HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10012024 - BOS Complete Min PktMeeting Minutes
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS
Supervisor John Gioia, District I
Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor Diane Burgis, District III
Supervisor Ken Carlson, District IV
Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V
Clerk of the Board (925) 655-2000
clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us
9:00 AM Administration Building
1025 Escobar Street, Martinez |
https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/87344719204 |
Call in: 888-278-0254 access code 843298#
Tuesday, October 1, 2024
1.CALL TO ORDER; ROLL CALL
District I Supervisor John Gioia, District II Supervisor Candace
Andersen, District III Supervisor Diane Burgis, District IV
Supervisor Ken Carlson, and District V Supervisor Federal D.
Glover
Present:
2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3.CLOSED SESSION
Page 1 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
A.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code § 54957.6)
1.Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino.
Employee Organizations: Public Employees Union, Local 1; AFSCME Locals 512 and 2700; California
Nurses Assn.; SEIU Locals 1021 and 2015; District Attorney Investigators’ Assn.; Deputy Sheriffs
Assn.; United Prof. Firefighters I.A.F.F., Local 1230; Physicians’ & Dentists’ Org. of Contra Costa;
Western Council of Engineers; United Chief Officers Assn.; Contra Costa County Defenders Assn.;
Contra Costa County Deputy District Attorneys’ Assn.; Prof. & Tech. Engineers IFPTE, Local 21; and
Teamsters Local 856.
2.Agency Negotiators: Monica Nino.
Unrepresented Employees: All unrepresented employees.
B.CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL--EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)
(1))
1.Kevin Dotts v. Contra Costa County, WCAB No. Unassigned
2.Pamela Kirk-Veasey v. Contra Costa County, WCAB No. ADJ17929497
3.Anita Wright v. Contra Costa County, WCAB No. ADJ11977197
4. Lester v. Cooper, et al., Contra Costa County Superior Court Case No. MSN 20-1173.
C.PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT Gov. Code § 54957
Title:Director of Child Support Services
There were no reports from closed session .
4.Inspirational Thought-
"Always strive to make the next hour better than this one." ~ OG Mandino
This was approved the Consent Agenda.
5.CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS (Items listed as C.1 through C.58 on the following agenda)
– Items are subject to removal from Consent Calendar by request of any Supervisor . Items
removed from the Consent Calendar will be considered with the Discussion Items .
Motion:Carlson
AndersenSecond:
District I Supervisor Gioia, District II Supervisor Andersen,
District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson,
and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
Result:Passed
6.PRESENTATIONS
PR.2 PRESENTATION recognizing October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. (Mélody
Saint-Saëns, Manager of Alliance to End Abuse)
Page 2 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
PR.1 PRESENTATION proclaiming October 2024 as Filipino American History Month. (Supervisor
Andersen)
Speaker: State Attorney General Rob Bonta
7.DISCUSSION ITEMS
D.1.HEARING on the itemized costs of abatement for property in
unincorporated Contra Costa County, located at 1531 1st St., Richmond,
California (IPROPERTY LLC, Owner). (Jason Crapo, Conservation and
Development Department)
24-3218
Attachments:A -Itemized Abatement Costs - TMP-5896 CERV22-00059 1531 1st.,
Richmond
Before 1
Before 2
Before 3
After 1
After 2
Correspondence-Yu Hu.pdf
Speaker: Yu Hu, property owner.
Motion:Gioia
CarlsonSecond:
District I Supervisor Gioia, District II Supervisor Andersen,
District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson,
and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
Result:Passed
D.2.HEARING to consider adopting Ordinance No. 2024-17, amending the 2022
California Energy Code to increase energy efficiency standards for certain
newly constructed buildings. (Demian Hardman-Saldana, Department of
Conservation and Development)
24-3219
Attachments:10-1-24 BOS_Local Energy Code Amendement Slide Deck
Exhibit A
Ordinance No. 2024-17 Energy Code Amendments
Findings ISO Energy Reach Code Adoption
2022 Cost-Effectiveness Studies
Signed Ord 2024-17 .pdf
Motion:Carlson
GioiaSecond:
District I Supervisor Gioia, District II Supervisor Andersen,
District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson,
and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
Result:Passed
D.3 CONSIDER consent item previously removed.
There were no consent items removed for discussion .
Page 3 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
This was approved.
D.4 PUBLIC COMMENT (2 Minutes/Speaker)
There were no requests to speak at public comment .
D.5 CONSIDER reports of Board members.
Supervisor Carlson joined Health Services Director Anna Roth at a meeting with the California
Department of Public Health on Monday, September 30, 2024.
8.ADJOURN in memory of
~The Hon. Bette Boatmun, Member of the Contra Costa Water District for 46 years,
and Elected and Empowering Women's founding mother .
and
~Charles Peter Duncan, President of the Walden District Improvement Association
The Board wished President Jimmy Carter a Happy 100th Birthday.
Adjourned today's meeting at 10:49 a.m.
9.CONSENT CALENDAR
Airport (Public Works)
CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS
A motion was made by District IV Supervisor Carlson, seconded by District II
Supervisor Andersen, to approve the Consent Agenda . The motion carried by the
following vote:
District I Supervisor Gioia, District II Supervisor Andersen,
District III Supervisor Burgis, District IV Supervisor Carlson,
and District V Supervisor Glover
Aye:
Result:Passed
C.1.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to
execute a lease between the County, as Lessor, and Buchanan Fields Golf
Club, LLC., as Tenant, for 11,097 square feet of land located at 2301
Meridian Park Blvd., Concord, for a two-year term at an initial monthly rent
of $2,800 for the first year, with annual increases thereafter, and one
five-year option to renew. (100% Airport Enterprise Fund)
24-3207
Attachments:Buchanan Golf_Coffee Kiosk Lease 2024_Final
approved
Auditor-Controller
C.2.DENY the claims filed by Kinder Morgan, Inc. (on behalf of its
subsidiary, SFPP, L.P.) in the total amount of $324,441.25, plus interest,
in unitary property taxes and rights of way taxes paid for tax year
2019/2020.
24-3208
Page 4 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
Attachments:Attachment A - Claim of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Unitary Property
Taxes)
Attachment B - Claim of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Rights of Way Taxes)
approved
C.3.DENY the claim filed by TransBay Cable, LLC in the total amount of
$1,042,412, plus interest, in unitary property taxes paid for tax year
2019/2020.
24-3209
Attachments:Attachment A - Claim of TransBay Cable, LLC
approved
C.4.ACCEPT the Annual Report on Revolving and Cash Difference Funds,
Overage Fund, and Shortages for fiscal year 2023-2024, as
recommended by the Auditor-Controller.
