Category: Codes + Standards

UL Updates UL 8802, Outline of Investigation for Germicidal Systems

The third edition of UL 8802, Outline of Investigation for Germicidal Systems, introduces a new Part IV to the Standard. This section addresses retrofit kits that facilitate replacement of the light source of a General Lighting Service luminaire with a UV LED emitter assembly. For this product type, risk of UV overexposure is mitigated by the exclusive use of UV LED sources that are classified as “risk group exempt” in accordance with criteria in IEC 62471.

The third edition of UL 8802, Outline of Investigation for Germicidal Systems, introduces a new Part IV to the Standard. This section addresses retrofit kits that facilitate replacement of the light source of a General Lighting Service (GLS) luminaire with a UV LED emitter assembly. For this product type, risk of UV overexposure is mitigated by the exclusive use of UV LED sources that are classified as “risk group exempt” in accordance with criteria in IEC 62471, Photobiological Safety of Lamps and Lamp Systems. The third edition also includes updates to other areas based on feedback from industry and field experiences.

UL issued the first edition of UL 8802 on September 1, 2020, to address UV germicidal systems that expose surfaces within an unoccupied area with UV energy where the exposure dose would otherwise pose a risk of personal injury to occupants.

The second edition appeared on March 1, 2021. It combined first-edition content with two Certification Requirement Decisions (CRDs) for UL 1598, the Standard for Luminaires, that were established to address safety requirements for other UV germicidal equipment types. The CRDs provide a framework for addressing personal injury hazards from UV overexposure; UL 1958 addresses risks other than UV overexposure, such as shock, fire and personal injury.

The requirements in UL 8802 continue to be limited to fixed equipment and systems intended for installation in nonresidential locations.

Design innovations for UV germicidal products continue to develop, requiring additional standards work by UL.

Comments Off on UL Updates UL 8802, Outline of Investigation for Germicidal Systems

DesignLights Consortium Releases Update to Technical Requirements for Horticultural Lighting

The DesignLights Consortium (DLC) recently released the final version of its updated Technical Requirements for Horticultural Lighting (Version 2.1). Scheduled to take effect September 1, the new policy establishes Qualified Products List (QPL) eligibility for three additional product types, and reflects changes made in response to stakeholder comments received this spring.

The DesignLights Consortium (DLC) recently released the final version of its updated Technical Requirements for Horticultural Lighting (Version 2.1). Scheduled to take effect September 1, the new policy establishes Qualified Products List (QPL) eligibility for three additional product types, and reflects changes made in response to stakeholder comments received this spring.

First unveiled last October and issued as a second draft in March, the DLC’s Horticultural Lighting Technical Requirements V2.1 add direct current (DC)-powered fixtures, externally supplied actively cooled horticultural fixtures, and LED replacement lamps to the DLC’s Horticultural Lighting Program.

The DLC’s Horticultural QPL currently contains more than 400 products, with more being reviewed and added regularly. An increasing number of electric utilities rely on the DLC horticultural lighting specification and QPL in the design of energy efficiency programs for commercial cultivators. At least two dozen North American utilities now require the use of QPL products as a prerequisite for EE incentives; many others have incorporated the DLC Technical Requirements into their programs while not yet requiring use of products on the QPL. Two states with cannabis-specific energy efficiency regulations offer a compliance pathway that requires use of the DLC’s Horticultural Lighting QPL. By adding QPL eligibility pathways for additional product categories, the DLC’s V2.1 Horticultural Lighting Technical Requirements offer licensed cannabis cultivators in these states more options for regulatory compliance.

The V2.1 policy defines externally supplied actively cooled horticultural luminaires as those in which liquid, often water or a water/glycol solution, flows through input and output ports of each fixture in the system, channeled through a cooling plate or other heat exchanger within the fixture. In adding these products to its Horticultural Lighting Program, the DLC provides descriptions of how to test and report on them to ensure performance comparable to products listed under previous versions of the policy. In response to comments received following release of Draft 2 in March, the DLC changed this section of the draft policy, revising requirements for reporting of data and corresponding image showing luminaire-level input power and photosynthetic photon flux (PPF) as a function of inlet fluid temperature.

