Agenda Packet — Hercules City Council, January 11, 2022 (part 2 of 3)

SOLAR POWER AND HIGHER ENERGY PERFORMANCE FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION

DELETE ALL BLUE TEXT AND FOOTNOTES

Sample Amendments
Section 1: Amendments
The California Building Code, Title 24, Article 6, adopted by the [City/County of jurisdiction] codified under Chapter [municipal/county code reference (if not adopted in entirety, include local code references for each section)], is amended as specified below.

Purpose
Section 100.0(e)2 is modified by adding a new Section 100.0(e)2.F as follows:
(F) New Construction Energy Reach Code - Purpose and Intent.

In addition to all requirements of the California Energy Code applicable to new construction, the following shall apply:
i. New low-rise residential buildings that are designed to utilize mixed-fuel (natural gas or propane in addition to electricity) shall be required to either comply with the prescriptive requirements of Section 150.1(c) or meet stricter Total Energy Design Rating (EDR) margins as specified in Section 150.1(b). The performance requirements may be reduced, but not below the requirements for the Standard Design Building, if sufficient solar access is not available.
[Option] EXCEPTION to 100.0(e)2.F.i. Free-Standing Accessory Dwelling Units that are no greater than 400 square feet.
ii. Newly constructed nonresidential and high-rise residential buildings that are designed to utilize mixed-fuel (natural gas or propane in addition to electricity) shall comply with either the prescriptive requirements of Section 140.2 or meet stricter compliance margins as specified in Section 140.1. iii. All newly constructed nonresidential buildings, hotels and motels and high- rise (including mid-rise) residential buildings shall be required to install a solar PV system.
iv. EXCEPTION to 100.0(e)2.F. Hospitals.

Definitions
Section 100.1(b) is modified by adding the following definitions:

ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDING is a building that uses electricity as the source of energy for all of its space heating, water heating, cooking and clothes drying appliances and has no gas 315

2020-11-01 5
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 plumbing in the building for these end uses. An All-Electric Building may include solar thermal collectors.
[Option] CERTIFIED ENERGY ANALYST is a person registered as a Certified Energy Analyst with the California Association of Building Energy Consultants as of the date of submission of a Certificate of Compliance as required under Section 10.103. [Option] FREE-STANDING ACCSESSORY DWELLING UNIT is a detached building that is not intended for sale separate from the primary residence, on a lot that is zoned for single family or multifamily use, located on the same lot as an existing dwelling, and does not exceed 1,200 square feet of total floor area.

MID-RISE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING is a four- to seven-story building that is of residential occupancy.

MIXED-FUEL BUILDING is a building that is plumbed for the use of natural gas or propane as fuel for space heating, water heating, cooking or clothes drying appliances.

Nonresidential and High-Rise Residential Buildings
Mandatory Solar PV Requirements
Section 140.0(b) is modified as follows:
(b) The requirements of Sections 120.0 through 130.56 (mandatory measures for nonresidential, high-rise residential and hotel/motel buildings).

A new Section 130.6 is added as follows:
130.6 – SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAICS
(a) Newly constructed nonresidential buildings, hotels, motels and high-rise residential buildings other than Mid-Rise Residential Buildings, shall install a solar PV system on the entire solar zone, as specified in Section 110.10.
(b) Newly constructed Mid-Rise Residential Buildings shall install a solar PV system with at least 0.3 kWDC capacity per dwelling unit. [Option: Modify value. See cost effectiveness study]
EXCEPTION 1 to Section 130.6(b). If the projected annual energy generated by the solar PV requirement specified above is greater than or equal to the projected annual site energy consumption, the size of the solar PV system may be reduced such that the projected generation is equal to the projected site energy consumption.

EXCEPTION 2 to Section 130.6(b). Buildings with a permanently installed domestic solar water-heating system complying with Section 150.1(c)8Biii.

EXCEPTION 3 to Section 130.6(b). Solar PV is installed on all sections of the roof that have adequate solar exposure. Areas that have adequate solar exposure include roof areas with no dimension less than five feet and no less than 160 square feet on 316

2020-11-01 6
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 low-sloped roofs where the annual solar access is 70 percent or greater and on steep-sloped roofs oriented between 90 degrees and 300 degrees of true north where the annual solar access is 70 percent or greater. Solar access is the ratio of solar insolation including shade to the solar insolation without shade. Shading from obstructions located on the roof or any other part of the building shall not be included in the determination of annual solar access.1
Performance Requirements
Section 140.1 is modified as follows:

SECTION 140.1 – PERFORMANCE APPROACH: ENERGY BUDGETS
An addition or alteration to an existing building or a newly constructed All-Electric Building complies with the performance approach if the energy budget calculated for the Proposed Design Building under Subsection (b) is no greater than the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building under Subsection (a).

A newly constructed Mixed-Fuel Building complies with the performance approach if the energy budget calculated for the Proposed Design Building under Subsection (b) has a compliance margin, relative to the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building under Subsection (a), of at least 10% for office and retail buildings and 5% for all other buildings. [Verify/modify compliance margins by climate zone.]2

(a) Energy Budget for the Standard Design Building. The energy budget for the Standard Design Building is determined by applying the mandatory and prescriptive requirements to the Proposed Design Building. The energy budget is the sum of the TDV energy for space-conditioning, indoor lighting, mechanical ventilation, service water heating, and covered process loads.

(b) Energy Budget for the Proposed Design Building. The energy budget for a Proposed Design Building is determined by calculating the TDV energy for the Proposed Design Building. The energy budget is the sum of the TDV energy for space-conditioning, indoor lighting, mechanical ventilation and service water heating and covered process loads.
(c) Calculation of Energy Budget. The TDV energy for both the Standard Design Building and the Proposed Design Building shall be computed by Compliance Software

1 Language for exceptions 1 and 2 is based on solar zone exceptions in Section 110.10(b). 2 Notes:
• For offices and retail occupancies, 10% was found to be cost-effective in all climate zones. • For high-rise residential occupancies, 5% was found to be cost effective in all climate zones. • For all other occupancies, 5% was found to be cost-effective in most climate zones, except Climate Zones 11, 13, 14 and 15.
• Higher compliance margins have been found to be cost-effective in certain climate zones. To customize these values to your climate zone and policy priorities, reference the findings in Figures 41-43 of the Nonresidential New Construction Cost-Effectiveness Study and Tables 7 and 8 of the 2019 Mid-Rise New Construction Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Study. You may wish to contact the Codes and Standards team for technical assistance.
317

2020-11-01 7
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 certified for this use by the Commission. The processes for Compliance Software approval by the Commission are documented in the ACM Approval Manual.

EXCEPTION 1 to Section 140.1. For newly constructed buildings, if the Certificate of Compliance is prepared and signed by a Certified Energy Analyst and the energy budget for the Proposed Design is no greater than the Standard Design Building, the required compliance margin is reduced by 1%, but in no event shall be less than 0.

EXCEPTION 2 to Section 140.1. Hospitals and newly constructed buildings with mechanical systems but no indoor lighting may comply with a 0% compliance margin.

NOTE: Authority: Sections 25213, 25218, 25218.5, 25402 and 25402.1, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 25007, 25008, 25218.5, 25310, 25402, 25402.1, 25402.4, 25402.5, 25402.8, and 25943, Public Resources Code.

Prescriptive Requirements
The following prescriptive requirements vary by climate zone. Remove requirements that do not apply to the local climate zone and renumber subsequent paragraphs.

Section 140.2 is modified as follows:

To comply using the prescriptive approach, a building shall be designed with and shall have constructed and installed systems and components meeting the applicable requirements of Sections 140.3 through 140.9 and additionally the following measures for newly constructed Mixed-Fuel Buildings, as applicable:
(a) High-Rise Residential Buildings

1. [All except CZ 1] Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no greater than 0.22.

2. [Only CZs 11, 13, 15 and 16] Install fenestration with a U value no greater than

0.25. 3. [All except CZs 2-10] Increase the mandatory insulation required in Section 120.7(b) by adding continuous exterior insulation with a minimal value of R-4.

4. [All CZs] For all ducted central forced air heating systems and central fan integrated ventilation systems the duct distribution system shall be designed to reduce external static pressure to meet a maximum fan efficacy equal to 0.25 Watts per cfm according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.3.

5. [All except CZs 1 and 16] Hot water pipe insulation shall be verified by a HERS inspector, in accordance with the 2019 Reference Appendices Section RA3.6.3.

6. Design Variable Air Volume (VAV) box minimum airflows to be equal to the zone ventilation minimums.
318

2020-11-01 8
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0

7. Include economizers and staged fan control in air handlers with a mechanical cooling capacity ≥ 33,000 Btu/h.

8. Reduce the lighting power density (Watts/ft2) by ten percent (10%) from that required from Table 140.6-C.

9. In common areas, improve lighting without claiming any Power Adjustment Factor credits:

A. Control to daylight dimming plus off per Section 140.6(a)2.H; and B. Perform Institutional Tuning per Section 140.6(a)2.J.

(b) Hotels and Motels

1. [CZs 4 and 6-15] Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no greater than 0.22 in common spaces.
[CZs 1-3, 5 and 16] Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no less than 0.45 in both common spaces and guest rooms.

2. Design Variable Air Volume (VAV) box minimum airflows to be equal to the zone ventilation minimums.

3. Include economizers and staged fan control in air handlers with a mechanical cooling capacity ≥ 33,000 Btu/h.

4. Reduce the lighting power density (Watts/ft2) by ten percent (10%) from that required from Table 140.6-C.

5. In common areas, improve lighting without claiming any Power Adjustment Factor credits:

A. Control to daylight dimming plus off per Section 140.6(a)2.H; and B. Perform Institutional Tuning per Section 140.6(a)2.J.

6. Install one drain water heat recovery device per every three guest rooms that is field verified as specified in the Reference Appendix RA3.6.9. (c) Buildings of all other occupancies:

1. Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no greater than 0.22.

2. Limit the fenestration area on east-facing and west-facing walls to one-half of the average amount of north-facing and south-facing fenestration.

3. Design Variable Air Volume (VAV) box minimum airflows to be equal to the zone ventilation minimums where VAV systems are installed.

4. Include economizers and staged fan control in air handlers with a mechanical cooling capacity ≥ 33,000 Btu/h.
319

2020-11-01 9
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0

5. Reduce the lighting power density (Watts/ft2) by ten percent (10%) from that required from Table 140.6-C.

6. Improve lighting without claiming any Power Adjustment Factor credits A. Perform Institutional Tuning per Section 140.6(a)2.J, and* B. In office spaces, control to daylight dimming plus off per Section 140.6(a)2.H, and
C. Install Occupant Sensing Controls in Large Open Plan Offices per Section 140.6(a)2.I.

Low-Rise Residential Buildings
Performance Requirements
The first paragraph of Section 150.1(b) is modified as follows:
(b) Performance Standards. A building complies with the performance standards if the energy consumption for the Proposed Design Building is no greater than the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building using Commission-certified compliance software as specified by the Alternative Calculation Methods Approval Manual. A newly constructed Mixed-Fuel Building must additionally reach an EDR margin above the Standard Design in order to comply with performance standards.

Sections 150.1(b)1 and 2 are modified as follows:

1. Newly Constructed Buildings. The Energy Budget for newly constructed buildings is expressed in terms of the Energy Design Rating, which is based on TDV energy.

The Energy Design Rating (EDR) has two components, the Energy Efficiency Design Rating, and the Solar Electric Generation and Demand Flexibility Design Rating. The Solar Electric Generation and Demand Flexibility Design Rating shall be subtracted from the Energy Efficiency Design Rating to determine the Total Energy Design Rating. The Proposed Building shall separately comply with the Energy Efficiency Design Rating and the Total Energy Design Rating.

A. A Mixed-Fuel Building complies with the performance standards if:
i. The Energy Efficiency Design Rating of the Proposed Building is no greater than the Energy Efficiency Design Rating for the Standard Design Building; and
ii. The Total Energy Design Rating for the Proposed Building is at least X [insert value for appropriate climate zone from “Total EDR Margin” from Appendix A. For a more customized approach including different values based on fuel-type, see values in Appendix G of the New 320

2020-11-01 10
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 Construction Residential Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study and consider contacting the Codes and Standards team for technical assistance] points less than the Total Energy Design Rating for the Standard Design Building.

EXCEPTION 1 to Section 150.1(b)1.A.ii. If the Certificate of Compliance is prepared and signed by a Certified Energy Analyst and the Total Energy Design Rating of the Proposed Design is no greater than the Standard Design Building, the Total Energy Rating of the Proposed Building complies with this section if it is at least Y [X from above less 1] points less than the Total Energy Design Rating for the Standard Design Building.

[Optional] EXCEPTION 2 to Section 150.1(b)1.A.ii. A Free- Standing Accessory Dwelling Unit no greater than 400 square feet complies with the performance standards if both the Total Energy Design Rating and the Energy Efficiency Design Rating for the Proposed Building are no greater than the corresponding Energy Design Ratings for the Standard Design Building.

EXCEPTION 3 to Section 150.1(b)1.A.ii.  Buildings with limited solar access are excepted if all of the following are true:
a. The Total Energy Design Rating for the Proposed Building is no greater than the Standard Design Building; and
b. A photovoltaic (PV) system meeting the minimum qualification requirements as specified in Joint Appendix JA11 is installed on all available areas with 80 contiguous square feet or more of effective annual solar access. Effective annual solar access shall be 70 percent or greater of the output of an unshaded PV array on an annual basis, wherein shade is due to existing permanent natural or manmade barriers external to the
dwelling, including but not limited to trees, hills, and adjacent structures; and
c. The Energy Efficiency Energy Design Rating for the Proposed Building is no greater than the respective value for the Standard Design Building by the EDR margin in Table 150.1(b)1 below.

Table 150.1(b)1: Energy Efficiency EDR Margins [insert values from “Energy Efficiency EDR Margin” from Appendix A]
Building Type Energy Efficiency EDR
Margin
Single Family
Multifamily

321

2020-11-01 11
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 B. An All-Electric Building complies with the performance standards if both the Total Energy Design Rating and the Energy Efficiency Design Rating for the Proposed Building are no greater than the corresponding Energy Design Ratings for the Standard Design Building.

EXCEPTION to Section 150.1(b)1. A community shared solar electric generation system, or other renewable electric generation system, and/or community shared battery storage system, which provides dedicated power, utility energy reduction credits, or payments for energy bill reductions, to the permitted building and is approved by the Energy Commission as specified in Title 24, Part 1, Section 10-115, may offset part or all of the solar electric generation system Energy Design Rating required to comply with the Standards, as calculated according to methods established by the Commission in the Residential ACM Reference Manual.

2. Additions and Alterations to Existing Buildings. The Energy Budget for additions and alterations is expressed in terms of TDV energy. A building complies with the performance standards if the energy consumption calculated for the Proposed Design Building is no greater than the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building.

Prescriptive Requirements
The first paragraph of Section 150.1(c) is modified as follows:

(c) Prescriptive Standards/Component Package. Buildings that comply with the prescriptive standards shall be designed, constructed, and equipped to meet all of the requirements for the appropriate Climate Zone shown in TABLE 150.1-A or B as well as all of the requirements of Sections 150.1(c)15 and 16, whichever are more stringent. In TABLE 150.1-A and TABLE 150.1-B, a NA (not allowed) means that feature is not permitted in a particular Climate Zone and a NR (no requirement) means that there is no prescriptive requirement for that feature in a particular Climate Zone. Installed components shall meet the following requirements:

The following prescriptive requirements vary by climate zone. The ordinance will need to be modified to remove requirements that do not apply to the local climate zone and subsequent paragraphs will need to be renumbered. See Summary Residential Prescriptive Requirements for a summary of measures by climate zone.3

New Sections 150.1(c)15 and 16 are added as follows:

3 Based on 2019 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Low-Rise Residential New Construction. 322

2020-11-01 12
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0

15. Additional Prescriptive Requirements for Single Family Mixed-Fuel Buildings.

A. [CZ 8 only] Ducts in Conditioned Space. Ductwork shall comply with either of the three options below:
i. Ducts shall comply with 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.2, which requires that no more than 12 linear feet of duct, including the air handler and plenum, may be located outside the conditioned space. ii. Ducts shall comply with 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.3, which requires that all ductwork shall be located entirely in conditioned space. iii. Ducts shall comply with 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.3, which requires that all ductwork shall be located entirely in conditioned space and shall be confirmed to have less than or equal to 25 cfm leakage to outside when measured as specified by Section RA3.1.4.3.4.

CZ 1-6 and 9-16] Duct System Sealing and Leakage Testing. The total duct system leakage shall not exceed 2 percent of the nominal system air handler air flow.

B. [CZ 14 only] Reduced infiltration. HERS Rater field verification of reduced building envelope air leakage. Verified infiltration rate shall be no greater than three air changes per hour at 50 Pascals (3ACH50), according to the requirements in Section RA 3.8: Field Verification and Diagnostic Testing of Air Leakage of Building Enclosures and Dwelling Unit Enclosures.

C. [CZs 11, 13, 15 only] Roof and Ceiling insulation shall be installed in a ventilated attic as follows:
i. A minimum of R-30 insulation installed between the roof rafters in contact with the roof deck and an additional layer of R-38 ceiling insulation located between the attic and the conditioned space.

D. [CZs 10-15 only] Roofing Products. Low-rise residential buildings with steep- sloped roofs shall have a minimum aged solar reflectance of 0.25.

E. [CZ16 only] Installed fenestration products, including glazed doors, shall have an area weighted average U-factor no greater than 0.24 and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) no less than 0.50 and shall be determined in accordance with Sections 110.6(a)2 and 110.6(a)3.

F. [ALL EXCEPT CZs 6-9 AND 16] Slab insulation. Slab floor perimeter insulation shall be installed with an R-value equal to or greater than R10. The minimum depth of concrete-slab floor perimeter insulation shall be 16 inches or the depth of the footing of the building, whichever is less.

G. [ALL EXCEPT CZ 7] Compact Hot Water. The hot water distribution system shall be designed and installed to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6.
323

2020-11-01 13
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 H. [ALL EXCEPT CZ 7] Ducted Central Forced Air Heating Systems. Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems. The duct distribution system shall be designed to reduce external static pressure to meet a maximum fan efficacy equal to:

Gas Furnaces: 0.35 Watts per cfm
Heat Pumps: 0.45 Watts per cfm,
according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.3.

I. [All CZs] Energy Storage. A battery energy storage system with a minimum capacity equal to 5 kWh shall be installed. The system shall have automatic controls programmed to have the ability to charge anytime PV generation is greater than the building load and discharge to the electric grid, during the highest priced time of use hours of the day.

16. Additional Prescriptive Requirements for Multifamily Mixed-Fuel Buildings.

A. [ALL EXCEPT CZs 3, 5, 7] Ducts in Conditioned Space. All ductwork shall be located entirely in conditioned space with ducts tested to have less than or equal to 25 cfm leakage to outside. Ductwork shall meet the requirements of Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space (VLLDCS) in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.3.8.

B. [ALL EXCEPT CZs 1, 3, 5, 16] Roofing Products. Low-rise residential buildings with steep-sloped roofs shall have a minimum aged solar reflectance of 0.25.

C. [CZs 1, 16] Installed fenestration products, including glazed doors, shall have an area weighted average U-factor no greater than 0.24 and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) no less than 0.50 and shall be determined in accordance with Sections 110.6(a)2 and 110.6(a)3.
[CZs 11, 13-15] Installed fenestration products, including glazed doors, shall have an area weighted average U-factor no greater than 0.24 and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) no greater than 0.23 and shall be determined in accordance with Sections 110.6(a)2 and 110.6(a)3.

D. [ALL EXCEPT CZs 6-9] Slab insulation. Slab floor perimeter insulation shall be installed with an R-value equal to or greater than R10. The minimum depth of concrete-slab floor perimeter insulation shall be 16 inches or the depth of the footing of the building, whichever is less.

E. [ALL EXCEPT CZ 8] Compact Hot Water. The hot water distribution system shall be designed and installed to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6.
[CZ8] Compact Hot Water. The hot water distribution system shall be designed and installed to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact 324

2020-11-01 14
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.6.5.

F. [All CZs] Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems. Central forced air system fans used to provide outside air, shall have an air-handling unit fan efficacy less than or equal to 0.35 W/CFM. The airflow rate and fan efficacy requirements in this section shall be confirmed through field verification and diagnostic testing in accordance with all applicable procedures specified in Reference Residential Appendix RA3.3. Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems shall be certified to the Energy Commission as Intermittent Ventilation Systems as specified in Reference Residential Appendix RA3.7.4.2.

G. [All CZs] Energy Storage. A battery energy storage system with a capacity equivalent to the PV system shall be installed. The system shall have automatic controls programmed to have the ability to charge anytime PV generation is greater than the building load and discharge to the electric grid during the highest priced time of use hours of the day.

Other Sample Ordinance Sections
Section 3: Infeasibility
If an applicant for a Covered Project believes that circumstances exist that make it infeasible to meet the requirements established by the local amendments to the State Energy Code, Title 24, Article 6, the applicant may request a modification. In applying for the modification, the burden is on the Applicant to demonstrate infeasibility to the City’s Building Official.

Section 4: CEQA
This ordinance is exempt from CEQA under 15061(b)(3) on the grounds that these standards are more stringent than the State energy standards, there are no reasonably foreseeable adverse impacts and there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 5: Severability
If any word, phrase sentence part, section, subsection or other portion of this amendment or any application thereof to any person or circumstance is declared void, unconstitutional, or invalid for any reason, then such word, phrase, sentence, part, section, subsection, or other portion, or the prescribed application thereof, shall be severable, and the remaining provisions of this amendment, and all applications thereof, not having been declared void, unconstitutional or invalid, shall remain in full force and effect.  The [name of governing body] hereby declares that it would have passed this amendment and each section, subsection sentence, clause and phrase of this amendment, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsection, sentences, clauses or phrases is declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 6: Violations
325

2020-11-01 15
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 Violation of the requirements of this Chapter shall be considered an infraction of the [jurisdiction Municipal/County Code], punishable by all the sanctions prescribed in [cite local reference to infractions].

Section 7: Effective Date
Building permit applications submitted after January 1, 2020 or after the California Energy Commission approves these amendments, whichever is later, shall be required to comply with the requirements set forth herein.

326

2020-11-01 16
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0

Appendix A: Low-Rise Residential Performance Values

Insert the appropriate value from the Total EDR Margin column into Section 150.1(b)1.A.ii and the appropriate values from the Energy Efficiency EDR Margin columns into Table 150.1.

Table A.1 – EDR Values for Low-Rise Residential Performance Requirements The EDR Margins below are calibrated from the Residential New Construction Cost Effectiveness Study results. The values were set as high as they could be while still being achievable for the four residential prototypes studied (mixed-fuel and all-electric, single family and multifamily) in that climate zone. In other words, the study found at least one cost- effective package (on a TDV basis) for each of the four combinations that produces an equivalent or greater Total EDR Margin.

Climate
Zone
Total EDR
Margin
Single Family
Energy Efficiency
EDR Margin
Multifamily
Energy Efficiency
EDR Margin
1 10 5 3
2 10 3 1
3 10 2 0
4 10 2 1
5 9 2 0
6 9 2 1
7 9 0 0
8 8 1 1
9 8 2 1
10 9 3 1
11 9 4 2
12 9 3 1
13 9 4 3
14 9 5 3
15 6 4 4
16 9 5 2

327

2020-11-01 17
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 Appendix B: Sample Findings
Findings may be included as Whereas clauses, as express findings in the ordinance, as referenced attachments or as part of a separate resolution, depending upon local practice.

WHEREAS, Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)(2) allows more stringent local amendments to the energy conservation provisions in the California Energy Code; and WHEREAS, the California Codes and Standards Reach Code Program, has determined specific modifications to the 2019 State Energy Code for each climate zone that have been found to be cost-effective; and
WHEREAS, that such modifications will result in designs that consume less energy than they would under the 2019 State Energy Code; and
WHEREAS, the Council expressly declares that the proposed amendments to the Energy Code are reasonably necessary because of local [include any or all that apply: climatic, topological, and geological] conditions; and
WHEREAS, rupture of natural gas and propane lines as a result of a seismic event poses a risk of fire or explosion; and
WHEREAS, prolonged disruption of natural gas service as a result of a seismic event presents a safety risk to the community; and
WHEREAS, combustion of natural gas in buildings poses an indoor air quality risk; and, WHEREAS, failure to address and significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could result in rises in sea level that could put at risk [Jurisdiction] homes and businesses, public facilities, and [cite any particular infrastructure at risk]; and WHEREAS, due to changes in rainfall patterns expected with climate change, the [City/County of jurisdiction] is likely to be subject to more severe weather events, including droughts as well as more intense storms that increase the risks of wildfire, erosion, overland local flooding and landslides; and
WHEREAS, it is expected that climate change will result in more severe and frequent extreme heat events, intensifying local heat islands and putting vulnerable populations at health risk; and
WHEREAS, the [City/County of jurisdiction] is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the United States’ original commitment to the Paris Climate Accord; and WHEREAS, the State of California enacted Senate Bill (SB) 32 to require greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030; and WHEREAS, the [City/County of jurisdiction] Climate Action Plan recommends [cite plan elements that relate to the proposed ordinance]; and
WHEREAS, highly efficient buildings enhance the public health, welfare and resiliency of the [City/County of jurisdiction]; and
328

2020-11-01 18
NEW CONSTRUCTION MODEL REACH CODE , ELECTRIC- PREFERRED VERSION 3.0 WHEREAS, it is reasonably necessary to require buildings to produce renewable, low-carbon electricity and to reduce energy consumption through efficient design in order to reduce the effects of climate change, reduce regional pollution and improve resilience to climate change; and
WHEREAS, the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations was adopted by the [City/County of jurisdiction] with local amendments on [date] under Ordinance [number] and codified under [cite reference to local code]; and WHEREAS, the requirements specified in this Ordinance were [cite any public process, commission or subcommittee review/approvals].

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the [City/County of jurisdiction] does ordain as follows:

329
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily Requirement
High-rise Multifamily
Requirement
Nonresidential
Requirement
Cost-effectiveness
Study Municipal Code Link Ordinance
Alameda PV 6/ 1/2021 8/11/2021 N/A
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
d
efined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
d
efined in Sec. 110.10
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 140.0 Ord. No.