24-3210
Attachments:Annual Report_2024.pdf
approved
Child Support Services
C.5.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Director of Child Support Services, a purchase
order with MedBillIQ in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for Worker's
Compensation Lien notification and execution services for the period
July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. (66% Federal, 34% State)
24-3211
approved
C.6.APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Director of Child Support Services, a purchase
order with Caltronics Business Systems in an amount not to exceed
$1,941 for the renewal of Papercut software for the period October 1,
2024, through September 30, 2025. (66% Federal, 34% State)
24-3212
approved
Clerk of the Board
C.7.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-340 declaring October 2024 as Domestic
Violence Awareness Month, as recommended by the Employment and
Human Services Director.
RES
2024-340
Attachments:Mission Possible Flyer 2024 Final.pdf
adopted
C.8.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-341 proclaiming October 2024 as
Cybersecurity Awareness Month in Contra Costa County, as
recommended by the Chief Information Officer.
RES
2024-341
adopted
Page 5 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.9.ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-342 recognizing October 2024 as Filipino
American History month, as recommended by Supervisor Andersen .
RES
2024-342
adopted
C.10
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-343 honoring Don Lau for his decades of
service in Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
RES
2024-343
adopted
C.11
.
APPOINT Heidi Swillinger to the Western Contra Costa Transit
Authority (JPA) Board of Directors for a term ending on January 1,
2025, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
24-3201
Attachments:Swillinger, Heidi (WCCTA) 09-16-24
approved
C.12
.
APPOINT Yvonne Wadleigh to the District 3 seat on the Family &
Children’s Trust Committee to a term expiring September 30, 2026, and
DECLARE a vacancy in the At-Large 3 Seat, as recommended by
Supervisor Burgis.
24-3202
Attachments:Vacancy Notice.pdf
approved
C.13
.
APPOINT Pamela DeWitt to the District 1 Appointed seat 1 for the East
Richmond Heights Municipal Advisory Council for a term ending on
December 31, 2026, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
24-3203
Attachments:PamDeWitt_erhMACapplication
approved
C.14
.
APPOINT Maura Millison to the At-Large #2 Seat, with a term ending
September 30, 2025, on the on the Family and Children’s Trust
Committee, as recommended by the Family and Human Services
Committee.
24-3204
Attachments:Millison Maura Application_Redacted
FACT ROSTER REDACTED 08.26.2024
approved
C.15
.
ACCEPT the resignation of Geri Stern, DECLARE a vacancy in the
District I seat 3 on the Mental Health Commission for a term ending on
June 30, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy
24-3205
Attachments:Geri Stern_Resignation
The vacancy notice will not be posted because this committee is going to merge
with another under provisions of Proposition 1.
approved
Conservation & Development
Page 6 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.16
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the Conservation and Development Director, a purchase order
with BMC Software, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $40,211 for the
renewal of the license for the department's help desk, asset management,
and hardware and software patching management systems, for the period
September 30, 2024 through September 29, 2029. (100% Land
Development Fund)
24-3206
approved
County Administration
C.17
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to
execute a contract with Parkworks Mechanical Systems, in an amount
not to exceed $200,000, for additional control cabinets for the parking
system at 1026 Escobar Street, in Martinez, as recommended by the
County Administrator. (100% General Fund)
24-3213
Attachments:1026 Escobar System Separation Proposal.pdf
approved
C.18
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute a purchase order with Stryker Sales, LLC, in an amount not to
exceed $65,335 for the purchase of emergency evacuation chairs and
LifePAK automated external defibrillators for County Administration
Buildings A and B located at 1025 and 1026 Escobar Street, Martinez, as
recommended by the County Administrator based on findings of the
Risk Management department. (100% General Fund)
24-3214
approved
C.19
.
APPROVE the payment of $50,000 as an escrow deposit for the
potential purchase of 2305 and 2313 Windy Springs Lane in Brentwood,
CA (100% Measure X funds)
24-3215
approved
District Attorney
C.20
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to
execute a contract with Marinus Analytics LLC in an amount not to
exceed $5,758 for a software application subscription with Traffic Jam,
to assist in the investigation of suspected human trafficking cases for the
period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025. (100% Federal)
24-3196
approved
Employment & Human Services
C.21
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a
purchase order and related agreement with Allied Network Solutions,
24-3197
Page 7 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
Inc., in an amount not to exceed $72,946 to purchase Cisco Intersight,
used to manage County virtual servers network devises and storage
infrastructure, for the period June 14, 2024 through June 13, 2026. (59%
Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
approved
C.22
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services
Director, or designee, to execute an agreement with JUMP Technology
Services, L.L.C., in an amount not to exceed $102,974 to provide
software services for taking reports and managing Adult Protective
Services cases for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30,
2026. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
24-3198
approved
C.23
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services
Director, or designee, to execute a non-financial Agreement with the
Trustees of the California State University on behalf of California State
University Long Beach to provide student internship placement(s) for
practical social work field experience to eligible and enrolled
Employment and Human Services Department Staff for the period
October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2028. (No fiscal impact)
24-3199
approved
C.24
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Employment and Human Services Director, a
purchase order and related agreement with CDW Government LLC in an
amount not to exceed $20,693 for the purchase of Optiv, Forcepoint
Web Security, subject to the terms of CDW Government’s network
security products license agreement, for the period February 23, 2024
through February 22, 2027. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
24-3200
approved
Fire Protection District
C.25
.
Acting as the governing Board of the Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection
District, APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to
apply for and accept grant funding in an amount up to $170,000 from the
Crockett Community Foundation, a nonprofit corporation, procure a new
boiler and air conditioning system, and execute an agreement for
installation. (10% CCFPD match)
24-3195
approved
Health Services
C.26
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
purchase, on behalf of the Health Services Director, 876 Albertsons gift
cards for a total amount not to exceed $24,966 to be used as incentives
for consumer participation in Mental/Behavioral Health Services
24-3183
Page 8 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
Act-Prop 63 planning processes. (100% Mental/Behavioral Health
Services Act)
approved
C.27
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to
execute on behalf of the Health Services Director, a purchase order with
AT&T Mobility Wireless Operations Holdings Inc. in an amount not to
exceed $330,000 for the purchase of mobility equipment, accessories,
and wireless services for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30,
2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-3184
approved
C.28
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Surescripts, LLC, to increase the
payment limit to $140,000 and extend the term through June 30, 2027
and for successive one year terms thereafter for secure, electronic
prescription data messaging services for Contra Costa Health. (100%
Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-3185
approved
C.29
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Contra Costa Community College District for
the County to provide HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections testing
and education at Diablo Valley College, Los Medanos College and
Contra Costa Community College for the period October 1, 2024
through September 30, 2026. (Non-financial agreement)
24-3186
approved
C.30
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Planned Parenthood : Shasta-Diablo, Inc. (dba
Planned Parenthood Northern California), in an amount not to exceed
$5,000,000 to provide obstetrics and gynecology, family planning and
behavioral health treatment services for Contra Costa Health Plan
members for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
(100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
24-3187
approved
C.31
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Attentive Cognitive and Mental Health
Services Psychology Inc., in an amount not to exceed $400,000 to
provide behavioral health therapy and neuropsychological testing
services for Contra Costa Health Plan members and County recipients
for the period November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2026. (100%
Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
24-3188
approved
Page 9 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.32
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Perseus Corporation, to increase
the payment limit by $120,312 to an amount not to exceed $301,280, and
extend the term through June 30, 2025 for additional consultation and
technical assistance regarding third-party cost reports. (100% Hospital
Enterprise Fund I)
24-3189
approved
C.33
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Thomas J. McDonald, MD Inc., in an amount
not to exceed $600,000 to provide ophthalmology services to Contra
Costa Health Plan members and County recipients for the period
November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa
Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
24-3190
approved
C.34
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Psynergy Programs, Inc., in an amount not to
exceed $873,462 to provide residential care services for the period July
1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (88% Mental Health Realignment; 12%
Mental/Behavioral Health Services Act)
24-3191
approved
C.35
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Schilling and Associates, Inc ., for
amended consultation and technical assistance services regarding
operation and function of quality, safety and performance improvement
for Contra Costa Health with no change in the payment limit of
$1,188,000 or term ending October 31, 2026. (100% Hospital Enterprise
Fund I)
24-3192
approved
C.36
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Locumtenens .com, to increase the
payment limit by $750,000 to an amount not to exceed $2,750,000 to
provide additional temporary physician services at Contra Costa
Regional Medical and Health Centers with no change in the term ending
December 31, 2024. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
24-3193
approved
C.37
.