V2.1 also allows QPL listing for DC-powered luminaires and describes how to test and report on them in place of the typical equivalent alternating current (AC) testing and reporting. In response to stakeholder comments, the DLC changed this section of the policy from Draft 2, with revisions to the testing and reporting range of loading points required for the test power source report.

For LED replacement lamps, the DLC responded to stakeholder input by changing the warranty requirement to three years instead of five, as had been proposed in Draft 2.

Comments Off on DesignLights Consortium Releases Update to Technical Requirements for Horticultural Lighting

PNNL Publishes Q&A Tutorial on TM-30

The consensus method ANSI/IES TM-30 has been used increasingly since its introduction in 2015, offering superior accuracy and expanded scope of included information compared to predecessor tools for assessing color rendition. A new tutorial article authored by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and published in LEUKOS consolidates a range of updated information to assist with best practices.

The consensus method ANSI/IES TM-30 has been used increasingly since its introduction in 2015, offering superior accuracy and expanded scope of included information compared to predecessor tools for assessing color rendition.

A number of specifications and standards now use TM-30, including the DesignLights Consortium Technical Requirements V5.1; ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES 189.1 Standard for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings; ANSI/IES TM-33 Standard Format for the Electronic Transfer of Luminaire Optical Data; WELL Building Standard V2; and the U.S. Department of Defense Unified Facilities Criteria for the Design of Military Medical Facilities.

Beyond this, TM-30 is commonly reported by lighting measurement equipment and the data is usually available from lighting manufacturers.

TM-30’s multifaceted approach allows for much more targeted product development and specification. Users are no longer tied to a one-metric, higher is “better” system, and can now more readily evaluate how a light source affects different colors in different ways. In turn, that information can be used to design or select a product that will achieve a specific goal, such as increasing the vividness of a scene, making colors look more natural, or addressing the color appearance of a specific object. All of this means that more tailored and optimized solutions can emerge that better balance color rendition and other performance aspects, like energy efficiency. However, making the most of TM-30 requires people who use the method to be more knowledgeable and intentional. A new tutorial article authored by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and published in LEUKOS consolidates a range of updated information to assist with best practices.

The tutorial, entitled “Background and Guidance for Using the ANSI/IES TM-30 Method for Evaluating Light Source Color Rendition,” takes the form of a series of questions with answers, including information about the development of the standard, color rendition fundamentals, TM-30 measures and their meaning, TM-30 calculation details, and application of TM-30.

The tutorial covers two new TM-30 annexes from 2019—Annex E and Annex F. Annex E provides guidance for applying the measures defined in TM-30 and documents important considerations for specifying light source color rendition. This includes recommended specification criteria that link specific color rendition attributes with intended outcomes. Annex F provides additional background and evidence to support the recommendations for specifying light source color rendition provided in Annex E. These two annexes are included with ANSI/IES TM-30-20—the latest iteration of the standard—which is freely available for download from the IES web store. TM-30-20 is a republication of TM-30-18 with the annexes included, and no other technical changes.

Download the tutorial here.

Comments Off on PNNL Publishes Q&A Tutorial on TM-30

CLTC’s Cori Jackson on Outcome-Based Energy Codes

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Cori Jackson, program director of the California Lighting Technology Center (CLTC) and president of the California Energy Alliance, on the topic of outcome-based energy codes.

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing Cori Jackson, program director of the California Lighting Technology Center (CLTC) and president of the California Energy Alliance, on the topic of outcome-based energy codes. The transcript follows.

DiLouie: What is an outcome-based commercial building energy code and how does it differ from prescriptive and performance-based codes paths?

Jackson: Outcome-based energy codes (OBC) use a building’s actual, measured/metered energy performance as the compliance metric.