EE 12/21/2020 5/ 12/2021
New: SF mixed-fuel ≥ 10 EDR
margin / SF all-electric ≥ 4.7
efficiency EDR margin / MF
mixed fuel ≥ 10.3 EDR margin /
MF all-electric ≥ 0 EDR
Add/Alts: prescriptive
measures
New: MF mixed fuel ≥ 10.3
EDR margin / MF all-electric ≥
0 EDR
Add/Alts: prescriptive
measures
New: mixed fuel office ≥ 20%
compliance margin / all-
electric office ≥ 10%
compliance margin / mixed
fuel retail ≥ 16% compliance
margin / all-electric retail ≥
16% compliance margin
Add/Alts: prescriptive
measures
PV 12/21/2020 5/ 12/2021 N/A
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
EE 12/3/2019 2/ 20/2020
New: All-electric OR
Mixed Fuel, Total EDR margin >
10 AND electric-ready
New HRR/Hotel: All-electric
OR Mixed-Fuel and >10%
compliance margin
New: All-electric OR
Mixed-Fuel: 10% compliance
margin AND electric-ready
Exception: Labs, industrial,
manufacturing occupancies

19.36.040
PV 12/3/2019 2/ 20/2020 N/A
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10

19.36.100.3
Brisbane PV 12/ 12/2019 2/20/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for
> 10,000 sq. ft OR
Solar thermal
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for
> 10,000 sq. ft OR
Solar thermal
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 15.81.050 Ord. No. 643
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Energy Ordinances
Berkeley Ord. No 7,678-N.S.2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC
Albany 2019 L R Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 12-6.1.b.4 (p) Resolution No.
2020-127
2021-10-01
1 330
Jurisdiction Ord.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 110.0 Ordinances 1979 ,
1980, 1981
EE 3/12/2019 8/ 14/2019
New: HPWH OR solar thermal
Adds/Alts: > $60k: Presc.
measures
New: HPWH OR increased
solar fraction
New: Electric water heating
OR solar thermal > 0.4 SF
Carlsbad Energy
Conservation
Ordinance CE Study

18.30.190 Ord. No. CS-348
PV 3/12/2019 8/ 14/2019 N/A New/Alt: 15 kW per 10,000
s.f.; min 5kW for < 10,000 s.f.

New/Alt: PV that offsets 80%;
15 kW per 10,000 s.f.; min
5kW for < 10,000 s.f.
2016 NR New
Construction 18.30.130 Ord. No. CS-347
Chula Vista EE 12/ 1/2020 1/25/2021
Add/Alts:
performance/precsriptive
efficiency reqs. for pre-2006
buildings (CZ specific)
N/A N/A 2019 Existing LR Chapter 15.26.040 Ord. No. 2020- 3495
Daly City PV 5/ 10/2021 7/15/2021 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 15.60.030 Ord. No. 1448
Davis EE 10/ 8/2019 1/22/2020
New SF: All-electric OR Mixed
Fuel, EDR margin of 9.5; New
LR MF: Mixed fuel, EDR margin
of 10; electric-ready
N/A N/A 2019 LR Res New
Construction 8.01.092 Ord. No. 2565
East Palo Alto PV 10/ 20/2020 12/9/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Ord. No. 07-2020
Emeryville PV 9/ 13/2021 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New Hotel/Motel: PV system
to fill solar zone (>15% of roof
area) as defined in Sec. 110.11
2020 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 8-10.03 Ord. No. 21-006
Carlsbad
2021-10-01
2 331
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily Requirement
High-rise Multifamily
Requirement
Nonresidential
Requirement
Cost-effectiveness
Study Municipal Code Link Ordinance
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Energy Ordinances
PV First Reading
9/22/2022 N/A
New: PV of 5 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 15 kWdc
per 10,000 sq. ft. for > 10,000
sq. ft. OR TDV valuation
method (includes additions
that increase roof by 1,000 sq.
ft and alterations with permit
value over $1,000,000 that
affects 75% of floor area
New: PV of 5 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 15 kWdc
per 10,000 sq. ft. for > 10,000
sq. ft. OR TDV valuation
method (includes additions
that increase roof by 1,000 sq.
ft and alterations with permit
value over $1,000,000 that
affects 75% of floor area
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 120.10 Ord. 2021-13
EE First Reading
9/22/2023
Additions/Alterations of pre-
1978 buildings >$50k: duct
sealing OR cool roof
Additions/Alterations of post-
1978 buildings >$50k: LED
lighting package OR insulated
hot water pipes OR upgraded
water fixtures;
Exception for buildings that
score >7 on DOE Home Energy
Score
Additions/Alterations of pre-
1978 >$50k: R-38 attic
insulation
Additions/Alterations of 1978-
1990 buildings >$50k: duct
sealing OR cool roof
Additions/Alterations of 1991-
present buildings: LED lighting
package OR water heating
package;
Exception for buildings that
score >7 on DOE Home
Energy Score
Additions/Alterations of 1,000
sq. ft. >$200k: Inclusion of
outdoor lighting- one
prescriptive measure / Steel
Framing- prescriptive
measure
2019 Existing LR Section 23.12.080 Ord. 2021-13
EE 3/17/2020 6/ 10/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: All-electric OR 10%
compliance margin
New: All-electric OR 10%
compliance margin (15% for
Office/Retail)
PV 3/17/2020 6/ 10/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
Los Angeles
County EE 11/26/2019 4/ 8/2020
New and Re-roof: Low-slope
Aged Refl. > 0.65, TE > 0.85,
SRI > 78
Steep-slope: Aged Refl. > 0.25,
TE > 0.85, SRI > 20
New and Re-roof: Low-slope
Aged Refl. > 0.65, TE > 0.75,
SRI > 78
Steep-slope: Aged Refl. > 0.25,
TE > 0.75, SRI > 20
New and Re-roof: Low-slope
Aged Refl. > 0.68, TE > 0.85,
SRI > 82
Steep-slope: Aged Refl. > 0.28,
TE > 0.85, SRI > 27
2016 Cool Roofs Title 31 Ord No. 2019-0061
Hayward 2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Ord. No. 20-059-1.02
Encinitas
2021-10-01
3 332
Jurisdiction Ord.

Eff. EDR Margin of 2 for SF and
1 for MF
Mixed-Fuel: Total EDR Margin
of 10 for SF and 11 for MF;
AND electric-ready
New HR MF/ Hotel: All-
electric OR

> 6% compliance
magin AND electric-ready
New: All-electric OR Office &
Retail: >14% compliance
margin; Industrial/
Manufacturing + 0%; All other
NR occupancies > 6%
compliance margin; AND
electric-ready
PV 12/3/2019 2/ 20/2020 N/A N/A
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Ord. No. 65 1482019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NCMilpitas Title 2, Chapter 11, Section 2
2021-10-01
4 333
Jurisdiction Ord.

New: PV of 3 kW min. for
< 10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 8.6.08 Ord. No. 852-CS
EE 12/2/2019 2/ 20/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: All-electric OR > 5%
compiance margin AND
electric-ready
New: All-electric OR Office &
Retail: >12% compliance
margin; Industrial/
Manufacturing + 0%; All other
NR occupancies > 5%
compliance margin; AND
electric-ready
PV 12/2/2019 2/ 20/2020 N/A
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
EE 2/1/2021 5/ 12/2021 Add/Alts: > $25k Prescriptive
EE reqs. N/A N/A
2019 Cost
Effectiveness Study for
Existing LR Residential
Building Upgrades
Section 8.02.020
PV 2/1/2021 5/ 12/2021 Add/Alts: Additional level or
roof area increased by >30% N/A N/A
2019 Cost-
Effectiveness Study:

Lo
w-Rise Residential
Addendum
Section 8.02.070
Re
dwood City PV 9/ 21/2020 12/9/2020 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
(some exceptions)
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
(some exceptions)
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 9.255 Ord. No.
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Ord. No. 5485
Piedmont Ord. No. 750NS
Palo Alto 16.17.040 et. seq.
2021-10-01
5 334
Jurisdiction Ord.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Chapter 6.02.100 Ord No. 06-20 NS
San Anselmo EE 4/ 14/2020 9/9/2020
New: All-electric OR
Limited Mixed-Fuel prewire for
induction, EE EDR Margin > 3
OR
Mixed-Fuel, pre-wire for
induction, EE EDR Margin > 3
and Total EDR Margin > 10
New: All-electric OR
Limited Mixed-Fuel: 5%
compliance margin, prewired
for induction OR
Mixed-Fuel: 10% compliance
margin, pre-wired for
induction
New: All-electric OR
Limited Mixed-Fuel: 5%
compliance margin, prewired
for induction OR Mixed-Fuel:
10% compliance margin, pre-
wired for induction
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 9-19.040 Ord. No. 1145
San Carlos PV 1/ 25/2021 5/12/2021 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New: PV of 2 W/sq. ft for
buildings < 10 habitable
stories
New: PV of 2 W/sq. ft for
buildings < 3 habitable stories
, healthcare facilities excepted
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 9.255 Ord. No. 1570
San Francisco EE 1/ 7/2020 4/8/2020 New: All-electric OR Mixed Fuel- Total EDR Score < 14
New HRR/Hotel: All-electric
OR Mixed-Fuel and >10%
compliance margin
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC
Section 4.201.3
Section 5.201.3 Ord. No 003-20
San Jose EE 10/ 1/2019 12/11/2019 N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New HR MF/ Hotel: All-
electric OR > 6% compliance
margin and electric-ready
New: All-electric OR Office &
Retail: >14% compliance
margin; Industrial/
Manufacturing + 0%; All other
NR occupancies > 6%
compliance margin; and
electric-ready
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 24.12.100 Ord. No. 30311
2021-10-01
6 335
Jurisdiction Ord.

9.5 AND electric-ready
New: All-electric OR
Hotel/HRR > 9% compliance
margin; AND electric-ready
New: All-electric OR
Office/Retail 15% compliance
margin, Others 5%
compliance margin AND
electric ready
Chapter 15.50 Ord. No. 1684
PV 7/7/2020 8/ 11/2020 N/A
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
New: PV system to fill solar
zone (>15% of roof area) as
defined in Sec. 110.10
Chapter 15.04.110 Ord. No. 1684
EE
(see All-electric sheet)
New SF and Duplexes: All-
electric OR
min Eff. EDR reduction of 2.5
N/A
(see All-electric sheet)
New Office Buildings: All-
electric OR Mixed-Fuel + 10%
compliance margin
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 23.23.040 Ord. No. 2019-9
PV Prewire PV system for
expansion to all-electric design
New: PV: ≥ 3 kW. Alternative:

Solar thermal ≥ 40 sq ft
collector area
New: <10,000 s.f.: min. 3 kW
PV; 10,000+ s.f.: 5 kW PV
Alternative: Solar thermal ≥
40 s.f. collector area
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 23.24.030 Ord. No. 2019-9
EE 10/5/2020 12/ 9/2020
(see All-electric sheet)
New 100% Affordable LR MF:

All-electric OR
at least .5 EDR less than
Standard Design OR
Prescriptive measures
New 100% Affordable HR MF:

All-electric OR
>5% compliance margin OR
Prescriptive measures
(see All-electric sheet) 2020 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 23.24.020 Ord. No. 2020-17
San Rafael EE 11/ 18/2019 4/8/2020
New: CALGreen Tier 1: Mixed
fuel, EDR ≥ 10, All-elec EDR ≥
14 New: CALGreen Tier 1 (5%
compliance margin)
New: CALGreen Tier 1 (10%
compliance margin)
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Chapter 12.100 Ord. No. 1974
EE
New: All-electric OR
Mixed-Fuel with CalGreen Tier
1 New HRR/Hotel: All-electric
OR Mixed-Fuel and >5%
compliance margin
New: All-electric OR Mixed-
Fuel and >10% compliance
margin
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC 8.36.020 Ord. No. 2617
PV Major Additions: PV system 1.5
watts per sq. ft.

New and Major Additions: 2
watts per sq. ft.

New and Major Additions: 2
watts per sq. ft.
2019 LR Res NC: PV +
Additions Addendum 8.106.055 Ord. No. 2617
12/11/2019
Santa Monica 9/24/2019 12/11/2019
San Mateo
(City)
9/3/2019
2019 L
R Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC
San Luis
Obispo
2021-10-01
7 336
Jurisdiction Ord.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
New: PV of 3 kW min. for <
10,000 sq. ft. and 5 kW min.
for > 10,000 sq. ft.

Alternative: Solar thermal
> 40 sq.ft. collector area
2019 LR Res NC /
2019 Non Res NC Section 16.42.090 Ord. No. 3168-20
West
Hollywood
EE, Cool
Roofs 8/19/2019 12/11/2019
New or Alteration > 10,000 sq.
ft.: PV to offset 15% of usage
OR solar thermal with min. .5
solar fraction OR vegetative
roof covering min. 30%
New or Alteration > 10,000
sq. ft.: PV to offset 15% of
usage OR solar thermal with
min. .5 solar fraction OR
vegetative roof covering min.
30%
New or Alteration > 10,000
sq. ft.: PV to offset 15% of
usage OR solar thermal with
min. .5 solar fraction OR
vegetative roof covering min.
30%
2019 NR+ Retrofits
PV / 2019 Non Res
NC

19.20.060 Ord. No. 19-1072
All rights reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and distributed without modification This report was prepared for the California Statewide Codes & Standards Program. The program is funded by California utility customers and administered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E®), Southern California Gas Company, and Southern California Edison Company under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission and in support of the California Energy Commission. © 2020 Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison. 2021-10-01
8 337
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Municipal Code Link Ordinance
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily High-rise Multifamily Nonresidential
Alameda All-
E
lectric 6/1/2021 8/11/2021 New: All-electric (excluding ADUs) New: All-electric
New: Exception for non-
electric space heating and
process systems in Fire, High-
Hazard, Laboratory
occupancies; public/employee
cafeteria; pre-wire for electric
13-11.3 Ord. No.

Berkeley All-
Electric 7/16/2019 N/A New: All-electric New: All-electric New: All-electric Chapter 12.80 Ord. No. 7,672-N.S Brisbane All-
E
lectric 12/12/2019 2/20/2020
New: Exception for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric New: All-electric
New: Except Life science
occupancies and gas specific for
profit kitchen

15.83.060 Ord. No. 643
Burlingame All-
E
lectric 8/17/2020 10/14/2020
New: Exception for
indoor/outdoor cooking
appliances and fireplaces; pre-
wire for electric. Adds/Alts: >
50% valuation when HVAC
included
New: All-electric
New: Exception for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment; pre-wire for
electric
110.0 Ordinances 1979 ,
1980, 1981
Campbell All-
E
lectric 2/18/2020 1/25/2021
New: All-electric space/water
heating. Natural gas OK for
other uses; pre-wire for electric
N/A N/A 18.18.020 Ord. No 2,260
Cupertino All-
E
lectric 1/21/2020 4/8/2020 New: All-electric (excluding ADUs) New: All-electric
New: Exception for Fire, High-
Hazard, Laboratory, and "Essential
Facilities" occupancies; pre-wire
for electric

16.54.100 et. seq. Ord. No. 19-2193
Daly City All-
E
lectric 5/10/2021 7/15/2021 New: All-electric (excluding dwelling units) New: All-electric
New: Exception for Fire, High-
Hazard, Laboratory occupancies
and for-profit kitchen cooking
equipment
Section 15.160.020 Ord. No. 1448
East Palo Alto All-
E
lectric 10/20/2020 12/9/2020
New: Exception for ADUs; and
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
New: Exceptions
cooktops/fireplaces, gas water-
heating for affordable housing;
pre-wire for electric
New: Exception for Life Science
buildings, Emergency operations,
and for-profit cooking; pre-wire
for electric
Chapter 15.25 Ord. No 07-2020
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted All-Electric Only Ordinances Scope
2021-10-01
9 338
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Municipal Code Link Ordinance
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily High-rise Multifamily Nonresidential
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted All-Electric Only Ordinances Scope
Emeryville All-
E
lectric 9/13/2021
New: All-electric (including
ADUs > 400 sq. ft.)
Adds/Alts: > 50% of foundation
or existing framing
N/A N/A S ection 8-10.03 Ord. No. 21-006
Encinitas All-
E
lectric
First Reading
9/22/2022 New: All-electric New: All-electric
New: Exception for Essential
facilities and for-profit kitchens
with business-related reason to
cook with flame
Section 23.12.080 Ord. 2021-13
Fairfax All-
E
lectric 9/1/2021 New: All-electric New: All-electric
New: Exception for public interest
projects and for-profit cooking
equipment
Chapter 15.05 Ord. No.

Hayward All-
E
lectric 3/17/2020 6/10/2020 New: All-electric (including ADUs > 400 sq. ft.)
New: All-electric OR 10%
compliance margin
New: All-electric OR 10%
compliance margin (15% for
Office/Retail)
9-1.02 Ord. No. 20-05
Healdsburg All-
E
lectric 12/16/2019 2/20/2020
New: Exception for cooktops,
fireplaces, pool/spa; pre-wire
for electric
New: Exception for cooktops,
fireplaces, pool/spa; pre-wire
for electric
New: Exception for cooktops,
fireplaces, pool/spa, Essential
Services, technical processes; pre-
wire for electric

15.04.08 Ord. No. 1196
Los Altos Hills All-
E
lectric 2/20/2020 12/9/2020
New: All-electric space/water
heating (including ADUs).

Natural gas OK for other uses;
pre-wire for electric
N/A N/A 8.1.6.02 Ord. No. 589
Los Altos All-
E
lectric 11/10/2020 1/25/2021
New: Exception for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
New: All-electric for
developments > 10 units
New: Exception for Scientific
Laboratory/ Public buildings and
for-profit cooking; prewire for
electric
Chapter 12.22 Ord. No. 2020-
470A-C
2021-10-01
10 339
Jurisdiction Ord.

Natural gas OK for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
New: All-electric New: All-electric 12.16.010 Ord. No. 1057 Millbrae All-
E
lectric 11/10/2020 1/25/2021
New: All-electric space/water
heating and clothes dryers.

Natural gas OK for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
New: All-electric
New: Exception for Life Science/
Public buildings. For-profit
cooking may appeal for exception;
prewire for electric

9.50 Ord. No. 2020-
Morgan Hill All-
E
lectric 10/23/2019 N/A New: All-electric New: All-electric New: All-electric 15.63 Ord. No. 2306 N.S.

Mountain
View
All-
Electric 10/ 22/2019 2/20/2020
New SF and Duplexes:

Exception for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric.

New LR MF: Exception for-
profit kitchen cooking
equipment
New: exception for F, H, and L
occupancies and for-profit
kitchen cooking equipment
New: Exception for Fire, High-
Hazard, Laboratory occupancies
and for-profit kitchen cooking
equipment
Chapter 8, Division 3, Section 8.20 Ord. No. 17.19
Oakland All-
E
lectric 12/1/2020 New: All-electric New: All-electric New: All-electric Ord. No. 2021-10-01
11 340
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Municipal Code Link Ordinance
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily High-rise Multifamily Nonresidential
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted All-Electric Only Ordinances Scope
Ojai All-
E
lectric 11/10/2020
New: Exception for ADUs,
pool/spa, for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment
New: All-electric New: Exception for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment Section 9-1.1002 Ord. No.

Pacifica All-
E
lectric 11/25/2019 4/8/2020
New: Exception for ADUs; and
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric.

New LR MF: Exception for-
profit kitchen cooking
equipment
New: Exception for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
New: Exception for Fire and Police
occupancies and for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment
Section 8.6 Ord. No. 852-CS
Palo Alto All-
E
lectric 12/2/2019 2/20/2020 New: All-electric
New: All-electric OR > 5%
compiance margin; electric-
ready
New: All-electric OR Office &
Retail: >12% compliance margin;
Industrial/ Manufacturing + 0%;
All other NR occupancies > 5%
compliance margin; pre-wire for
electric

16.17.040 et. seq. Ord. No. 5485
Petaluma All-
E
lectric
5/17/2021 New: All-electric
Add/Alts: > 50% exterior wall
perimeter/ floor area
New: All-electric
Add/Alts: > 50% exterior wall
perimeter/ floor area
New: All-electric
Add/Alts: > 50% exterior wall
perimeter/ floor area. Exception
for Essential Services

17.09 Ord. No.

Piedmont All-
E
lectric 2/1/2021 5/12/2021 New: All-electric N/A N/A 8.02.070 Ord. No. 750NS 2021-10-01
12 341
Jurisdiction Ord.

Richmond All-
E
lectric 3/3/2020 6/10/2020
New: All-electric space/water
heating and clothes dryers.

Natural gas OK for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
Replace/Upgrade Equipment:
all-electric
New: All-electric
New: Exception for Fire/Police,
Life Sciences, For-profit kitchen
cooking equipment; pre-wire for
electric
Chapter 6.02.100 Ord No. 06-20 NS
Sacramento All-
E
lectric 6/1/2021
New Buildings ≤ 3 Stories: All-
electric
EFFECTIVE 2023
New Buildings ≥ 4 Stories: All-
Electric
EFFECTIVE 2026
New Buildings ≤ 3 Stories: All-
electric
EFFECTIVE 2023
New Buildings ≥ 4 Stories: All-
Electric
EFFECTIVE 2027
New Buildings ≤ 3 Stories: All-
electric
EFFECTIVE 2023
New Buildings ≥ 4 Stories: All-
Electric
EFFECTIVE 2028
Chapter 15.30.030 Ord. No.

San Carlos All-
E
lectric 1/25/2021 5/12/2021
New: Exception for
cooktops/fireplaces; pre-wire
for electric
Adds/Alts: > 50% of structure
New: exception Laboratory
occupancies and for-profit
kitchen cooking equipment
upon review; additional
exceptions
New: exception Laboratory
occupancies and for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment upon review;
additional exceptions
Section 110.0 Ord. No. 1570
2021-10-01
13 342
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted
Date
CEC
Approval
Date
Municipal Code Link Ordinance
Single Family and Low-rise
Multifamily High-rise Multifamily Nonresidential
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted All-Electric Only Ordinances Scope
San Francisco All-
E
lectric 11/17/2020 New: All-electric New: All-electric New: All-electric Section 106A Ord. No. 9/17/72019 N/A New: All-electric N/A N/A Chapter 17.845 Ord No. 30330 12/1/2020 N/A New New
New: Exception for hospitals and
facilities with a Distributed Energy
Resource
Chapter 17.845 Ord. No. 30502
San Mateo
City
All-
Electric 10/ 5/2020 12/9/2020
New: All-electric (including
ADU's) N/A New Office Buildings: All-electric Section 23.24 Ord. No. 2020-17 San Mateo
County
All-
Electric 2/ 25/2020 9/9/2020 New: All-electric New: All-electric New: Exception for Laboratories,
Emergency operations, and for-
profit cooking (requires approval)
Section 9200 Ord No. 4824
Santa Barbara All-
E
lectric 7/27/2021 New: All-electric New: All-electric
New: Exception for public interest
projects, Laboratories, clean
rooms, and for-profit cooking
equipment
Section 22.100.040 Ord. No.

Santa Cruz All-
E
lectric 4/14/2020 N/A New: All-electric (including
ADUs > 750 sq. ft.) New: All-electric
New: Exception for industrial heat
processes and for-profit kitchen
cooking equipment
Chapter 6.100 Ord. No. 2020-06
Santa Rosa All-
Electric 11/12/2019 2/20/2020 New: All-electric N/A N/A Chapter 18-33.040 Ord. No. 2019-019 Saratoga All-
E
lectric 12/4/2019 4/8/2020
New: All-electric space/water
heating. Natural gas OK for
cooktops/fireplaces/clothes
dryer; pre-wire for electric
New: All-electric space/water
heating; pre-wire for electric
New: All-electric space/water
heating. Except public agency
owned emergency centers; pre-
wire for electric
Chapter 16.51.015 Ord. No. 366
San Jose All-
Electric
2021-10-01
14 343
Jurisdiction Ord.

Sunnyvale All-
E
lectric 12/1/2020 1/25/2021 New: All-electric New: All-electric New: Exception for Fire, High-
Hazard, Laboratory occupancies
and for-profit kitchen cooking
equipment; prewire for electric
Chapter 16.42 Ord. No. 3168-20
This report was prepared for the California Statewide Codes & Standards Program. The program is funded by California utility customers and administered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E®), Southern California Gas Company, and Southern California Edison Company under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission and in support of the California Energy Commission.
© 2020 Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison.

All rights reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and distributed without modification 2021-10-01
15 344
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted Date Exceptions Ordinance
Single Family, Duplexes,
and Townhouses Multifamily Nonresidential - Office N onresidential - Other Albany EV 12/ 20/2020 N/A New MF: 20% of spaces
equipped with EVCS N/A N/A Resolution 2020-
127
Brisbane EV 12/ 12/2019
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit / min. 50% required
guest spaces EVCS spaces
New Office: >10 spaces- 15%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 10
% Level 1 EV-Ready +
25% Level 1 EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 15%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
10 % Level 1 EV-Ready
Ord. 643
Burlingame EV 8/ 17/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: 10% of units with Level 2
EV-Ready space ; remaining
units with Level 1 EV-Ready
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
10 % Level 1 EV-Ready
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities
Ord.
1979/1980/1981
Carlsbad EV 3/ 12/2019
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit Add/Alts: >$60k OR
panel upgrade
New: 10% of units with Level 2
EV-Capable space AND 50% of
those spaces installed with EVSE
Add/Alts: >$200k
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities / utility service
cost > $400
Ord. CS-349
Contra Costa
County EV N/A New: 5% of spaces EVSE
equipped
New: EVSE charging at each space
required by TABLE 5.106.5.3.3
New: EVSE charging at each space
required by TABLE 5.106.5.3.4
Amendment to 74-

4.006 CGBSC
Colma EV 2/ 24/2021
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: 15% of units with Level 2
EV-Ready space N/A N/A Ord.

Cupertino EV 1/ 21/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit ;
remaining spaces Level 1 EV-
Ready /
> 20 units: 25% of spaces Level
2 EV-Ready
New Office: >10 spaces- 20%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 10
% Level 1 EV-Ready + 30% Level 1
EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. 19-2193
Daly City EV 5/ 10/2021
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit/
> 20 units: 75% of spaces Level
1 EV-Ready ; remaining units
Level 2 EV-Ready
New: 10% of spaces to be Level 2
EVCS + 10% spaces Level 2 EV-
R
eady + 30% Level 2 EV-Capable
New Other NR: 6% equipped with
Level 2 EVCS + 5 % Level 1 EV-
Ready;
>100 spaces- 80kW fast charger
per 100
Ord. 1449
Davis EV 4/ 23/2019 New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit
New: < 20 units: Level 1
charging at 5% of spaces / >20
units: Level 2 charging at 1% of
spaces (min. 1)
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include capacity for 20% Level 2
E
V-Capable
N/A Ord. 2554
2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Electric Vehicle Ordinances Scope
New: 10% of units with Level 2 EV-Capable space AND 50% of those spaces installed with EVSE
2021-10-01
16 345
Jurisdiction Ord.

New: Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 10%
Level 1 EV-Ready + 30 % EV-
Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities + MF: utility
service cost > $4500
Ord. 07-2020
Encinitas EV 11/ 13/2019 New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit
New: EVSE charging at 15% of
spaces
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities / utility service
cost > $400 per unit
Ord. 2019-22
Fremont EV 4/ 20/2021 New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit
New: EV-Ready spaces
calculated based on total spaces N/A N/A Utility service cost > $400 per unit Ordinance 05-2021
L
os Altos EV 10/ 27/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready spaces
for each unit (Two Level 2 if
multiple spaces exist)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit/ > 20
units: 25% of spaces Level 2 EV-
Ready + remaining spaces Level
1 EV-Ready
New: Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 30
% Level 2 EV-Ready Capable +
10% Level 1 EV-Ready
New: Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 5%
Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. 2020-471
Marin County EV 10/ 8/2019
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include Level 2-Ready circuit
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per dwelling unit
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include capacity for 20% Level 2
EV-Capable spaces
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. 3712
Millbrae EV 11/ 10/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit /
> 20 units: 25% of spaces Level
2 EV-Ready + remaining spaces
Level 1 EV-Ready / Affordable
MF: 10% spaces Level 2
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 10 % LeMF: utility
service cost > $4500vel 1 EV-
Ready + additional 30% EV-
Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities + MF: utility
service cost > $4500
Ord. No. 2020-20
Mill Valley EV 11/ 18/2019
New: Level 2 EV-Ready per unit
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include Level 2-Ready circuit
New: One Level 2 EV-Ready
space per dwelling unit
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. 1313
New: 10% of spaces to be Level 2 EV-Ready + remaining spaces EV- Capable OR 20% spaces Level 2 EV-Ready + EVCS in 5% spaces (min. 2)
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must include capacity for 20% Level 2 EV- Capable
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must include capacity for 20% Level 2 EV- Capable
New NR + Hotel/Motel: EVSE charging at 8% of spaces
Add/Alts: > 10k sq. ft.
2021-10-01
17 346
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted Date Exceptions Ordinance
Single Family, Duplexes,
and Townhouses Multifamily Nonresidential - Office N onresidential - Other 2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Electric Vehicle Ordinances Scope
Milpitas EV 12/ 3/2019
New: Level 1 EV-Ready circuit
+ Level 2 EV-Ready circuit per
unit
New: < 20 units: Level 2
charging at 15% of spaces +
Level 1 EV-Capable at 35% of
spaces / >20 units: Level 2
charging at 20% of spaces +
Level 1 EV-Capable at 35% of
spaces
New Office: 5% equipped with
Level 2 EVCS + 10 % Level 1 EV-
Ready + 20% Level 2 EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 4%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 3 %
Level 1 EV-Ready;
>100 spaces- 80kW fast charger
per 100
MF Affordable Housing
Projects Ord. 65 148
Mountain View EV 11/ 12/2019
New: Level 1 EV-Ready circuit
+ Level 2 EV-Ready circuit per
unit
New: Level 2 charging at 15% of
spaces + remaining spaces EV-
Ready + Level 3 EVCS for every
100 spaces
Ord. 17.19
Oceanside EV 8/ 19/2020 N/A Ord. No.

