Day lite control

[steve66]

Maybe I missed something in there, but who is verifying any actual performance requirements are being met? All I am seeing is that the owner, contractor or whoever is signing the paperwork is the one that is taking on any risk of not being in compliance should something come up at a later time.

Inspectors are supposed to verify. ComCheck is the software usually used to verify designs meet the energy code. I think the DOE realizes that installed systems don't always match the blueprints, and they often don't meet the code. The latest versions of ComCheck print off a "inspection check list" along with the compliance certificate. See the attached form.

The software also reports all results back to the DOE, so anytime in the future, they could go to any address and verify the installed systems match the design.

As far as responsibility goes, if a contractor installs a system that doesn't meet code, I think that could come back to bite you. And I've been told there is no statute of limitations on this stuff. If someone sells a building 20 years down the road, and the new owner finds out a contractor installed a system that didn't comply with the code, they could come back after the contractor.

Of course, some of that may be exaggerated by the State Employees who are trying to get as much federal money as possible.

 

[scrypps]

I can't speak for other states, but I have never ran into any kind of inspector that enforces any energy codes. AFAIK there are no state level codes, and if there are Federal codes that apply there just is nobody enforcing them. Doesn't mean there are not some designers designing to certain standards but no third party AHJ is ensuring final installs meet such requirements.

Depending on on the size of the project. I would always be wary of not following code that has been signed into law by just betting the inspector won't enforce it. A bathroom remodel, maybe, an office TI, I would say "no".

 

[mwm1752]

so electrical permits are not subject to the violations- How does that work!

In Kalifornia the energy code is code and subject to violations just as any other code. However most AHJ don't view it as life safety so will rarely write you with a violation. Most just look the other way. This is why the energy code is getting so cumbersome and onerous.
Us contractors are at fault for the code being more strict as compliance has been very lax in the past. ( General contractors too)

California might be different but in Colorado the electrical permit is based upon electrical installation per the NEC. The electrical inspector inspects per the NEC. Energy savings is not in the NEC. I would certainly call out an electrical inspector failing an electrical final because there were to many fixtures in a building or I didn't put in high efficacy lamping. The rule would need mandated by the AHJ in a approved ammendment by local goverment. The Building inspector is technically the inspector passing or failing the components required for the energy code.

 

[flatlander]

Depending on on the size of the project. I would always be wary of not following code that has been signed into law by just betting the inspector won't enforce it. A bathroom remodel, maybe, an office TI, I would say "no".

Maybe I missed something in there, but who is verifying any actual performance requirements are being met? All I am seeing is that the owner, contractor or whoever is signing the paperwork is the one that is taking on any risk of not being in compliance should something come up at a later time.

The only persons authorized to test and verify a non residential lighting project is a certified acceptance tester. One can apply if they are a licensed Electric contractor, electrical engineer not the AHJ.
The AHJ cannot by law grant final and occupancy without the acceptance tester sign off.

 

[Sierrasparky]

California might be different but in Colorado the electrical permit is based upon electrical installation per the NEC. The electrical inspector inspects per the NEC. Energy savings is not in the NEC. I would certainly call out an electrical inspector failing an electrical final because there were to many fixtures in a building or I didn't put in high efficacy lamping. The rule would need mandated by the AHJ in a approved amendment by local goverment. The Building inspector is technically the inspector passing or failing the components required for the energy code.

Yup , California is different and there are other states with energy codes.
California law requires enforcement of all the codes , the energy code is just one.

Agreed some AHJ look the other way on the energy code.


This is not new to CA , the first code was implemented in the 70's from what I was told.
We have been doing Bi-level switching since the 90's in commercial. Fluorescent in Kitchens and bathrooms.

Today it's all Led's

The new proposed Residential code the whole home has to have High Efficacy lighting!

 

[mwm1752]

The only persons authorized to test and verify a non residential lighting project is a certified acceptance tester. One can apply if they are a licensed Electric contractor, electrical engineer not the AHJ.
The AHJ cannot by law grant final and occupancy without the acceptance tester sign off.

A true statement of big goverment -- How is that state budget doing? Do they accept the ICC certification for the IECC? or does title 24 have its own lic?

 

[flatlander]

A true statement of big goverment -- How is that state budget doing? Do they accept the ICC certification for the IECC? or does title 24 have its own lic?

No , to be a acceptance tester you must be certified by a state approved company. There are 2 now in California. Both the certification company and the tester are subject to 3 party audits. These audits are charged to the testing provider. (The company that field tests and verify)

So if you falsify the test you will loose your ability to provide this service.

 

[kwired]

When it comes to federal regulations and rural places there is a lot of regulations that are not enforced. Some may be in the back of the mind but not actively being enforced.

