MINUTES OF THE

      SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      March 3, 1993

 

 

 

 

The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Chairman R. Hal Smith, at 8:40 a.m., on Wednesday, March 3, 1993, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman

Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Vice Chairman

Senator Ernest E. Adler

Senator Thomas J. Hickey

Senator Mark A. James

Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.

Senator Dina Titus

 

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst

Rayanne Francis, Senate Committee Secretary

 

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

James P. Hawke, Director, Nevada Office of Community Services

Irene E. Porter, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Homebuilders

  Association

 

 

 

SENATE BILL (S.B.) 128:Prohibits importation, manufacture, sale or installation of certain appliances that use continuously burning pilot light.

 

SENATE BILL 137:  Prohibits installation of system using electric resistance to heat water in certain homes.

 

Chairman Smith opened the hearing on S.B. 128 and S.B. 137.

 

James P. Hawke, Director, Office of Community Services, intro-duced himself to members of the committee.  He stated he had discussed S.B. 128 and S.B. 137 with utility company representatives, utility association members, and appliance manufacturers.  Mr. Hawke admitted he had received very little support for either piece of legislation and requested the Senate Committee on Natural Resources withdraw the bills from further consideration.

 

Chairman Smith closed the hearing on S.B. 128 and S.B. 137.

 

 

SENATE BILL 124:  Makes various changes relating to standards for conservation of energy in buildings.

 

Chairman Smith opened the hearing on S.B. 124.

 

Mr. Hawke explained the amended language contained in S.B. 124 would establish a schedule of fees for reviewing petitions which request exemption from a building code or standard.  He remarked current state standards prohibit the use of electric resistance (electric baseboard) heating in new construction.  He said it was his intention to attach a modest fee to commercial design review when a variance petition was received.  He assured members of the committee that he intended to exempt residential construction from this fee schedule.

 

Mr. Hawke explained the Nevada Office of Community Services (OCS) spent a considerable amount of time reviewing commercial variance petitions.  He testified the OCS only receives funding from the Department of Energy and through cooperative agreements with utility companies, the mining industry and federal power marketing agencies serving the western states (Western Area Power Administration and Bonneville Power Administration).

 

Mr. Hawke stated the OCS receives an average of seven or eight commercial variance petitions per year.  However, depending on the accuracy of the petition, he remarked one plan could take as long as one weeks time to complete.

 

Mr. Hawke explained current state building standards are based on regulations contained in "The Model Energy Conservation Standards for 1986."  He continued by saying this information was taken from the Uniform Building Code, chapter 53.  He mentioned "The Model Energy Conservation Standards for 1986" had been slightly amended to modify the building standards in the State of Nevada.

 

Mr. Hawke stressed another benefit of enacting S.B. 124 would be to establish the OCS's building standards as the set minimum for the entire state.  Currently, local government can adopt less stringent building standards than the state's.  Mr. Hawke drew attention to a map on page 8 of a handout provided to members of the committee (Exhibit C).  He noted the dates of the model energy efficiency building codes vary from community to community.  He also pointed out a majority of the communities not identified on the map do not enforce any kind of minimum energy standard.

 

Mr. Hawke commented the current state minimum standard for energy conservation in new construction is enforced by code enforcement personnel at the local level.  He said the OCS has designed a  "Design Compliance Forms" to be utilized by code enforcement personnel, plan checkers, builders, engineers, architects and designers to ensure compliance in new construc-tion.  Mr. Hawke also described a training program which has been designed to keep rural inspectors up-to-date.

 

Mr. Hawke proceeded to review material contained in Exhibit C with members of the committee.  In reference to a letter he had received from Stephen Wiel (page 11, Exhibit C), Mr. Hawke stated that it would be futile for the OCS to modernize the state's energy conservation standards unless the state's standards were endorsed as the bare minimum.  He concluded by saying a minimum standard must be set which applies to all of the jurisdictions in the state.

 

Senator Hickey commented Clark County, probably, had the most sophisticated system for developing building codes in the entire State of Nevada.  Mr. Hawke pointed out S.B. 124 has the support of the Southern Nevada Association of Building Officials (SNABO) and the Northern Nevada Association of Building Officials (NNABO).  He said both organizations had indicated it would be much easier for the state's suppliers, designers, vendors, builders and tradesmen to have a specific energy conservation minimum to refer to when conducting their business.