Redwood City EV 9/ 21/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: <20 units- Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit ;
remaining spaces Level 1 EV-
Ready / >20 units- 25% of
spaces Level 2 EV-Ready
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 10 % Level 1 EV-Ready
+ additional 30% EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. No.

Sacramento EV 4/ 20/2021 N/A New MF: 20% of spaces Level 2 EV-Ready Ord.

San Anselmo EV 4/ 14/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready per unit
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include Level 2-Ready circuit
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per dwelling unit
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must
include capacity for 20% Level 2
EV-Capable spaces
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. 1145
New: 10% of spaces to be Level 2 EV-Ready + remaining spaces EV- Capable OR 20% spaces Level 2 EV-Ready + EVCS in 5% spaces (min. 2)
Add/Alts: Panel upgrade must include capacity for 20% Level 2 EV- Capable
New Mixed Use: Level 2 charging at 15% of spaces + remaining spaces EV-Ready + Level 3 EVCS for every 100 spaces
New Commercial/Hotel/Motel : < 10 spaces- Level 2 EVCS + EV-Ready remaining spaces / >10 spaces - 15% equipped with Level 2 EVCS + EV- Ready remaining spaces / >100 spaces - Level 3 DC EVCS
New: 20% of spaces Level 2 EV-Ready
New Hotel/Motel: 20% of spaces Level 2 EV-Ready
New MF and NR: 15% of spaces reserved for ZEV (> 5 parking spaces) and Level 2 charging at 50% of those reserved spaces
2021-10-01
18 347
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted Date Exceptions Ordinance
Single Family, Duplexes,
and Townhouses Multifamily Nonresidential - Office N onresidential - Other 2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Electric Vehicle Ordinances Scope
San Carlos EV 1/ 25/2021
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
space (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: 10% of units with Level 2
EV-Ready space ; remaining
units with Level 1 EV-Ready /MF
exception: utility service cost >
$4500
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 10 % Level 1 EV-Ready
+ additional 30% EV-Capable
New Other NR: ≥10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 5 % Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities / utility service
cost > $400 per unit
Ord.

San Jose EV 10/ 1/2019 New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit
New: EVSE charging at 10% of
spaces + 20% of spaces EV-
Ready + 70% EV-Capable
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities + Detached
garages
Ord. 30311
San Mateo
County EV 2/25/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: 10% of units with Level 2
EV-Ready space + 40% of units
Level 1 EV-Ready spaces
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 10
% Level 1 EV-Ready + 30% Level 1
EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces; 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS + 5
% Level 1 EV-Ready
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities + MF: utility
service cost > $4500
Ord. 4824
Santa Monica EV 4/ 28/2020 New: Level 2 EV-Ready space per unit
New: EVSE charging at 10% of
spaces + 20% of spaces EV-
Ready + 70% EV-Capable
New Office: EVSE charging at 10%
of spaces + 20% EV-Ready + 30%
EV-Capable
New Hotel/Motel: EVSE charging
at 10% of spaces + 30% EV-
Capable
New Other NR: EVSE charging at
10% of spaces + 30% EV-Capable
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities / utility service
cost > $400 per unit
Ord. 2634
South San
Francisco EV 6/9/2021
New: Level 2 EV-Ready space
per unit + Level 1 EV-Ready
circuit (Level 2 if only 1 space
exists)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit /
> 20 units: 25% of spaces Level
2 EV-Ready + remaining spaces
Level 1 EV-Ready / Affordable
MF: 10% spaces Level 2 +
remaining Level 1
N/A N/A ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. No.

Sunnyvale EV 12/ 1/2020
New: Level 2 EV-Ready + Level
1 EV-Ready space per unit
(Level 2 if only 1 space exists)
New: < 20 units: Level 2 EV-
Ready space per unit /
> 20 units: 25% of spaces Level
2 EV-Ready + remaining spaces
Level 1 EV-Ready / Affordable
MF: 10% spaces Level 2
New Office: >10 spaces- 10%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 10 % Level 1 EV-Ready
+ additional 30% EV-Capable
New Other NR: >10 spaces- 6%
equipped with Level 2 EVCS +
additional 5 % Level 1 EV-Ready /
>100 spaces - Level 3 DC EVCS
ADU/JADU without parking
facilities Ord. No. 3168-20
New: EVSE charging at 10% of spaces + 40% EV-Capable
New Hotel/Motel: EVSE charging at 10% of spaces + 50% EV-Capable 2021-10-01
19 348
Jurisdiction Ord.

Type
Council
Adopted Date Exceptions Ordinance
Single Family, Duplexes,
and Townhouses Multifamily Nonresidential - Office N onresidential - Other 2019 Code Cycle - Locally Adopted Electric Vehicle Ordinances Scope
This report was prepared for the California Statewide Codes & Standards Program. The program is funded by California utility customers and administered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E®), Southern California Gas Company, and Southern California Edison Company under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission and in support of the California Energy Commission. © 2020 Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison.

All rights reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and distributed without modification 2021-10-01
20 349
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE TO

REQUIRE CERTAIN NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS TO BE ALL-ELECTRIC

BUILDINGS
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows (omitting the parenthetical footnotes from the official text of the enacted or amended provisions of the County Ordinance Code):

SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance adopts and amends the 2019 California Energy Code to require all newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings to be constructed as all-electric buildings without natural gas infrastructure. This ordinance is adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code sections 17922, 17958, 17958.5, 17958.7, and 18941.5, Public Resources Code section 25402.1(h)(2), and Government Code sections 50020 through 50022.10.

SECTION II. Section 74-2.002 (Adoption) of Division 74 (Building Code) of the County Ordinance Code is amended to read:
74-2.002 Adoption.
(a) The building code of this county is the 2019 California Building Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2), the 2019 California Residential Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2.5), the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11), the 2019 California Existing Building Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 10), and the 2019 Energy Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6), as amended by the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in this division and Division 72. (b) The 2019 California Building Code, with the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in Chapter 74-4 and Division 72, is adopted by this reference as though fully set forth in this division.
(c) The 2019 California Residential Code, with the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in Chapter 74-4 and Division 72, is adopted by this reference as though fully set forth in this division.
(d) The 2019 California Green Building Standards Code, with the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in Chapter 74-4 and Division 72, is adopted by this reference as though fully set forth in this division.

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
1 350
(e) The 2019 California Existing Building Code, with the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in Chapter 74-4 and Division 72, is adopted by this reference as though fully set forth in this division.
(f) The 2019 California Energy Code, with the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in Chapter 74-4 and Division 72, is adopted by this reference as though fully set forth in this division.
(g) At least one copy of this building code is now on file with the building inspection division, and the other requirements of Government Code section 50022.6 have been and shall be complied with.
(h) As of the effective date of the ordinance from which this division is derived, the provisions of the building code are controlling and enforceable within the county. (Ords. 2022-02 § 2, 2019-31 § 2, 2016-22 § 2, 2013-24 § 2, 2011-03 § 2, 2007-54 §3, 2002-31 § 3, 99-17 § 5, 99-1, 90-100 § 5, 87-55 § 4, 80-14 § 5, 74-30.) SECTION III. Section 74.4.010 (Amendments to CEnC) is added to Chapter 74-4 (Modifications) of Division 74 (Building Code) of the County Ordinance Code, to read:
74-4.010 Amendments to CEnC. The 2019 California Energy Code ("CEnC") is amended by the changes, additions, and deletions set forth in this chapter and Division 72. Section numbers used below are those of the 2019 California Energy Code. (a) Section 100.0(e)(2)(A) of CEnC Subchapter 1 (All Occupancies - General Provisions) is amended to read:

A. All newly constructed buildings.
i. Sections 110.0 through 110.12 apply to all newly constructed buildings within the scope of Section 100.0(a). In addition, newly constructed buildings shall meet the requirements of Subsection B, C, D, or E, as applicable.
ii. A newly constructed building that is any of the following building types shall be an all-electric building:
a. Residential.
b. Detached accessory dwelling unit.
c. Hotel.

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
2 351
d. Office.
e. Retail.

Exception to Section 100.0(e)(2)(A)(ii): Development projects that have obtained vested rights before the effective date of this subsection (ii) or June 1, 2022, whichever is later, pursuant to a development agreement in accordance with Government Code section 65866, a vesting tentative map in accordance with Government Code section 66998.1, or other applicable law, are exempt for the requirements of Section 100.0(e)(2)(A)(ii). (b) Section 100.1(b) (Definitions) of CEnC Subchapter 1 (All Occupancies - General Provisions) is amended by adding the following definition:

ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDING means a building that has no natural gas or propane plumbing installed within the building, and that uses electricity as the sole source of energy for its space heating (including heating of all indoor and outdoor spaces of the building), water heating (including heating of indoor and outdoor pools and spas), cooking appliances, and clothes drying appliances. An all-electric building may utilize solar thermal pool heating. (Ord. 2022-02 § 3.)
SECTION IV. VALIDITY. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors declares that if any section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this ordinance or of the 2019 California Energy Code as adopted and amended herein is declared for any reason to be invalid, it is the intent of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors that it would have passed all other portions or provisions of this ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom any portion or provision as may be declared invalid.

SECTION V. EFFECTIVE AND OPERATIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective, but not operative, upon approval by the California Energy Commission or 30 days after passage, whichever is later. This ordinance will become operative on the effective date of this ordinance or June 1, 2022, whichever is later. Within 15 days of passage, this ordinance shall be published once in the East Bay Times, a newspaper published in this County. \\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
3 352
PASSED on ___________________________, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: MONICA NINO, _____________________________
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Board Chair
and County Administrator
By: ______________________ [SEAL]
Deputy
KCK:

H:\Client Matters\2021\DCD\Ordinance No. 2022-02 All-Electric Buildings.wpd ORDINANCE NO. 2022-02
4 353
Margin?

Title 24, Parts 6 and 11
Local Energy Efficiency Ordinances

2019 Cost-effectiveness Study:

Low-Rise Residential New Construction

Prepared for:

Kelly Cunningham
Codes and Standards Program
Pacific Gas and Electric Company

Prepared by:

Frontier Energy, Inc.

Misti Bruceri & Associates, LLC

Last Modified: August 01, 2019

354

LEGAL NOTICE

This report was prepared by Pacific Gas and Electric Company and funded by the California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Neither PG&E nor any of its employees makes any warranty, express or implied; or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any data, information, method, product, policy or process disclosed in this document; or represents that its use will not infringe any privately-owned rights including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks or copyrights. 355
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study Table of Contents
Acronyms ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Methodology and Assumptions.............................................................................................................. 1

2.1 Building Prototypes ........................................................................................................................ 1

2.2 Measure Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 3

2.2.1 Federal Preemption ................................................................................................................ 4

2.2.2 Energy Design Rating .............................................................................................................. 4

2.2.3 Energy Efficiency Measures .................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Package Development .................................................................................................................... 8

2.3.1 Solar Photovoltaics (PV) ......................................................................................................... 8

2.3.2 Energy Storage (Batteries) ...................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Incremental Costs ........................................................................................................................... 9

2.5 Cost-effectiveness ........................................................................................................................ 13

2.5.1 On-Bill Customer Lifecycle Cost ............................................................................................ 13

2.5.2 TDV Lifecycle Cost ................................................................................................................. 15

2.6 Electrification Evaluation .............................................................................................................. 15

2.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................... 18 3 Results .................................................................................................................................................. 18

3.1 PV and Battery System Sizing ....................................................................................................... 19

3.2 Single Family Results .................................................................................................................... 21

3.2.1 GHG Emission Reductions .................................................................................................... 26

3.3 Multifamily Results ....................................................................................................................... 26

3.3.1 GHG Emission Reductions .................................................................................................... 32

3.4 Electrification Results ................................................................................................................... 32

3.4.1 Single Family ......................................................................................................................... 33

3.4.2 Multifamily ........................................................................................................................... 33 4 Conclusions & Summary ....................................................................................................................... 41 5 References ............................................................................................................................................ 44 Appendix A – California Climate Zone Map .................................................................................................. 46 Appendix B – Utility Tariff Details................................................................................................................. 47 Appendix C – Single Family Detailed Results ................................................................................................ 57 Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary ........................................................................................... 61 Appendix E – Multifamily Detailed Results .................................................................................................. 68 Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary .............................................................................................. 72 Appendix G – Results by Climate Zone ......................................................................................................... 79

356
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study List of Tables
Table 1: Prototype Characteristics .............................................................................................................................2 Table 2: Characteristics of the Mixed Fuel vs All-Electric Prototype ..........................................................................3 Table 3: Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures .....................................................9 Table 4: Incremental Cost Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 10 Table 5: IOU Utility Tariffs Applied Based on Climate Zone .................................................................................... 14 Table 6: Incremental Costs – All-Electric Code Compliant Home Compared to a Mixed Fuel Code Compliant Home ................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 Table 7: PV & Battery Sizing Details by Package Type ............................................................................................. 20 Table 8: Single Family Package Lifetime Incremental Costs .................................................................................... 22 Table 9: Single Family Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the Mixed Fuel Case 1,2 .......................................... 23 Table 10: Single Family Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the All-Electric Case1,2 ......................................... 24 Table 11: Multifamily Package Incremental Costs per Dwelling Unit ..................................................................... 28 Table 12: Multifamily Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the Mixed Fuel Case1,2 ........................................... 29 Table 13: Multifamily Package Cost-effectiveness Results for the All-Electric Case1,2 ............................................ 30 Table 14: Single Family Electrification Results ....................................................................................................... 34 Table 15: Comparison of Single Family On-Bill Cost Effectiveness Results with Additional PV ............................. 36 Table 16: Multifamily Electrification Results (Per Dwelling Unit) .......................................................................... 38 Table 17: Comparison of Multifamily On-Bill Cost Effectiveness Results with Additional PV (Per Dwelling Unit) 39 Table 18: Summary of Single Family Target EDR Margins ....................................................................................... 43 Table 19: Summary of Multifamily Target EDR Margins ......................................................................................... 43 Table 20: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone .............................................................................................. 48 Table 21: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone .................................................................................................. 51 Table 22: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ......................................................................................... 53 Table 23: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ............................................................................................ 54 Table 24: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions ........................................................................................ 56 Table 25: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ................................................ 57 Table 26: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results .......................... 58 Table 27: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ................................................ 59 Table 28: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV-PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ..................... 60 Table 29: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary ............................. 61 Table 30: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary .................. 62 Table 31: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary ..................................... 63 Table 32: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary .............................. 64 Table 33: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary .................. 65 Table 34: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV Package Measure Summary ................................................... 66 Table 35: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary ...................................... 67 Table 36: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results .................................................. 68 Table 37: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ............................ 69 Table 38: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ................................................... 70 Table 39: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency & PV-PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results ....................... 71 Table 40: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary ................................ 72 Table 41: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary .................... 73 Table 42: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary ....................................... 74 Table 43: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary ................................. 75 Table 44: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary ..................... 76 Table 45: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency & PV Package Measure Summary ...................................................... 77 Table 46: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary ........................................ 78 Table 47: Single Family Climate Zone 1 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 80 357
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study Table 48: Multifamily Climate Zone 1 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 81 Table 49: Single Family Climate Zone 2 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 82 Table 50: Multifamily Climate Zone 2 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 83 Table 51: Single Family Climate Zone 3 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 84 Table 52: Multifamily Climate Zone 3 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 85 Table 53: Single Family Climate Zone 4 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 86 Table 54: Multifamily Climate Zone 4 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 87 Table 55: Single Family Climate Zone 5 PG&E Results Summary ............................................................................ 88 Table 56: Multifamily Climate Zone 5 PG&E Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ............................................... 89 Table 57: Single Family Climate Zone 5 PG&E/SoCalGas Results Summary ............................................................ 90 Table 58: Multifamily Climate Zone 5 PG&E/SoCalGas Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ............................... 91 Table 59: Single Family Climate Zone 6 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 92 Table 60: Multifamily Climate Zone 6 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 93 Table 61: Single Family Climate Zone 7 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 94 Table 62: Multifamily Climate Zone 7 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 95 Table 63: Single Family Climate Zone 8 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 96 Table 64: Multifamily Climate Zone 8 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 97 Table 65: Single Family Climate Zone 9 Results Summary ...................................................................................... 98 Table 66: Multifamily Climate Zone 9 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ......................................................... 99 Table 67: Single Family Climate Zone 10 SCE/SoCalGas Results Summary ........................................................... 100 Table 68: Multifamily Climate Zone 10 SCE/SoCalGas Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) .............................. 101 Table 69: Single Family Climate Zone 10 SDGE Results Summary......................................................................... 102 Table 70: Multifamily Climate Zone 10 SDGE Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ............................................ 103 Table 71: Single Family Climate Zone 11 Results Summary .................................................................................. 104 Table 72: Multifamily Climate Zone 11 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ..................................................... 105 Table 73: Single Family Climate Zone 12 Results Summary .................................................................................. 106 Table 74: Multifamily Climate Zone 12 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ..................................................... 107 Table 75: Single Family Climate Zone 13 Results Summary .................................................................................. 108 Table 76: Multifamily Climate Zone 13 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ..................................................... 109 Table 77: Single Family Climate Zone 14 SCE/SoCalGas Results Summary ........................................................... 110 Table 78: Multifamily Climate Zone 14 SCE/SoCalGas Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) .............................. 111 Table 79: Single Family Climate Zone 14 SDGE Results Summary......................................................................... 112 Table 80: Multifamily Climate Zone 14 SDGE Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ............................................ 113 Table 81: Single Family Climate Zone 15 Results Summary .................................................................................. 114 Table 82: Multifamily Climate Zone 15 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ..................................................... 115 Table 83: Single Family Climate Zone 16 Results Summary .................................................................................. 116 Table 84: Multifamily Climate Zone 16 Results Summary (Per Dwelling Unit) ..................................................... 117

List of Figures
Figure 1: Graphical description of EDR scores (courtesy of Energy Code Ace) ..........................................................5 Figure 2: B/C ratio comparison for PV and battery sizing ....................................................................................... 20 Figure 3: Single family Total EDR comparison ......................................................................................................... 25 Figure 4: Single family EDR Margin comparison (based on Efficiency EDR Margin for the Efficiency packages and the Total EDR Margin for the Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages) ........................................... 25 Figure 5: Single family greenhouse gas emissions comparison............................................................................... 26 Figure 6: Multifamily Total EDR comparison ........................................................................................................... 31 Figure 7: Multifamily EDR Margin comparison (based on Efficiency EDR Margin for the Efficiency packages and the Total EDR Margin for the Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages) ........................................... 31 Figure 8: Multifamily greenhouse gas emissions comparison ................................................................................ 32 358
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study Figure 9: B/C ratio results for a single family all-electric code compliant home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ........................................................................................................................................................................ 36 Figure 10: B/C ratio results for the single family Efficiency & PV all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 11: B/C ratio results for the single family neutral cost package all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 12: B/C ratio results for a multifamily all-electric code compliant home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ...................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 13: B/C ratio results for the multifamily Efficiency & PV all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ...................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 14: B/C ratio results for the multifamily neutral cost package all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 15: Map of California Climate Zones (courtesy of the California Energy Commission) ............................... 46

359
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study Acronyms

2020 PV$ Present value costs in 2020
ACH50 Air Changes per Hour at 50 pascals pressure differential ACM Alternative Calculation Method
AFUE Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C Lifecycle Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BEopt Building Energy Optimization Tool
BSC Building Standards Commission
CAHP California Advanced Homes Program
CBECC-Res Computer program developed by the California Energy Commission for use in demonstrating compliance with the California Residential Building Energy Efficiency Standards CFI California Flexible Installation
CFM Cubic Feet per Minute
CMFNH California Multifamily New Homes
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CPC California Plumbing Code
CZ California Climate Zone
DHW Domestic Hot Water
DOE Department of Energy
DWHR Drain Water Heat Recovery
EDR Energy Design Rating
EER Energy Efficiency Ratio
EF Energy Factor
GHG Greenhouse Gas
HERS Rater Home Energy Rating System Rater
HPA High Performance Attic
HPWH Heat Pump Water Heater
HSPF Heating Seasonal Performance Factor
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IECC International Energy Conservation Code
IOU Investor Owned Utility
kBtu kilo-British thermal unit
kWh Kilowatt Hour
LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
360
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study LCC Lifecycle Cost
LLAHU Low Leakage Air Handler Unit
VLLDCS Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space MF Multifamily
NAECA National Appliance Energy Conservation Act
NEEA Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
NEM Net Energy Metering
NPV Net Present Value
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PV Photovoltaic
SCE Southern California Edison
SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric
SEER Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SF Single Family
CASE Codes and Standards Enhancement
TDV Time Dependent Valuation
Therm Unit for quantity of heat that equals 100,000 British thermal units Title 24 Title 24, Part 6
TOU Time-Of-Use
UEF Uniform Energy Factor
ZNE Zero-net Energy

361
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 1 2019-08-01
1 Introduction
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (Energy Commission, 2018b) is maintained and updated every three years by two state agencies, the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) and the Building Standards Commission (BSC). In addition to enforcing the code, local jurisdictions have the authority to adopt local energy efficiency ordinances, or reach codes, that exceed the minimum standards defined by Title 24 (as established by Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)2 and Section 10-106 of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards). Local jurisdictions must demonstrate that the requirements of the proposed ordinance are cost-effective and do not result in buildings consuming more energy than is permitted by Title 24. In addition, the jurisdiction must obtain approval from the Energy Commission and file the ordinance with the BSC for the ordinance to be legally enforceable.

This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2020, for new single family and low-rise (one- to three-story) multifamily residential construction. The analysis includes evaluation of both mixed fuel and all- electric homes, documenting that the performance requirements can be met by either type of building design.

Compliance package options and cost-effectiveness analysis in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs) are presented (see Appendix A – California Climate Zone Map for a graphical depiction of Climate Zone locations).

All proposed package options include a combination of efficiency measures and on-site renewable energy. 2 Methodology and Assumptions
This analysis uses two different metrics to assess cost-effectiveness. Both methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with energy efficiency measures. The main difference between the methodologies is the manner in which they value energy and thus the cost savings of reduced or avoided energy use.
• Utility Bill Impacts (On-Bill): Customer-based Lifecycle Cost (LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer on-bill savings using electricity and natural gas utility rate schedules over a 30-year duration accounting for discount rate and energy cost inflation. • Time Dependent Valuation (TDV): Energy Commission LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the “societal value or cost” of energy use including long-term projected costs such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand and other societal costs such as projected costs for carbon emissions, as well as grid transmission and distribution impacts. This metric values energy use differently depending on the fuel source (gas, electricity, and propane), time of day, and season.

Electricity used (or saved) during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity used (or saved) during off-peak periods (Horii et al., 2014). This is the methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24, Part 6.

2.1 Building Prototypes
The Energy Commission defines building prototypes which it uses to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of proposed changes to Title 24 requirements. At the time that this report was written, there are two single family prototypes and one low-rise multifamily prototype. All three are used in this analysis in development of the above-code packages. Table 1 describes the basic characteristics of each prototype. Additional details on the prototypes can be found in the Alternative Calculation Method (ACM) Approval Manual (Energy Commission, 2018a). The prototypes have equal geometry on all walls, windows and roof to be orientation neutral. 362
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 2 2019-08-01
Table 1: Prototype Characteristics
Characteristic Single Family
One-Story
Single Family
Two-Story Multifamily
Conditioned Floor Area 2,100 ft2 2,700 ft2
6,960 ft2:
(4) 780 ft2 &
(4) 960 ft2 units
Num. of Stories 1 2 2
Num. of Bedrooms 3 3 (4) 1-bed &
(4) 2-bed units
Window-to-Floor Area Ratio 20% 20% 15%
Source: 2019 Alternative Calculation Method Approval Manual (California Energy Commission, 2018a).

The Energy Commission’s protocol for single family prototypes is to weight the simulated energy impacts by a factor that represents the distribution of single-story and two-story homes being built statewide, assuming 45 percent single-story and 55 percent two-story. Simulation results in this study are characterized according to this ratio, which is approximately equivalent to a 2,430-square foot (ft2) house.1 The methodology used in the analyses for each of the prototypical building types begins with a design that precisely meets the minimum 2019 prescriptive requirements (zero compliance margin). Table 150.1-A in the 2019 Standards (Energy Commission, 2018b) lists the prescriptive measures that determine the baseline design in each climate zone. Other features are consistent with the Standard Design in the ACM Reference Manual (Energy Commission, 2019), and are designed to meet, but not exceed, the minimum requirements. Each prototype building has the following features:
• Slab-on-grade foundation.
• Vented attic.
• High performance attic in climate zones where prescriptively required (CZ 4, 8-16) with insulation installed at the ceiling and below the roof deck per Option B. (Refer to Table 150.1-A in the 2019 Standards.)
• Ductwork located in the attic for single family and within conditioned space for multifamily.

Both mixed fuel and all-electric prototypes are evaluated in this study. While in past code cycles an all-electric home was compared to a home with gas for certain end-uses, the 2019 code includes separate prescriptive and performance paths for mixed-fuel and all-electric homes. The fuel specific characteristics of the mixed fuel and all-electric prototypes are defined according to the 2019 ACM Reference Manual and described in Table 2.2

1 2,430 ft2 = (45% x 2,100 ft2) + (55% x 2,700 ft2)
2 Standards Section 150.1(c)8.A.iv.a specifies that compact hot water distribution design and a drain water heat recovery system or extra PV capacity are required when a heat pump water heater is installed prescriptively. The efficiency of the distribution and the drain water heat recovery systems as well as the location of the water heater applied in this analysis are based on the Standard Design assumptions in CBECC-Res which result in a zero-compliance margin for the 2019 basecase model.
363
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 3 2019-08-01
Table 2: Characteristics of the Mixed Fuel vs All-Electric Prototype Characteristic Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Space Heating/Cooling1 Gas furnace 80 AFUE
Split A/C 14 SEER, 11.7 EER
Split heat pump 8.2 HSPF,
14 SEER, 11.7 EER
Water Heater1,2, 3, 4 Gas tankless UEF = 0.81
50gal HPWH UEF = 2.0
SF: located in the garage
MF CZ 2,4,6-16: located in living space
MF CZ 1,3,5: located in exterior closet
Hot Water Distribution Code minimum. All hot water
lines insulated
Basic compact distribution credit,
(CZ 6-8,15)
Expanded compact distribution credit,
compactness factor = 0.6
(CZ 1-5,9-14,16)
Drain Water Heat
Recovery
Efficiency
None
CZ 1: unequal flow to shower = 42%
CZ 16: equal flow to shower & water
heater = 65%
None in other CZs
Cooking Gas Electric
Clothes Drying Gas Electric
1Equipment efficiencies are equal to minimum federal appliance efficiency standards. 2The multifamily prototype is evaluated with individual water heaters. HPWHs located in the living space do not have ducting for either inlet or exhaust air; CBECC-Res does not have the capability to model ducted HPWHs.
3UEF = uniform energy factor. HPWH = heat pump water heater. SF = single family. MF = multifamily.
4CBECC-Res applies a 50gal water heater when specifying a storage water heater. Hot water draws differ between the prototypes based on number of bedrooms.

2.2 Measure Analysis
The California Building Energy Code Compliance simulation tool, CBECC-RES 2019.1.0, was used to evaluate energy impacts using the 2019 Title 24 prescriptive standards as the benchmark, and the 2019 TDV values. TDV is the energy metric used by the Energy Commission since the 2005 Title 24 energy code to evaluate compliance with the Title 24 standards.

Using the 2019 baseline as the starting point, prospective energy efficiency measures were identified and modeled in each of the prototypes to determine the projected energy (Therm and kWh) and compliance impacts. A large set of parametric runs were conducted to evaluate various options and develop packages of measures that exceed minimum code performance. The analysis utilizes a parametric tool based on Micropas3 to automate and manage the generation of CBECC-Res input files. This allows for quick evaluation of various efficiency measures across multiple climate zones and prototypes and improves quality control. The batch process functionality of CBECC-Res is utilized to simulate large groups of input files at once. Annual utility costs were calculated using hourly data output from CBECC-Res and electricity and natural gas tariffs for each of the investor owned utilities (IOUs).