Energy codes, lead paint, asbestos, a lot of OSHA rules, are all things that may be huge issues in some places and only once in a while around here do you see much special attention - especially in dwellings or small commercial settings.

If you want my opinion when it comes to energy savings, most american's need to change some of their habits. We have become very lazy and wasteful. Sure there are also ways of optimizing efficiency of what we do use, but there is a lot of lighting or other equipment that we leave running when not needed because we are just too lazy.

 

[scrypps]

A true statement of big goverment -- How is that state budget doing? Do they accept the ICC certification for the IECC? or does title 24 have its own lic?

Of course it is a statement of big government. Big government is bringing you those big transmission lines that make the lights go on after you install them. Big government has big expenses, it would rather transfer to the consumer. So instead of building new power plants with money it doesn't have so everyone can leave low efficiency lights on 24/7, big government is writing a big book telling you how much of its power you get.

 

[kwired]

Of course it is a statement of big government. Big government is bringing you those big transmission lines that make the lights go on after you install them. Big government has big expenses, it would rather transfer to the consumer. So instead of building new power plants with money it doesn't have so everyone can leave low efficiency lights on 24/7, big government is writing a big book telling you how much of its power you get.

Installing more lines isn't as much of a problem as potential environmental impact from adding more generation, whether owned by government or privately owned. Even so called green energy has some drawbacks.

 

[mwm1752]

Of course it is a statement of big government. Big government is bringing you those big transmission lines that make the lights go on after you install them. Big government has big expenses, it would rather transfer to the consumer. So instead of building new power plants with money it doesn't have so everyone can leave low efficiency lights on 24/7, big government is writing a big book telling you how much of its power you get.

Efficancy efficiency only applies to residential which does plat a part in energy consumption -- If goverment was so concerned about real energy usage maybe restrictions on casino lighting which is not regulated in any way might be addressed. IMO big goverment has many fruitless expenses that it could eliminate in order to take care of the basic needs of infrastructure. I have no problem with being more conservative with resources as many around liberally use them. Maybe those who liberally used should change because it is the right thing to do and not be forced because they have no concept of the problem.

 

[Fulthrotl]

No , to be a acceptance tester you must be certified by a state approved company. There are 2 now in California.
Both the certification company and the tester are subject to 3 party audits. These audits are charged to the testing provider.
(The company that field tests and verify)

So if you falsify the test you will loose your ability to provide this service.

essentially, you are verifying that the engineered, approved drawings are
installed as designed. no fixture or hardware substitutions. daylight harvesting
must actually work. the equipment must actually work.

and electrical engineers a lot of times don't get it right, either. sometimes they
will specify daylight controls when they actually are not required. and, if it's on
the drawing, it has to be installed, or be amended and go back thru plan check.

electrical inspectors often don't much care for it, either, as it's just one more
layer of paperwork they have to deal with, in addition to everything else. some
inspectors feel their authority has been usurped, and are not pleased with that,
either. something a lot of people in this line of work have disregarded is that
building inspectors have been rode hard and put away wet for a while now.

the crash in the building industry left a lot of inspectors with not a lot to inspect.
cities laid off inspectors, didn't replace them when they retired, etc. now, there
is a fair bit of construction going on again, and most inspectors are buried, at
least the ones i've been working with the last two years. i remember a few months
ago, when my inspector showed up, he had this glazed look in his eyes, said
two inspectors from his city had retired, nobody had replaced them, and he
had 33 tickets to process that day.

so now, in addition to that, let's put another layer on top that even PE's don't
often get right.

one thing is pretty certain. it isn't going away any time soon. and it isn't going
to get easier for PE's to design compliant installs. for those of you old enough
to remember driving when the smog laws were first implemented in 1973 in force,
some of the american cars didn't have enough power to merge on the freeways
in 1974. and the rules just got harder to comply with.

and now, we have fully compliant cars that stock produce 600+ horsepower. it
took 40 years to get there however.

as far as lighting goes in this analogy, we are in 1974. it's gonna suck for a while.

 

[Sierrasparky]

electrical inspectors often don't much care for it, either, as it's just one more
layer of paperwork they have to deal with, in addition to everything else. some
inspectors feel their authority has been usurped, and are not pleased with that,
either. something a lot of people in this line of work have disregarded is that
building inspectors have been rode hard and put away wet for a while now.

.

usurped- that be a strong word for what actually happened. :lol::rotflmao:

See actually , much of the inspectors and the like have refused to recognize the Energy code. It was not life safety so the hell with it. Inspectors who attended CALBO meetings came up with some catchy phrases to CYA. Like "it was installed and compliant when I inspected it" or " that is not the way we interpret it" or " ????

So in the California Energy commish wisdom they removed the regular building inspector from the loop. Creating specialized , certified individuals that sign forms under penalty of perjury. A level of responsibility no Building inspector is currently required. City building inspectors are immune to prosecution or firing unless there is an egregious or willful act.