APPROVE the new medical staff, allied health, and tele-radiologist
appointments and reappointments, additional privileges, medical staff
advancement, and resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff
Executive Committee, at their September 16, 2024 meeting, and by the
Health Services Director. (No fiscal impact)
24-3194
approved
Page 10 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
Housing Authority
C.38
.
Acting as the governing board of the Contra Costa Housing Authority;
APPROVE and AWARD a contract in the amount of $112,000 plus up
to $11,200 for contingencies as authorized by the Housing Authority
Executive Director to A&R Construction for the repair of four
fire-damaged units located in the Elder Winds public housing
development in the City of Antioch, and TAKE related actions. (100%
U.S. Housing and Urban Development funds)
24-2667
approved
Human Resources
C.39
.
ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26193 to reclassify one
Network Administrator II (represented) position and its incumbent to
Information Systems Manager I (represented) and place the incumbent at
Step 7 of the salary range of the new classification in the Library
Department. (100% Library Fund)
24-3226
Attachments:P300 26193 Reclass NA II to ISM I in Library.docx
Signed P300 26193.pdf
approved
Library
C.40
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to
close the Prewett Library in Antioch on Friday, November 29; Thursday,
December 26; Friday, December 27; and Saturday, December 28, 2024
to coincide with the holiday closure of the Antioch Community Center
for annual maintenance projects. (No fiscal impact)
24-3220
approved
C.41
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with EasyVista, Inc ., in
an amount not to exceed $40,254 for the renewal of EasyVista Reach
subscriptions to enable remote support for staff and patron computers,
for the period September 18, 2024 through September 18, 2027. (100%
Library Fund)
24-3221
approved
C.42
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with EBSCO
Information Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $77,435 for
renewal of the Flipster subscription to provide digital access to popular
magazines, for the period November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2025.
(100% Library Fund)
24-3222
approved
Page 11 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.43
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Zoho Corporation
in an amount not to exceed $7,649 for renewal of ManageEngine
ADAudit Plus subscriptions to support security monitoring and auditing
of library user accounts, for the period August 4, 2024 through August 3,
2027. (100% Library Fund)
24-3223
approved
C.44
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with Global Online
Learning Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $6,000 for the
renewal of Off2Class subscriptions, for the period August 1, 2024
through July 31, 2025. (100% Library Fund)
24-3224
approved
C.45
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on
behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase order with EBSCO
Information Services, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $11,379 for the
renewal of LearningExpress Library Complete subscription, for the
period October 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (100% Library Fund)
24-3225
approved
Public Defender
C.46
.
APPROVE Budget Amendment No. BDA-24-00510 authorizing new
revenue in the amount of $70,000 from the Public Defender's Office and
appropriating it to the Public Works - ISF Fleet Services Fund for the
purchase of two vehicles for the Client Services Program (100% General
Fund)
24-3174
Attachments:BDA-24-00510.pdf
approved
Public Works
C.47
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-339 declaring October 2024 as Creek and
Channel Safety Awareness Month, ACCEPT the status report from the
Public Works Department and the Flood Control and Water
Conservation District on the Creek and Channel Safety Awareness
Program, and DIRECT the Public Works Department and the Flood
Control and Water Conservation District to continue with
implementation and the annual campaign of a Countywide sustainable
Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program, as recommended by the
Chief Engineer, Flood Control and Water Conservation District,
Countywide. (100% Flood Control Zone 3B Funds)
RES
2024-339
adopted
Page 12 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.48
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-335 approving the Parcel Map and
Subdivision Agreement for minor subdivision MS18-00014, for a
project being developed by Shelley Molineaux, as recommended by the
Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-335
Attachments:Parcel Map
Subdivision Agreement
Improvement Security Bond for Subdivision Agreement (1)
Tax Letter
adopted
C.49
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-336 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Oak View
Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on December 1,
2024, from 4:00 p.m. through 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a holiday
fair, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-336
adopted
C.50
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-337 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of Edgecroft Road,
between 49 Edgecroft Road and 59 Edgecroft Road, on October 15,
2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a
utility pole, Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-337
adopted
C.51
.
ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-338 approving and authorizing the Public
Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion of McBryde
Avenue, between 6072 McBryde Avenue and 6110 McBryde Avenue,
on October 16, 2024, from 7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose
of replacing a utility pole, Richmond area. (No fiscal impact)
RES
2024-338
adopted
C.52
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,
to execute a contract with Advanced Chemical Transport, Inc. (d/b/a
ACTenviro), in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide hazardous
waste collection and disposal services for the period of October 1, 2024,
through September 30, 2027, Countywide. (100% Local Road and Flood
Control District Funds)
24-3176
approved
C.53
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with HCI Systems, Inc., effective
November 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $2,000,000 to a new
payment limit of $3,000,000 and extend the term through July 31, 2026,
for on-call fire sprinkler services at various County sites and facilities,
Countywide. (100% General Fund)
24-3177
approved
Page 13 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
C.54
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Sharjo, LLC (dba ServiceMaster
Restoration Services), effective August 31, 2024, to extend the term
through August 31, 2025, with no change to the payment limit, for
on-call restoration services at various County sites and facilities,
Countywide. (No fiscal impact)
24-3178
approved
C.55
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee,
to execute a contract amendment with Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec),
effective July 31, 2024, to increase the payment limit by $400,000 to a
new payment limit of $1,800,000, increase the rates, and extend the term
through July 31, 2026, for structural integrated pest management
services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (100%
General Fund)
24-3179
approved
C.56
.