3 Developed by Ken Nittler of Enercomp, Inc.
364
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 4 2019-08-01
The Reach Codes Team selected packages and measures based on cost-effectiveness as well as decades of experience with residential architects, builders, and engineers along with general knowledge of the relative acceptance of many measures.

2.2.1 Federal Preemption
The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act (NAECA), including heating, cooling, and water heating equipment. Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting policies that mandate higher minimum efficiencies than the federal standards require, the focus of this study is to identify and evaluate cost-effective packages that do not include high efficiency equipment. While this study is limited by federal preemption, in practice builders may use any package of compliant measures to achieve the performance goals, including high efficiency appliances. Often, these measures are the simplest and most affordable measures to increase energy performance.

2.2.2 Energy Design Rating
The 2019 Title 24 code introduces California’s Energy Design Rating (EDR) as the primary metric to demonstrate compliance with the energy code. EDR is still based on TDV but it uses a building that is compliant with the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as the reference building. The reference building has an EDR score of 100 while a zero-net energy (ZNE) home has an EDR score of zero (Energy Commission, 2018d). See Figure 1 for a graphical representation of this. While the Reference Building is used to determine the rating, the Proposed Design is still compared to the Standard Design based on the prescriptive baseline assumptions to determine compliance.

The EDR is calculated by CBECC-Res and has two components:

1. An “Efficiency EDR” which represents the building’s energy use without solar generation.4

2. A “Total EDR” that represents the final energy use of the building based on the combined impact of efficiency measures, PV generation and demand flexibility.

For a building to comply, two criteria are required:
(1) the proposed Efficiency EDR must be equal to or less than the Efficiency EDR of the Standard Design, and (2) the proposed Total EDR must be equal to or less than the Total EDR of the Standard Design.

Single family prototypes used in this analysis that are minimally compliant with the 2019 Title 24 code achieve a Total EDR between 20 and 35 in most climates.

This concept, consistent with California’s “loading order” which prioritizes energy efficiency ahead of renewable generation, requires projects meet a minimum Efficiency EDR before PV is credited but allows for PV to be traded off with additional efficiency when meeting the Total EDR. A project may improve on building efficiency beyond the minimum required and subsequently reduce the PV generation capacity required to achieve the required Total EDR but may not increase the size of the PV system and trade this off with a reduction of efficiency measures. Figure 1 graphically summarizes how both Efficiency EDR and PV / demand flexibility EDR are used to calculate the Total EDR used in the 2019 code and in this analysis.

4 While there is no compliance credit for solar PV as there is under the 2016 Standards, the credit for installing electric storage battery systems that meet minimum qualifications can be applied to the Efficiency EDR. 365
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 5 2019-08-01

Figure 1: Graphical description of EDR scores (courtesy of Energy Code Ace5)

Results from this analysis are presented as EDR Margin, a reduction in the EDR score relative to the Standard Design. EDR Margin is a better metric to use than absolute EDR in the context of a reach code because absolute values vary, based on the home design and characteristics such as size and orientation. This approach aligns with how compliance is determined for the 2019 Title 24 code, as well as utility incentive programs, such as the California Advanced Homes Program (CAHP) & California Multifamily New Homes (CMFNH), which require minimum performance criteria based on an EDR Margin for low-rise residential projects. The EDR Margin is calculated according to Equation 1 for the two efficiency packages and Equation 2 for the Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages (see Section 2.3).

Equation 1
𝐸𝐷𝑅 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝒆𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒚 = 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑬𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒚 𝐸𝐷𝑅 − 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑬𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒚 𝐸𝐷𝑅 Equation 2
𝐸𝐷𝑅 𝑀𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝒆𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒚 & 𝑷𝑽 = 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝐸𝐷𝑅 − 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝐷𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝐸𝐷𝑅

2.2.3 Energy Efficiency Measures
Following are descriptions of each of the efficiency measures evaluated under this analysis. Because not all of the measures described below were found to be cost-effective and cost-effectiveness varied by climate zone, not all measures are included in all packages and some of the measures listed are not included in any final package. For a list of measures included in each efficiency package by climate zone, see Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary and Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary.

Reduced Infiltration (ACH50): Reduce infiltration in single family homes from the default infiltration assumption of five (5) air changes per hour at 50 Pascals (ACH50)6 by 40 to 60 percent to either 3 ACH50 or 2 ACH50. HERS

5 https://energycodeace.com/
6 Whole house leakage tested at a pressure difference of 50 Pascals between indoors and outdoors. 366
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 6 2019-08-01
rater field verification and diagnostic testing of building air leakage according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.8 (Energy Commission, 2018c). This measure was not applied to multifamily homes because CBECC-Res does not allow reduced infiltration credit for multifamily buildings.

Improved Fenestration: Reduce window U-factor to 0.24. The prescriptive U-factor is 0.30 in all climates. In climate zones 1, 3, 5, and 16 where heating loads dominate, an increase in solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) from the default assumption of 0.35 to 0.50 was evaluated in addition to the reduction in U-factor.

Cool Roof: Install a roofing product that’s rated by the Cool Roof Rating Council to have an aged solar reflectance (ASR) equal to or greater than 0.25. Steep-sloped roofs were assumed in all cases. Title 24 specifies a prescriptive ASR of 0.20 for Climate Zones 10 through 15 and assumes 0.10 in other climate zones.

Exterior Wall Insulation: Decrease wall U-factor in 2x6 walls to 0.043 from the prescriptive requirement of 0.048 by increasing exterior insulation from one-inch R-5 to 1-1/2 inch R-7.5. This was evaluated for single family buildings only in all climate zones except 6 and 7 where the prescriptive requirement is higher (U-factor of

0.065) and improving beyond the prescriptive value has little impact.

High Performance Attics (HPA): HPA with R-38 ceiling insulation and R-30 insulation under the roof deck. In climates where HPA is already required prescriptively this measure requires an incremental increase in roof insulation from R-19 or R-13 to R-30. In climates where HPA is not currently required (Climate Zones 1 through 3, and 5 through 7), this measure adds roof insulation to an uninsulated roof as well as increasing ceiling insulation from R-30 to R-38 in Climate Zones 3, 5, 6 and 7.

Slab Insulation: Install R-10 perimeter slab insulation at a depth of 16-inches. For climate zone 16, where slab insulation is required, prescriptively this measure increases that insulation from R-7 to R-10.

Duct Location (Ducts in Conditioned Space): Move the ductwork and equipment from the attic to inside the conditioned space in one of the three following ways.

1. Locate ductwork in conditioned space. The air handler may remain in the attic provided that 12 linear feet or less of duct is located outside the conditioned space including the air handler and plenum. Meet the requirements of 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.2. (Energy Commission, 2018c)

2. All ductwork and equipment located entirely in conditioned space meeting the requirements of 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.3. (Energy Commission, 2018c)

3. All ductwork and equipment located entirely in conditioned space with ducts tested to have less than or equal to 25 cfm leakage to outside. Meet the requirements of Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space (VLLDCS) in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.3.8. (Energy Commission, 2018c) Option 1 and 2 above apply to single family only since the basecase for multifamily assumes ducts are within conditioned space. Option 3 applies to both single family and multifamily cases.

Reduced Distribution System (Duct) Leakage: Reduce duct leakage from 5% to 2% and install a low leakage air handler unit (LLAHU). This is only applicable to single family homes since the basecase for multifamily assumes ducts are within conditioned space and additional duct leakage credit is not available.

Low Pressure Drop Ducts: Upgrade the duct distribution system to reduce external static pressure and meet a maximum fan efficacy of 0.35 Watts per cfm for gas furnaces and 0.45 Watts per cfm for heat pumps operating at full speed. This may involve upsizing ductwork, reducing the total effective length of ducts, and/or selecting low pressure drop components such as filters. Fan watt draw must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.3 (Energy Commission, 2018c). New federal regulations that went into effect July 3, 2019 require higher fan efficiency for gas furnaces than for heat pumps and air handlers, which is why the recommended specification is different for mixed fuel and all-electric homes. 367
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 7 2019-08-01
HERS Verification of Hot Water Pipe Insulation: The California Plumbing Code (CPC) requires pipe insulation on all hot water lines. This measure provides credit for HERS rater verification of pipe insulation requirements according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.6.3. (Energy Commission, 2018c) Compact Hot Water Distribution: Two credits for compact hot water distribution were evaluated.

1. Basic Credit: Design the hot water distribution system to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6 (Energy Commission, 2018c). In many single family homes this may require moving the water heater from an exterior to an interior garage wall. Multifamily homes with individual water heaters are expected to easily meet this credit with little or no alteration to plumbing design. CBECC-Res software assumes a 30% reduction in distribution losses for the basic credit.

2. Expanded Credit: Design the hot water distribution system to meet minimum requirements for the expanded compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA3.6.5 (Energy Commission, 2018c). In addition to requiring HERS verification that the minimum requirements for the basic compact distribution credit are met, this credit also imposes limitations on pipe location, maximum pipe diameter, and recirculation system controls allowed.

Drain Water Heat Recovery (DWHR): For multifamily buildings add DWHR that serves the showers in an unequal flow configuration (pre-heated water is piped directly to the shower) with 50% efficiency. This upgrade assumes all apartments are served by a DWHR with one unit serving each apartment individually. For a slab-on-grade building this requires a horizontal unit for the first-floor apartments.

Federally Preempted Measures:

The following additional measures were evaluated. Because these measures require upgrading appliances that are federally regulated to high efficiency models, they cannot be used to show cost-effectiveness in a local ordinance. The measures and packages are presented here to show that there are several options for builders to meet the performance targets. Heating and cooling capacities are autosized by CBECC-Res in all cases.

High Efficiency Furnace: For the mixed-fuel prototypes, upgrade natural gas furnace to one of two condensing furnace options with an efficiency of 92% or 96% AFUE.

High Efficiency Air Conditioner: For the mixed-fuel prototypes, upgrade the air conditioner to either single-stage SEER 16 / EER 13 or two-stage SEER 18 / EER 14 equipment.

High Efficiency Heat Pump: For the all-electric prototypes, upgrade the heat pump to either single-stage SEER 16 / EER 13 / HSPF 9 or two-stage SEER 18 / EER 14 / HSPF 10 equipment.

High Efficiency Tankless Water Heater: For the mixed-fuel prototype, upgrade tankless water heater to a condensing unit with a rated Uniform Energy Factor (UEF) of 0.96.

High Efficiency Heat Pump Water Heater (HPWH): For the all-electric prototypes, upgrade the federal minimum heat pump water heater to a HPWH that meets the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA)7 Tier 3 rating.

The evaluated NEEA water heater is an 80gal unit and is applied to all three building prototypes. Using the same

7 Based on operational challenges experienced in the past, NEEA established rating test criteria to ensure newly installed HPWHs perform adequately, especially in colder climates. The NEEA rating requires an Energy Factor equal to the ENERGY STAR performance level and includes requirements regarding noise and prioritizing heat pump use over supplemental electric resistance heating. 368
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 8 2019-08-01
water heater provides consistency in performance across all the equipment upgrade cases, even though hot water draws differ across the prototypes.

2.3 Package Development
Three to four packages were evaluated for each prototype and climate zone, as described below. 1) Efficiency – Non-Preempted: This package uses only efficiency measures that don’t trigger federal preemption issues including envelope, and water heating and duct distribution efficiency measures. 2) Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted: This package shows an alternative design that applies HVAC and water heating equipment that are more efficient than federal standards. The Reach Code Team considers this more reflective of how builders meet above code requirements in practice. 3) Efficiency & PV: Using the Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package as a starting point8, PV capacity is added to offset most of the estimated electricity use. This only applies to the all-electric case, since for the mixed fuel cases, 100% of the projected electricity use is already being offset as required by 2019 Title 24, Part 6.
4) Efficiency & PV/Battery: Using the Efficiency & PV Package as a starting point, PV capacity is added as well as a battery system.

2.3.1 Solar Photovoltaics (PV)
Installation of on-site PV is required in the 2019 residential code. The PV sizing methodology in each package was developed to offset annual building electricity use and avoid oversizing which would violate net energy metering (NEM) rules.9 In all cases, PV is evaluated in CBECC-Res according to the California Flexible Installation (CFI) assumptions.

The Reach Code Team used two options within the CBECC-Res software for sizing the PV system, described below. Analysis was conducted to determine the most appropriate sizing method for each package which is described in the results.
• Standard Design PV – the same PV capacity as is required for the Standard Design case10 • Specify PV System Scaling – a PV system sized to offset a specified percentage of the estimated electricity use of the Proposed Design case

2.3.2 Energy Storage (Batteries)
A battery system was evaluated in CBECC-Res with control type set to “Time of Use” and with default efficiencies of 95% for both charging and discharging. The “Time of Use” option assumes batteries are charged anytime PV generation is greater than the house load but controls when the battery storage system discharges.

During the summer months (July – September) the battery begins to discharge at the beginning of the peak period at a maximum rate until fully discharged. During discharge the battery first serves the house load but will

8 In cases where there was no cost-effective Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package, the most cost-effective efficiency measures for that climate zone were also included in the Efficiency & PV Package in order to provide a combination of both efficiency and PV beyond code minimum. 9 NEM rules apply to the IOU territories only.
10 The Standard Design PV system is sized to offset the electricity use of the building loads which are typically electric in a mixed fuel home, which includes all loads except space heating, water heating, clothes drying, and cooking.

369
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 9 2019-08-01
discharge to the electric grid if there is excess energy available. During other months the battery discharges whenever the PV system does not cover the entire house load and does not discharge to the electric grid. This control option is considered to be most reflective of the current products on the market. This control option requires an input for the “First Hour of the Summer Peak” and the Statewide CASE Team applied the default hour in CBECC-Res which differs by climate zone (either a 6pm or 7pm start). The Self Utilization Credit was taken when the battery system was modeled.

2.4 Incremental Costs
Table 4 below summarizes the incremental cost assumptions for measures evaluated in this study. Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measures relative to the base case.11 Replacement costs are applied to HVAC and DHW equipment, PV inverters, and battery systems over the 30-year evaluation period. There is no assumed maintenance on the envelope, HVAC, or DHW measures since there should not be any additional maintenance cost for a more efficient version of the same system type as the baseline. Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. When costs were obtained from a source that didn’t already include builder overhead and profit, a markup of ten percent was added. All costs are provided as present value in 2020 (2020 PV$). Costs due to variations in furnace, air conditioner, and heat pump capacity by climate zone were not accounted for in the analysis.

Equipment lifetimes applied in this analysis for the water heating and space conditioning measures are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3: Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures Measure Lifetime
Gas Furnace 20
Air Conditioner 20
Heat Pump 15
Gas Tankless Water Heater 20
Heat Pump Water Heater 15
Source: City of Palo Alto 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost- effectiveness Analysis Draft (TRC, 2018) which is based on the Database of Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER).12

11 Interest costs due to financing are not included in the incremental costs presented in the Table 4 but are accounted for in the lifetime cost analysis. All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage, see Section

2.5 for details.
12 http://www.deeresources.com
370
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 10 2019-08-01

Table 4: Incremental Cost Assumptions
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost (2020 PV$)
Source & Notes Single Family
Multifamily
(Per Dwelling
Unit)
Non-Preempted Measures
Reduced
Infiltration

3.0 vs 5.0 ACH50 $391 n/a NREL’s BEopt cost database ($0.115/ft2 for 3 ACH50 & $0.207/ft2 for 2 ACH50) + $100 HERS rater verification. 2.0 vs 5.0 ACH50 $613 n/a
Window U-
factor 0.24 vs 0.30 $2,261 $607 $4.23/ft2 window area based on analysis conducted for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 cycles (Statewide CASE Team, 2018).

Window SHGC 0.50 vs 0.35 $0 $0
Data from CASE Report along with direct feedback from Statewide CASE Team that higher SHGC does not necessarily have any incremental cost (Statewide CASE Team, 2017d). Applies to CZ 1,3,5,16.

Cool Roof -
Aged Solar
Reflectance

0.25 vs 0.20 $237 $58 Costs based on 2016 Cost-effectiveness Study for Cool Roofs reach code analysis for 0.28 solar reflectance product. (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2017b). 0.20 vs 0.10 $0 $0 Exterior Wall
Insulation R-7.5 vs R-5 $818 n/a Based on increasing exterior insulation from 1” R-5 to 1.5” R-7.5 in a 2x6 wall (Statewide CASE Team, 2017c). Applies to single family only in all climates except CZ 6, 7.

Under-Deck
Roof
Insulation
(HPA)
R-13 vs R-0 $1,338 $334 Costs for R-13 ($0.64/ft2), R-19 ($0.78/ft2) and R-30 ($1.61/ft2) based on data presented in the 2019 HPA CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2017b) along with data collected directly from builders during the 2019 CASE process. The R-30 costs include additional labor costs for cabling. Costs for R-38 from NREL’s BEopt cost database.

R-19 vs R-13 $282 $70
R-30 vs R-19 $1,831 $457
R-38 vs R-30 $585 $146
Attic Floor
Insulation R-38 vs R-30 $584 $146 NREL’s BEopt cost database: $0.34/ft2 ceiling area Slab Edge
Insulation
R-10 vs R-0 $553 $121 $4/linear foot of slab perimeter based on internet research. Assumes 16in depth.

R-10 vs R-7 $157 $21 $1.58/linear foot of slab perimeter based on NREL’s BEopt cost database. This applies to CZ 16 only where R-7 slab edge insulation is required prescriptively. Assumes 16in depth.

Duct Location
<12 feet in attic $358 n/a
Costs based on a 2015 report on the Evaluation of Ducts in Conditioned Space for New California Homes (Davis Energy Group, 2015). HERS verification cost of $100 for the Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space credit.

Ducts in
Conditioned
Space
$658 n/a
Verified Low
Leakage Ducts in
Conditioned
Space
$768 $110
371
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 11 2019-08-01
Table 4: Incremental Cost Assumptions
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost (2020 PV$)
Source & Notes Single Family
Multifamily
(Per Dwelling
Unit)
Distribution
System
Leakage
2% vs 5% $96 n/a
1-hour labor. Labor rate of $96 per hour is from 2019 RSMeans for sheet metal workers and includes an average City Cost Index for labor for California cities & 10% for overhead and profit. Applies to single family only since ducts are assumed to be in cond itioned space for multifamily
Low Leakage Air
Handler $0 n/a
Negligible cost based on review of available products. There are more than 6,000 Energy Commission certified units and the list includes many furnace and heat pump air handler product lines from the major manufacturers, including minimum efficiency, low cost product lines.

Low Pressure
Drop Ducts
(Fan W/cfm)

0.35 vs 0.45 $96 $48 Costs assume one-hour labor for single family and half-hour per multifamily apartment. Labor rate of $96 per hour is from 2019 RSMeans for sheet metal workers and includes an average City Cost Index for labor for California cities. 0.45 vs 0.58 $96 $48 Hot Water
Pipe Insulation HERS verified $110 $83 Cost for HERS verification only, based on feedback from HERS raters. $100 per single family home and $75 per multifamily unit before markup.

Compact Hot
Water
Distribution
Basic credit $150 $0
For single family add 20-feet venting at $12/ft to locate water heater on interior garage wall, less 20-feet savings for less PEX and pipe insulation at $4.88/ft. Costs from online retailers.

Many multifamily buildings are expected to meet this credit without any changes to distribution design.

Expanded credit n/a $83 Cost for HERS verification only. $75 per multifamily unit before markup. This was only evaluated for multifamily buildings.

Drain Water
Heat Recovery 50% efficiency n/a $690
Cost from the 2019 DWHR CASE Report assuming a 2-inch DWHR unit. The CASE Report multifamily costs were based on one unit serving 4 dwelling units with a central water heater.

Since individual water heaters serve each dwelling unit in this analysis, the Reach Code Team used single family costs from the CASE Report. Costs in the CASE Report were based on a

46.1% efficient unit, a DWHR device that meets the 50% efficiency assumed in this analysis may cost a little more. (Statewide CASE Team, 2017a).

Federally Pre-empted Measures
Furnace AFUE
92% vs 80% $139 $139 Equipment costs from online retailers for 40-kBtu/h unit. Cost saving for 6-feet of venting at $26/foot due to lower cost venting requirements for condensing (PVC) vs non -condensing (stainless) furnaces. Replacement at year 20 assumes a 50% reduction in first cost. Value at year 30 based on remaining useful life is included. 96% vs 80% $244 $244 Air
Conditioner

SEER/EER
16/13 vs 14/11.7 $111 $111 Costs from online retailers for 2-ton unit. Replacement at year 20 assumes a 50% reduction in first cost. Value at year 30 based on remaining useful life is included. 18/14 vs 14/11.7 $1,148 $1,148 372
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 12 2019-08-01
Table 4: Incremental Cost Assumptions
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost (2020 PV$)
Source & Notes Single Family
Multifamily
(Per Dwelling
Unit)
Heat Pump

SEER/EER
/HSPF
16/13/9 vs
14/11.7/8.2 $411 $411 Costs from online retailers for 2-ton unit. Replacement at year 15 assumes a 50% reduction in first cost. 18/14/10 vs
14/11.7/8.2 $1,511 $1,511
Tankless
Water Heater
Energy Factor

0.96 vs 0.81 $203 $203
Equipment costs from online retailers for 40-kBtu/h unit. Cost saving for 6-feet of venting at $26/foot due to lower cost venting requirements for condensing (PVC) vs non -condensing (stainless) furnaces. Replacement at year 15 assumes a 50% reduction in first cost.

HPWH NEEA Tier 3 vs

2.0 EF $294 $294 Equipment costs from online retailers. Replacement at year 15 assumes a 50% reduction in first cost.

PV + Battery
PV System System size
varies $3.72/W-DC $3.17/W-DC
First costs are from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2018 costs (Barbose et al., 2018) and represent costs for the first half of 2018 of $3.50/W-DC for residential system and $2.90/W-DC for non- residential system ≤500 kW-DC. These costs were reduced by 16% for the solar investment tax credit, which is the average credit over years 2020-2022.

Inverter replacement cost of $0.14/W-DC present value includes replacements at year 11 at $0.15/W-DC (nominal) and at year 21 at $0.12/W-DC (nominal) per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017).

System maintenance costs of $0.31/W-DC present value assume $0.02/W-DC (nominal) annually per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017). 10% overhead and profit added to all costs
Battery
System size
varies by building
type
$656/kWh $656/kWh
$633/kWh first cost based on the PV Plus Battery Study report (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2018) as the average cost of the three systems that were analyzed . This cost was reduced by 16% for the solar investment tax credit, which is the average credit over years 2020-2022.

Replacement cost at year 15 of $100/kWh based on target price reductions (Penn, 2018).

373
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 13 2019-08-01

2.5 Cost-effectiveness
Cost-effectiveness was evaluated for all sixteen climate zones and is presented based on both TDV energy, using the Energy Commission’s LCC methodology, and an On-Bill approach using residential customer utility rates.

Both methodologies require estimating and quantifying the value of the energy impact associated with energy efficiency measures over the life of the measures (30 years) as compared to the prescriptive Title 24 requirements.

Results are presented as a lifecycle benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio, a net present value (NPV) metric which represents the cost-effectiveness of a measure over a 30-year lifetime taking into account discounting of future savings and costs and financing of incremental first costs. A value of one indicates the NPV of the savings over the life of the measure is equivalent to the NPV of the lifetime incremental cost of that measure. A value greater than one represents a positive return on investment. The B/C ratio is calculated according to Equation 3.

Equation 3
𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑡 − 𝑡𝑜 − 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 𝑁𝑃𝑉 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑡
𝑁𝑃𝑉 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
In most cases the benefit is represented by annual utility savings or TDV savings and the cost by incremental first cost and replacement costs. However, in some cases a measure may have incremental cost savings but with increased energy related costs. In this case, the benefit is the lower first cost and the cost is the increase in utility bills. The lifetime costs or benefits are calculated according to Equation 4.

Equation 4
𝑵𝑷𝑽 𝒐𝒇 𝒍𝒊𝒇𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝒕/𝒃𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒇𝒊𝒕 = ∑ 𝑨𝒏𝒏𝒖𝒂𝒍 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝒕/𝒃𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒇𝒊𝒕𝒕 ∗ (𝟏 + 𝒓)𝒕𝒏 𝒕=𝟏
Where:
• n = analysis term
• r = discount rate
The following summarizes the assumptions applied in this analysis to both methodologies. • Analysis term of 30-years
• Real discount rate of 3 percent
• Inflation rate of 2 percent
• First incremental costs are financed into a 30-year mortgage • Mortgage interest rate of 4.5 percent
• Average tax rate of 20 percent (to account for tax savings due to loan interest deductions)

2.5.1 On-Bill Customer Lifecycle Cost
Residential utility rates were used to calculate utility costs for all cases and determine On-Bill customer cost- effectiveness for the proposed packages. The Reach Codes Team obtained the recommended utility rates from each IOU based on the assumption that the reach codes go into effect January of 2020. Annual utility costs were calculated using hourly electricity and gas output from CBECC-Res and applying the utility tariffs summarized in Table 5. Appendix B – Utility Tariff Details includes the utility rate schedules used for this study. The applicable residential time-of-use (TOU) rate was applied to all cases.13 Annual electricity production in excess of annual electricity consumption is credited to the utility account at the applicable wholesale rate based on the approved

13 Under NEM rulings by the CPUC (D-16-01-144, 1/28/16), all new PV customers shall be in an approved TOU rate structure. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/General.aspx?id=3800

374
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 14 2019-08-01
NEM2 tariffs for that utility. Minimum daily use billing and mandatory non-bypassable charges have been applied. Future change to the NEM tariffs are likely; however, there is a lot of uncertainty about what those changes will be and if they will become effective during the 2019 code cycle (2020-2022).

The net surplus compensation rates for each utility are as follows:14 • PG&E: $0.0287 / kWh
• SCE: $0.0301 / kWh
• SDG&E: $0.0355 / kWh
Utility rates were applied to each climate zone based on the predominant IOU serving the population of each zone according to Two SCE tariff options were evaluated: TOU-D-4-9 and TOU-D-PRIME. The TOU-D-PRIME rate is only available to customers with heat pumps for either space or water heating, a battery storage system, or an electric vehicle and therefore was only evaluated for the all-electric cases and the Efficiency & PV/Battery packages. The rate which resulted in the lowest annual cost to the customer was used for this analysis, which was TOU-D-4-9 in all cases with the exception of the single family all-electric cases in Climate Zone 14.

Table 5. Climate Zones 10 and 14 are evaluated with both SCE/SoCalGas and SDG&E tariffs since each utility has customers within these climate zones. Climate Zone 5 is evaluated under both PG&E and SoCalGas natural gas rates.

Two SCE tariff options were evaluated: TOU-D-4-9 and TOU-D-PRIME. The TOU-D-PRIME rate is only available to customers with heat pumps for either space or water heating, a battery storage system, or an electric vehicle and therefore was only evaluated for the all-electric cases and the Efficiency & PV/Battery packages. The rate which resulted in the lowest annual cost to the customer was used for this analysis, which was TOU-D-4-9 in all cases with the exception of the single family all-electric cases in Climate Zone 14.

Table 5: IOU Utility Tariffs Applied Based on Climate Zone Climate Zones Electric / Gas
Utility
Electricity
(Time-of-use)
Natural
Gas
1-5, 11-13, 16 PG&E E-TOU, Option B G1
5 PG&E / SoCalGas E-TOU, Option B GR
6, 8-10, 14, 15 SCE / SoCal Gas TOU-D-4-9 or

TOU-D-PRIME GR
7, 10, 14 SDG&E TOU-DR1 GR
Source: Utility websites, See Appendix B – Utility Tariff Details for details on the tariffs applied.

Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time, using assumptions from research conducted by Energy and Environmental Economics (E3) in the 2019 study Residential Building Electrification in California study (Energy & Environmental Economics, 2019). Escalation of natural gas rates between 2019 and 2022 is based on the currently filed General Rate Cases (GRCs) for PG&E, SoCalGas and SDG&E. From 2023 through 2025, gas rates are assumed to escalate at 4% per year above inflation, which reflects historical rate increases between 2013 and 2018. Escalation of electricity rates from 2019 through 2025 is assumed to be 2% per year above inflation, based on electric utility estimates. After 2025, escalation rates for both natural gas and electric rates are assumed to drop to a more conservative 1% escalation per year above inflation for long-term rate trajectories beginning in 2026 through 2050. See Appendix B – Utility Tariff Details for additional details.

14 Net surplus compensation rates based on 1-year average February 2018 – January 2019. 375
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 15 2019-08-01

2.5.2 TDV Lifecycle Cost
Cost-effectiveness was also assessed using the Energy Commission’s TDV LCC methodology. TDV is a normalized monetary format developed and used by the Energy Commission for comparing electricity and natural gas savings, and it considers the cost of electricity and natural gas consumed during different times of the day and year. The 2019 TDV values are based on long term discounted costs of 30 years for all residential measures. The CBECC-Res simulation software outputs are in terms of TDV kBTUs. The present value of the energy cost savings in dollars is calculated by multiplying the TDV kBTU savings by a net present value (NPV) factor, also developed by the Energy Commission. The NPV factor is $0.173/TDV kBtu for residential buildings.

Like the customer B/C ratio, a TDV B/C ratio value of one indicates the savings over the life of the measure are equivalent to the incremental cost of that measure. A value greater than one represents a positive return on investment. The ratio is calculated according to Equation 5.

Equation 5
𝑇𝐷𝑉 𝐵𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑡 − 𝑡𝑜 − 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 𝑇𝐷𝑉 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑠𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 ∗ 𝑁𝑃𝑉 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑁𝑃𝑉 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡

2.6 Electrification Evaluation
In addition to evaluating upgrades to mixed fuel and all-electric buildings independently that do not result in fuel switching, the Reach Code Team also analyzed the impact on construction costs, utility costs, and TDV when a builder specifies and installs electric appliances instead of the gas appliances typically found in a mixed fuel building. This analysis compared the code compliant mixed fuel prototype, which uses gas for space heating, water heating, cooking, and clothes drying, with the code compliant all-electric prototype. It also compared the all-electric Efficiency & PV Package with the code compliance mixed fuel prototype. In these cases, the relative costs between natural gas and electric appliances, differences between in-house electricity and gas infrastructure and the associated infrastructure costs for providing gas to the building were also included.

A variety of sources were reviewed when determining incremental costs. The sources are listed below. • SMUD All-Electric Homes Electrification Case Study (EPRI, 2016) • City of Palo Alto 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Analysis (TRC, 2018) • Building Electrification Market Assessment (E3, 2019) • Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings (Hopkins et al., 2018) • Analysis of the Role of Gas for a Low-Carbon California Future (Navigant, 2008) • Rulemaking No. 15-03-010 An Order Instituting Rulemaking to Identify Disadvantaged Communities in the San Joaquin Valley and Analyze Economically Feasible Options to Increase Access to Affordable Energy in Those Disadvantages Communities (California Public Utilities Commission, 2016) • 2010-2012 WO017 Ex Ante Measure Cost Study: Final Report (Itron, 2014) • Natural gas infrastructure costs provided by utility staff through the Reach Code subprogram • Costs obtained from builders, contractors and developers Incremental costs are presented in Table 6. Values in parentheses represent a lower cost or cost reduction in the electric option relative to mixed fuel. The costs from the available sources varied widely, making it difficult to develop narrow cost estimates for each component. For certain components data is provided with a low to high range as well as what were determined to be typical costs and ultimately applied in this analysis. Two sets of typical costs are presented, one which is applied in the On-Bill cost effectiveness methodology and another applied in the TDV methodology. Details of these differences are explained in the discussion of site gas infrastructure costs in the following pages.
376
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 16 2019-08-01
Table 6: Incremental Costs – All-Electric Code Compliant Home Compared to a Mixed Fuel Code Compliant Home
Measure Incremental Cost (2020 PV$) Incremental Cost (2020 PV$) Multifamily1 (Per Dwelling Unit) Single Family1
Low High Typical
(On-Bill)
Typical
(TDV)
Low High Typical
(On-Bill)
Typical
(TDV)
Heat Pump vs Gas Furnace/Split AC ($2,770) $620 ($221)

Same as Single Family
Heat Pump Water Heater vs Gas
Tankless ($1,120) $1,120 $0
Electric vs Gas Clothes Dryer2 ($428) $820 $0
Electric vs Gas Cooking2 $0 $1,800 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $200 $800 $600 $150 $600 $600 In-House Gas Infrastructure ($1,670) ($550) ($800) ($600) ($150) ($600) Site Gas Infrastructure ($25,000) ($900) ($5,750) ($11,836) ($16,250) ($310) ($3,140) ($6,463) Total First Cost ($30,788) $3,710 ($6,171) ($12,257) ($20,918) $4,500 ($3,361) ($6,684) Present Value of Equipment Replacement Cost $1,266 $1,266 Lifetime Cost Including Replacement & Financing of First Cost ($5,349) ($11,872)
($2,337) ($5,899)
1Low and high costs represent the potential range of costs and typical represents the costs used in this analysis and determined to be most representative of the conditions described in this report. Two sets of typical costs are presented, one which is applied in the On-Bill cost effectiveness methodology and another applied in the TDV methodology. 2Typical costs assume electric resistance technology. The high range represents higher end induction cooktops and heat pump clothes dryers. Lower cost induction cooktops are available.

Typical incremental costs for switching from a mixed fuel design to an all-electric design are based on the following assumptions:

Appliances: The Reach Code Team determined that the typical first installed cost for electric appliances is very similar to that for natural gas appliances. This was based on information provided by HVAC contractors, plumbers and builders as well as a review of other studies. After review of various sources, the Reach Code Team concluded that the cost difference between gas and electric resistance options for clothes dryers and stoves is negligible and that the lifetimes of the two technologies are also similar.

HVAC: Typical HVAC incremental costs were based on the City of Palo Alto 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Analysis (TRC, 2018) which assumes approximately $200 first cost savings for the heat pump relative to the gas furnace and air conditioner. Table 6 also includes the present value of the incremental replacement costs for the heat pump based on a 15-year lifetime and a 20-year lifetime for the gas furnace in the mixed fuel home.

DHW: Typical costs for the water heating system were based on equivalent installed first costs for the HPWH and tankless gas water heater. This accounts for slightly higher equipment cost but lower installation labor due to the elimination of the gas flue. Incremental replacement costs for the HPWH are based on a 15-year lifetime and a 20-year lifetime for the tankless water heater.

For multifamily, less data was available and therefore a range of low and high costs is not provided. The typical first cost for multifamily similarly is expected to be close to the same for the mixed fuel and all- electric designs. However, there are additional considerations with multifamily such as greater complexity for venting of natural gas appliances as well as for locating the HPWH within the conditioned space (all climates except Climate Zones 1, 3, and 5, see Table 2) that may impact the total costs.

Electric service upgrade: The study assumes an incremental cost to run 220V service to each appliance of $200 per appliance for single family homes and $150 per appliance per multifamily apartment based on cost estimates from builders and contractors. The Reach Code Team reviewed production builder utility plans for 377
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 17 2019-08-01
mixed-fuel homes and consulted with contractors to estimate which electricity and/or natural gas services are usually provided to the dryer and oven. Typical practice varied, with some builders providing both gas and electric service to both appliances, others providing both services to only one of the appliances, and some only providing gas. For this study, the Reach Code Team determined that for single family homes the typical cost is best qualified by the practice of providing 220V service and gas to either the dryer and the oven and only gas service to the other. For multifamily buildings it’s assumed that only gas is provided to the dryer and oven in the mixed fuel home.

It is assumed that no upgrades to the electrical panel are required and that a 200 Amp panel is typically installed for both mixed fuel and all-electric new construction homes. There are no incremental electrical site infrastructure requirements.

In-house gas infrastructure (from meter to appliances): Installation cost to run a gas line from the meter to the appliance location is $200 per appliance for single family and $150 per appliance per multifamily apartment based on cost estimates from builders and contractors. The cost estimate includes providing gas to the water heater, furnace, dryer and cooktop.

Site gas infrastructure: The cost-effective analysis components with the highest degree of variability are the costs for on-site gas infrastructure. These costs can be project dependent and may be significantly impacted by such factors as utility territory, site characteristics, distance to the nearest gas main and main location, joint trenching, whether work is conducted by the utility or a private contractor, and number of dwelling units per development. All gas utilities participating in this study were solicited for cost information. The typical infrastructure costs for single family homes presented in Table 6 are based on cost data provided by PG&E and reflect those for a new subdivision in an undeveloped area requiring the installation of natural gas infrastructure, including a main line. Infrastructure costs for infill development can also be highly variable and may be higher than in an undeveloped area. The additional costs associated with disruption of existing roads, sidewalks, and other structures can be significant. Total typical costs in Table 6 assume $10,000 for extension of a gas main, $1,686 for a service lateral, and $150 for the meter.

Utility Gas Main Extensions rules15 specify that the developer has the option to only pay 50% of the total cost for a main extension after subtraction of allowances for installation of gas appliances. This 50% refund and the appliance allowance deductions are accounted for in the site gas infrastructure costs under the On-Bill cost- effectiveness methodology. The net costs to the utility after partial reimbursement from the developer are included in utility ratebase and recovered via rates to all customers. The total cost of $5,750 presented in Table 6 reflects a 50% refund on the $10,000 extension and appliance deductions of $1,086 for a furnace, water heater, cooktop, and dryer. Under the On-Bill methodology this analysis assumes this developer option will remain available through 2022 and that the cost savings are passed along to the customer.

The 50% refund and appliance deductions were not applied to the site gas infrastructure costs under the TDV cost-effectiveness methodology based on input received from the Energy Commission and agreement from the Reach Code technical advisory team that the approach is appropriate. TDV cost savings impacts extend beyond the customer and account for societal impacts of energy use. Accounting for the full cost of the infrastructure upgrades was determined to be justified when evaluating under the TDV methodology.

15 PG&E Rule 15: https://www.pge.com/tariffs/tm2/pdf/GAS_RULES_15.pdf SoCalGas Rule 20: https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/tariffs/tm2/pdf/20.pdf SDG&E Rule 15: http://regarchive.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/GAS_GAS-RULES_GRULE15.pdf 378
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 18 2019-08-01
Less information was available for the costs associated with gas infrastructure for low-rise multifamily development. The typical cost in Table 6 for the On-Bill methodology is based on TRC’s City of Palo Alto 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Analysis (TRC, 2018). These costs, provided by the City of Palo Alto, are approximately $25,100 for an 8-unit new construction building and reflect connection to an existing main for infill development. Specific costs include plan review, connection charges, meter and manifold, plumbing distribution, and street cut fees. While these costs are specifically based on infill development and from one municipal utility, the estimates are less than those provided by PG&E reflecting the average cost differences charged to the developer between single family and multifamily in an undeveloped area (after accounting for deductions per the Gas Main Extensions rule). To convert costs charged to the developer to account for the full infrastructure upgrade cost (costs applied in the TDV methodology analysis), a factor of

2.0616 was calculated based on the single family analysis. This same factor was applied to the multifamily cost of $3,140 to arrive at $6,463 (see Table 6).

2.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Equivalent CO2 emission savings were calculated based on outputs from the CBECC-Res simulation software.

Electricity emissions vary by region and by hour of the year. CBECC-Res applies two distinct hourly profiles, one for Climate Zones 1 through 5 and 11 through 13 and another for Climate Zones 6 through 10 and 14 through

16. For natural gas a fixed factor of 0.005307 metric tons/therm is used. To compare the mixed fuel and all- electric cases side-by-side, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are presented as CO2-equivalent emissions per square foot of conditioned floor area.
3 Results
The primary objective of the evaluation is to identify cost-effective, non-preempted performance targets for both single family and low-rise multifamily prototypes, under both mixed fuel and all-electric cases, to support the design of local ordinances requiring new low-rise residential buildings to exceed the minimum state requirements. The packages presented are representative examples of designs and measures that can be used to meet the requirements. In practice, a builder can use any combination of non-preempted or preempted compliant measures to meet the requirements.

This analysis covered all sixteen climate zones and evaluated two efficiency packages, including a non- preempted package and a preempted package that includes upgrades to federally regulated equipment, an Efficiency & PV Package for the all-electric scenario only, and an Efficiency & PV/Battery Package. For the efficiency-only packages, measures were refined to ensure that the non-preempted package was cost-effective based on one of the two metrics applied in this study, TDV or On-Bill. The preempted equipment package, which the Reach Code Team considers to be a package of upgrades most reflective of what builders commonly apply to exceed code requirements, was designed to be cost-effective based on the On-Bill cost-effectiveness approach.

Results are presented as EDR Margin instead of compliance margin. EDR is the metric used to determine code compliance in the 2019 cycle. Target EDR Margin is based on taking the calculated EDR Margin for the case and rounding down to the next half of a whole number. Target EDR Margin for the Efficiency Package are defined based on the lower of the EDR Margin of the non-preempted package and the equipment, preempted package.

For example, if for a particular case the cost-effective non-preempted package has an EDR Margin of 3 and the preempted package an EDR Margin of 4, the Target EDR Margin is set at 3.

16 This factor includes the elimination of the 50% refund for the main extension and adding back in the appliance allowance deductions.
379
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 19 2019-08-01
For a package to qualify, a minimum EDR Margin of 0.5 was required. This is to say that a package that only achieved an EDR Margin of 0.4, for example, was not considered. An EDR Margin less than 0.5 generally corresponds to a compliance margin lower than 5% and was considered too small to ensure repeatable results.

In certain cases, the Reach Code Team did not identify a cost-effective package that achieved the minimum EDR Margin of 0.5.

Although some of the efficiency measures evaluated were not cost-effective and were eliminated, the following measures are included in at least one package:
• Reduced infiltration
• Improved fenestration
• Improved cool roofs
• High performance attics
• Slab insulation
• Reduced duct leakage
• Verified low leakage ducts in conditioned space
• Low pressure-drop distribution system
• Compact hot water distribution system, basic and expanded • High efficiency furnace, air conditioner & heat pump (preempted) • High efficiency tankless water heater & heat pump water heater (preempted)

3.1 PV and Battery System Sizing
The approach to determining the size of the PV and battery systems varied based on each package and the source fuel. Table 7 describes the PV and battery sizing approaches applied to each of the four packages. For the Efficiency Non-preempted and Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted packages a different method was applied to each the two fuel scenarios. In all mixed fuel cases, the PV was sized to offset 100% of the estimated electrical load and any electricity savings from efficiency measures were traded off with a smaller PV system. Not downsizing the PV system after adding efficiency measures runs the risk of producing more electricity than is consumed, reducing cost-effectiveness and violating NEM rules. While the impact of this in most cases is minor, analysis confirmed that cost-effectiveness improved when reducing the system size to offset 100% of the electricity usage as opposed to keeping the PV system the same size as the Standard Design.

In the all-electric Efficiency cases, the PV system size was left to match the Standard Design (Std Design PV), and the inclusion of energy efficiency measures was not traded off with a reduced capacity PV system. Because the PV system is sized to meet the electricity load of a mixed fuel home, it is cost-effective to keep the PV system the same size and offset a greater percentage of the electrical load.

For the Efficiency & PV case on the all-electric home, the Reach Code Team evaluated PV system sizing to offset 100%, 90% and 80% of the total calculated electricity use. Of these three, sizing to 90% proved to be the most cost-effective based on customer utility bills. This is a result of the impact of the annual minimum bill which is around $120 across all the utilities. The “sweet spot” is a PV system that reduces electricity bills just enough to match the annual minimum bill; increasing the PV size beyond this adds first cost but does not result in utility bill savings.
380
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 20 2019-08-01
Table 7: PV & Battery Sizing Details by Package Type
Package Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Efficiency (Envelope & Equipment) PV Scaled @ 100% electricity Std Design PV Efficiency & PV n/a PV Scaled @ 90%
Efficiency & PV/Battery
PV Scaled @ 100% electricity
5kWh / SF home

2.75kWh/ MF apt
PV Scaled @ 100%
5kWh / SF home

2.75kWh/ MF apt

A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the appropriate battery and PV capacity for the Efficiency & PV/Battery Packages using the 1-story 2,100 square foot prototype in Climate Zone 12. Results are shown in Figure 2. The current version of CBECC-Res requires a minimum battery size of 5 kWh to qualify for the self- utilization credit. CBECC-Res allows for PV oversizing up to 160% of the building’s estimated electricity load when battery storage systems are installed; however, the Reach Code Team considered this high, potentially problematic from a grid perspective, and likely not acceptable to the utilities or customers. The Reach Code Team compared cost-effectiveness of 5kWh and 7.5kWh battery systems as well as of PV systems sized to offset 90%, 100%, or 120% of the estimated electrical load.

Results show that from an on-bill perspective a smaller battery size is more cost-effective. The sensitivity analysis also showed that increasing the PV capacity from 90% to 120% of the electricity use reduced cost- effectiveness. From the TDV perspective there was little difference in results across all the scenarios, with the larger battery size being marginally more cost-effective. Based on these results, the Reach Code Team applied to the Efficiency & PV/Battery Package a 5kWh battery system for single family homes with PV sized to offset 100% of the electricity load. Even though PV scaled to 90% was the most cost-effective, sizing was increased to 100% to evaluate greater generation beyond the Efficiency & PV Package and to achieve zero net electricity. These results also show that in isolation, the inclusion of a battery system reduces cost-effectiveness compared to the same size PV system without batteries.

For multifamily buildings the battery capacity was scaled to reflect the average ratio of battery size to PV system capacity (kWh/kW) for the single family Efficiency & PV Package. This resulted in a 22kWh battery for the multifamily building, or 2.75kWh per apartment.

Figure 2: B/C ratio comparison for PV and battery sizing

On-Bill = 1.9 (TDV = 1.84)
On-Bill = 1.49 (TDV = 1.9)
On-Bill = 1.37 (TDV = 1.88)
On-Bill = 1.35 (TDV = 1.91)
On-Bill = 1.23 (TDV = 1.9)
On-Bill = 1.14 (TDV = 1.87)
On-Bill = 1.04 (TDV = 1.88)
381
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 21 2019-08-01

3.2 Single Family Results
Table 8 through Table 10 contain cost effectiveness findings for the single family packages. Table 8 summarizes the package costs for all of the mixed fuel and all-electric efficiency, PV and battery packages. The mixed fuel results are evaluated and presented relative to a mixed fuel code compliant basecase while the all-electric results are relative to an all-electric code compliant basecase.

Table 9 and Table 10 present the B/C ratios for all the single family packages according to both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies for the mixed fuel and the all-electric cases, respectively. Results are cost-effective based on TDV for all cases except for Climate Zone 7 where no cost-effective combination of non-preempted efficiency measures was found that met the minimum 0.5 EDR Margin threshold. Cases where the B/C ratio is indicated as “>1” refer to instances where there are incremental cost savings in addition to annual utility bill savings. In these cases, there is no cost associated with the upgrade and benefits are realized immediately.

Figure 3 presents a comparison of Total EDRs for single family buildings and Figure 4 presents the EDR Margin results. Each graph compares the mixed fuel and all-electric cases as well as the various packages. The EDR Margin for the Efficiency Package for most climates is between 1.0 and 5.5 for mixed fuel cases and slightly higher, between 1.5 and 6.5, for the all-electric design. No cost-effective mixed fuel or all-electric non- preempted Efficiency package was found Climate Zone 7.

For the mixed fuel case, the Efficiency & PV/Battery Package increased the EDR Margin to values between 7.0 and 10.5. Because of the limitations on oversizing PV systems to offset natural gas use it is not feasible to achieve higher EDR Margins by increasing PV system capacity.

For the all-electric case, the Efficiency & PV Package resulted in EDR Margins of 11.0 to 19.0 for most climates; adding a battery system increased the EDR Margin by an additional 7 to 13 points. Climate zones 1 and 16, which have high heating loads, have much higher EDR Margins for the Efficiency & PV package (26.5-31.0). The Standard Design PV, which is what is applied in the all-electric Efficiency Package, is not sized to offset any of the heating load. When the PV system is sized to offset 90% of the total electricity use, the increase is substantial as a result. In contrast, in Climate Zone 15 the Standard Design PV system is already sized to cover the cooling electricity load, which represents 40% of whole building electricity use. Therefore, increasing the PV size to offset 90% of the electric load in this climate only results in adding approximately 120 Watts of PV capacity and subsequently a negligible impact on the EDR.

Additional results details can be found in Appendix C – Single Family Detailed Results with summaries of measures included in each of the packages in Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary. A summary of results by climate zone is presented in Appendix G – Results by Climate Zone. 382
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 22 2019-08-01

Table 8: Single Family Package Lifetime Incremental Costs Climate
Zone
Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Non-Preempted Equipment -
Preempted
Efficiency &
PV/Battery Non-Preempted Equipment -
Preempted Efficiency & PV Efficiency &
PV/Battery
CZ01 +$1,355 +$1,280 +$5,311 +$7,642 +$2,108 +$18,192 +$24,770 CZ02 +$1,504 +$724 +$5,393 +$3,943 +$2,108 +$12,106 +$18,132 CZ03 +$1,552 +$1,448 +$5,438 +$1,519 +$2,108 +$8,517 +$14,380 CZ04 +$1,556 +$758 +$5,434 +$1,519 +$2,108 +$8,786 +$14,664 CZ05 +$1,571 +$772 +$5,433 +$1,519 +$2,108 +$8,307 +$14,047 CZ06 +$1,003 +$581 +$4,889 +$926 +$846 +$6,341 +$12,036 CZ07 n/a +$606 +$4,028 n/a +$846 +$4,436 +$9,936
CZ08 +$581 +$586 +$4,466 +$926 +$412 +$5,373 +$11,016 CZ09 +$912 +$574 +$4,785 +$1,180 +$846 +$5,778 +$11,454 CZ10 +$1,648 +$593 +$5,522 +$1,773 +$949 +$6,405 +$12,129 CZ11 +$3,143 +$1,222 +$7,026 +$3,735 +$2,108 +$10,827 +$17,077 CZ12 +$1,679 +$654 +$5,568 +$3,735 +$2,108 +$11,520 +$17,586 CZ13 +$3,060 +$611 +$6,954 +$4,154 +$2,108 +$10,532 +$16,806 CZ14 +$1,662 +$799 +$5,526 +$4,154 +$2,108 +$10,459 +$16,394 CZ15 +$2,179 -($936) +$6,043 +$4,612 +$2,108 +$5,085 +$11,382 CZ16 +$3,542 +$2,441 +$7,399 +$5,731 +$2,108 +$16,582 +$22,838

383
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 23 2019-08-01
Table 9: Single Family Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the Mixed Fuel Case 1,2 CZ Utility
Efficiency Efficiency & PV/Battery
Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted Target
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
01 PG&E 5.3 3.4 2.8 6.9 4.9 4.1 5.0 10.6 0.9 1.6 10.5
02 PG&E 3.3 1.6 1.7 3.3 3.8 3.6 3.0 10.1 0.5 1.6 10.0
03 PG&E 3.0 1.3 1.3 4.1 1.9 2.0 2.5 10.0 0.4 1.4 10.0
04 PG&E 2.5 0.9 1.2 2.7 2.4 2.7 2.5 10.1 0.3 1.5 10.0
05 PG&E 2.7 1.1 1.2 2.6 2.3 2.5 2.5 9.4 0.4 1.3 9.0
05 PG&E/SoCalGas 2.7 0.9 1.2 2.6 2.0 2.5 2.5 9.4 0.3 1.3 9.0 06 SCE/SoCalGas 2.0 0.7 1.2 2.0 1.6 2.0 1.5 9.8 0.8 1.3 9.5 07 SDG&E 0.0 - - 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.0 9.2 0.1 1.3 9.0
08 SCE/SoCalGas 1.3 0.6 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.8 1.0 8.4 0.9 1.3 8.0 09 SCE/SoCalGas 2.6 0.7 2.0 2.9 1.8 3.7 2.5 8.8 1.0 1.5 8.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas 3.2 0.6 1.3 3.2 2.0 3.8 3.0 9.6 1.0 1.5 9.5 10 SDG&E 3.2 0.8 1.3 3.2 2.6 3.8 3.0 9.6 0.6 1.5 9.5
11 PG&E 4.3 0.8 1.2 5.1 2.5 3.7 4.0 9.2 0.4 1.5 9.0
12 PG&E 3.5 1.2 1.8 3.4 3.3 4.6 3.0 9.6 0.4 1.7 9.5
13 PG&E 4.6 0.8 1.3 5.8 5.3 8.4 4.5 9.7 0.4 1.6 9.5
14 SCE/SoCalGas 5.0 1.6 2.5 5.8 4.0 6.1 4.5 9.0 1.3 1.7 9.0 14 SDG&E 5.0 1.9 2.5 5.8 4.9 6.1 4.5 9.0 1.2 1.7 9.0
15 SCE/SoCalGas 4.8 1.0 1.6 5.0 >1 >1 4.5 7.1 1.1 1.5 7.0 16 PG&E 5.4 1.6 1.5 6.2 2.2 2.2 5.0 10.5 0.9 1.4 10.5
1“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings. 2Information about the measures included for each climate zone are described in Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary.

384
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 24 2019-08-01
Table 10: Single Family Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the All-Electric Case1,2 CZ Utility
Efficiency Efficiency & PV Efficiency & PV/Battery
Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted Target
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
01 PG&E 15.2 1.8 1.7 6.9 2.9 2.7 6.5 31.4 1.8 1.5 31.0 41.2 1.4 1.4 41.0 02 PG&E 4.9 1.2 1.1 5.1 2.3 2.1 4.5 19.4 1.8 1.4 19.0 30.1 1.4 1.4 30.0 03 PG&E 4.7 2.6 2.4 4.4 1.8 1.6 4.0 18.5 2.2 1.7 18.0 29.3 1.5 1.6 29.0 04 PG&E 3.4 1.9 1.8 3.9 1.5 1.5 3.0 17.2 2.1 1.6 17.0 28.6 1.5 1.6 28.5 05 PG&E 4.4 2.6 2.3 4.4 1.9 1.7 4.0 18.2 2.3 1.8 18.0 28.7 1.6 1.6 28.5 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 4.4 2.6 2.3 4.4 1.9 1.7 4.0 18.2 2.3 1.8 18.0 28.7 1.6 1.6 28.5 06 SCE/SoCalGas 2.0 1.3 1.4 2.9 2.2 2.3 2.0 14.3 1.2 1.5 14.0 26.1 1.2 1.4 26.0 07 SDG&E 0.0 - - 2.2 1.6 1.7 0.0 11.3 1.9 1.5 11.0 24.2 1.3 1.5 24.0 08 SCE/SoCalGas 1.6 0.6 1.2 1.8 2.8 3.0 1.5 10.9 1.0 1.5 10.5 21.6 1.1 1.4 21.5 09 SCE/SoCalGas 2.8 0.8 2.0 3.3 2.1 3.2 2.5 11.5 1.1 1.6 11.5 21.3 1.1 1.5 21.0 10 SCE/SoCalGas 3.1 0.9 1.5 3.4 2.3 3.2 3.0 11.1 1.1 1.5 11.0 21.2 1.1 1.5 21.0 10 SDG&E 3.1 1.1 1.5 3.4 2.6 3.2 3.0 11.1 1.7 1.5 11.0 21.2 1.4 1.5 21.0 11 PG&E 4.6 1.2 1.5 5.9 3.0 3.3 4.5 14.2 1.8 1.6 14.0 23.2 1.5 1.6 23.0 12 PG&E 3.8 0.8 1.1 5.1 2.0 2.5 3.5 15.7 1.7 1.4 15.5 25.4 1.3 1.5 25.0 13 PG&E 5.1 1.1 1.4 6.0 2.9 3.3 5.0 13.4 1.7 1.5 13.0 22.5 1.4 1.5 22.0 14 SCE/SoCalGas 5.6 1.0 1.5 6.0 2.3 3.1 5.5 15.5 1.2 1.6 15.5 23.9 1.4 1.6 23.5 14 SDG&E 5.6 1.3 1.5 6.0 2.9 3.1 5.5 15.5 1.8 1.6 15.5 23.9 1.7 1.6 23.5 15 SCE/SoCalGas 5.6 1.1 1.6 7.3 3.3 4.5 5.5 6.2 1.1 1.6 6.0 13.5 1.2 1.5 13.0 16 PG&E 9.7 1.7 1.7 4.9 2.4 2.3 4.5 27.0 2.1 1.6 26.5 35.4 1.7 1.5 35.0 1“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings. 2Information about the measures included for each climate zone are described in Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary 385
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 25 2019-08-01

Figure 3: Single family Total EDR comparison

Figure 4: Single family EDR Margin comparison (based on Efficiency EDR Margin for the Efficiency packages and the Total EDR Margin for the Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages)

386
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 26 2019-08-01

3.2.1 GHG Emission Reductions
Figure 5 compares annual GHG emissions for both mixed fuel and all-electric single family 2019 code compliant cases with Efficiency, Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages. GHG emissions vary by climate but are consistently higher in mixed fuel cases than all-electric. Standard Design mixed fuel emissions range from 1.3 (CZ 7) to 3.3 (CZ 16) lbs CO2e/square foot of floor area, where all-electric Standard Design emissions range from

0.7 to 1.7 lbs CO2e/ ft2. Adding efficiency, PV and batteries to the mixed fuel code compliant prototype reduces GHG emissions by 20% on average to between 1.0 and 1.8 lbs CO2e/ft2, with the exception of Climate Zones 1 and 16. Adding efficiency, PV and batteries to the all-electric code compliant prototype reduces annual GHG emissions by 65% on average to 0.8 lbs CO2e/ft2 or less. None of the cases completely eliminate GHG emissions.

