EPA's Sam Rashkin Fields Questions
In a webinar led by Ari Rapport, a Building Performance Specialist with IBACOS, we took a look at ENERGY STAR® Version 3 from a homebuilder’s perspective – touching on three key areas:
Ari was joined by Anthony Grisolia, IBACOS' Services Manager, and Sam Rashkin of the EPA, the National Director of ENERGY STAR for Homes. Anthony hosted the session, while Sam served as a guest commentator and was on hand to answer questions.
Get all of the webinar details.
Please complete our SHORT SURVEY.
Also, take a look at some of the great questions attendees posed during this session, which were answered by Sam Rashkin.
It seems from experience that allowing a builder to maintain ENERGY STAR partner status and use the ENERGY STAR logo by building at least one home a year, regardless of how many homes built, waters down the program with homebuyers. Has any consideration been given to requiring a percentage of total homes built annually to be ENERGY STAR certified?
[Sam] That’s a really good question, and we absolutely agree with that concern, and it’s 
something we are considering. We don’t know whether it’s making 100% or 50% the right number, but do expect a policy determination on that. We do agree. There is an unintended confusion for the consumer, and we want to nip that in the bud. Excellent question.
How would you recommend certifying a house that’s started before April 1, 2011, but will close after July 1? It will be essentially complete under the 2.0 standards but it will need to qualify for 2.5. How will that work?
[Sam] If I understand the question correctly, it was permitted before it was contracted. First, it’s important to remember the distinction, it can be permitted or contracted, either of those could be the date that determines which period of implementation kicks in. But the question is if it’s finished after July 1, it must be compliant with version 2.5 requirements. If it’s finished after Dec. 31, then it’s got to be prepared to meet version 3.0, which includes all the checklists.
As insulation, windows, HVAC, appliances, and other technologies in a home approach maximum efficiency, lighting will have to play a bigger role in achieving zero energy. What approach is ENERGY STAR embracing?
[Sam] Essentially, the way we address lighting is the reference design assumes 80% of sockets include high-efficacy fixtures and that’s specified in terms of what is a high-efficacy fixture in the notes. The role that more efficient fixtures play is somewhat minimized by the fact that the reference design already assumes such a high volume of sockets use them. There’s some room there for some improvements, but I think it’s minimal. But I want to say--if you don’t include high-efficiency fixtures, you’ll be penalized fairly significantly, so it’s already an important part of the program because it’s part of the reference design.
Is Revision 2 of ENERGY STAR Version 3 the final document for compliance?
[Sam] It’s really important to understand that it’s human nature that builders and raters apply the most focus, the most attention to program requirements when urgency fits in and deadlines are approaching. So we’ve gotten a lot of great feedback, a lot of good comments that have been integrated into Revision 2, and a lot more coming. We anticipate each quarter until the end of this year to release a sequential revision 3, revision 4, thereafter, we don’t think it will be necessary more than every 6 months to have a revision. But even there, there’s going to be so much learning curve about new, acceptable innovations that can be applied, or accommodations that can be made so this is a process that’s going to keep getting better. The basic essence of what will be required won’t change, but the clarifications and accommodations will keep coming forward.
Over the last couple of weeks we’ve seen some marketing messages throughout the media from KB Home, Pulte Homes about the new EPG scale [and other builder-driven programs]. What does that mean for ENERGY STAR moving forward?
[Sam] We think this is a great compliment to ENERGY STAR, that the builders are stepping up and saying, we’re going to give consumers more information. The ENERGY STAR blue logo is a great, simple message to consumers. If I see the blue logo, now, with Version 3, I get assured performance with every home. I get complete protection with water systems, I get properly installed heating and cooling systems, and my insulation actually works in every home. It’s a great message of assured performance. But beyond that, builders want to calibrate their homes to some level that’s more precise, that helps them in their consumer sales process. We think it’s a great compliment. In the case of KB Home, the Energy Performance Guide, the EPG, is a way for them to showcase the actual dollar use per year, is the big message, and what percent savings consumers could expect over a sample existing home, and what percent they can expect over a minimum code home. So quickly, just to characterize the EPG, it’s the performance and metrics I think the consumer understands, and then ENERGY STAR is a government-backed label for assured performance. And I think they work great together.
And I think historically Pulte has used the Energy Performance guarantee in many markets, they’ll come up with their own label, and I think these all work very well together.
I want to mention, by the way, that KB Home is still ENERGY STAR compliant 100% in all divisions. And Pulte, I think has 60% of their divisions ENERGY STAR compliant. So even with these labels, ENERGY STAR is still a very big part of their energy platform.
Ari Rapport, Sam Rashkin, and Anthony Grisolia Discuss ENERGY STAR Version 3
