1. Presented by: Keith Lockhart David J. Harris Jack Foster, Jr. Springfield Utility Board Non-Residential Energy Code Compliance Program

2. History >Energy and Conservation Services has provided energy code compliance as a service to the City of Springfield since 1993 >SUB submitted a RD&D proposal to review and inspect for Non-Residential Energy Code Compliance >Packing the Torch for SUB >December 20, 2001 – proposal was accepted as a qualified RD&D Measure – eligible for C&RD creditDecember 20, 2001 – proposal was accepted as a qualified RD&D Measure – eligible for C&RD credit

3. Purposes of SUB’s Involvement In Energy Code Enforcement In Springfield, Oregon

4. Four Program Objectives >SUB’s motivation has been to achieve energy conservation through code compliance =Uniform Building Code, Chapter 13, Section 1311.2 >Evaluate Level of Code Compliance & Energy Savings =2002-2004 – 1.49 million square feet reviewed & inspected =98% compliance rate =2002-2004 – Savings beyond code exceeds 1.56 million kWh >Personal Interaction >Lost Opportunities and Energy Savings =It is a lost opportunity to allow the building of non- compliant commercial space =Captured through SUB Conservation Programs

5. Process of Energy Code Compliance

6. Plan Review Process

7. Site Inspection Process

8. Results

9. Status of Forms Submitted

10. Failed Plan Reviews

11. Failed Inspections

12. Failed Inspections for New Construction

13. Failed Inspections for Remodel

14. Summary

15. Utility Support for Energy Code Enforcement >Dedication to continue support for a Non- Residential Energy Code Compliance Program at SUB =SUB support strengthened by long term relationship with government and private entities >Non-Residential Energy Code Compliance is an “unfunded mandate” =If fire, life & safety not involved – City enforcement tenuous at best

16. SUB CAN NOT DO IT ALONE!

17. Springfield Utility Board Proposal to RTF >Recognition of Non-Residential Code Enforcement as an eligible conservation measure >RTF recommends that BPA allow utilities to claim costs associated with funding code compliance at the local level which would permit SUB to continue to perform plan review and site inspections to verify code compliance

18. Thank You!