Because of the time value of emissions calculation for electricity in CBECC-Res, there is always some amount of GHG impacts with using electricity from the grid.

Figure 5: Single family greenhouse gas emissions comparison

3.3 Multifamily Results
Table 11 through Table 13 contain cost effectiveness findings for the multifamily packages. Table 11 summarizes the package costs for all the mixed fuel and all-electric efficiency, PV and battery packages.

Table 12 and Table 13 present the B/C ratios for all the packages according to both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies for the mixed fuel and the all-electric cases, respectively. All the packages are cost-effective based on TDV except Climate Zone 3 for the all-electric cases where no cost-effective combination of non- preempted efficiency measures was found that met the minimum 0.5 EDR Margin threshold. Cases where the B/C ratio is indicated as “>1” refer to instances where there are incremental cost savings in addition to annual utility bill savings. In these cases, there is no cost associated with this upgrade and benefits are realized immediately.

It is generally more challenging to achieve equivalent savings targets cost-effectively for the multifamily cases than for the single family cases. With less exterior surface area per floor area the impact of envelope measures 387
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 27 2019-08-01
is diminished in multifamily buildings. Ducts are already assumed to be within conditioned space and therefore only one of the duct measures found to be cost-effective in single family homes can be applied.

Figure 6 presents a comparison of Total EDRs for the multifamily cases and Figure 7 presents the EDR Margin results. Each graph compares the mixed fuel and all-electric cases as well as the various packages. Cost-effective efficiency packages were found for all mixed fuel cases. The Target EDR Margins for the mixed fuel Efficiency Package are 0.5 for Climate Zones 3, 5 and 7, between 1.0 and 2.5 for Climate Zones 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 through 12 and 16, and between 3.0 and 4.0 in Climate Zones 13 through 15. For the all-electric case, no cost-effective non- preempted efficiency packages were found in Climate Zone 3. The Target EDR Margins are between 0.5 and 2.5 for Climate Zones 2, 4 through 10 and 12, and between 3.0 and 4.0 in Climate Zones 1, 11, and 13 through 16.

For the mixed fuel case, the Efficiency & PV/Battery Package results in an EDR Margin of between 8.5 and 11.5 across all climate zones. Most of these packages were not found to be cost-effective based on utility bill savings alone, but they all are cost-effective based on TDV energy savings. For the all-electric case, the Efficiency & PV Package resulted in EDR Margins of 10.5 to 17.5 for most climates; adding a battery system increased the EDR Margin by an additional 10 to 15 points. Climate zones 1 and 16, which have high heating loads, have much higher EDR Margins for the Efficiency & PV package (19.5-22.5). The Standard Design PV, which is what is applied in the Efficiency Package, is not sized to offset any of the heating load. When the PV system is sized to offset 90% of the total electricity use, the increase is substantial as a result. In Climate Zone 15 the Standard Design PV system is already sized to cover the cooling electricity load, which represents 30% of whole building electricity use. Therefore, increasing the PV size to offset 90% of the electric load in this climate only results in adding approximately 240 Watts of PV capacity per apartment and subsequently a much smaller impact on the EDR than in other climate zones. Because of the limitations on oversizing PV systems to offset natural gas use it is not feasible to achieve comparable EDR Margins for the mixed fuel case as in the all-electric case.

Additional results details can be found in Appendix E – Multifamily Detailed Results with summaries of measures included in each of the packages in Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary. A summary of results by climate zone is presented in Appendix G – Results by Climate Zone. 388
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 28 2019-08-01
Table 11: Multifamily Package Incremental Costs per Dwelling Unit Climate
Zone
Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Non-
Preempted
Equipment -
Preempted
Efficiency &
PV/Battery
Non-
Preempted
Equipment -
Preempted
Efficiency
& PV
Efficiency &
PV/Battery
CZ01 +$960 +$507 +$3,094 +$949 +$795 +$5,538 +$8,919 CZ02 +$309 +$497 +$2,413 +$361 +$795 +$3,711 +$6,833 CZ03 +$175 +$403 +$2,279 n/a +$795 +$3,272 +$6,344 CZ04 +$329 +$351 +$2,429 +$361 +$795 +$3,158 +$6,201 CZ05 +$180 +$358 +$2,273 +$247 +$795 +$3,293 +$6,314 CZ06 +$190 +$213 +$2,294 +$231 +$361 +$2,580 +$5,590 CZ07 +$90 +$366 +$2,188 +$202 +$361 +$2,261 +$5,203 CZ08 +$250 +$213 +$2,353 +$231 +$361 +$2,240 +$5,249 CZ09 +$136 +$274 +$2,234 +$231 +$361 +$2,232 +$5,236 CZ10 +$278 +$250 +$2,376 +$361 +$361 +$2,371 +$5,395 CZ11 +$850 +$317 +$2,950 +$1,011 +$795 +$3,601 +$6,759 CZ12 +$291 +$434 +$2,394 +$1,011 +$795 +$3,835 +$6,943 CZ13 +$831 +$290 +$2,936 +$1,011 +$795 +$3,462 +$6,650 CZ14 +$874 +$347 +$2,957 +$1,011 +$795 +$3,356 +$6,380 CZ15 +$510 -($157) +$2,604 +$1,011 +$1,954 +$1,826 +$5,020 CZ16 +$937 +$453 +$3,028 +$843 +$795 +$4,423 +$7,533

389
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 29 2019-08-01
Table 12: Multifamily Package Cost-Effectiveness Results for the Mixed Fuel Case1,2 CZ Utility
Efficiency Efficiency & PV/Battery
Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted Target
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
01 PG&E 3.4 1.1 1.2 2.3 1.3 1.4 2.0 11.5 0.4 1.2 11.5
02 PG&E 1.8 1.0 1.7 2.3 1.1 1.5 1.5 10.9 0.2 1.6 10.5
03 PG&E 0.6 1.0 1.1 1.6 1.1 1.2 0.5 10.3 0.1 1.4 10.0
04 PG&E 1.3 0.8 1.2 1.9 1.1 1.7 1.0 11.2 0.2 1.6 11.0
05 PG&E 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.2 1.3 0.5 9.9 0.2 1.4 9.5
05 PG&E/SoCalGas 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.5 1.1 1.3 0.5 9.9 0.1 1.4 9.5 06 SCE/SoCalGas 1.3 0.6 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.0 10.7 0.6 1.4 10.5 07 SDG&E 0.9 0.7 2.2 2.0 1.1 1.4 0.5 11.0 0.0 1.4 11.0
08 SCE/SoCalGas 1.5 0.7 1.4 1.1 1.4 1.7 1.0 9.9 0.7 1.3 9.5 09 SCE/SoCalGas 1.8 1.5 3.3 2.8 1.7 2.9 1.5 9.7 0.9 1.5 9.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas 1.7 0.8 1.7 2.9 2.0 3.3 1.5 10.4 1.0 1.6 10.0 10 SDG&E 1.7 1.1 1.7 2.9 2.6 3.3 1.5 10.4 0.2 1.6 10.0
11 PG&E 2.9 0.7 1.2 3.2 1.8 3.3 2.5 10.5 0.4 1.6 10.5
12 PG&E 1.9 1.1 2.2 2.8 1.2 2.2 1.5 10.3 0.3 1.7 10.0
13 PG&E 3.1 0.6 1.3 3.4 2.0 3.8 3.0 10.7 0.4 1.6 10.5
14 SCE/SoCalGas 3.1 0.7 1.2 3.3 2.0 3.0 3.0 9.6 1.1 1.4 9.5 14 SDG&E 3.1 0.9 1.2 3.3 2.5 3.0 3.0 9.6 0.5 1.4 9.5
15 SCE/SoCalGas 4.2 1.4 2.3 4.4 >1 >1 4.0 8.8 1.3 1.7 8.5 16 PG&E 2.4 1.1 1.2 2.9 1.8 2.1 2.0 9.9 0.5 1.3 9.5
1“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings. 2Information about the measures included for each climate zone are described in Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary.

390
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 30 2019-08-01
Table 13: Multifamily Package Cost-effectiveness Results for the All-Electric Case1,2 CZ Utility
Efficiency Efficiency & PV Efficiency & PV/Battery
Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Target
Efficiency
EDR
Margin
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
Total
EDR
Margin
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Target
Total
EDR
Margin
01 PG&E 3.6 1.6 1.4 3.3 2.4 2.3 3.0 22.5 2.0 1.5 22.5 34.5 1.3 1.4 34.5 02 PG&E 1.9 1.7 2.1 3.2 1.6 1.6 1.5 17.5 2.4 1.8 17.5 30.9 1.4 1.7 30.5 03 PG&E 0.0 - - 2.7 1.7 1.6 0.0 16.1 2.4 1.7 16.0 29.5 1.3 1.6 29.5 04 PG&E 1.4 1.4 1.5 2.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 15.0 2.4 1.8 15.0 28.9 1.3 1.8 28.5 05 PG&E 0.6 1.1 0.9 3.6 2.1 2.0 0.5 17.1 2.5 1.8 17.0 30.3 1.4 1.7 30.0 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 0.6 1.1 0.9 3.6 2.1 2.0 0.5 17.1 2.5 1.8 17.0 30.3 1.4 1.7 30.0 06 SCE/SoCalGas 1.0 0.7 1.3 2.2 1.6 1.9 1.0 13.8 1.2 1.7 13.5 27.5 1.2 1.6 27.5 07 SDG&E 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.9 1.6 1.7 0.5 12.8 2.1 1.8 12.5 27.1 1.2 1.6 27.0 08 SCE/SoCalGas 1.2 0.9 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.8 1.0 11.6 1.3 1.8 11.5 24.2 1.2 1.6 24.0 09 SCE/SoCalGas 1.6 1.3 2.7 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.5 11.3 1.3 1.9 11.0 23.3 1.3 1.7 23.0 10 SCE/SoCalGas 1.8 1.2 2.0 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.5 10.8 1.3 1.8 10.5 23.3 1.3 1.7 23.0 10 SDG&E 1.8 1.5 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.0 1.5 10.8 2.1 1.8 10.5 23.3 1.4 1.7 23.0 11 PG&E 3.5 1.4 1.6 3.9 2.0 2.3 3.5 13.4 2.2 1.8 13.0 25.3 1.4 1.8 25.0 12 PG&E 2.6 0.9 1.1 2.9 1.6 1.6 2.5 14.4 2.1 1.6 14.0 26.6 1.3 1.7 26.5 13 PG&E 3.3 1.3 1.6 3.8 2.0 2.3 3.0 12.2 2.1 1.7 12.0 23.9 1.4 1.7 23.5 14 SCE/SoCalGas 3.7 1.2 1.6 3.8 1.6 2.2 3.5 14.0 1.4 1.9 14.0 24.8 1.4 1.8 24.5 14 SDG&E 3.7 1.5 1.6 3.8 2.0 2.2 3.5 14.0 2.2 1.9 14.0 24.8 1.7 1.8 24.5 15 SCE/SoCalGas 4.4 1.5 2.3 6.4 1.2 1.7 4.0 7.1 1.4 2.1 7.0 16.9 1.3 1.8 16.5 16 PG&E 4.1 2.1 2.1 3.2 1.6 1.7 3.0 19.6 2.6 1.9 19.5 29.9 1.6 1.7 29.5 1“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings. 2Information about the measures included for each climate zone are described in Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary.

391
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 31 2019-08-01

Figure 6: Multifamily Total EDR comparison

Figure 7: Multifamily EDR Margin comparison (based on Efficiency EDR Margin for the Efficiency packages and the Total EDR Margin for the Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages)

392
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 32 2019-08-01

3.3.1 GHG Emission Reductions
Figure 8 compares annual GHG emissions for both mixed fuel and all-electric multifamily 2019 code compliant cases with Efficiency, Efficiency & PV and Efficiency & PV/Battery packages. GHG emissions vary by climate but are consistently higher in mixed fuel cases than all-electric. Standard design mixed fuel emissions range from 2.0 to 3.0 lbs CO2e/square foot of floor area, where all-electric standard design emissions range from 1.2 to 1.7 lbs CO2e/ ft2. Adding PV, batteries and efficiency to the mixed fuel code compliant prototype reduces annual GHG emissions by 17% on average to between 1.7 and 2.2 lbs CO2e/ft2, except Climate Zone 16. Adding PV, batteries and efficiency to the all-electric code compliant prototype reduces annual GHG emissions by 64% on average to

0.6 lbs CO2e/ft2 or less with the exception of Climate Zones 14, 15 and 16. As in the single family case, none of the cases completely eliminate GHG emissions because of the time value of emissions calculation for electricity in CBECC-Res.

Figure 8: Multifamily greenhouse gas emissions comparison

3.4 Electrification Results
Cost-effectiveness results comparing mixed fuel and all-electric cases are summarized below. The tables show average annual utility bill impacts and lifetime utility bill impacts, which account for fuel escalation for electricity and natural gas (see Section 2.5), lifetime equipment cost savings, and both On-Bill and TDV cost-effectiveness (B/C ratio). Positive utility bill values indicate lower utility costs for the all-electric home relative to the mixed fuel case while negative values in red and parenthesis indicate higher utility costs for the all-electric case.

Lifetime equipment cost savings include savings due to eliminating natural gas infrastructure and replacement costs for appliances based on equipment life. Positive values for the lifetime equipment cost savings indicate lower installed costs for the all-electric and negative values indicate higher costs. B/C ratios 1.0 or greater indicate positive cost-effectiveness. Cases where the B/C ratio is indicated as “>1” refer to instances where there was incremental cost savings in addition to annual utility bill savings. In these cases, there is no cost associated with this upgrade and benefits are realized immediately. 393
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 33 2019-08-01
Three scenarios were evaluated:

1. 2019 Code Compliant: Compares a 2019 code compliant all-electric home with a 2019 code compliant mixed fuel home.

2. Efficiency & PV Package: Compares an all-electric home with efficiency and PV sized to 90% of the annual electricity use to a 2019 code compliant mixed fuel home. The first cost savings in the code compliant all-electric house is invested in above code efficiency and PV reflective of the Efficiency & PV packages described above.

3. Neutral Cost Package: Compares an all-electric home with PV beyond code minimum with a 2019 code compliant mixed fuel home. The PV system for the all-electric case is sized to result in a zero lifetime incremental cost relative to a mixed fuel home.

3.4.1 Single Family
Table 14, Table 15, Figure 9, Figure 10, and Figure 11 present results of cost-effectiveness analysis for electrification of single family buildings, according to both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies. Based on typical cost assumptions arrived at for this analysis, the lifetime equipment costs for the single family code compliant all-electric option are approximately $5,350 less than the mixed fuel code compliant option. Cost savings are entirely due to the elimination of gas infrastructure, which was assumed to be a savings of $5,750. When evaluating cost-effectiveness based on TDV, the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules 50% refund and appliance allowance deduction are not applied and therefore the cost savings are twice as much.

Under the Efficiency & PV Package and the On-Bill analysis, the incremental cost of the efficiency and PV is typically more than the cost savings seen in the code compliant case, which results in a net cost increase in most climate zones for the all-electric case. In climates with small heating loads (7 and 15) there continues to be an incremental cost savings for the all-electric home. With the TDV analysis, there is still an incremental cost savings in all climates except 1 and 16 for single family.

Utility impacts differ by climate zone and utility, but utility costs for the code compliant all-electric option are typically higher than for the compliant mixed fuel design. There are utility cost savings across all climates zones and building types for the all-electric Efficiency & PV Package, resulting in a more cost-effective option.

The all-electric code compliant option is cost-effective based on the On-Bill approach for single family homes in Climate Zones 6 through 9, 10 (SCE/SoCalGas territory only), and 15. The code compliant option is cost-effective based on the TDV methodology in all climate zones except 1 and 16. If the same costs used for the On-Bill approach are also used for the TDV approach (incorporating the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules 50% refund and appliance allowance deduction), the all-electric code compliant option is cost-effective in Climate Zones 6 through 10. The Efficiency & PV all-electric option is cost-effective in all climate zones based on both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies. In many cases it is cost-effective immediately with lower equipment and utility costs.

The last set of results in Table 14 shows the neutral cost case where the cost savings for the all-electric code compliant home is invested in a larger PV system, resulting in a lifetime incremental cost of zero based on the On-Bill approach. This package results in utility cost savings in all cases except Climate Zones 1, 14 (SCE/SoCalGas territory only), and 16. For these three cases the Reach Code Team evaluated how much additional PV would be required to result in a cost-effective package. These results are presented in Table 15 and show that an additional 1.6kW in Climate Zone 1 results in a B/C ratio of 1.1. For Climate Zone 14 and 16 adding 0.25kW and

1.2kW, respectively, results in a B/C ratio of 1.2. Neutral cost cases are cost-effective based on the TDV methodology in all climate zones except 16.

3.4.2 Multifamily
Multifamily results are found in Table 16, Table 17, Figure 12, Figure 13, and Figure 14. Lifetime costs for the multifamily code compliant all-electric option are approximately $2,300 less than the mixed fuel code compliant option, entirely due to the elimination of gas infrastructure. When evaluating cost-effectiveness based on TDV, 394
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 34 2019-08-01
the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules 50% refund and appliance allowance deduction are not applied and therefore the cost savings are approximately 2.5 times higher.

With the Efficiency & PV Package and the On-Bill analysis, due to the added cost of the efficiency and PV there is a net cost increase for the all-electric case in all climate zones for except 7, 8, 9, and 15. With the TDV analysis, there is still an incremental cost savings in all climates. Like the single family results, utility costs are typically higher for the code compliant all-electric option but lower than the code compliant mixed fuel option with the Efficiency & PV Package.

The all-electric code compliant option is cost-effective based on the On-Bill approach for multifamily in Climate Zones 6 through 9, 10 and 14 (SCE/SoCalGas territory only), and 15. Based on the TDV methodology, the code compliant option for multifamily is cost-effective for all climate zones. If the same costs used for the On-Bill approach are also used for the TDV approach (incorporating the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules 50% refund and appliance allowance deduction), the all-electric code compliant option is cost-effective in Climate Zones 8 and 9. Like the single family cases, the Efficiency & PV all-electric option is cost-effective in all climate zones based on both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies.

The last set of results in Table 16 show the neutral cost case where the cost savings for the all-electric code compliant home is invested in a larger PV system, resulting in a lifetime incremental cost of zero based on the On-Bill approach. This package results in utility cost savings in all cases except Climate Zone 1. For this case the Reach Code Team evaluated how much additional PV would be required to result in a cost-effective package.

These results are presented in Table 17 and show that an additional 0.3kW per apartment results in a B/C ratio of 1.1. Neutral cost cases are cost-effective based on the TDV methodology in all climate zones except 16.

Table 14: Single Family Electrification Results
On-Bill Cost-effectiveness1 TDV Cost-effectiveness
CZ Utility
Average Annual Utility Bill
Savings
Lifetime NPV Lifetime NPV
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Net
Utility
Savings
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio2
TDV Cost
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
TDV
B/C
Ratio
2019 Code Compliant Home
01 PG&E -($1,194) +$712 -($482) -($14,464) +$5,349 0.4 -($13,081) +$11,872 0.9 02 PG&E -($825) +$486 -($340) -($10,194) +$5,349 0.5 -($7,456) +$11,872 1.6 03 PG&E -($717) +$391 -($326) -($9,779) +$5,349 0.5 -($7,766) +$11,872 1.5 04 PG&E -($710) +$387 -($322) -($9,671) +$5,349 0.6 -($7,447) +$11,872 1.6 05 PG&E -($738) +$367 -($371) -($11,128) +$5,349 0.5 -($8,969) +$11,872 1.3 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($738) +$370 -($368) -($11,034) +$5,349 0.5 -($8,969) +$11,872 1.3 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($439) +$289 -($149) -($4,476) +$5,349 1.2 -($4,826) +$11,872 2.5 07 SDG&E -($414) +$243 -($171) -($5,134) +$5,349 1.0 -($4,678) +$11,872 2.5 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($347) +$249 -($97) -($2,921) +$5,349 1.8 -($3,971) +$11,872 3.0 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($377) +$271 -($107) -($3,199) +$5,349 1.7 -($4,089) +$11,872 2.9 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($403) +$280 -($123) -($3,684) +$5,349 1.5 -($4,458) +$11,872 2.7 10 SDG&E -($496) +$297 -($198) -($5,950) +$5,349 0.9 -($4,458) +$11,872 2.7 11 PG&E -($810) +$447 -($364) -($10,917) +$5,349 0.5 -($7,024) +$11,872 1.7 12 PG&E -($740) +$456 -($284) -($8,533) +$5,349 0.6 -($6,281) +$11,872 1.9 13 PG&E -($742) +$413 -($329) -($9,870) +$5,349 0.5 -($6,480) +$11,872 1.8 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($661) +$413 -($248) -($7,454) +$5,349 0.7 -($7,126) +$11,872 1.7 14 SDG&E -($765) +$469 -($296) -($8,868) +$5,349 0.6 -($7,126) +$11,872 1.7 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($297) +$194 -($103) -($3,090) +$5,349 1.7 -($5,364) +$11,872 2.2 16 PG&E -($1,287) +$712 -($575) -($17,250) +$5,349 0.3 -($17,391) +$11,872 0.7 395
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 35 2019-08-01
On-Bill Cost-effectiveness1 TDV Cost-effectiveness
CZ Utility
Average Annual Utility Bill
Savings
Lifetime NPV Lifetime NPV
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Net
Utility
Savings
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio2
TDV Cost
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Efficiency & PV Package
01 PG&E -($99) +$712 +$613 +$18,398 -($12,844) 1.4 +$13,364 -($6,321) 2.1 02 PG&E -($89) +$486 +$397 +$11,910 -($6,758) 1.8 +$9,307 -($234) 39.7 03 PG&E -($87) +$391 +$304 +$9,119 -($3,169) 2.9 +$6,516 +$3,355 >1 04 PG&E -($85) +$387 +$302 +$9,074 -($3,438) 2.6 +$6,804 +$3,086 >1 05 PG&E -($98) +$367 +$268 +$8,054 -($2,959) 2.7 +$5,625 +$3,564 >1 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($98) +$370 +$272 +$8,148 -($2,959) 2.8 +$5,625 +$3,564 >1 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($188) +$289 +$102 +$3,049 -($992) 3.1 +$4,585 +$5,531 >1 07 SDG&E -($137) +$243 +$106 +$3,174 +$912 >1 +$2,176 +$7,436 >1 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($160) +$249 +$89 +$2,664 -($25) 107.9 +$3,965 +$6,499 >1 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($169) +$271 +$102 +$3,067 -($429) 7.1 +$5,368 +$6,094 >1 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($173) +$280 +$107 +$3,216 -($1,057) 3.0 +$5,165 +$5,466 >1 10 SDG&E -($137) +$297 +$160 +$4,805 -($1,057) 4.5 +$5,165 +$5,466 >1 11 PG&E -($147) +$447 +$300 +$8,988 -($5,478) 1.6 +$9,776 +$1,045 >1 12 PG&E -($92) +$456 +$364 +$10,918 -($6,172) 1.8 +$9,913 +$352 >1 13 PG&E -($144) +$413 +$269 +$8,077 -($5,184) 1.6 +$8,960 +$1,339 >1 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($241) +$413 +$172 +$5,164 -($5,111) 1.0 +$9,850 +$1,412 >1 14 SDG&E -($139) +$469 +$330 +$9,910 -($5,111) 1.9 +$9,850 +$1,412 >1 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($107) +$194 +$87 +$2,603 +$264 >1 +$2,598 +$6,787 >1 16 PG&E -($130) +$712 +$582 +$17,457 -($11,234) 1.6 +$9,536 -($4,710) 2.0 Neutral Cost Package
01 PG&E -($869) +$712 -($157) -($4,704) +$0 0 -($6,033) +$6,549 1.1 02 PG&E -($445) +$486 +$40 +$1,213 +$0 >1 +$868 +$6,505 >1 03 PG&E -($335) +$391 +$56 +$1,671 +$0 >1 +$483 +$6,520 >1 04 PG&E -($321) +$387 +$66 +$1,984 +$0 >1 +$1,062 +$6,521 >1 05 PG&E -($335) +$367 +$31 +$938 +$0 >1 -($163) +$6,519 40.1 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($335) +$370 +$34 +$1,031 +$0 >1 -($163) +$6,519 40.1 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($227) +$289 +$63 +$1,886 +$0 >1 +$3,258 +$6,499 >1 07 SDG&E -($72) +$243 +$171 +$5,132 +$0 >1 +$3,741 +$6,519 >1 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($144) +$249 +$105 +$3,162 +$0 >1 +$4,252 +$6,515 >1 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($170) +$271 +$100 +$3,014 +$0 >1 +$4,271 +$6,513 >1 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($199) +$280 +$81 +$2,440 +$0 >1 +$3,629 +$6,494 >1 10 SDG&E -($155) +$297 +$143 +$4,287 +$0 >1 +$3,629 +$6,494 >1 11 PG&E -($426) +$447 +$21 +$630 +$0 >1 +$1,623 +$6,504 >1 12 PG&E -($362) +$456 +$94 +$2,828 +$0 >1 +$2,196 +$6,525 >1 13 PG&E -($370) +$413 +$43 +$1,280 +$0 >1 +$1,677 +$6,509 >1 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($416) +$413 -($4) -($107) +$0 0 +$2,198 +$6,520 >1 14 SDG&E -($391) +$469 +$79 +$2,356 +$0 >1 +$2,198 +$6,520 >1 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($98) +$194 +$97 +$2,900 +$0 >1 +$2,456 +$6,483 >1 16 PG&E -($878) +$712 -($166) -($4,969) +$0 0 -($8,805) +$6,529 0.7 1Red values in parentheses indicate an increase in utility bill costs or an incremental first cost for the all-electric home. 2“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings . 396
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 36 2019-08-01

Table 15: Comparison of Single Family On-Bill Cost Effectiveness Results with Additional PV
CZ Utility
Neutral Cost Min. Cost Effectiveness
PV
Capacity
(kW)
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
PV Capacity
(kW)
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio
01 PG&E 4.7 -($4,704) +$0 0 6.3 +$6,898 -($6,372) 1.1 14 SCE/SoCalGas 4.5 -($107) +$0 0 4.8 +$1,238 -($1,000) 1.2 16 PG&E 4.1 -($4,969) +$0 0 5.3 +$5,883 -($4,753) 1.2

Figure 9: B/C ratio results for a single family all-electric code compliant home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