DiLouie: What is driving interest in the energy efficiency policy community for outcome-based energy codes?

Jackson: Two primary drivers: 1) OBC can better ensure that energy savings are actually achieved instead of relying on estimates or models and, 2) simplicity. OBC can eliminate all of the complex and lengthy prescriptive requirements and replace this with a list of energy budgets by building type and/or application.

DiLouie: What would a typical building project look like in a perfect outcome-based energy code scenario? How would it be designed, enforced, operated, purchase power, and achieve ongoing compliance?

Jackson: Great question and we don’t know the answers to all these questions yet. In a perfect OBC scenario, the building would be designed according to owners requirements and the architects vision. There would be no limitations in terms of mandatory equipment or features that are currently required by energy codes. Enforcement is one issue that needs to be resolved. Enforcement would require conditional occupancy permits, possibly, or another mechanism that allowed the building to operate in order to capture actual energy use for use in determining compliance. Enforcement would become much simpler for code officials, as well, because they would no longer be required to verify long lists of mandatory building features. Instead, they would verify energy use information provided by the building owner, similar to required energy benchmarking data currently reported to the State of California, possibly. People interested in this topic have discussed performance bonds, for example, as a financial mechanism that could be used to set aside funds for retrofits or corrective measures should a building fail to comply with its energy budget. Again, there is a lot of details to work out among stakeholders before an OBC could be deployed broadly.

DiLouie: Various jurisdictions such as Boulder, Seattle, and the country of Sweden have experimented with outcome-based energy codes. What were the results and lessons learned?

Jackson: Each of these experiments had different outcomes. Some are still ongoing. In Seattle, for example, regulators added a measured performance option to its energy code, but because the compliance documentation requirements were still very complex and the benefits of reduced regulation in some other areas were not enough to offer a sufficient incentive, most buildings did not utilize the option. The lesson there, which is key, is that in order to make OBC enticing to building owners, the reduction in code complexity and mandatory measures must be significant. Otherwise, why subject yourself to the post-occupancy evaluation and possible compliance issues? Boulder is taking a different approach. They are requiring periodic retro commissioning, mandatory lighting upgrades, and some other measures focused on the ongoing performance of a building. I know they are also exploring how to deploy an OBC approach focused on new construction and retrofits that goes beyond the types of single measures they currently have for ensuring ongoing building performance.

DiLouie: There’s been interest in outcome-based energy codes for the past decade. What progress is being made today? Are any jurisdictions on a firm path to implementing such codes, and if so, what is the timeline?

Jackson: I would say that Boulder, CO is probably the furthest along the path to OBC based on what I know. Adopting an OBC is long process, generally. I estimate they are still at least five years away from a full deployment. The California Energy Commission was presented with an OBC option by the California Energy Alliance during its most recent code cycle but they rejected the proposal because their hands are tied by the Warren Alquist Act, which established and regulated the CEC and what it can address. Until that law is changed, the CEC will be unable to adopt an OBC even though I believe there is significant support for it by CEC leadership.

DiLouie: What markets—commercial, residential, new construction, existing construction—are most suited to outcome-based codes? Would a new construction code shift to an existing construction code after occupancy? Would all existing buildings suddenly become subject to code?

Jackson: These are great questions. Right now, OBC, at least in California, is focused on new construction of commercial buildings and major renovations. The residential market, regulating personal energy use, is not something that I think is reasonable. Overall, I think an OBC will be a compliance option when it arrives. Building owners will have the option to use this approach in exchange for a very significant reduction in mandatory energy measures related to specific building designs, equipment or devices.

DiLouie: What are barriers to adopting outcome-based codes, and how can or will they be overcome? What incentives could be built into the code, such as integration with energy providers for favorable rates?

Jackson: I think one of the biggest incentives is simply to eliminate all of the mandatory and prescriptive code altogether. Eliminating hundreds of pages of requirements and allowing building designers and owners the freedom to construct a building that actually meets their needs is huge. Other incentives that have been discussed included expedited permitting and reduced permit costs. In California, permit costs are incredibly high.

