Author: Alliant

The International Code Council (ICC), the organization that develops, updates and publishes the most influential building and energy efficiency codes in the world, recently changed the way it considers and adopts certain construction and energy efficiency codes.  The changes were made after lobbying by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) which argues that more strenuous code requirements increase the costs of residential buildings and negatively impact the ability of many to afford to buy homes.ⁱ  One outcome of the recent ICC changes is that local and state governments will have a weaker voice in the development of code provisions, specifically as they address building safety and energy efficiency.ⁱⁱ Another is that the ICC requirements may not be as strong as they have been in the past with regard to energy efficiency, impacting climate change negatively.  Many experts argue that the risk to international economies, public entity credit ratings and increased property insurance costs, is a matter that cannot be ignored by any entity with an interest in climate change risk management. 

ICC revisions are accomplished by a process in which proposals for change are commonly submitted by building inspectors, engineers and architects, among others.  The proposals are then reviewed and considered by committees of the ICC and eventually voted on by the ICC’s total membership consisting of more than 8000 local government officials.ⁱⁱⁱ  The committees generally act as gatekeepers for code changes since if they disapprove of a proposed change, ICC rules make it very difficult for the proposal to win ultimate ICC approval by requiring a 2/3 majority vote of the membership to overturn the committee action, for example.^iv   

In October 2019, the New York Times broke a story reporting on the existence of a confidential 2002 agreement between the ICC and the NAHB that gives the NAHB the right to name 4 of the 11 voting members of the committee that considers proposed changes to the International Residential Code that governs commercial and residential construction and specifically, the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), which sets code requirements for how construction must address climate change.  Remaining members of this committee are chosen by a mix of government officials and building industry professionals.  The ICC/HAHB agreement also contained a provision that the NAHB would not promote competing building codes in return for its guaranteed seats on the key committees.^v  According to the report, the ICC originally denied the existence of the 2002 agreement, then reversed itself and admitted that such an agreement was in place and defended its propriety, though refused to make a copy of the agreement publicly available.  However, when confronted with a summary of the terms of the agreement, the ICC admitted that the major details of the agreement were as reported.^vi   

Critics of this arrangement, along with certain ICC changes to development of the IECC made earlier this year and discussed below, argue that the ICC is responding to special interests and giving home builders too much power.^vii  They argue that under the 2002 agreement, for example, to overcome a unified 4-member home builder objection to a proposed revision of the code by the committee would require approval of 6 of the remaining 7 committee members.  However, the Senior Vice-President of the ICC for technical services responded that the home builder seats on the committee are simply a way to take advantage of the industry’s expertise and that the ICC’s 8000 voting members can reverse a committee decision.^viii 

The NAHB is an outspoken lobbying group when it comes to the ICC’s code development process.^ix   In fact, in a 2015 message to members about that year’s ICC code update, the NAHB bragged that “of the 259 proposals on which the association (NAHB) took a stand, the (ICC) committees agreed 81% of the time.  And only 6% of the proposals that NAHB opposed made it through the committee hearings intact.”^x  In a subsequent 2018 publication of the NAHB to its members called “Money in Your Pocket,” it advised that its efforts in the ICC’s 2015 IECC development process had preserved lower cost options in home building with an estimated value of $1.26 billion ($1000 per housing start).  The proposals the NAHB claimed credit for defeating included a high efficiency water heating equipment requirement and a requirement to facilitate future solar energy system installations.^xi

The IECC is important for many reasons as its advocates point out the link between it and resiliency in the face of climate disasters.  According to Lauren Urbanek of the Natural Resources Defense Council, strong and resilient buildings can weather “the increasing number of climate-related storms, fires, floods, and extreme heat and cold temperatures we fear will keep coming.”  In addition, she continues, “A home with more insulation, better windows, and a tighter building envelope will stay warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer, even if there’s a power outage and no electricity for hearing or cooling.”^xii  Those who focus on the need to decrease the causes of climate change point out the effects of the ICC/NAHB agreement.  According to the U.S. Department of Energy in a comparison of the 2006, 2009 and 2012 ICC codes relative to energy efficiency standards, prior to the change in this committee’s  membership via the agreement, energy efficiency code requirements increased 32% over a 6-year period, compared to the 2006 ICC code baseline.  According to the same source, the 2015 codes (which were the first to be negotiated after the ICC/NAHB agreed upon changes in committee makeup went into effect), the increase in energy efficiency was less than 1percent over the course of the next 6 years.^xiv In analyzing the energy efficiency provisions of the 2018 ICC codes, the Energy Department said the increase in energy efficiency provisions was reduced to less than 2%.