APPROVE updates to Engineering Manuals used by the Public Works
Department and Flood Control and Water Conservation District, as
recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (No Fiscal
Impact)
24-3180
approved
Risk Management
C.57
.
DENY claims filed by J.J.P.H.A. (a minor); Andrea Catucci; Jorge
Enrique Hortua Cuintaco; M. Hernandez, L. Rodriguez, F. Rodriguez,
and E. Hernandez; Dhondup Lhamo & Thupten Dharab; Edgar Rene
Yoc Pirir; and Jorge Zamora. DENY late claim filed by Richard Duncan.
24-3181
approved
Sheriff
C.58
.
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to
execute a contract with Mobile-Med Work Health Solutions, Inc. in an
amount not to exceed $377,429 to provide mobile occupational health
services to the Office of the Sheriff for the period October 1, 2024
through September 30, 2025. (100% State)
24-3182
approved
Page 14 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
GENERAL INFORMATION
The Board meets in all its capacities pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 24-2.402.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the Clerk of the Board to a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors less than
96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar Street, First Floor,
Martinez, CA 94553, during normal business hours.
All matters listed under CONSENT ITEMS are considered by the Board to be routine and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a
member of the Board before the Board votes on the motion to adopt. Each member of the public will be
allowed two minutes to comment on the entire consent agenda .
Persons who wish to speak on matters set for PUBLIC HEARINGS will be heard when the Chair calls
for public testimony. Each speaker during public testimony will be limited to two minutes. After public
testimony, the hearing is closed and the matter is subject to discussion and action by the Board .
Comments on matters listed on the agenda or otherwise within the purview of the Board of Supervisors
can be submitted to the office of the Clerk of the Board via mail: Board of Supervisors, 1025 Escobar
Street, First Floor, Martinez, CA 94553 or to clerkoftheboard@cob.cccounty.us.
In the interest of facilitating the business of the Board, the total amount of time that a member of the
public may use in addressing the Board on all agenda items is 10 minutes.
Time limits for public speakers may be adjusted at the discretion of the Chair .
The County will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend
Board meetings who contact the Clerk of the Board at least 24 hours before the meeting, at (925)
655-2000.
Anyone desiring to submit an inspirational thought nomination for inclusion on the Board Agenda may
contact the Office of the County Administrator or Office of the Clerk of the Board, 1025 Escobar Street,
Martinez, California.
Subscribe to receive to the weekly Board Agenda by calling the Office of the Clerk of the Board, (925)
655-2000 or using the County's on line subscription feature at the County’s Internet Web Page, where
agendas and supporting information may also be viewed:
www.contracosta.ca.gov
DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS
Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, members of the Board of Supervisors are disqualified and
not able to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitively bid, labor, or
personal employment contracts), franchises, discretionary land use permits and other entitlements if the
Board member received, since January 1, 2023, more than $250 in campaign contributions from the
applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant or contractor, or any financially interested participant
who actively supports or opposes the County’s decision on the agenda item. Members of the Board of
Page 15 of 16
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Meeting Minutes October 1, 2024
Supervisors who have received, and applicants, contractors or their agents who have made, campaign
contributions totaling more than $250 to a Board member since January 1, 2023, are required to disclose
that fact for the official record of the subject proceeding. Disclosures must include the amount of the
campaign contribution and identify the recipient Board member, and may be made either in writing to
the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors before the subject hearing or by verbal disclosure at the time of the
hearing.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STANDING COMMITTEES
For more information please visit the Board of Supervisors Standing Committees page here :
https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8633/Board-of-Supervisors-Standing-Committees
Airport Committee: December 5, 2024 at 11:00 a.m.
Contra Costa Resilient Shoreline Committee: October 16, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Equity Committee: October 21, 2024 at 10:30 a.m.
Family and Human Services Committee: October 28, 2024 at 10:30 a.m.
Finance Committee: October 7 Canceled; Next meeting November 4, at 9:30 a.m.
Head Start Advisory Committee: November 4, 2024 at 11:00 a.m.
Internal Operations Committee: October 14, 2024 at 11:00 a.m.
Legislation Committee: December 9, 2024 at 2:30p.m.
Los Medanos Healthcare Operations Committee: December 9, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
Public Protection Committee: October 7, 2024 at 1:00 p.m.
Sustainability Committee: November 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m.
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee : October 14, 2024 at 9:30 a.m.
AGENDA DEADLINE: Thursday, 12 noon, 12 days before the Tuesday Board meetings.
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms
Contra Costa County has a policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and
industry-specific language in its Board of Supervisors meetings and written materials. For a list of
commonly used language that may appear in oral presentations and written materials associated with
Board meetings, please visit https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/8464/Glossary-of-Agenda-Acronyms.
Page 16 of 16
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3218 Name:
Status:Type:Discussion Item Passed
File created:In control:9/10/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:HEARING on the itemized costs of abatement for property in unincorporated Contra Costa County,
located at 1531 1st St., Richmond, California (IPROPERTY LLC, Owner). (Jason Crapo, Conservation
and Development Department)
Attachments:1. A -Itemized Abatement Costs - TMP-5896 CERV22-00059 1531 1st., Richmond, 2. Before 1, 3.
Before 2, 4. Before 3, 5. After 1, 6. After 2, 7. Correspondence-Yu Hu.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass 5:0
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development
Report Title:Abatement of nuisance on property located at 1531 1st St., Richmond, California
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
OPEN the hearing of the costs of abating a public nuisance in unincorporated Contra Costa County on the real
property located at 1531 1ST St., Richmond, California, Unincorporated Contra Costa County (APN: 409-051-0
04).
RECEIVE and CONSIDER the attached itemized report on the abatement costs and any objections thereto
from the property owner or other persons with a legal interest in the property; and CLOSE the hearing.
DETERMINE the cost of all abatement work and all administrative costs to be $7,891.43 .
ORDER the itemized report confirmed and DIRECT that it be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
ORDER the costs to be specially assessed against the above-reference property and AUTHORIZE the
recordation of a Notice of Abatement Lien.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No net fiscal impact. The costs as determined above will be added to the tax roll as a special assessment on this
property and will be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary County taxes are collected.
BACKGROUND:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3218,Version:1
Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Article 14-6.4 and California Government Code Section 25845 authorize
the recovery of abatement costs in public nuisance cases, the recordation of a Notice of Abatement Lien, and
inclusion of abatement costs on the tax roll as a special assessment, upon approval of the Board of Supervisors.
The Notice and Order to Abate was posted on the above-referenced property for a vacant residence that is not
secured whose premises contain waste, rubbish, and debris and was served on the property owner and all
persons known to be in possession of the property by certified mail on April 11, 2024.
The property owner did not file an appeal of the Notice and Order to Abate. The County Abatement Officer
abated the nuisance on July 1, 2024.
