Wisdom & Associates, Inc.

Alaska Association of Energy Professionals Pledge Report

Support is continuing to build for the organization we are now at 38 pledges from the industry for forming the association. Keep the pledges coming in

 

Support for the Association is Building Fast

As of noon today 15 people have replied with a pledge of support. Don't wait, the sooner we reach the minimum number of pledges the sooner we can get down to business

So far the following raters have pledged support.

Cliff Judkins    Jeff Jenkins    Chris Duguay   

 Guy Stone    Danny DeBoer    Dave Owens

Jerry Herring    Bill Fischer    Bill Steyer       

 Phil Kluza        Daymond Geary Todd Russell

Steven Wisdom     Robert Moss    Paul Verhagen

Don't be left out send you pledge to akenergypros@gmail.com

Thanks Steven

Update to Energy Raters

The steering committee formed at the last raters meeting in Anchorage met on Thursday 12/8/11; Dave Owens and Steven Wisdom were elected Co Chairman of the group. Jon Schultz, Emmett Leffell, Mark Houston and Chuck Renfro were also present. The group agreed on a plan of action to get the raters organization off the ground and running. The following goals were set and all agreed to work towards the common goal of forming an independent organization for certified energy raters and auditors in the state for Alaska.
This organization will focus on the promotion of our profession, including being a united voice for the group to AHFC, state legislators and the general public. To accomplish this we will need backing and involvement from the entire rater and auditor community. Before we can actually form a C Corporation we need firm commitments from a minimum of 30 raters willing to pledge and are willing to invest $150 as charter members in the organization. Once we have an adequate number of committed members we can proceed with soliciting AHFC for start up funding to help with the first years funding of the organization and file as a 501 c corporation. After the c corporation is formed we will then begin collecting the actual start up fees from your commitments. Once the organization is officially formed the membership will begin to meet and elect officers and a board of directors to officially take over the organization and get it working towards its goals. There is a lot of work ahead and we need a written commitment from you on record to proceed. If you are willing to step up and be a charter member of this organization you need to copy and paste the following in to an email and send it to the attached e-mail address. The dead line for receiving the commitments is January 30, 2012. If you agree with us please do this today before the opportunity slips by.
“ I __(your Name)___________________ support the above group effort to incorporate a group known as “Alaska Association of Energy Professionals” and pledge $150.00 towards this effort. I understand I will not be billed until this group is officially formed and recognized.
Please copy and paste the above statement to an email and send it to
akenergypros@gmail.com
Dave Owens and Steven Wisdom
Co- Chairmen of the Alaska Association of Energy Professionals

December 8, 2011 Meeting

The steering committee met on Thursday in Anchorage and prepared a plan of action to get things rolling to form the association. The official name of the group will be “Alaska Association of Energy Professionals. The steering committee is comprised of Jon Schultz, Emmett Leffel, Mark Houston, Chuck Renfro, Linda Frank, Cliff Hickson, Dave Owens and Steven Wisdom. Dave and Steven were appointed as Co-Chairmen of the group. Additional information will be posted here at todays end and an e-mail will be sent to all raters with and update and details
Steven

Energy Rater Organization

Recently interest has been revived in forming an Energy Raters Organization for the raters in Alaska. This organization has been a long time in the discussion mode and it is time for everyone to step up and make it happen.

Jon Schultz and others put a lot of effort into this last year and got the ball rolling and then we all got busy again. Well as most of you know all of the funds are again encumbered and we are again waiting for someone to complete an upgrade so someone else can be added and again we are behind the curve to keep the ball rolling. Dave Owens, Jon Schultz, Mark Houston, Linda Frank, Chuck Renfro, and I have volunteered to help get this up and going again but it will require input and effort from all rates to make this happen. If you are interested in working with the committee let us know!! 

 No one else is going to represent our interest in the profession like we can. There is an ongoing need for a voice from the raters in Alaska to let the Legislators know how successful this program has been and how many Alaska jobs this has created, not just for the raters but for the company’s doing the work. The energy rebate program has had a significant impact on the bottom line of a lot of  mechanical contractors, Insulation contractors, and Remolding contractors to name a few. If we do not speak out and help obtain funding this industry will die away again as it has several times in the past. A rater’s organization can help with the promotion of the program. 

In addition the raters in Alaska need a single source voice to AHFC on policies and procedures for rating, training and quality control. Without a central voice we are at the whim of individuals that do not have the on the ground view that raters in the field have of issues, policies and procedures. If you want to see this industry to continue into the future, all raters need to get involved to make this happen. It does not require a lot of time but it will require your input to make it successful. 

I have been a rater long enough to see several programs come and go over the years, if we do not step up and promote this program and ourselves,  it will go the way of past programs and dry up and you will be lucky to see a rating once a month come in. 