 

Mr. Hawke explained the OCS did not have the funding to train all of the various communities, because each community had adopted a different standard.  He explained passage of S.B. 124 would establish a set minimum standard for energy conservation.

Senator Hickey recognized the main thrust of S.B. 124 was to generate funding for the OCS's training program.

 

Senator Neal asked what was the objective of S.B. 124.  Mr. Hawke explained the establishment of a uniform standard would help the OCS provide training for the building code enforcement in the rural areas.  He stressed the buyer of a newly con-structed home would be the party to truely benefit by the establishment of a minimum standard.

 

Senator Neal mentioned many of the homes in the district he represented were quite old and poorly constructed.  He asked Mr. Hawke if the OCS intended to address the energy standards of existing residential construction.  As part of the state's weatherization program, Mr. Hawke stated he had inspected many of the homes in Senator Neal's district.  He explained 25 cents of the oil overcharge money is set aside in a fund for the weatherization of homes of low-income families in Nevada.

 

Senator Adler said he knew of situations where a low-income family's mortgage payment was $500/month and the power bill was $450/month.  He said shoddy construction and the lack of adequate insulation made it extremely difficult for families living in these homes to stay warm and pay their bills.  Senator Adler remarked he even knew of families who had moved out of their homes, because they could not afford to pay the utility bills.  Mr. Hawke said passage of S.B. 124 would help to prevent more homes like this from being constructed.

 

Senator Adler mentioned substandard mobile homes were coming in from other states and being set up in the rural areas of Nevada.  He asked how the OCS dealt with this problem.  Mr. Hawke sym-pathized with Senator Adler's problem, but pointed out federal law preempts the state's authority to regulate manufactured housing.  He recognized the severity of the problem and testi-fied the State of Nevada would continue to be a dumping ground for mobile homes that other states would not permit.

 

Mr. Hawke referred to S.B. 137 and stated the State of Califor-nia no longer allowed the installation of electric resistance water heaters in new construction.  He drew attention to a couple of letters provided to the committee from the Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association, Incorporated (GAMA) (Exhibit D and E).  Mr. Hawke explained GAMA had threatened to sue the State of Nevada upon passage of S.B. 137.  He continued by saying GAMA would not sue the State of California, because one of its members manufactured electric resistance water heaters.  He concluded his testimony by saying Nevada would probably become a dumping ground of these surplus water heaters.

 

Senator Adler said it seemed the State of Nevada ended up with many of the "cast offs" other states did not want.  Mr. Hawke said the Pacific Northwest had an innovative way of dealing with the problem--the utility companies charged a special hook-up fee for energy inefficient homes.  However, he said he would not recommend this method, because many of these utility companies are in the process of being sued.

 

Irene E. Porter, Lobbyist, Southern Nevada Homebuilders Association, introduced herself to members of the committee.  She noted legislation similar to S.B. 124 had been introduced several times the past few sessions.

 

Ms. Porter said the OCS already has the power to adopt minimum energy conservation standards for all areas of the state not covered by a locally adopted energy code.  She emphasized the Washoe/Reno area had adopted the 1989 energy standard, and Clark County is currently in the midst of adopting the 1992 energy code.  Ms. Porter testified the OCS was still operating off of the 1986 energy conservation standard.

 

Ms. Porter testified passage of S.B. 124 would result in a duplicated effort of what most urban communities were already paying for and getting done.  She explained the members of the Southern Nevada Homebuilders Association were already taking residential energy conservation very seriously.  Ms. Porter explained people looking to buy a new home have demanded energy efficient appliances and adequate insulation.

 

Ms. Porter drew attention to the fact the Governor's reorgani-zation plan called for the elimination of the Nevada Office of Community Services.

 

Ms. Porter concluded her testimony by encouraging the OCS to concentrate its efforts in the rural areas of Nevada, and to allow the urban communities to continue operating as they are currently.

 

Chairman Smith closed the hearing on S.B. 124.

 

 

Per Mr. Hawke's earlier request to withdraw S.B. 128 and S.B. 137 from further consideration, Chairman Smith called for action from the committee.

 

      SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO INDEFINITELY POSTPONE S.B 128 AND S.B. 137.

 

      SENATOR HICKEY SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

      * * * * *

 

There being no further business before the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Chairman Smith adjourned the hearing at 9:30 a.m.

 

 

 

 

            RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

                                    

            Rayanne J. Francis,

            Committee Secretary

 

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

                                

Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman

 

DATE:                           

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senate Committee on Natural Resources

March 3, 1993

Page 1