“Layton Consulting Fenestration Nerds” By Anton Van Dyk: Did you know that British Columbia has a Law that specifies a window U-value?

I recently had a conversation with someone regarding the contradiction in U-values specified in the BC Building Code (BCBC) and the BC Energy Efficiency Standard Regulation (BCESR) or what is also referred to as the BC Energy Efficiency Act (BCEEA).  The issue, in reality, is not the contradiction as you can navigate these, but what is an issue, is the lack of awareness of the BCESR and what it applies to.

A few years back, before the January 1, 2022 update to the BCESR, I suggested that the BCESR should be harmonized with the BCBC now that the building code specifies U-vales, either through prescriptive methods or through the Energy Step Code.  This is because the BCESR for windows made sense before U-values were codified, but now it seems to be a bit redundant and confusing as we have two different U-values and two different implementation dates and methods.  I was told the reason why harmonization could not be achieved, was due to the BCESR being relevant to windows and doors sold in BC that fall outside of the building permit process.  I found this a bit odd because technically you cannot modify, renovate, or build a residential building that is heated without a building permit. So… what is the purpose of this?

Now keep in mind that the Building Code falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Housing and the BCESR falls under the Ministry of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation, and since these are two separate areas of the Government it could be assumed that contradiction will live with us for some time.  To date, I have never been given a reasonable answer as to why two layers of Government must regulate windows and doors. 

The bigger issue is with the enforcement of the BCESR versus the BCBC.  As the BCBC has Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ’s) they can ensure that the correct windows and doors are being used on buildings that fall under the permit process and the BCBC, while the BCESR has no enforcement. It leaves enforcement up to the manufacturer to be aware and follow through.  The one challenge I have seen with this is that many Architects, Energy Advisors and other specifiers are simply unaware of the BCESR as it is not linked to a building design tool such as the BCBC.  So, it often gets overlooked, resulting in some products violating the BCESR but still meeting the BCBC. 

So, let's break down what the BCESR requires so we are all aware of this.  One thing to consider is that the BCESR falls under the BC Energy Efficiency Act (BCEEA), which regulates everything from your dishwasher to your fridge, as well as windows and doors.  As it is a law and not a code, it comes with a consequence of a fine and/or jail time, where the BCBC comes with a pass/fail to meet occupancy.  So, what happens when a product passes inspection in the BCBC but fails to meet the BCEEA?  Who is responsible for ensuring the law is followed?

So, how do you comply with both, to prevent this?  Well, the BCBC is simple, as 99% now is directed by EA’s and the Architect who is signing off via Letters of Assurance. So, whatever they specify is their design and their responsibility, so then let’s look at what the BCESR says for windows. 

The two charts below show the initial requirements that were introduced in 2009 before U-value was in the BCBC and the updates that came into effect on Jan 1, 2022.  In these tables, they describe the building type and product, the U-value and the method of calculating the U-value.  

So, it is fairly straightforward to understand when it comes to building and product type and the U- value limit set.  What is often missed is the section on the very right where it lists the method of calculating the U-value.  Note how it references CSA and NFRC only. 

I bring this up as the Vancouver Building Bylaw (VBBL) references the allowance of Passive House Certified windows to be used.  This allows for products, manufactured outside of BC, to be used in a building in Vancouver, but as the PH method for U-values is not listed in the BCESR then the VBBL could be promoting a violation of the Law.  We are also seeing more and more import products being proposed for use in BC, which come with thermal values modelled using either the PH method or an ISO standard.  The issue with these standards is they use boundary conditions that are different than the CSA and NFRC standards such as temperature range and product size.  As a result, a U-value modelled using a non-CSA/NFRC method is not equivalent to the standards listed in the BCESR.   

So, to conclude, if anyone asks for an equivalency letter for an imported product to meet a North American standard, it simply cannot be done and could result in a violation of the BCEEA which is a violation of the Law.

I will keep being an advocate for the industry to seek harmonization on this subject as I find it unfair for an industry to have to meet two conflicting policies and since one has no enforcement arm to it, it becomes an honour system.  Also, as energy efficiency becomes a greater topic in building codes, policymakers need to understand that what was needed in the past, may not be needed in the future. 

If you are a designer or consultant and are specifying windows, please be aware of these two conflicting obligations and if you are a manufacturer and need assistance in understanding how to achieve compliance with both the BCBC and BCESR, feel free to reach out.