In an effort to help get information out to everyone and to keep everyone in the loop we have revived the blog on our web site. This will be a central place for information to be shared. If you will send your commits to me I will post them to be shared with everyone. You commits do not have to be long or detailed. Just let us know what you are thinking. A simple I support the effort or I do not support the effort would be appreciated. Let us hear your thoughts!! You can view the blog at www.WisdomAndAssociates.com or simply click on http://blog.wisdomandassociates.com

Wisdom and Associates is committing time and effort for everyone to be heard on the topic. Please send your e mails to Steve@akinspection.com and we will post your comments on the blog as a sounding board for everyone to be heard and to get this off the ground and running. 

Steven Wisdom

2006 International Codes Adopted In Alaska Today

Mark your calendars! Today September 13, 2007 marks the day the State of Alaska is adopting the 2006 International Building, 2006 International Mechanical, and the 2006 International Fire Code.  This means any of those residential projects out there that start today and anytime after will now fall under the 2006 International Codes. 

The State Fire Marshals Office as the building official for the State of Alaska submitted the 2006 IBC, IFC and IMC with Sections of the IFGC for adoption to the Lt. Governors office.  The Lt. Govenor  signed and filed those code adoptions into law on the 14^th of August 2007, to be effective on the 13^th of September. 

Please note that the State is still operating under the 2005 National Electrical Code, and the 2003 Uniform Plumbing Code, these codes have not been adopted in their newer versions.  In addition, in case you missed it, the State of Alaska also adopted a new Building Energy Efficiency Standard (BEES) on April 1, 2007.  The BEES went through some major changes.  While a majority of those who have the ability to still sign off on the Ventilation and Energy Standard portion of the PUR 101, many are not aware that the requirements for a home to meet those standards has changed significantly. 

With all these code changes this year, we at Wisdom & Associates, Inc have made sure to have our fall class schedule reflect the needs of contractors, home inspectors, mechanical administrators and real estate professionals.  Our fall schedule includes the 2006 International Residential Code Part I, which covers a majority of the code changes from the 2003 to the 2006 IRC.  We are also including several Alaska's Energy & Ventilation Standard classes, and a 2006 International Mechanical Code.  With these classes, you should be able to come up to speed on all the code changes in no time.  Please let us know if you'd like to register for these classes - seating is limited.

Code Corner in ASHI Reporter - August 2007

Code Corner with Wisdom & Associates, Inc.
Rob Moss, ASHI Certified Inspector

This installment of code corner will go over room square footage and ceiling height requirements of the 2006 International Residential Code. The International Residential Code defines habitable space as: A space in a building for living, sleeping, eating, or cooking. Bathrooms, toilet rooms, closets, halls, storage or utility spaces and similar areas are not considered habitable spaces. Because occupants spend more time in habitable spaces than accessory areas, these spaces have more regulations. Many times the code will differentiate between habitable and non-habitable spaces for requirements. For this reason it is important to understand the definition of a habitable space.

For a room to be considered habitable several requirements must be met. The minimum size requirements are that at least one room must be at least 120 square feet in size within a unit or house. All other habitable rooms must be at least 70 square feet in size. The exception to this is the kitchen, which is only required to be a minimum of 50 square feet in size. Does this mean that a bathroom now has to be a minimum of 70 square feet? No, since the bath room is not considered a habitable space there is no minimum size requirement.

In addition to the minimum 70 square foot size of a habitable room, it must also be a minimum of 7 feet in any horizontal direction. Additionally, minimum ceiling height requirements apply to habitable rooms, hallways, corridors, bathrooms, toilet rooms, laundry rooms, and basements. The minimum ceiling height is 7 feet. This is a change from what you may have been used to in the Uniform Building Code which had a minimum ceiling height of 7’6”. The required height is measured from finished floor to lowest projection of the ceiling, with some exceptions.

Not more than 50% of the required floor area of a room is permitted to have a sloped ceiling less than 7 feet, with no portion of the required area less than 5 feet in height. What this is saying is if the room is required to have 70 square feet in area to meet the minimum habitable space requirement, then not more than 35 sq ft of the room can have a sloped ceiling less than 7 feet in height. Any portion of the room with a ceiling height of 5 foot or less will not contribute to the square footage requirement for the room Beams and girders spaced not less than 4 feet on center may not project more than 6 inches below the required ceiling height. Ceilings in basements without habitable spaces may project within 6 feet 8 inches to the finished floor, and beams, girders, ducts, etc. may project to within 6 feet 4 inches of finished floor.

This column discusses current model codes. Some jurisdictions use older model codes and/or make amendments that modify specific requirements. Check with your local enforcement authority for more information. This article is based on section R305 of the 2006 International Residential Code.