SO now they complain........... sorry I cant hear you.

No offense to the CA inspectors here on this forum as I bet you are exception.

 

[Fitzdrew516]

Title 24 requirements

Title 24 requirements

I have done a good amount of work in California under the new Title 24 requirements. Some products that will really help you out are either looking into doing a nLight system (Acuity Brands) or a newer company called Digital Lumens has networked control/daylight sensors/etc. manufactured into the fixture itself. However, I will say that if I were you I would try to stray away from daylighting. I know the code requires it for daylit zones, however, the code also provides an exception to A LOT of the control requirements. If you can design your lighting system (area) so that it is equal to or under .5 watts per square foot then you are exempt from most control requirements. Btw, with LEDs .5W/Sq Ft. is not hard at all. Again, I know it's pretty cool to have a fancy lighting system, but the cost of it is absolutely insane especially when you consider not only materials cost, but installation and commissioning for networked lighting systems. Anyway - That's just my 2 cents.

- Drew

 

[mgookin]

Florida has had an energy code for decades. The local building dept enforces it. It mandates that energy calculations be provided as part of the permit submittal package for review by the plans examiners and inspection by the inspectors. It's not very complicated to comply with. I don't understand why Cali is requiring separate inspections & certifications of compliance. You have a HVAC inspector looking at HVAC, Electrical Inspectors looking at electric, building inspectors looking at insulation, window tint, etc.

 

[Sierrasparky]

Florida has had an energy code for decades. The local building dept enforces it. It mandates that energy calculations be provided as part of the permit submittal package for review by the plans examiners and inspection by the inspectors. It's not very complicated to comply with. I don't understand why Cali is requiring separate inspections & certifications of compliance. You have a HVAC inspector looking at HVAC, Electrical Inspectors looking at electric, building inspectors looking at insulation, window tint, etc.

It is simple , As the energy saving strategies got more complex there was a complete failure in the field for compliance.

Inspectors did not want to inspect and looked the other way. The AHJ claimed they did not have time or money to deal with the Energy codes.

So the state took compliance away from the AHJ, Heck the code says that a building cannot be granted occupancy if the Acceptance tester does not sign off, I bet there is not a single job that has been refused a occupancy due to this. I could be wrong.

 

[donaldelectrician]

essentially, you are verifying that the engineered, approved drawings are
installed as designed. no fixture or hardware substitutions. daylight harvesting
must actually work. the equipment must actually work.

and electrical engineers a lot of times don't get it right, either. sometimes they
will specify daylight controls when they actually are not required. and, if it's on
the drawing, it has to be installed, or be amended and go back thru plan check.

electrical inspectors often don't much care for it, either, as it's just one more
layer of paperwork they have to deal with, in addition to everything else. some
inspectors feel their authority has been usurped, and are not pleased with that,
either. something a lot of people in this line of work have disregarded is that
building inspectors have been rode hard and put away wet for a while now.

the crash in the building industry left a lot of inspectors with not a lot to inspect.
cities laid off inspectors, didn't replace them when they retired, etc. now, there
is a fair bit of construction going on again, and most inspectors are buried, at
least the ones i've been working with the last two years. i remember a few months
ago, when my inspector showed up, he had this glazed look in his eyes, said
two inspectors from his city had retired, nobody had replaced them, and he
had 33 tickets to process that day.

so now, in addition to that, let's put another layer on top that even PE's don't
often get right.

one thing is pretty certain. it isn't going away any time soon. and it isn't going
to get easier for PE's to design compliant installs. for those of you old enough
to remember driving when the smog laws were first implemented in 1973 in force,
some of the american cars didn't have enough power to merge on the freeways
in 1974. and the rules just got harder to comply with.

and now, we have fully compliant cars that stock produce 600+ horsepower. it
took 40 years to get there however.

as far as lighting goes in this analogy, we are in 1974. it's gonna suck for a while.

I think I will get ready for it !






Don

 

[kwired]

so we can meet whatever standards are in place for permanent lighting and some other things, then the user comes along and plugs in additional portable lighting or other equipment and that is not necessarily covered by such codes because he is not completely happy with what is permanently installed?

 

[Sierrasparky]

so we can meet whatever standards are in place for permanent lighting and some other things, then the user comes along and plugs in additional portable lighting or other equipment and that is not necessarily covered by such codes because he is not completely happy with what is permanently installed?

As far as I am aware portable plugged in lights are not covered. And yes that is the work around.
However in office spaces some of the receptacles need to be controlled by occupancy sensors.

 

[kwired]

As far as I am aware portable plugged in lights are not covered. And yes that is the work around.
However in office spaces some of the receptacles need to be controlled by occupancy sensors.

Even more convenient, don't need to worry about turning things off when you leave.