The property owner was billed for the actual cost of the abatement and all administrative costs. The bill was
sent by first-class mail to the property owner on July 25, 2024. The property owner did not pay the bill within
45 days of the date of mailing.
Notice of this Cost Hearing was sent to the property owner by certified mail by the Clerk of the Board. For
proof of service, see Clerk of the Board at 1025 Escobar St., 1st Floor, Martinez, CA 94553.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, the County will not be able to recover costs for abatement on code violations for this property.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DATE: September 19, 2024 TO: Clerk of the Board FROM: Department of Conservation & Development By: Andrew Gomer, Building Inspector II RE: Itemized Report of Abatement Costs The following is an itemized report of the costs of abatement for the below described property pursuant to C.C.C. Ord. Code ' 14-6.428. OWNER: IPROPERTY LLC POSSESSOR: N/A MORTGAGE HOLDER: N/A ABATEMENT ORDERED DATE: April 11, 2024 ABATEMENT COMPLETED DATE: July 25, 2024 SITE ADDRESS: 1531 1st St., Richmond, CA APN#: 409-051-004 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Residential AMOUNT OF ABATEMENT COSTS (CCC ORDINANCE CODE 14-6.428) ITEM EXPLANATION COST Notice to Comply (include first 2 inspections) $ 300.00 Site Visits (5 x $150.00 @) $ 750.00
Recording Fee $ 17.00 Certified Letter & Regular Mailings $ 44.43 Photos $ 10.00 Contractor hired for abatement $ 6,370.00 Final Site Inspection to Confirm Compliance 200.00 Compliance Report and Board Hearing $ 200.00 Total $ 7,891.43
Abatement costs can be paid at or mailed to Department of Conservation and Development, Building Inspection Division, 30 Muir Rd., Martinez, CA 94553.
Energy Code Compliance Margins for
Proposed Building Energy Building Code Amendment
1 Energy Design Rating (EDR1) - Rates the building energy efficiency based on hourly source
energy use for the home measured in kBtu/ft2-yr. It includes energy use for the building envelope,
indoor air quality (IAQ), HVAC, water heating and unregulated loads. The metric approximates the
building’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to support California’s GHG reduction goals.
2 Source Energy (SE) - The log run marginal source energy of fossil fuels that are combusted as a
result of building energy consumption considering the long-term effects of Commission-projected
energy resource procurement. For a given hour, the value in that hour for each forecasted year is
averaged to establish a lifetime average source energy.
Building Type
Climate Zone 3,
West County
EDR11/ SE2
Margin
Climate Zone
12, Central and
East County
EDR11/ SE2
Margin
Cost-effective
Design Options
Single-Family Homes1 9 EDR1 Points 11 EDR1 Points
Install second heat pump
system or install battery
storage and additional
solar.
Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADUs)1
Not yet proven
cost-effective.
No change
recommended.
6.6 EDR1 Points
Only for Climate Zone 12,
Install second heat pump
system, or install battery
storage and additional
solar.
Low-rise Multifamily (up
to 3 habitable stories)2 10% 11%
More heat pump
system(s) or install
battery storage and/or
additional solar.
High-rise Multifamily
Residential (4 or more
habitable stories)2
4% 4%
Would need additional
solar above current code
requirement(s).
Non-residential (Office,
Retail, and Hotel)2 5% 4%
Would need additional
efficiency above current
code requirement(s).
Exhibit A
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3219 Name:
Status:Type:Discussion Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:HEARING to consider adopting Ordinance No. 2024-17, amending the 2022 California Energy Code
to increase energy efficiency standards for certain newly constructed buildings. (Demian Hardman-
Saldana, Department of Conservation and Development)
Attachments:1. 10-1-24 BOS_Local Energy Code Amendement Slide Deck, 2. Exhibit A, 3. Ordinance No. 2024-17
Energy Code Amendments, 4. Findings ISO Energy Reach Code Adoption, 5. 2022 Cost-
Effectiveness Studies, 6. Signed Ord 2024-17 .pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass 5:0
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development
Report Title:HEARING to Consider Adopting Ordinance No. 2024-17 amending the 2022 California Energy
code to increase energy efficiency standards for certain newly constructed buildings
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.OPEN the public hearing on Ordinance No. 2024-17, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public
hearing.
2.ADOPT Ordinance No. 2024-17, amending the 2022 California Energy Code with changes, additions,
and deletions, requiring increased energy efficiency standards for newly constructed residential
buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings.
3.ADOPT the attached findings and cost effectiveness studies in support of the County’s changes,
additions and deletions to the 2022 California Energy Code
4.DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development, to submit a certified copy of Ordinance
No. 2024-17, the adopted findings and cost effectiveness studies and this Board Order to the California
Energy Commission, the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and the
California Building Standards Commission.
5.FIND that adoption of the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3219,Version:1
6.DIRECT staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and pay any required fee for the
filing.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
On June 4, 2024, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to develop an ordinance amending the County building
code to increase the energy efficiency standards for newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices and
retail buildings to meet the County’s 2024 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan goals.
On September 10, 2024, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) introduced Ordinance No. 2024-17, waived its
reading, and fixed a hearing date of October 1, 2024, to consider amending the 2022 California Energy Code to
require increased energy efficiency standards for all newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and
retail buildings.
Health and Safety Code sections 17958.5 and 18941.5 authorize a local agency to modify the 2022 California
Energy Code and establish more restrictive building standards if the local agency finds that the changes and
modifications are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, topographical, or environmental
conditions. California Public Resources Code section 25402.1(h)(2) further authorizes a local agency to modify
the California Energy Code if the local agency finds that the proposed standards are cost-effective and the
California Energy Commission (CEC) determines that the proposed standards will require the diminution of
energy consumption levels permitted by the 2022 California Energy Code.
The proposed Ordinance No 2024-17 (attached) would amend the 2022 California Energy Code due to local
climatic, geographical, topographical, and environmental conditions. The attached findings describe the local
climatic, geographical, topographical, and environmental conditions that make the more restrictive standards
reasonably necessary. The attached findings also include the required findings related to energy savings and
cost-effectiveness based on several cost-effectiveness studies prepared as part of the Statewide Reach Codes
Program. The referenced cost-effectiveness studies are also attached. The proposed substantive changes to the
2022 California Energy Code are described below.
Modifications to the 2022 California Energy Code
The proposed ordinance requires a higher (or more stringent) energy efficiency standard than is required in the
current 2022 California Energy Code for newly constructed single-family residential buildings, detached
accessory dwelling units, multi-family residential buildings, hotel, office, and retail buildings. Building permit
applicants will be required to demonstrate compliance with this standard by achieving the required Source
Energy score on the Energy Code analysis submitted as part of their permit application.
