The report that accompanies the House-passed version of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (H.R.4923) contains language that ASHRAE and several organizations view as potentially harmful to the development, adoption, and implementation of building energy codes. Here’s the language as it appears in H.R.4923:

“Consistent with current policy, the Department [of Energy] is directed not to advocate, promote, or discourage the adoption or inclusion of a particular building energy code or code provision, other than the technical and economic analysis work required by statutory mandate, or to provide funding to private third parties or non-governmental organizations that engage in this type of advocacy.”

To balance this language, ASHRAE has been working with congressional offices and several stakeholder organizations to encourage Senators to come out in strong support for building energy codes by including the following or similar language in the final text or report of the Energy and Water Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015:

“Consensus-based, market-driven model building energy codes and standards provide energy and cost-savings to businesses, consumers, and taxpayers, and are used widely at all levels of government. The Department [of Energy] plays a significant and necessary role in the development, adoption, and implementation of model building energy codes, creating proposals based on publicly reviewed cost and technical analysis, providing technical assistance to states and localities, and convening public forums that encourage the exchange of information.”

Earlier this week, ASHRAE sent a letter with over 20 signatories to Senate Appropriators encouraging the inclusion of this language, and offering to help educate the Senators and their staff on the benefits to consumers, business, the economy, and the environment of consensus-based model building energy codes.

As noted in the previous section of the Update, a continuing resolution (CR) is likely in the near-term, which would defang the House language. Even with a CR, this letter will continue to hold value, as it is still possible for Congress to enact an energy funding bill, and language similar to that contained in the House report has already shown up in other bills, such as the Energy Savings and Building Efficiency Act (H.R.5027).