397
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 37 2019-08-01

Figure 10: B/C ratio results for the single family Efficiency & PV all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

Figure 11: B/C ratio results for the single family neutral cost package all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

398
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 38 2019-08-01
Table 16: Multifamily Electrification Results (Per Dwelling Unit) On-Bill Cost-effectiveness1 TDV Cost-effectiveness
CZ Utility
Average Annual Utility Bill
Savings
Lifetime NPV Lifetime NPV
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Net
Utility
Savings
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio2
TDV Cost
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
TDV
B/C
Ratio
2019 Code Compliant Home
01 PG&E -($396) +$193 -($203) -($6,079) +$2,337 0.4 -($5,838) +$5,899 1.0 02 PG&E -($310) +$162 -($148) -($4,450) +$2,337 0.5 -($4,144) +$5,899 1.4 03 PG&E -($277) +$142 -($135) -($4,041) +$2,337 0.6 -($4,035) +$5,899 1.5 04 PG&E -($264) +$144 -($120) -($3,595) +$2,337 0.6 -($3,329) +$5,899 1.8 05 PG&E -($297) +$140 -($157) -($4,703) +$2,337 0.5 -($4,604) +$5,899 1.3 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($297) +$178 -($119) -($3,573) +$2,337 0.7 -($4,604) +$5,899 1.3 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($191) +$161 -($30) -($902) +$2,337 2.6 -($2,477) +$5,899 2.4 07 SDG&E -($206) +$136 -($70) -($2,094) +$2,337 1.1 -($2,390) +$5,899 2.5 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($169) +$157 -($12) -($349) +$2,337 6.7 -($2,211) +$5,899 2.7 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($177) +$159 -($18) -($533) +$2,337 4.4 -($2,315) +$5,899 2.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($183) +$159 -($23) -($697) +$2,337 3.4 -($2,495) +$5,899 2.4 10 SDG&E -($245) +$139 -($106) -($3,192) +$2,337 0.7 -($2,495) +$5,899 2.4 11 PG&E -($291) +$153 -($138) -($4,149) +$2,337 0.6 -($4,420) +$5,899 1.3 12 PG&E -($277) +$155 -($122) -($3,665) +$2,337 0.6 -($3,557) +$5,899 1.7 13 PG&E -($270) +$146 -($124) -($3,707) +$2,337 0.6 -($3,821) +$5,899 1.5 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($255) +$187 -($69) -($2,062) +$2,337 1.1 -($3,976) +$5,899 1.5 14 SDG&E -($328) +$175 -($154) -($4,607) +$2,337 0.5 -($3,976) +$5,899 1.5 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($154) +$142 -($12) -($367) +$2,337 6.4 -($2,509) +$5,899 2.4 16 PG&E -($404) +$224 -($180) -($5,411) +$2,337 0.4 -($5,719) +$5,899 1.0 Efficiency & PV Package
01 PG&E -($19) +$193 +$174 +$5,230 -($3,202) 1.6 +$2,467 +$361 >1 02 PG&E -($10) +$162 +$152 +$4,549 -($1,375) 3.3 +$2,605 +$2,187 >1 03 PG&E -($12) +$142 +$130 +$3,910 -($936) 4.2 +$1,632 +$2,626 >1 04 PG&E -($8) +$144 +$136 +$4,080 -($822) 5.0 +$2,381 +$2,740 >1 05 PG&E -($19) +$140 +$121 +$3,635 -($956) 3.8 +$1,403 +$2,606 >1 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($19) +$178 +$159 +$4,765 -($956) 5.0 +$1,403 +$2,606 >1 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($84) +$161 +$77 +$2,309 -($243) 9.5 +$1,940 +$3,319 >1 07 SDG&E -($49) +$136 +$87 +$2,611 +$75 >1 +$1,583 +$3,638 >1 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($74) +$157 +$83 +$2,480 +$96 >1 +$1,772 +$3,658 >1 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($76) +$159 +$82 +$2,469 +$104 >1 +$1,939 +$3,667 >1 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($79) +$159 +$80 +$2,411 -($34) 70.9 +$1,737 +$3,528 >1 10 SDG&E -($77) +$139 +$61 +$1,842 -($34) 54.2 +$1,737 +$3,528 >1 11 PG&E -($25) +$153 +$128 +$3,834 -($1,264) 3.0 +$2,080 +$2,298 >1 12 PG&E -($11) +$155 +$144 +$4,316 -($1,498) 2.9 +$2,759 +$2,064 >1 13 PG&E -($26) +$146 +$121 +$3,625 -($1,125) 3.2 +$2,083 +$2,437 >1 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($99) +$187 +$87 +$2,616 -($1,019) 2.6 +$2,422 +$2,543 >1 14 SDG&E -($86) +$175 +$88 +$2,647 -($1,019) 2.6 +$2,422 +$2,543 >1 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($67) +$142 +$75 +$2,247 +$511 >1 +$1,276 +$4,073 >1 16 PG&E -($24) +$224 +$200 +$5,992 -($2,087) 2.9 +$2,629 +$1,476 >1 399
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 39 2019-08-01
On-Bill Cost-effectiveness1 TDV Cost-effectiveness
CZ Utility
Average Annual Utility Bill
Savings
Lifetime NPV Lifetime NPV
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Net
Utility
Savings
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C
Ratio2
TDV Cost
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
TDV
B/C
Ratio
Neutral Cost Package
01 PG&E -($228) +$193 -($35) -($1,057) +$0 0 -($2,267) +$3,564 1.6 02 PG&E -($115) +$162 +$47 +$1,399 +$0 >1 +$59 +$3,563 >1 03 PG&E -($81) +$142 +$61 +$1,843 +$0 >1 +$138 +$3,562 >1 04 PG&E -($64) +$144 +$80 +$2,402 +$0 >1 +$983 +$3,563 >1 05 PG&E -($90) +$140 +$50 +$1,490 +$0 >1 -($152) +$3,564 23.4 05 PG&E/SoCalGas -($90) +$178 +$87 +$2,620 +$0 >1 -($152) +$3,564 23.4 06 SCE/SoCalGas -($90) +$161 +$71 +$2,144 +$0 >1 +$1,612 +$3,562 >1 07 SDG&E -($32) +$136 +$105 +$3,135 +$0 >1 +$1,886 +$3,560 >1 08 SCE/SoCalGas -($67) +$157 +$90 +$2,705 +$0 >1 +$1,955 +$3,564 >1 09 SCE/SoCalGas -($71) +$159 +$87 +$2,623 +$0 >1 +$1,924 +$3,561 >1 10 SCE/SoCalGas -($78) +$159 +$81 +$2,431 +$0 >1 +$1,588 +$3,561 >1 10 SDG&E -($71) +$139 +$68 +$2,033 +$0 >1 +$1,588 +$3,561 >1 11 PG&E -($93) +$153 +$59 +$1,783 +$0 >1 -($48) +$3,562 74.0 12 PG&E -($82) +$155 +$73 +$2,184 +$0 >1 +$739 +$3,564 >1 13 PG&E -($79) +$146 +$68 +$2,034 +$0 >1 +$310 +$3,560 >1 14 SCE/SoCalGas -($141) +$187 +$45 +$1,359 +$0 >1 +$747 +$3,562 >1 14 SDG&E -($137) +$175 +$38 +$1,131 +$0 >1 +$747 +$3,562 >1 15 SCE/SoCalGas -($50) +$142 +$92 +$2,771 +$0 >1 +$1,738 +$3,560 >1 16 PG&E -($194) +$224 +$30 +$900 +$0 >1 -($1,382) +$3,564 2.6 1Red values in parentheses indicate an increase in utility bill costs or an incremental first cost for the all-electric home. 2“>1” indicates cases where there are both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

Table 17: Comparison of Multifamily On-Bill Cost Effectiveness Results with Additional PV (Per Dwelling Unit)
CZ Utility
Neutral Cost Min. Cost Effectiveness
PV
Capacity
(kW)
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C Ratio
PV
Capacity
(kW)
Utility Bill
Savings
Equipment
Cost
Savings
On-Bill
B/C Ratio
01 PG&E 2.7 -($1,057) +$0 0 3.0 +$1,198 -($1,052) 1.1

400
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 40 2019-08-01

Figure 12: B/C ratio results for a multifamily all-electric code compliant home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

Figure 13: B/C ratio results for the multifamily Efficiency & PV all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

401
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 41 2019-08-01

Figure 14: B/C ratio results for the multifamily neutral cost package all-electric home versus a mixed fuel code compliant home

4 Conclusions & Summary
This report evaluated the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of “above code” performance specifications through the application of efficiency measures, PV, and electric battery storage in all 16 California climate zones. The analysis found cost-effective packages across the state for both single family and low-rise multifamily buildings.

For the building types and climate zones where cost-effective packages were identified, the results of this analysis can be used by local jurisdictions to support the adoption of reach codes. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated according to two metrics: On-Bill customer lifecycle benefit-to-cost and TDV lifecycle benefit-to-cost.

While all the above code targets presented are based on packages that are cost-effective under at least one of these metrics, they are not all cost-effective under both metrics. Generally, the test for being cost-effective under the TDV methodology is less challenging than under the On-Bill methodology. Therefore, all packages presented are cost-effective based on TDV, and may or may not be cost-effective based on the On-Bill method.

It is up to each jurisdiction to determine what metric is most appropriate for their application. A summary of results by climate zone are presented in Appendix G – Results by Climate Zone.

Above code targets are presented as Target EDR Margin, which have been defined for each scenario where a cost-effective package was identified. Target EDR Margins represent the maximum “reach” values that meet the requirements. Jurisdictions may adopt less stringent requirements. For the Efficiency Package the Target EDR Margin was defined based on the lower EDR Margin of the Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package and the Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package. For example, if the cost-effective Non-Preempted package has an EDR Margin of 3 and the Preempted package an EDR Margin of 4, the Target EDR Margin is set at 3.

The average incremental cost for the single family Efficiency packages is ~$1,750. The Efficiency & PV Package average incremental cost is $9,180 and for the Efficiency & PV/Battery Package it is approximately $5,600 for the 402
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 42 2019-08-01
mixed fuel cases and $15,100 for the all-electric cases. The incremental costs for each multifamily apartment are approximately 30-40% lower. See Table 8 and Table 11 for a summary of package costs by case.

Table 18 and Table 19 summarize the maximum Target EDR Margins determined to be cost effective for each package for single family and multifamily, respectively. Cases labeled as “n/a” in the tables indicate where no cost-effective package was identified under either On-Bill or TDV methodology.

This analysis also looked at the GHG emissions impacts of the various packages. An all-electric design reduces GHG emissions 40-50% in most cases relative to a comparable mixed fuel design.

There is significant interest throughout California on electrification of new buildings. The Reach Code Team assembled data on the cost differences between a code compliant mixed fuel building and a code compliant all- electric building. Based on lifetime equipment cost savings (the difference in first cost for equipment and infrastructure combined with incremental replacement costs) of $5,349 for an all-electric single family home this analysis found that from a customer on-bill perspective, the all-electric code compliant option is cost-effective in Climates Zones 6 through 9, 10 (SCE/SoCalGas territory only), and 15, and cost-effective in all climate zones except 1 and 16 based on TDV. For multifamily buildings, based on a cost savings of $2,337 per apartment, the code compliant option is cost-effective in Climates Zones 6 through 9, 10 & 14 (SCE/SoCalGas territory only), and 15, and cost-effective based on TDV.

Adding efficiency and PV to the code compliant all-electric buildings increases the cost-effectiveness in all climate zones. The Efficiency & PV Package is cost-effective when compared to a mixed fuel code compliant building in all climate zones for both single family and multifamily buildings based on both the On-Bill and TDV methodologies. The Efficiency & PV package adds PV to offset 90% of the electricity use of the home. While this results in higher installed costs, the reduced lifetime utility costs are larger ($0 to $6,000 lifetime incremental equipment costs in many climates for single family homes and an associated $4,500 to $13,500 lifetime utility cost savings across the same cases), resulting in positive B/C ratios for all cases.

The Reach Code Team also evaluated a neutral cost electrification scenario where the cost savings for the all- electric code compliant home is invested in a larger PV system, resulting in a lifetime incremental cost of zero based on the On-Bill approach. This package results in utility cost savings and positive on-bill B/C ratio in all cases except Climate Zones 1 and 16 for single family, and Climate Zone 1 for low-rise multifamily. Increasing the PV sizes in those climates by approximately 30% resulted in positive on-bill B/C ratios, while still not resulting in oversizing of PV systems.

Other studies have shown that cost-effectiveness of electrification increases with high efficiency space conditioning and water heating equipment in the all-electric home. This was not directly evaluated in this analysis but based on the favorable cost-effectiveness results of the Equipment, Preempted package for the individual mixed fuel and all-electric upgrades it’s expected that applying similar packages to the electrification analysis would result in increased cost-effectiveness.

The Reach Code Team found there can be substantial variability in first costs, particularly related to natural gas infrastructure. Costs are project-dependent and will be impacted by such factors as site characteristics, distance to the nearest gas main, joint trenching, whether work is conducted by the utility or a private contractor, and number of homes per development among other things. While the best cost data available to the Reach Code Team was applied in this analysis, individual projects may experience different costs, either higher or lower than the estimates presented here.

403
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 43 2019-08-01
Table 18: Summary of Single Family Target EDR Margins
Climate
Zone Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Efficiency
Efficiency &
PV/Battery Efficiency Efficiency & PV
Efficiency &
PV/Battery
01 5.0 10.5 6.5 31.0 41.0
02 3.0 10.0 4.5 19.0 30.0
03 2.5 10.0 4.0 18.0 29.0
04 2.5 10.0 3.0 17.0 28.5
05 2.5 9.0 4.0 18.0 28.5
06 1.5 9.5 2.0 14.0 26.0
07 n/a 9.0 n/a 11.0 24.0
08 1.0 8.0 1.5 10.5 21.5
09 2.5 8.5 2.5 11.5 21.0
10 3.0 9.5 3.0 11.0 21.0
11 4.0 9.0 4.5 14.0 23.0
12 3.0 9.5 3.5 15.5 25.0
13 4.5 9.5 5.0 13.0 22.0
14 4.5 9.0 5.5 15.5 23.5
15 4.5 7.0 5.5 6.0 13.0
16 5.0 10.5 4.5 26.5 35.0

Table 19: Summary of Multifamily Target EDR Margins
Climate
Zone Mixed Fuel All-Electric
Efficiency
Efficiency &
PV/Battery Efficiency Efficiency & PV
Efficiency &
PV/Battery
01 2.0 11.5 3.0 22.5 34.5
02 1.5 10.5 1.5 17.5 30.5
03 0.5 10.0 n/a 16.0 29.5
04 1.0 11.0 1.0 15.0 28.5
05 0.5 9.5 0.5 17.0 30.0
06 1.0 10.5 1.0 13.5 27.5
07 0.5 11.0 0.5 12.5 27.0
08 1.0 9.5 1.0 11.5 24.0
09 1.5 9.5 1.5 11.0 23.0
10 1.5 10.0 1.5 10.5 23.0
11 2.5 10.5 3.5 13.0 25.0
12 1.5 10.0 2.5 14.0 26.5
13 3.0 10.5 3.0 12.0 23.5
14 3.0 9.5 3.5 14.0 24.5
15 4.0 8.5 4.0 7.0 16.5
16 2.0 9.5 3.0 19.5 29.5

404
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 44 2019-08-01
5 References
California Energy Commission. 2017. Rooftop Solar PV System. Measure number: 2019-Res-PV-D Prepared by Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=221366 California Energy Commission. 2018a. 2019 Alternative Calculation Method Approval Manual. CEC-400-2018- 023-CMF. December 2018. California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2018publications/CEC- 400-2018-023/CEC-400-2018-023-CMF.pdf
California Energy Commission. 2018b. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings. CEC-400-2018-020-CMF. December 2018. California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2018publications/CEC-400-2018-020/CEC-400-2018-020-CMF.pdf California Energy Commission. 2018c. 2019 Reference Appendices. CEC-400-2018-021-CMF. December 2018.

California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2018publications/CEC-400-2018-021/CEC-400-2018- 021-CMF.pdf
California Energy Commission. 2018d. 2019 Residential Compliance Manual. CEC-400-2018-017-CMF. December 2018. California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2018publications/CEC-400-2018-017/CEC-400- 2018-017-CMF.pdf
California Energy Commission. 2019. 2019 Residential Alternative Calculation Method Reference Manual. CEC- 400-2019-005-CMF. May 2019. California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2019publications/CEC-400-2019-005/CEC-400-2019-005-CMF.pdf California Public Utilities Commission. 2016. Rulemaking No. 15-03-010 An Order Instituting Rulemaking to Identify Disadvantaged Communities in the San Joaquin Valley and Analyze Economically Feasible Options to Increase Access to Affordable Energy in Those Disadvantages Communities. Proposed Decision of Commissioner Guzman Aceves. April 07, 2017. http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M183/K389/183389022.PDF Davis Energy Group. 2015. Evaluation of Ducts in Conditioned Space for New California Homes. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. March 2015. https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/evaluation-ducts-conditioned- space-new-california-homes
Energy & Environmental Economics. 2019. Residential Building Electrification in California. April 2019. https://www.ethree.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf EPRI. 2016. SMUD All-Electric Homes Electrification Case Study: Summary for the Three-Prong Test Discussion.

Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. September. 2016. Presentation to Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

Horii, B., E. Cutter, N. Kapur, J. Arent, and D. Conotyannis. 2014. “Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Energy Efficiency Standards.”
http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2016standards/prerulemaking/documents/2014-07- 09_workshop/2017_TDV_Documents/
Itron. 2014. 2010-2012 WO017 Ex Ante Measure Cost Study: Final Report. Itron. May 2014. Presented to California Public Utilities Commission.

Barbose, Galen and Darghouth, Naim. 2018. Tracking the Sun. Installed Price Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States – 2018 Edition. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. September 2018. https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/tracking_the_sun_2018_edition_final_0.pdf Navigant. 2018. Analysis of the Role of Gas for a Low-Carbon California Future. July 24, 2018. Prepared for Southern California Gas Company.
https://www.socalgas.com/1443741887279/SoCalGas_Renewable_Gas_Final-Report.pdf 405
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 45 2019-08-01
Penn, Ivan. 2018. Cheaper Battery Is Unveiled as a Step to a Carbon-Free Grid. The New York Times. September 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/business/energy-environment/zinc-battery-solar-power.html.

Accessed January 29, 2019.

Statewide CASE Team. 2017a. Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative Drain Water Heat Recovery – Final Report. July 2017. http://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE- Report_DWHR_Final_September-2017.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. 2017b. Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative High Performance Attics – Final Report. September 2017. http://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE- Report_HPA_Final_September-2017.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. 2017c. Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative High Performance Walls – Final Report. September 2017. http://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE- Report_HPW_Final_September-2017.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. 2017d. Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative Residential High Performance Windows & Doors – Final Report. August 2017. http://title24stakeholders.com/wp- content/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE-Report_Res-Windows-and-Doors_Final_September-2017.pdf Statewide CASE Team. 2018. Energy Savings Potential and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High Efficiency Windows in California. Prepared by Frontier Energy. May 2018. https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/energy- savings-potential-and-cost-effectiveness-analysis-high-efficiency-windows-california Statewide Reach Codes Team. 2016. CALGreen Cost-Effectiveness Study. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Prepared by Davis Energy Group. November 2016. http://localenergycodes.com/download/50/file_path/fieldList/2016%20RNC%20Tiers%201-2%20Cost- Eff%20Report
Statewide Reach Codes Team. 2017a. CALGreen All-Electric Cost-Effectiveness Study. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Prepared by Davis Energy Group. October 2017. http://localenergycodes.com/download/276/file_path/fieldList/2016%20RNC%20All-Electric%20Cost- Eff%20Report
Statewide Reach Codes Team. 2017b. 2016 Title 24 Residential Reach Code Recommendations: Cost- effectiveness Analysis for All California Climate Zones. Prepared for Southern California Edison. Prepared by TRC Energy Services. August 2017.
http://localenergycodes.com/download/283/file_path/fieldList/2016%20RNC%20Reach%20Code%20Tier%203 %20Cost-Eff%20Report
Statewide Reach Codes Team. 2018. PV + Battery Storage Study. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

Prepared by EnergySoft. July, 2018.
http://localenergycodes.com/download/430/file_path/fieldList/PV%20Plus%20Battery%20Storage%20Report Hopkins, Asa, Takahashi, Kenji, Glick, Devi, Whited, Melissa. 2018. Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings. Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. October 2018. http://www.synapse- energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf TRC. 2018. City of Palo Alto 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Analysis Draft. September 2018. https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/66742

406
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 46 2019-08-01
Appendix A – California Climate Zone Map

Figure 15: Map of California Climate Zones (courtesy of the California Energy Commission17)

17 https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html 407
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 47 2019-08-01
Appendix B – Utility Tariff Details
PG&E ............................................................................................................................................................. 48 SCE ............................................................................................................................................................... 51 SoCalGas ....................................................................................................................................................... 53 SDG&E ........................................................................................................................................................... 54 Escalation Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 56

408
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 48 2019-08-01
PG&E
The following pages provide details on the PG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 20 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.

Table 20: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ01 V
CZ02 X
CZ03 T
CZ04 X
CZ05 T
CZ11 R
CZ12 S
CZ13 R
CZ16 Y

The PG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis for the 12-month period ending January 2019 according to the rates shown below.

409
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 49 2019-08-01

410
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 50 2019-08-01

411
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 51 2019-08-01
SCE
The following pages provide details on are the SCE electricity tariffs applied in this study. Table 21 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.

Table 21: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ06 6
CZ08 8
CZ09 9
CZ10 10
CZ14 14
CZ15 15

412
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 52 2019-08-01

413
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 53 2019-08-01
SoCalGas
Following are the SoCalGas natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 22 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.

Table 22: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ05 2
CZ06 1
CZ08 1
CZ09 1
CZ10 1
CZ14 2
CZ15 1

414
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 54 2019-08-01
SDG&E
Following are the SDG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 23 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.

Table 23: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ07 Coastal
CZ10 Inland
CZ14 Mountain

415
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 55 2019-08-01

416
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 56 2019-08-01
Escalation Assumptions
The average annual escalation rates in the following table were used in this study and are from E3’s 2019 study Residential Building Electrification in California (Energy & Environmental Economics, 2019). These rates are applied to the 2019 rate schedules over a thirty-year period beginning in 2020. SDG&E was not covered in the E3 study. The Reach Code Team reviewed SDG&E’s GRC filing and applied the same approach that E3 applied for PG&E and SoCalGas to arrive at average escalation rates between 2020 and 2022.

Table 24: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions

Statewide Electric
Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Natural Gas Residential Core Rate
(%/yr escalation, real)
PG&E SoCalGas SDG&E
2020 2.0% 1.48% 6.37% 5.00%
2021 2.0% 5.69% 4.12% 3.14%
2022 2.0% 1.11% 4.12% 2.94%
2023 2.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
2024 2.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
2025 2.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
2026 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2027 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2028 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2029 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2030 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2031 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2032 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2033 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2034 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2035 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2036 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2037 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2038 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2039 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2040 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2041 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2042 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2043 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2044 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2045 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2046 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2047 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2048 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
2049 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%
417
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 57 2019-08-01
Appendix C – Single Family Detailed Results

Table 25: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results BASECASE Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted
CZ Utility
Total EDR
Efficiency
EDR
CALGreen
Tier 1 EDR
Target
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW
Total EDR
Efficiency
EDR
Efficiency
EDR Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C
Ratio

TDV B/C
Ratio
Total EDR
Efficiency
EDR
Efficiency
EDR Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C
Ratio

TDV B/C
Ratio
1 PG&E 32.5 54.2 23 3.0 3.3 27.9 49.0 5.3 18.8% 2.5 3.2 3.4 2.8 26.0 47.3 6.9 25.1% 2.3 3.2 4.9 4.1 2 PG&E 25.0 46.0 12 2.2 2.8 22.0 42.7 3.3 16.3% 1.9 2.8 1.6 1.7 21.8 42.6 3.3 16.4% 1.9 2.8 3.8 3.6 3 PG&E 23.9 46.9 10 1.9 2.7 21.3 43.9 3.0 16.7% 1.6 2.7 1.3 1.3 20.1 42.8 4.1 22.8% 1.5 2.7 1.9 2.0 4 PG&E 23.1 44.9 8 1.9 2.7 20.8 42.4 2.5 13.9% 1.7 2.7 0.9 1.2 20.5 42.2 2.7 14.9% 1.6 2.7 2.4 2.7 5 PG&E 22.2 44.4 10 1.8 2.6 19.7 41.7 2.7 16.7% 1.6 2.5 1.1 1.2 19.7 41.7 2.6 16.2% 1.5 2.5 2.3 2.5 5 PG&E/SoCalGas 22.2 44.4 10 1.8 2.6 19.7 41.7 2.7 16.7% 1.6 2.5 0.9 1.2 19.7 41.7 2.6 16.2% 1.5 2.5 2.0 2.5 6 SCE/SoCalGas 23.3 49.9 10 1.6 2.7 21.5 47.8 2.0 12.1% 1.5 2.7 0.7 1.2 21.5 47.9 2.0 11.8% 1.4 2.7 1.6 2.0 7 SDG&E 20.3 49.1 5 1.3 2.6 20.3 49.1 0.0 0.0% 1.3 2.6 - - 18.8 47.6 1.5 12.4% 1.2 2.6 1.5 1.4 8 SCE/SoCalGas 21.3 46.9 10 1.4 2.9 20.1 45.6 1.3 7.7% 1.3 2.9 0.6 1.4 19.7 45.3 1.6 9.4% 1.3 2.9 1.3 1.8 9 SCE/SoCalGas 24.5 47.7 13 1.5 2.9 22.3 45.1 2.6 11.7% 1.5 2.9 0.7 2.0 21.9 44.8 2.9 13.4% 1.4 2.9 1.8 3.7 10 SCE/SoCalGas 24.2 46.3 10 1.6 3.0 21.7 43.1 3.2 14.3% 1.5 3.0 0.6 1.3 21.5 43.1 3.2 14.6% 1.4 3.0 2.0 3.8 10 SDG&E 24.2 46.3 10 1.6 3.0 21.7 43.1 3.2 14.3% 1.5 3.0 0.8 1.3 21.5 43.1 3.2 14.6% 1.4 3.0 2.6 3.8 11 PG&E 24.6 44.9 11 2.1 3.6 21.3 40.6 4.3 16.4% 1.9 3.4 0.8 1.2 20.7 39.9 5.1 19.2% 1.8 3.4 2.5 3.7 12 PG&E 25.5 44.8 12 2.1 3.0 22.5 41.3 3.5 14.9% 1.9 2.9 1.2 1.8 22.5 41.4 3.4 14.4% 1.9 3.0 3.3 4.6 13 PG&E 25.7 46.5 11 2.0 3.8 22.2 41.9 4.6 16.9% 1.8 3.6 0.8 1.3 21.2 40.7 5.8 21.4% 1.7 3.6 5.3 8.4 14 SCE/SoCalGas 25.3 46.3 15 2.3 3.2 21.5 41.3 5.0 18.5% 2.1 3.0 1.6 2.5 20.8 40.4 5.8 21.7% 2.0 3.0 4.0 6.1 14 SDG&E 25.3 46.3 15 2.3 3.2 21.5 41.3 5.0 18.5% 2.1 3.0 1.9 2.5 20.8 40.4 5.8 21.7% 2.0 3.0 4.9 6.1 15 SCE/SoCalGas 22.4 49.1 11 1.7 5.4 19.7 44.3 4.8 14.8% 1.6 5.0 1.0 1.6 19.5 44.1 5.0 15.4% 1.5 5.0 >1 >1 16 PG&E 30.4 48.9 22 3.3 2.7 25.0 43.5 5.4 20.6% 2.6 2.7 1.6 1.5 24.8 42.7 6.2 23.5% 2.7 2.6 2.2 2.2 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