For newly constructed non-residential buildings (office, retail, and hotel) and multi-family residential buildings,
the 2022 California Energy Code requires that an Energy Budget be calculated. The Energy Budget
approximates the projected energy consumption for a non-residential building or multi-family building
proposed for construction. The Energy Budget is calculated by the sum of two separate metrics, Source Energy
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3219,Version:1
and Time-Dependent Valuation (TDV) Energy. The Source Energy metric accounts for both the energy
consumed on site, plus energy used in its production and delivery. Source Energy is also a reasonable proxy for
greenhouse gas emissions. Accordingly, staff identified Source Energy as the metric for which to impose
increased efficiency requirements.
Due to climactic effects, the required energy performance standard (e.g., Source Energy or EDR1) differs
depending on the climate zone (location) in which the new building is constructed. Contra Costa County has
two climate zones. Climate Zone 3 generally encompasses West County, and Climate Zone 12 generally
encompasses Central and East County.
The proposed ordinance would:
1.Require a Source Energy Design Rating Compliance Margin (i.e. a lower EDR1 score) resulting in a
stricter energy efficiency requirement than is required in the current state energy code for all newly
constructed single-family residential buildings and newly constructed detached accessory dwelling units
(ADUs), with the exception of ADUs located in Climate Zone 3 (see exceptions listed below for
explanation).
2.Require a Source Energy Compliance Margin (i.e. a lower source energy score) resulting in stricter
energy efficiency requirement than is required in the current state energy code for all newly constructed
multi-family buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings.
3.Impose additional electric readiness requirements for hotels, offices, and retail buildings that are
designed for natural gas infrastructure.
The Source Energy Design Rating Compliance Margin for single-family buildings and ADUs, and Source
Energy Compliance Margin for multi-family buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings, are calculated
relative to those same metrics as calculated for the required Energy Budget for the standard design building
under the Energy Code. The compliance margins for each building type proposed in the ordinance are provided
in Exhibit A of this report. Exhibit A also includes a summary of the cost-effective design options that
correspond with the compliance margins proposed for each building type.
The Source Energy Design Rating Compliance Margin for single-family buildings and ADUs, and Source
Energy Compliance Margin for multi-family buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings, are calculated
relative to those same metrics as calculated for the required Energy Budget for the standard design building
under the Energy Code. The compliance margins for each building type proposed in the ordinance are provided
in Exhibit A of this report. Exhibit A also includes a summary of the cost-effective design options that
correspond with the compliance margins proposed for each building type.
Below are exceptions to the compliance margins proposed in the ordinance:
·Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) located in Climate Zone 3. The currently available cost-
effectiveness studies do not demonstrate that it is cost-effective to require a higher energy efficiency
standard for detached ADUs located in Climate Zone 3.
·Newly constructed buildings that do not require a Photovoltaic (PV) system (i.e. solar panels). There are
some instances where smaller homes, especially ADUs, may be exempt under the current energy code
from being required to install a PV system. It would not be cost-effective to require a higher energy
efficiency standard for instances where the building code does not require a PV system be installed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3219,Version:1
·Nonresidential occupancies (hotel, office, and retail) designed with single zone conditioning systems. It
has not yet been proven to be cost-effective to require a higher energy efficiency standard for non-
residential buildings that have single zone conditioning systems.
·A community shared solar electric generation system, or other renewable electric generation system, or
community shared battery storage system which provides dedicated power may offset part or all of the
Energy Budget standards for a proposed building. This exception encourages the installation of these
systems, which is consistent with the current intent of the building code.
·Additions and alternations. The reach code provisions do not apply to additions, alterations, or repairs.
However, if the majority of an existing building is damaged or demolished and then reconstructed, the
reconstructed structured would be considered a new building and would be subject to the provisions of
this ordinance.
The ordinance also includes an electric readiness requirement for nonresidential systems (hotel, office and retail
buildings). Where new hotel, office or retail building types are proposed to install gas or propane, the
construction drawings would be required to include routing of conduit from the equipment using gas or propane
to the point of interconnection with the electrical service. The installation of electrical conduit at the location of
gas or propane equipment will facilitate the replacement of such appliances with electric-powered equipment at
a future date at the discretion of the property owner. County staff recommends that this additional requirement
be included for the nonresidential building types that are required to have a higher energy efficiency standard
by the proposed ordinance (hotel, office and retail). This provision is expected to have a nominal cost to a
developer and would reduce costs for property owners if they choose to change their gas or propane equipment
to electric in the future. The current Energy Code already includes similar requirements for all residential
buildings, and this standard is expected to be required for nonresidential development in the 2025 Building
Code (effective January 1, 2026).
The ordinance has been designed to allow property owners and developers flexibility in their building design to
meet the higher efficiency standards proposed. The ordinance does not include any requirements that home
appliances such as stoves, clothes dryers, and clothes washers be electric. Additionally, it does not require any
ancillary building uses to be electric, such as for pool heating or outdoor cooking equipment.
Lastly, the proposed ordinance would delete the County all-electric requirement for newly constructed
buildings. On February 27, 2024, the Board of Supervisors suspended enforcement of the all-electric
requirement and directed staff to develop alternate regulations aimed at achieving the County’s climate action
goals. The proposed ordinance is a result of those efforts.
Local Impact on Energy Resources and Utility Service
This ordinance will not create difficulties for new buildings receiving electrical service because it will not
significantly increase the electrical service requirements of new buildings compared to existing statewide
requirements. This ordinance will have less impact on electrical service requirements for new buildings
compared to the County’s all-electric building ordinance, which is no longer being enforced, because this
ordinance will allow for mixed fuel buildings and will provide developers with greater flexibility in designing
the energy requirements of buildings. This ordinance provides home builders with choices and options for
complying within the conventional electrical service requirements for new homes. These include options using
both gas and electric powered appliances and devices within the home, as well as renewable energy generation
(such as solar panels) and energy storage (batteries).
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 4 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3219,Version:1
Nearly all new single-family residences constructed within the County are constructed with an electrical service
of 200 amps or less, which is standard practice and is routinely accommodated by PG&E. The proposed
ordinance will not change this. Home builders will be able to comply with the requirements of this ordinance
using a standard electrical service of 200 amps or less.
Under current conditions, a very small portion of homes built within the County experience challenges
receiving utility electrical service due to utility capacity issues. The circumstances leading to such challenges
include exceptionally large homes, homes with unusually large electricity needs resulting from the uses on the
property, and homes in very remote undeveloped areas where it is difficult for the utility to extend service. Such
conditions exist today and will continue to exist in the foreseeable future. However, this will not be affected by
the proposed ordinance because the ordinance does not impact the factors that create these challenges.
Separate from electrical capacity constraints, in recent years, many developers have reported increased wait
times in scheduling utility connections for newly constructed buildings of all types. It is now taking PG&E
much longer to provide personnel on site to perform the necessary connection services than it used to. The
scheduling delays associated with connecting utility electrical service that many construction projects are
currently experiencing will not be affected by this ordinance because such delays are driven by factors that are
not related to this ordinance.