As this diagram shows, any area with a ceiling height of less than 5 feet cannot contribute to a rooms habitable space requirements (shaded red). Additionally, not more than 50% of the required floor area of a room or space is permitted to be less than 7 feet in height (shaded orange). For example, if there were a 70 square foot bedroom, not more than half, or 35 square feet, could be between 5 and 7 feet in height in order for the room to be considered habitable.

This diagram shows a basement without habitable space. The minimum height is 6 feet 8 inches. However, beams, ducts and other structural components may project to within 6 feet 4 inches of the floor. It is important to understand that this basement is considered un-inhabitable. In other word is just a deep crawl space and can not in the future be converted in to bedrooms or a family room since it does not meet the requirements of a habitable space.

Published in August!

It's that time of month again for you to check your mailboxes! Rob Moss has written another Code Corner for the ASHI Reporter.  This time Code Corner is titled, "How Much, How High To Be Habitable? which is an article on ceiling heights and square footage of rooms to be considered habitable space.   

Code Corner in ASHI Reporter - July 2007

Code Corner with Wisdom & Associates, Inc.
Rob Moss, ASHI Certified Inspector

This installment of code corner will go over the requirements for the use and covering of foam plastic materials based on the 2006 International Residential Code. The popularity of foam plastic materials has risen greatly in recent times because of many factors. Foam products offer high insulating values, can be used as concrete forms, and generally retain their positive characteristics when wetted. However, the use of foam plastics inside the home is highly regulated from a code standpoint because of the toxic smoke that can be produced when these products burn.

The 2006 International Residential Code requires that all foam plastics be separated from the interior of the building, attics and crawlspaces. This would include a crawl space with exposed Insulated Concrete Form block since the blocks are made from polystyrene plastics.

Foam such as expanded polystyrene or urethane spray foam must be separated form the interior of the building by a minimum of ½” gypsum board or other approved materials.

Foam plastics must be separated form the interior of attics and crawl spaces by a minimum of 3/8” gypsum board or other approved materials.

Even though the code references gypsum board as one product to use for the foam separation in the crawl space, in many areas of the country this would not be best practice since the crawl spaces can be damp or wet. The damp crawl space combined with the paper face of the gypsum board would be the equivalent of Purina mold chow, and might cause more problems than it solves.

Some other approved materials for separating the foam plastics from the interior of the building, attic or crawl space are ½” plywood, particle board, mineral wool insulation or sheet metal. The requirement for covering the foam plastics is to reduce the likely hood of ignition. The gypsum board is not meant as a fire proofing but to delay the ignition of the foam by providing a thermal barrier between the plastic and the flame source.

An exception to exposed foam in the crawl space is for the rim joist area. This exception allows foam plastics to be sprayed into the rim joist area of the crawl space if maximum thickness is 3.25” the density is between 1.5 and 2.0 pcf, and the flame spread index is 25 or less and the smoke development index is 450 of less.

Evaluation Reports provide some flexibility in dealing with product restrictions within the code. Foam plastics are a good example of how the evaluation reports can help. The evaluation reports are a record of testing of a specific product when the manufacturer feels the code is too restrictive or does not properly address the product. In the case of foam plastics some polystyrene foam products are manufactured with different plastic beads. Some of these beads have a lower flame spread and smoke index than other others. The manufacturer of any product can pay a testing lab to run testing and evaluations on the product for specific performance under certain conditions. These reports are called evaluation reports. The reports are good for a specific period of time, usually 3 years.

Evaluation Reports are product specific evaluations made by the ICC. They contain valuable information about product usage and the inspector may use the Evaluation Report instead of the code.

Evaluation Reports may allow an exception to the code for a specific building product that meets certain conditions. However, Evaluation Reports may be outdated and it is the decision of the inspector whether or not to use them. Visit www.ICCSAFE.ORG for

This column discusses current model codes. Some jurisdictions use older model codes and/or make amendments that modify specific requirements. Check with your local enforcement authority for more information. This article is based on section R314 of the 2006 International Residential Code. Many changes have been introduced in the 2006 code from the previous code in regards to foam plastic, so inspectors would be wise to carefully read the applicable sections.

What is flame spread and smoke index?

The definition of flame spread is the propagation of flame over a surface. In the building codes materials with a high flame spread are prohibited from being used as interior finishes. The flame spread index of a material is based on the results of ASTM test E 84. The test procedure involves placing materials in a horizontal, rectangular tunnel with two gas burners. Flame is shot onto the material in a controlled manner and the distance the flame travels over ten minutes is used to determine a materials index rating. Most wood products are less than 200. Fire retardants can reduce flame spread to as low as 25. The smoke developed index of a product is a measure of the visual obscurity created when a material burns. The developed smoke index is a numerical value assigned to products based on ASTM test E 84. 

Published!

Be sure to check your mailboxes, a new issue of the July ASHI Reporter form the American Society of Home Inspectors will be coming out and in it Rob Moss will have anther edition of Code Corner!