418
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 58 2019-08-01
Table 26: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results CZ Utility
BASECASE Efficiency & PV/Battery
Total
EDR
CALGreen Tier 1
EDR Target
lbs CO2
per sqft
PV
kW
Total
EDR
Total
EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2
per sqft
PV
kW
On-Bill B/C
Ratio

TDV B/C
Ratio
1 PG&E 32.5 23 3.0 3.3 21.9 10.6 31.8% 2.4 3.3 0.9 1.6
2 PG&E 25.0 12 2.2 2.8 14.9 10.1 27.3% 1.8 2.9 0.5 1.6
3 PG&E 23.9 10 1.9 2.7 13.9 10.0 27.7% 1.5 2.8 0.4 1.4
4 PG&E 23.1 8 1.9 2.7 13.0 10.1 24.9% 1.5 2.8 0.3 1.5
5 PG&E 22.2 10 1.8 2.6 12.8 9.4 29.7% 1.4 2.6 0.4 1.3
5 PG&E/SoCalGas 22.2 10 1.8 2.6 12.8 9.4 29.7% 1.4 2.6 0.3 1.3 6 SCE/SoCalGas 23.3 10 1.6 2.7 13.6 9.8 20.1% 1.2 2.8 0.8 1.3 7 SDG&E 20.3 5 1.3 2.6 11.1 9.2 9.0% 1.0 2.7 0.1 1.3
8 SCE/SoCalGas 21.3 10 1.4 2.9 12.9 8.4 23.7% 1.1 3.0 0.9 1.3 9 SCE/SoCalGas 24.5 13 1.5 2.9 15.7 8.8 24.7% 1.2 3.0 1.0 1.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas 24.2 10 1.6 3.0 14.6 9.6 27.3% 1.3 3.1 1.0 1.5 10 SDG&E 24.2 10 1.6 3.0 14.6 9.6 27.3% 1.3 3.1 0.6 1.5 11 PG&E 24.6 11 2.1 3.6 15.4 9.2 29.4% 1.8 3.5 0.4 1.5
12 PG&E 25.5 12 2.1 3.0 15.9 9.6 28.9% 1.8 3.0 0.4 1.7
13 PG&E 25.7 11 2.0 3.8 16.1 9.7 28.9% 1.7 3.7 0.4 1.6
14 SCE/SoCalGas 25.3 15 2.3 3.2 16.3 9.0 30.1% 1.8 3.1 1.3 1.7 14 SDG&E 25.3 15 2.3 3.2 16.3 9.0 30.1% 1.8 3.1 1.2 1.7 15 SCE/SoCalGas 22.4 11 1.7 5.4 15.3 7.1 25.1% 1.4 5.1 1.1 1.5 16 PG&E 30.4 22 3.3 2.7 19.9 10.5 32.6% 2.4 2.8 0.9 1.4 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

419
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 59 2019-08-01
Table 27: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results CZ Utility
BASECASE Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
CALGreen Tier 1
EDR Target
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
1 PG&E 46.8 68.2 36 1.5 3.3 31.8 53.0 15.2 40.2% 1.0 3.3 1.8 1.7 39.9 61.3 6.9 18.3% 1.3 3.3 2.9 2.7 2 PG&E 32.8 53.7 16 1.1 2.8 27.9 48.7 4.9 20.5% 0.9 2.8 1.2 1.1 27.7 48.5 5.1 21.2% 0.9 2.8 2.3 2.1 3 PG&E 33.1 55.6 14 1.0 2.7 28.5 50.9 4.7 20.6% 0.8 2.7 2.6 2.4 28.7 51.2 4.4 19.6% 0.9 2.7 1.8 1.6 4 PG&E 31.3 52.8 12 1.0 2.7 27.9 49.4 3.4 15.5% 0.9 2.7 1.9 1.8 27.4 48.9 3.9 17.6% 0.9 2.7 1.5 1.5 5 PG&E 32.5 54.2 16 1.0 2.6 28.1 49.9 4.4 19.7% 0.9 2.6 2.6 2.3 28.0 49.8 4.4 20.3% 0.9 2.6 1.9 1.7 5 PG&E/SoCalGas 32.5 54.2 16 1.0 2.6 28.1 49.9 4.4 19.7% 0.9 2.6 2.6 2.3 28.0 49.8 4.4 20.3% 0.9 2.6 1.9 1.7 6 SCE/SoCalGas 29.7 55.8 12 0.9 2.7 27.7 53.8 2.0 10.9% 0.8 2.7 1.3 1.4 26.8 53.0 2.9 16.0% 0.8 2.7 2.2 2.3 7 SDG&E 27.1 55.3 7 0.7 2.6 27.1 55.3 0.0 0.0% 0.7 2.6 - - 24.8 53.0 2.2 16.9% 0.7 2.6 1.6 1.7 8 SCE/SoCalGas 26.1 51.5 10 0.8 2.9 24.5 49.9 1.6 8.9% 0.8 2.9 0.6 1.2 24.4 49.7 1.8 9.7% 0.8 2.9 2.8 3.0 9 SCE/SoCalGas 28.8 51.9 13 0.9 2.9 26.0 49.1 2.8 12.5% 0.8 2.9 0.8 2.0 25.5 48.6 3.3 14.7% 0.8 2.9 2.1 3.2 10 SCE/SoCalGas 28.8 50.7 11 0.9 3.0 25.7 47.6 3.1 14.0% 0.9 3.0 0.9 1.5 25.3 47.2 3.4 15.5% 0.8 3.0 2.3 3.2 10 SDG&E 28.8 50.7 11 0.9 3.0 25.7 47.6 3.1 14.0% 0.9 3.0 1.1 1.5 25.3 47.2 3.4 15.5% 0.8 3.0 2.6 3.2 11 PG&E 30.0 50.2 12 1.1 3.6 25.4 45.6 4.6 16.2% 1.0 3.6 1.2 1.5 24.1 44.3 5.9 20.8% 0.9 3.6 3.0 3.3 12 PG&E 30.9 50.1 13 1.0 3.0 27.1 46.3 3.8 15.3% 0.9 3.0 0.8 1.1 25.8 45.0 5.1 20.4% 0.9 3.0 2.0 2.5 13 PG&E 30.7 51.5 13 1.1 3.8 25.7 46.4 5.1 17.4% 0.9 3.8 1.1 1.4 24.7 45.4 6.0 20.9% 0.9 3.8 2.9 3.3 14 SCE/SoCalGas 31.3 52.2 16 1.4 3.2 25.7 46.6 5.6 18.9% 1.2 3.2 1.0 1.5 25.3 46.2 6.0 20.5% 1.2 3.2 2.3 3.1 14 SDG&E 31.3 52.2 16 1.4 3.2 25.7 46.6 5.6 18.9% 1.2 3.2 1.3 1.5 25.3 46.2 6.0 20.5% 1.2 3.2 2.9 3.1 15 SCE/SoCalGas 26.2 52.8 8 1.3 5.4 20.6 47.2 5.6 16.8% 1.1 5.4 1.1 1.6 18.9 45.5 7.3 21.8% 1.0 5.4 3.3 4.5 16 PG&E 46.5 64.6 39 1.7 2.7 36.8 54.9 9.7 25.2% 1.4 2.7 1.7 1.7 41.6 59.7 4.9 12.7% 1.6 2.7 2.4 2.3

420
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 60 2019-08-01
Table 28: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV-PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results CZ Utility
BASECASE Efficiency & PV Efficiency & PV/Battery
Total EDR
CALGreen Tier 1
EDR Target
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
Total EDR
Total EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
Total EDR
Total EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
1 PG&E 46.8 36 1.5 3.3 15.4 31.4 40.2% 0.5 6.0 1.8 1.5 5.6 41.2 51.9% 0.3 6.76 1.4 1.4 2 PG&E 32.8 16 1.1 2.8 13.4 19.4 20.5% 0.5 4.9 1.8 1.4 2.7 30.1 31.5% 0.3 5.51 1.4 1.4 3 PG&E 33.1 14 1.0 2.7 14.6 18.5 20.6% 0.5 4.5 2.2 1.7 3.7 29.3 31.6% 0.2 5.10 1.5 1.6 4 PG&E 31.3 12 1.0 2.7 14.1 17.2 15.5% 0.5 4.5 2.1 1.6 2.8 28.6 26.5% 0.2 5.15 1.5 1.6 5 PG&E 32.5 16 1.0 2.6 14.3 18.2 19.7% 0.5 4.3 2.3 1.8 3.8 28.7 32.7% 0.2 4.84 1.6 1.6 5 PG&E/SoCalGas 32.5 16 1.0 2.6 14.3 18.2 19.7% 0.5 4.3 2.3 1.8 3.8 28.7 32.7% 0.2 4.84 1.6 1.6 6 SCE/SoCalGas 29.7 12 0.9 2.7 15.5 14.3 10.9% 0.6 4.1 1.2 1.5 3.6 26.1 18.9% 0.3 4.68 1.2 1.4 7 SDG&E 27.1 7 0.7 2.6 15.8 11.3 0.7% 0.6 3.7 1.9 1.5 2.9 24.2 6.7% 0.3 4.21 1.3 1.5 8 SCE/SoCalGas 26.1 10 0.8 2.9 15.1 10.9 8.9% 0.6 4.0 1.0 1.5 4.5 21.6 24.9% 0.3 4.54 1.1 1.4 9 SCE/SoCalGas 28.8 13 0.9 2.9 17.3 11.5 12.5% 0.7 4.1 1.1 1.6 7.6 21.3 25.5% 0.4 4.66 1.1 1.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas 28.8 11 0.9 3.0 17.7 11.1 14.0% 0.7 4.2 1.1 1.5 7.6 21.2 27.0% 0.4 4.78 1.1 1.5 10 SDG&E 28.8 11 0.9 3.0 17.7 11.1 14.0% 0.7 4.2 1.7 1.5 7.6 21.2 27.0% 0.4 4.78 1.4 1.5 11 PG&E 30.0 12 1.1 3.6 15.8 14.2 16.2% 0.6 5.4 1.8 1.6 6.8 23.2 29.2% 0.4 6.11 1.5 1.6 12 PG&E 30.9 13 1.0 3.0 15.2 15.7 15.3% 0.5 5.0 1.7 1.4 5.6 25.4 29.3% 0.3 5.62 1.3 1.5 13 PG&E 30.7 13 1.1 3.8 17.3 13.4 17.4% 0.6 5.4 1.7 1.5 8.2 22.5 29.4% 0.4 6.14 1.4 1.5 14 SCE/SoCalGas 31.3 16 1.4 3.2 15.8 15.5 18.9% 0.9 4.8 1.2 1.6 7.4 23.9 30.9% 0.6 5.39 1.4 1.6 14 SDG&E 31.3 16 1.4 3.2 15.8 15.5 18.9% 0.9 4.8 1.8 1.6 7.4 23.9 30.9% 0.6 5.39 1.7 1.6 15 SCE/SoCalGas 26.2 8 1.3 5.4 20.0 6.2 16.8% 1.1 5.5 1.1 1.6 12.7 13.5 27.0% 0.8 6.25 1.2 1.5 16 PG&E 46.5 39 1.7 2.7 19.6 27.0 25.2% 0.9 5.5 2.1 1.6 11.1 35.4 34.3% 0.6 6.17 1.7 1.5 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

421
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 61 2019-08-01
Appendix D – Single Family Measure Summary
Table 29: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary

VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

422
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 62 2019-08-01
Table 30: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary

LLAHU - Low Leakage Air Handling Unit
VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

423
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 63 2019-08-01
Table 31: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary

VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

424
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 64 2019-08-01
Table 32: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary

VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

425
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 65 2019-08-01
Table 33: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency – Equipment, Preempted Package Measure Summary

LLAHU - Low Leakage Air Handling Unit
VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

426
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 66 2019-08-01
Table 34: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV Package Measure Summary

VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

427
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 67 2019-08-01
Table 35: Single Family All-Electric Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Measure Summary

VVLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space

428
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 68 2019-08-01
Appendix E – Multifamily Detailed Results
Table 36: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results Climate Zone
Utility
BASECASE Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
CALGreen Tier 1
EDR Target
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW per
Building
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp Margin
lbs CO2 per sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
01 PG&E 28.6 60.7 23 2.7 15.9 25.1 57.3 3.4 19.3% 2.3 16.0 1.1 1.2 26.4 58.4 2.3 12.2% 2.5 15.9 1.3 1.4 02 PG&E 25.7 56.5 12 2.4 13.9 24.2 54.7 1.8 9.9% 2.3 13.8 1.0 1.7 23.6 54.2 2.3 12.5% 2.2 13.9 1.1 1.5 03 PG&E 24.7 57.8 10 2.1 13.5 24.0 57.2 0.6 4.7% 2.1 13.5 1.0 1.1 23.1 56.2 1.6 11.2% 1.9 13.4 1.1 1.2 04 PG&E 25.5 56.8 8 2.2 13.6 24.3 55.5 1.3 7.7% 2.1 13.5 0.8 1.2 23.8 54.9 1.9 10.9% 2.0 13.5 1.1 1.7 05 PG&E 24.2 57.4 10 2.1 12.6 23.7 56.9 0.5 4.4% 2.0 12.6 1.0 1.0 22.7 55.9 1.5 10.9% 1.9 12.6 1.2 1.3 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 24.2 57.4 10 2.1 12.6 23.7 56.9 0.5 4.4% 2.0 12.6 0.8 1.0 22.7 55.9 1.5 10.9% 1.9 12.6 1.1 1.3 06 SCE/SoCalGas 26.8 63.2 10 2.2 13.9 25.8 61.9 1.3 7.0% 2.1 13.8 0.6 1.5 25.5 61.9 1.3 7.4% 2.0 13.9 1.4 1.7 07 SDG&E 26.8 64.5 5 2.1 13.2 26.1 63.6 0.9 5.3% 2.1 13.1 0.7 2.2 25.0 62.5 2.0 12.2% 2.0 13.2 1.1 1.4 08 SCE/SoCalGas 25.7 61.8 10 2.2 14.6 24.6 60.3 1.5 7.4% 2.1 14.5 0.7 1.4 24.6 60.7 1.1 5.7% 2.0 14.6 1.4 1.7 09 SCE/SoCalGas 26.4 59.7 13 2.2 14.7 25.0 57.9 1.8 8.2% 2.2 14.4 1.5 3.3 24.1 56.9 2.8 12.9% 2.1 14.4 1.7 2.9 10 SCE/SoCalGas 27.0 58.7 10 2.3 15.1 25.7 57.0 1.7 7.7% 2.2 14.9 0.8 1.7 24.7 55.8 2.9 13.0% 2.1 14.8 2.0 3.3 10 SDG&E 27.0 58.7 10 2.3 15.1 25.7 57.0 1.7 7.7% 2.2 14.9 1.1 1.7 24.7 55.8 2.9 13.0% 2.1 14.8 2.6 3.3 11 PG&E 24.5 54.5 11 2.4 16.6 22.3 51.6 2.9 11.9% 2.2 16.3 0.7 1.2 22.2 51.3 3.2 13.2% 2.2 16.1 1.8 3.3 12 PG&E 25.9 55.3 12 2.3 14.9 24.3 53.4 1.9 8.8% 2.2 14.8 1.1 2.2 23.5 52.5 2.8 12.8% 2.1 14.7 1.2 2.2 13 PG&E 26.1 55.9 11 2.3 17.5 23.7 52.8 3.1 12.1% 2.1 17.1 0.6 1.3 23.7 52.5 3.4 13.2% 2.1 16.9 2.0 3.8 14 SCE/SoCalGas 25.6 55.9 15 2.8 14.6 23.1 52.8 3.1 12.8% 2.5 14.3 0.7 1.2 23.2 52.6 3.3 13.3% 2.5 14.2 2.0 3.0 14 SDG&E 25.6 55.9 15 2.8 14.6 23.1 52.8 3.1 12.8% 2.5 14.3 0.9 1.2 23.2 52.6 3.3 13.3% 2.5 14.2 2.5 3.0 15 SCE/SoCalGas 25.0 59.2 11 2.5 21.6 22.7 55.0 4.2 12.9% 2.4 20.4 1.4 2.3 22.6 54.8 4.4 13.5% 2.3 20.4 >1 >1 16 PG&E 29.4 57.3 22 3.5 13.4 26.6 54.9 2.4 11.3% 3.0 13.7 1.1 1.2 26.9 54.4 2.9 13.1% 3.1 13.2 1.8 2.1 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

429
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 69 2019-08-01

Table 37: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency & PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results CZ Utility
BASECASE Efficiency & PV/Battery
Total
EDR
CALGreen
Tier 1 EDR
Target
lbs CO2
per sqft
PV kW
per
Building
Total
EDR
Total
EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2
per sqft
PV kW
per
Building
On-Bill
B/C Ratio

TDV B/C
Ratio
01 PG&E 28.6 23 2.7 15.9 17.1 11.5 29.3% 2.1 16.5 0.4 1.2 02 PG&E 25.7 12 2.4 13.9 14.8 10.9 16.9% 2.1 14.2 0.2 1.6 03 PG&E 24.7 10 2.1 13.5 14.4 10.3 10.7% 1.9 13.9 0.1 1.4 04 PG&E 25.5 8 2.2 13.6 14.3 11.2 15.7% 1.9 13.9 0.2 1.6 05 PG&E 24.2 10 2.1 12.6 14.3 9.9 9.4% 1.8 13.1 0.2 1.4 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 24.2 10 2.1 12.6 14.3 9.9 9.4% 1.8 13.1 0.1 1.4 06 SCE/SoCalGas 26.8 10 2.2 13.9 16.1 10.7 10.0% 1.8 14.2 0.6 1.4 07 SDG&E 26.8 5 2.1 13.2 15.8 11.0 7.3% 1.7 13.6 0.0 1.4 08 SCE/SoCalGas 25.7 10 2.2 14.6 15.8 9.9 13.4% 1.8 14.9 0.7 1.3 09 SCE/SoCalGas 26.4 13 2.2 14.7 16.7 9.7 15.2% 1.8 14.9 0.9 1.5 10 SCE/SoCalGas 27.0 10 2.3 15.1 16.6 10.4 13.7% 1.9 15.3 1.0 1.6 10 SDG&E 27.0 10 2.3 15.1 16.6 10.4 13.7% 1.9 15.3 0.2 1.6 11 PG&E 24.5 11 2.4 16.6 14.0 10.5 19.9% 2.0 16.7 0.4 1.6 12 PG&E 25.9 12 2.3 14.9 15.6 10.3 17.8% 2.0 15.2 0.3 1.7 13 PG&E 26.1 11 2.3 17.5 15.4 10.7 20.1% 2.0 17.5 0.4 1.6 14 SCE/SoCalGas 25.6 15 2.8 14.6 16.0 9.6 20.8% 2.2 14.7 1.1 1.4 14 SDG&E 25.6 15 2.8 14.6 16.0 9.6 20.8% 2.2 14.7 0.5 1.4 15 SCE/SoCalGas 25.0 11 2.5 21.6 16.2 8.8 18.9% 2.1 20.9 1.3 1.7 16 PG&E 29.4 22 3.5 13.4 19.5 9.9 19.3% 2.7 14.1 0.5 1.3 “inf” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

430
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 70 2019-08-01
Table 38: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency Package Cost-Effectiveness Results CZ Utility
BASECASE Non-Preempted Equipment - Preempted
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
CALGreen Tier
1 EDR Target
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C
Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
Total EDR
Efficiency EDR
Efficiency EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C
Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
01 PG&E 41.1 70.6 36 1.6 15.9 37.5 67.0 3.6 14.6% 1.5 15.9 1.6 1.4 37.1 67.3 3.3 18.4% 1.4 15.9 2.4 2.3 02 PG&E 34.3 63.4 16 1.4 13.9 32.4 61.5 1.9 9.1% 1.3 13.9 1.7 2.1 31.1 60.2 3.2 15.1% 1.3 13.9 1.6 1.6 03 PG&E 33.5 64.2 14 1.3 13.5 33.5 64.2 0.0 0.0% 1.3 13.5 - - 30.4 61.5 2.7 19.5% 1.1 13.5 1.7 1.6 04 PG&E 32.0 61.4 12 1.3 13.6 30.5 60.0 1.4 8.0% 1.2 13.6 1.4 1.5 29.7 59.2 2.2 12.2% 1.2 13.6 1.2 1.1 05 PG&E 34.7 65.4 16 1.3 12.6 34.1 64.8 0.6 3.4% 1.3 12.6 1.1 0.9 30.6 61.8 3.6 23.5% 1.2 12.6 2.1 2.0 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 34.7 65.4 16 1.3 12.6 34.1 64.8 0.6 3.4% 1.3 12.6 1.1 0.9 30.6 61.8 3.6 23.5% 1.2 12.6 2.1 2.0 06 SCE/SoCalGas 31.9 65.9 12 1.3 13.9 30.9 64.9 1.0 5.9% 1.3 13.9 0.7 1.3 29.8 63.7 2.2 13.0% 1.2 13.9 1.6 1.9 07 SDG&E 31.7 66.6 7 1.2 13.2 31.1 66.0 0.6 4.6% 1.2 13.2 0.6 1.0 29.7 64.7 1.9 13.6% 1.1 13.2 1.6 1.7 08 SCE/SoCalGas 29.8 63.6 10 1.3 14.6 28.6 62.4 1.2 6.5% 1.2 14.6 0.9 1.7 27.9 61.7 1.9 10.3% 1.2 14.6 1.6 1.8 09 SCE/SoCalGas 30.4 61.9 13 1.3 14.7 28.7 60.3 1.6 8.1% 1.3 14.7 1.3 2.7 28.8 60.4 1.5 7.4% 1.2 14.7 1.6 1.6 10 SCE/SoCalGas 31.2 61.3 11 1.4 15.1 29.3 59.5 1.8 8.7% 1.3 15.1 1.2 2.0 29.3 59.5 1.8 8.6% 1.3 15.1 1.7 2.0 10 SDG&E 31.2 61.3 11 1.4 15.1 29.3 59.5 1.8 8.7% 1.3 15.1 1.5 2.0 29.3 59.5 1.8 8.6% 1.3 15.1 2.0 2.0 11 PG&E 31.9 60.6 12 1.4 16.6 28.5 57.1 3.5 13.1% 1.3 16.6 1.4 1.6 28.1 56.7 3.9 14.4% 1.3 16.6 2.0 2.3 12 PG&E 32.0 59.9 13 1.3 14.9 29.4 57.3 2.6 11.4% 1.2 14.9 0.9 1.1 29.0 57.0 2.9 13.0% 1.2 14.9 1.6 1.6 13 PG&E 32.1 60.5 13 1.4 17.5 28.8 57.2 3.3 12.6% 1.2 17.5 1.3 1.6 28.3 56.7 3.8 14.3% 1.2 17.5 2.0 2.3 14 SCE/SoCalGas 32.5 61.6 16 1.7 14.6 28.9 57.9 3.7 13.8% 1.6 14.6 1.2 1.6 28.7 57.8 3.8 14.3% 1.6 14.6 1.6 2.2 14 SDG&E 32.5 61.6 16 1.7 14.6 28.9 57.9 3.7 13.8% 1.6 14.6 1.5 1.6 28.7 57.8 3.8 14.3% 1.6 14.6 2.0 2.2 15 SCE/SoCalGas 28.2 61.0 8 1.8 21.6 23.9 56.6 4.4 14.2% 1.6 21.6 1.5 2.3 21.9 54.6 6.4 20.6% 1.5 21.6 1.2 1.7 16 PG&E 40.2 66.6 39 1.9 13.4 36.2 62.5 4.1 15.0% 1.7 13.4 2.1 2.1 37.1 63.4 3.2 11.4% 1.7 13.4 1.6 1.7 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

431
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 71 2019-08-01
Table 39: Multifamily All-Electric Efficiency & PV-PV/Battery Package Cost-Effectiveness Results Climate Zone
Utility
BASECASE Efficiency & PV Efficiency & PV/Battery
Total EDR
CALGreen Tier
1 EDR Target
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
Total EDR
Total EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C
Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
Total EDR
Total EDR
Margin
% Comp
Margin
lbs CO2 per
sqft
PV kW per
Building
On-Bill B/C
Ratio
TDV B/C Ratio
01 PG&E 41.1 36 1.6 15.9 18.6 22.5 14.6% 0.8 26.9 2.0 1.5 6.6 34.5 24.6% 0.4 30.3 1.3 1.4 02 PG&E 34.3 16 1.4 13.9 16.8 17.5 9.1% 0.7 21.9 2.4 1.8 3.4 30.9 16.1% 0.3 24.8 1.4 1.7 03 PG&E 33.5 14 1.3 13.5 17.4 16.1 2.6% 0.7 20.8 2.4 1.7 4.0 29.5 8.6% 0.3 23.6 1.3 1.6 04 PG&E 32.0 12 1.3 13.6 17.0 15.0 8.0% 0.7 20.2 2.4 1.8 3.1 28.9 16.0% 0.3 22.9 1.30 1.77 05 PG&E 34.7 16 1.3 12.6 17.6 17.1 3.4% 0.7 19.9 2.5 1.8 4.4 30.3 8.4% 0.3 22.5 1.4 1.7 05 PG&E/SoCalGas 34.7 16 1.3 12.6 17.6 17.1 3.4% 0.7 19.9 2.5 1.8 4.4 30.3 8.4% 0.3 22.5 1.4 1.7 06 SCE/SoCalGas 31.9 12 1.3 13.9 18.1 13.8 5.9% 1.0 19.5 1.2 1.7 4.4 27.5 8.9% 0.5 22.1 1.2 1.6 07 SDG&E 31.7 7 1.2 13.2 18.9 12.8 4.6% 0.9 18.1 2.1 1.8 4.6 27.1 6.6% 0.5 20.5 1.2 1.6 08 SCE/SoCalGas 29.8 10 1.3 14.6 18.2 11.6 6.5% 1.0 19.4 1.3 1.8 5.6 24.2 12.5% 0.5 22.0 1.2 1.6 09 SCE/SoCalGas 30.4 13 1.3 14.7 19.1 11.3 8.1% 1.0 19.4 1.3 1.9 7.1 23.3 15.1% 0.6 22.0 1.3 1.7 10 SCE/SoCalGas 31.2 11 1.4 15.1 20.4 10.8 8.7% 1.1 19.9 1.3 1.8 7.9 23.3 14.7% 0.6 22.5 1.3 1.7 10 SDG&E 31.2 11 1.4 15.1 20.4 10.8 8.7% 1.1 19.9 2.1 1.8 7.9 23.3 14.7% 0.6 22.5 1.4 1.7 11 PG&E 31.9 12 1.4 16.6 18.5 13.4 13.1% 0.8 22.8 2.2 1.8 6.6 25.3 21.1% 0.4 25.8 1.4 1.8 12 PG&E 32.0 13 1.3 14.9 17.6 14.4 11.4% 0.7 21.7 2.1 1.6 5.4 26.6 20.4% 0.4 24.5 1.3 1.7 13 PG&E 32.1 13 1.4 17.5 19.9 12.2 12.6% 0.8 23.3 2.1 1.7 8.2 23.9 20.6% 0.4 26.4 1.4 1.7 14 SCE/SoCalGas 32.5 16 1.7 14.6 18.5 14.0 13.8% 1.3 20.2 1.4 1.9 7.7 24.8 21.8% 0.8 22.8 1.4 1.8 14 SDG&E 32.5 16 1.7 14.6 18.5 14.0 13.8% 1.3 20.2 2.2 1.9 7.7 24.8 21.8% 0.8 22.8 1.7 1.8 15 SCE/SoCalGas 28.2 8 1.8 21.6 21.1 7.1 14.2% 1.5 23.6 1.4 2.1 11.3 16.9 20.2% 1.1 26.6 1.3 1.8 16 PG&E 40.2 39 1.9 13.4 20.6 19.6 15.0% 1.2 22.0 2.6 1.9 10.3 29.9 23.0% 0.8 24.8 1.6 1.7 “>1” = indicates cases where there is both first cost savings and annual utility bill savings.

432
2019 Energy Efficiency Ordinance Cost-effectiveness Study 72 2019-08-01
Appendix F – Multifamily Measure Summary
Table 40: Multifamily Mixed Fuel Efficiency – Non-Preempted Package Measure Summary