California Energy Commission Approval and Operative Dates
Modifications to the California Energy Code, and the associated findings, must be submitted to the California
Energy Commission (CEC) for review and approval before the modifications take effect. If adopted by the
Board, staff will transmit the adopted ordinance and findings to the CEC. Included as part of the findings to the
CEC will be all appropriate cost-effectiveness studies required to substantiate cost-effectiveness to meet CEC
approval. Staff has worked very closely with the Statewide Codes and Standards Program technical consultants
in preparing the ordinance to meet the CEC standards for the proposed ordinance. The CEC has informed staff
that the review and approval process is expected to take approximately 60 days. As drafted, the ordinance will
become operative on January 1, 2025, or upon approval by the CEC, whichever is later.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
For the purposes of compliance with CEQA, adoption of the ordinance is the project. Based on the record
before the County, staff has determined that this project is categorically exempt from environmental review
under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) (Review for Exemption) and 15308 (Actions by Regulatory
Agencies for Protection of the Environment). Section 15061(b)(3) is the common sense exemption and applies
only to projects where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may
have a significant effect on the environment. Section 15308 covers Class 8 categorical exemptions, which
consist of actions taken by regulatory agencies, as authorized by state or local ordinance, to assure the
maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves
procedures for protection of the environment. For the purpose of protecting the environment, the proposed
ordinance requires higher energy efficiency standards for all newly constructed residential buildings, hotels,
offices, and retail buildings. The regulatory standards contained in the proposed ordinance are more stringent
than those set forth in the State Building Standards Code, and as a result there are no reasonably foreseeable
adverse impacts or possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County would likely not meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets proposed in its draft 2024
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 5 of 6
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3219,Version:1
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (anticipated adoption in fall 2024).
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 6 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Proposed Energy Code Amendment to Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New Buildings
Board of Supervisors
October 1, 2024
Demian Hardman-Saldana
Department of Conservation and Development
Contra Costa County
925-655-2816 · Demian.Hardman@dcd.cccounty.us
1
Today’s Presentation
Ordinance
Adoption Process
Ordinance Overview
2
3
Ordinance Process
2/27/2024
•All-Electric
Ordinance
Suspended
5/20/2024
•Sustainability
Committee
Recommended
option(s)
6/4/2024
•BOS Authorized
DCD to prepare
Ordinance for
More Stringent
Energy Code to
Meet Climate
Goals
9/10/24
•Ordinance
Introduced to
BOS to set
public hearing
to consider
adoption
10/1/24
•Ordinance
considered by
BOS for
adoption
1/1/25
•Ordinance
becomes
operative
pending
California
Energy
Commission
Approval
On February 27, 2024, the Board of Supervisors suspended the all-electric ordinance in response to the to the
Berkeley decision
The proposed ordinance is planned for an operative date of January 1, 2025
4
Proposed Ordinance
Purpose:
To replace emissions reductions lost from the
suspended all-electric ordinance so the County can
meet its 2024 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
goals.
Proposed Action:
Amend the 2022 California Building Code to
increase energy efficiency standards for the design
and construction of newly constructed residential
buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings with an
operative date of January 1, 2025
5
Building Type
Climate Zone 3
West County
Energy Improvement Margin
Climate Zone 12
Central/East County
Energy Improvement Margin
Cost-effective Design Options
Single-Family Homes, Duplexes
and Townhomes1 9 EDR1 Points 11 EDR1 Points Install second heat pump system or install
battery storage and additional solar.
Detached Accessory Dwelling
Units (ADUs)1 Not yet proven cost-effective.
No change recommended.
6.6 EDR1 Points Only for Climate Zone 12, install second
heat pump system, or install battery storage
and additional solar.
Low-rise Multifamily (up to 3
habitable stories)2 10%11%More heat pump system(s), or install
battery storage and/or additional solar.
High-rise Multifamily Residential
(4 or more habitable stories)2 4%4%Would need additional solar above current
code requirement(s).
Non-residential (Office, Retail, and
Hotel)2 5%4%Would need additional efficiency above
current code requirement(s).
1 Energy Design Rating (EDR1) - Rates the building energy efficiency based on hourly source energy use for the home measured in kBtu/ft2-yr. It includes energy use for
the building envelope, indoor air quality (IAQ), HVAC, water heating and unregulated loads. The metric approximates the building’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to
support California’s GHG reduction goals.
2 Source Energy (SE) - The log run marginal source energy of fossil fuels that are combusted as a result of building energy consumption considering the long-term
effects of Commission-projected energy resource procurement. For a given hour, the value in that hour for each forecasted year is averaged to establish a lifetime
average source energy.
Proposed Ordinance
Other Provisions & Exceptions
6
•Electric readiness in nonresidential new construction where gas is installed for hotel, office
and retail buildings
Other Provisions
•Small homes exempt from installing solar under current code
•Nonresidential new construction with single-zone conditioning systems
•Projects with community solar and/or battery storage may use these systems to meet
compliance
•Additions and alterations
Exceptions
Questions?
Contact:
Demian Hardman-Saldana
Principal Planner
demian.hardman@dcd.cccounty.us
P: 925-655-2816
7
Energy Code Compliance Margins for
Proposed Building Energy Building Code Amendment
1 Energy Design Rating (EDR1) - Rates the building energy efficiency based on hourly source
energy use for the home measured in kBtu/ft2-yr. It includes energy use for the building envelope,
indoor air quality (IAQ), HVAC, water heating and unregulated loads. The metric approximates the
building’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to support California’s GHG reduction goals.
2 Source Energy (SE) - The log run marginal source energy of fossil fuels that are combusted as a
result of building energy consumption considering the long-term effects of Commission-projected
energy resource procurement. For a given hour, the value in that hour for each forecasted year is
averaged to establish a lifetime average source energy.
Building Type
Climate Zone 3,
West County
EDR11/ SE2
Margin
Climate Zone
12, Central and
East County
EDR11/ SE2
Margin
Cost-effective
Design Options
Single-Family Homes1 9 EDR1 Points 11 EDR1 Points
Install second heat pump
system or install battery
storage and additional
solar.
Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADUs)1
Not yet proven
cost-effective.
No change
recommended.
6.6 EDR1 Points
Only for Climate Zone 12,
Install second heat pump
system, or install battery
storage and additional
solar.
Low-rise Multifamily (up
to 3 habitable stories)2 10% 11%
More heat pump
system(s) or install
battery storage and/or
additional solar.
High-rise Multifamily
Residential (4 or more
habitable stories)2
4% 4%
Would need additional
solar above current code
requirement(s).
Non-residential (Office,
Retail, and Hotel)2 5% 4%
Would need additional
efficiency above current
code requirement(s).