DiLouie: What would change for electrical contractors in a jurisdiction that implements an outcome-based code?

Jackson: For the electrical contractor, not too much would change. These individuals would continue to install the electrical infrastructure and devices necessary to meet the electrical code and building design. I think there will be a reduction in the confusion that comes when plans and specifications contradict the energy code requirements, which will be a welcome change.

DiLouie: What opportunities would outcome-based codes create for electrical contractors?

Jackson: I think the opportunities will grow substantially in terms of building automation and controls projects because control systems will be key for OBC-compliant buildings to achieve their energy goals. But with OBC, those systems can now be designed and specified to meet the building owners needs and not to meet some regulation that doesn’t do anything for the building owner.

DiLouie: What impact would outcome-based energy codes have on demand for lighting controls?

Jackson: The demand will increase substantially, in my opinion. Right now with many energy codes, the lighting power densities are so low, that many types of controls don’t make financial sense. However with an OBC, the lighting design teams will be free to do their jobs without such restrictive LPDs, but the building will still need to meet energy budgets or similar energy goals, and to do that, these projects will need good control systems.

DiLouie: What impact would outcome-based energy codes have on preference for technology, such as room- versus building-/campus-based systems? Would these codes drive greater interest in smart buildings/IoT?

Jackson: OBC would definately increase the demand for permantely installed EM&V technology beyond building-level metering, I think. I think the overall trend toward smart buildings and IoT is here to stay, and OBC will only drive that further into the mainstream. But as for specific controls in buildings, that will be building/application specific. Both local and centralized control systems will continue to have their benefits and be used in areas where they make sense.

DiLouie: If you could tell the entire electrical industry only one thing about outcome-based energy codes, what would it be?

Jackson: OBC will simplify the energy code compliance process and significantly increase the use of building controls and automation. OBC will give the electrical industry back the flexibility to design and construct useful structures instead of constructing buildings to meet a list of requirements that may not be useful to anyone once the building is in operation.

DiLouie: Is there anything else that you’d like to add about this topic?

Jackson: If OBC sounds like a good idea, please reach out to the California Energy Alliance. They are leading the effort to develop and deploy an OBC. Every supportive voice counts and they are also looking for early adopters willing to support a pilot at their building or in their town. Get involved if this sounds like something that will improve your business or building.

1 Comment on CLTC’s Cori Jackson on Outcome-Based Energy Codes

ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR Covers IECC 2021

My most recent contribution to ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR breaks down the major lighting changes in the 2021 version of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).

My most recent contribution to ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR breaks down the major lighting changes in the 2021 version of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC).

Regarding lighting, the 2021 version of the IECC reduces lighting power allowances, expands mandatory controls requirements and issues clarifications. The most significant changes from the 2018 IECC are tighter interior lighting power allowances and the addition of daylight-responsive control for secondary daylight zones, plug load controls and parking garage control requirements. Let’s take a look at some of the other big changes.

Click here to check it out.

Comments Off on ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR Covers IECC 2021

DOE Publishes a Request for Information Pertaining to the Backstop Requirement for General Service Lamps

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has published a Federal Register notice re-evaluating its prior determination that the Secretary of Energy was not required to implement the statutory backstop requirement for general service lamps (GSLs).

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has published a Federal Register notice re-evaluating its prior determination that the Secretary of Energy was not required to implement the statutory backstop requirement for general service lamps (GSLs).

Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended, if DOE fails to complete a rulemaking in accordance with certain statutory criteria, or if a final rule for GSLs does not produce savings that are greater than or equal to the savings from a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lumens/W, the Secretary must prohibit the sale of any GSL that does not meet a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lumens/W.

This request for information (RFI) solicits information from the public regarding the availability of lamps that would satisfy a minimum efficacy standard of 45 lumens/W, as well other information that may be relevant to a possible implementation of the statutory backstop.

• DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this RFI until June 24, 2021.
• Interested persons may submit comments identified by docket number EERE–2021–BT–STD–0005, by email (GSL2021STD0005@ee.doe.gov), Federal eRulemaking portal, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier.
• Find product information for General Service Lamps including current standards and test procedures, statutory authority, waivers, exceptions and contact information.

Comments Off on DOE Publishes a Request for Information Pertaining to the Backstop Requirement for General Service Lamps

DOE Issues Preliminary Determination of Energy Savings for Residential Buildings

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) recently announced its preliminary determination of energy savings for the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), preliminarily affirming that the updated code will increase energy efficiency in residential buildings.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) recently announced its preliminary determination of energy savings for the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), preliminarily affirming that the updated code will increase energy efficiency in residential buildings. The Department’s analysis, performed by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), indicates that buildings meeting the 2021 IECC (as compared to the previous 2018 edition) would result in national average energy savings of approximately:

• 9.38% site energy
• 8.79% source energy
• 8.66% energy cost
• 8.66% carbon emission

Upon publication of an affirmative determination, States are required to certify that they have reviewed the provisions of their residential building code regarding energy efficiency, and make a determination as to whether it is appropriate for them to revise their code to meet or exceed the updated edition of the IECC.

Comments Off on DOE Issues Preliminary Determination of Energy Savings for Residential Buildings

DOE Announces Energy Codes Conference

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program recently announced the 2021 National Energy Codes Conference will take place July 20-22, 2021. This year’s conference will be presented in a virtual forum and free to for all to attend.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program recently announced the 2021 National Energy Codes Conference will take place July 20-22, 2021. This year’s conference will be presented in a virtual forum and free to for all to attend.

This year’s featured topics will include:

• Emerging State & Local Goals: From Zero Energy to Electrification to Decarbonization
• Zero Energy: The Convergence of Energy Codes and Above-Code Programs
• Workforce Development: Opportunities for Building Codes and Compliance Programs
• The Role of Building Codes in Shaping Equity and Environmental Justice
• The Final Frontier: Energy Codes and Building Performance Standards for Existing Buildings

And more. Registration and final conference program will be announced soon.

Comments Off on DOE Announces Energy Codes Conference

DLC Develops Draft Policy for Night Lighting

The DesignLights Consortium recently introduced the first draft of Light Usage for Night Applications (LUNA), which establishes performance thresholds for specific categories of outdoor lighting in order to minimize light pollution and energy consumption, provide appropriate visibility for people, and limit negative impacts to the environment.

The DesignLights Consortium recently introduced the first draft of Light Usage for Night Applications (LUNA), which establishes performance thresholds for specific categories of outdoor lighting in order to minimize light pollution and energy consumption, provide appropriate visibility for people, and limit negative impacts to the environment.

Specific requirements address uplight, light trespass, CCT, and controllability.

To learn more and submit comments on the new policy, click here. Public comments will be accepted until May 21, 2021.

Comments Off on DLC Develops Draft Policy for Night Lighting

DOE Issues Preliminary Determination of Energy Savings for Commercial Buildings

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) recently announced its preliminary determination of energy savings for ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019, preliminarily affirming that the updated code will increase energy efficiency in commercial buildings.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) recently announced its preliminary determination of energy savings for ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019, preliminarily affirming that the updated code will increase energy efficiency in commercial buildings.

The Department’s analysis, performed by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), indicates that buildings meeting Standard 90.1-2019 (as compared to the previous 2016 edition) would result in national average energy savings of approximately:

• 4.7 percent site energy
• 4.3 percent source energy
• 4.3 percent energy cost
• 4.2 percent carbon emissions

What does this mean?

Upon publication of an affirmative determination, the 2019 edition of 90.1 is likely to become the new national energy reference standard, and as such states will be required to certify their codes meet or exceed it after a two-year period.

Click here to learn more.

Comments Off on DOE Issues Preliminary Determination of Energy Savings for Commercial Buildings

Type on the field below and hit Enter/Return to search