the process on substantive issues with the participation
of all members and which all can live with.
In instances where the Workgroup finds that even 75% acceptance or
support is not achievable, publication of recommendations will include
documentation of the differences and the options that were considered for which
there is more than 50% support from the Workgroup.
The Workgroup will
develop its recommendations using consensus-building techniques with the
assistance of the facilitator.
Techniques such as brainstorming, ranking and prioritizing approaches
will be utilized. Where differences
exist that prevent the Workgroup from reaching a final consensus decision (i.e.
with support of at least 75% of the members) on a recommendation, the Workgroup
will outline the differences in its documentation.
The Workgroup’s consensus
process will be conducted as an open process consistent with applicable
law. Workgroup members, staff, and
facilitator will be the only participants seated at the table. Only Workgroup
members may participate in discussions and vote on proposals and
recommendations. The facilitator, or a Workgroup member through the
facilitator, may request specific clarification from a member of the public in
order to assist the Workgroup in understanding an issue. Observers/members of the public are welcome to speak during the
public comment period provided at each meeting, and all comments submitted on
the public comment forms provided in the agenda packets will be included in the
facilitator’ summary reports.
Facilitator will work
with staff and Workgroup members to design agendas and worksheets that will be
both efficient and effective. The staff
will help the Workgroup with information and meeting logistics.
To enhance the
possibility of constructive discussions as members educate themselves on the
issues and engage in consensus-building, members agree to refrain from public
statements that may prejudge the outcome of the Workgroup’s consensus
process. In discussing the Workgroup
process with the media, members agree to be careful to present only their own
views and not the views or statements of other participants. In addition, in
order to provide balance to the Workgroup process, members agree to represent
and consult with their stakeholder interest groups.
SUNSHINE LAW GUIDELINES
(Section
286.011, Florida Statutes)
Applicability of Sunshine Law
1. Meetings
of public groups (workgroups) or commissions must be open to the public;
2. Reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and
3. Minutes of the meetings must be taken.
Ø
Equally
applicable to elected and appointed members and applies to any gathering of two
or more members of the same group (Workgroup) to discuss some matter which will
foreseeably come before that group (Workgroup) for action. Applies to advisory
groups.
Ø
Written
reports circulated among group (Workgroup) members for comments.
Ø
Telephone
conversations and computer communications including e-mails and attachments.