Exhibit A
FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX
1 of 5
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS TO
CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE TO REQUIRE CERTAIN NEWLY
CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS TO BE MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT
The California Building Standards Commission has adopted and published the 2022 Building
Standards Code, which became effective on January 1, 2023. The 2022 Building Standards Code is
composed of the 2022 California Building, Residential, Green Building Standards, Energy,
Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical, and Existing Building Codes. These codes are enforced in Contra
Costa County by the Building Inspection Division of the Department of Conservation and
Development.
Although these codes apply statewide, Health and Safety Code sections 17958.5 and 18941.5
authorize a local jurisdiction to modify or change these codes to establish more restrictive building
standards if the jurisdiction finds that the modifications and changes are reasonably necessary
because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Additionally, Public Resources
Code section 25402.1(h)(2) further authorizes a local jurisdiction to modify or change the California
Energy Code if the local jurisdiction finds that the proposed standards are cost-effective, and the
California Energy Commission determines that the proposed standards will require the diminution of
energy consumption levels permitted by the 2022 California Energy Code.
Ordinance No. 2024-17 amends the 2022 California Energy Code to increase energy efficiency
standards for certain newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and retail buildings be
constructed to be more energy efficient than the 2022 California Energy Code mandates.
Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 17958.7, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
finds that the more restrictive standards contained in Ordinance No. 2024-17 are reasonably
necessary because of the local climatic, geological, and topographic conditions that are described
below.
I. Local Conditions
A. Climatic
1. Temperature
a) Conditions
Temperatures have been recorded as high as 114° F. Average summer highs are in the 75°
to 90° range, with average maximums of 105° in some areas of unincorporated Contra
Costa County.
FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX
2 of 5
b) Impact
Prolonged exposure to high temperatures can be detrimental to the health and safety of
building occupants. Buildings that meet higher efficiency requirements have the ability to
maintain indoor space conditioning for longer periods of time. During power outages,
particularly outages that coincide with extreme temperatures, energy efficient buildings
provide higher levels of health and safety to the occupants of the building.
2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) Conditions
Energy use in buildings contributes significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Increased levels of GHGs in the atmosphere accelerate the rate of climate change, a
phenomenon known as global warming. Scientists attribute the global warming trend
observed since the mid-20th century to the human expansion of the “greenhouse
effect.”The greenhouse effect is caused by the warming that results when the
atmosphere traps heat radiating from Earth toward space.1 Residential and commercial
buildings are responsible for roughly 25% of California’s GHG emissions.2 In
buildings, the combustion of natural gas and petroleum products for heating and
cooking needs emits carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20).
Emissions from natural gas consumption represent 78 percent of direct fossil fuel CO2
emissions from the residential and commercial sectors in 2022.3
In 2016, through Senate Bill 32, California set targets to reduce GHG emissions to be
40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Subsequently, the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) released its 2022 Scoping Plan outlining a roadmap for California to
achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier.4 Contra Costa County is also taking steps
to reduce GHG emissions. As part of the Envision Contra Costa 2040, the County is
updating its Climate Action and Adaptation Plan to improve community resilience and
establish GHG reduction targets consistent with the State targets. As part of this update,
the County completed a local greenhouse gas emissions inventory.
b) Impact
Requiring more stringent building efficiency standards in new construction for the
building types specified in this ordinance is consistent with the intent of State legislation
and County requirements to aggressively implement energy policies designed to ensure
success in meeting GHG emission reduction goals.
1 NASA, The Causes of Climate Change, as of August 8, 2024, https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/causes/
2 California Air Resources Board, Building Decarbonization, as of August 8, 2024, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/building-decarbonization
3 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Source of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, as of August 8, 2024,
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#commercial-and-residential.
4 California Air Resources Board (n 2)
FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX
3 of 5
B. Geological
1. Seismicity
a) Conditions
Contra Costa County is located in Seismic Design Categories D and E, which
designates the County at very high risk for earthquakes. Buildings and other structures
in these zones can experience major seismic damage. Contra Costa County is near
numerous earthquake faults including the San Andreas Fault, and all or portions of the
Hayward, Calaveras, Concord, Antioch, Mt. Diablo, and other lesser faults. A 4.1
earthquake with its epicenter in Concord occurred in 1958, and a 5.4 earthquake with its
epicenter also in Concord occurred in 1955. The Concord and Antioch faults have a
potential for a Richter 6 earthquake and the Hayward and Calaveras faults have the
potential for a Richter 7 earthquake. Minor tremblers from seismic activity are not
uncommon in the area. A study released in 2015 by the Working Group of California
Earthquake Probabilities predicts that for the San Francisco region, the 30-year
likelihood of one or more earthquake of 6.7 or larger magnitude is 72%. The purpose of
this Working Group is to develop statewide, time-dependent Earthquake Rupture
Forecasts for California that use best available science, and are endorsed by the United
States Geological Survey, the Southern California Earthquake Center, and the
California Geological Survey. Scientists, therefore, believe that an earthquake of a
magnitude 6.7 or larger is now slightly more than twice as likely to occur as to not
occur in, approximately, the next 30 years.
b) Impact
A major earthquake could cause major damage to electrical transmission facilities and
gas distribution infrastructure which is likely to disrupt these services to buildings. “If
ambient temperatures are extremely hot or cold during these outages, it can become a
public health emergency. Efficient buildings retain their space conditioning (cooling
and heating) longer during power outages, making building occupants more resilient.”5
Increasing the level of energy efficiency in new construction for the building types
specified in this ordinance will increase resilience during power outages by enabling
buildings to maintain safe indoor conditions during power outages.
5 Center for Climate And Energy Solutions, Resilience Strategies for Power Outages,
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#commercial-and-residential
FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX
4 of 5
C. Topographic
1. Vegetation
a) Conditions
The wildland-urban interface exists throughout Contra Costa County, oftentimes
abutting residential development and other critical infrastructure. Due to the
presence of highly combustible dry grass, weeds, and brush in hilly and open space
areas for 6-8 months of the year, these areas are susceptible to wildland fires which
can threaten nearby structures and disrupt power delivery. Wildland fires also create
thick layers of toxic smoke and particulate matter that can be harmful to
communities exposed to it.
b) Impact
Energy efficient buildings, especially those with Distributed Energy Resources
(DER) such as solar generation and battery storage, are more capable of
maintaining indoor air quality and comfortable temperatures during power loss
events caused by wildland fires and/or extreme heat. “Resilient solutions that
incorporate back-up power with efficiency measures will deliver many more critical
hours of safety (the duration a building can maintain livable conditions during an
extreme weather event or wildfire)”6 Requiring more stringent building efficiency
standards by amending the building code will enhance Contra Costa County
residents’ resilience to wildland fires which have become endemic to the region.
II. Necessity of More Restrictive Standards
Due to the conditions described above, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors finds that
there are local climatic, geological, and topographical conditions unique to Contra Costa County that
require the imposition of building energy standards that are more stringent that the State’s energy
code for newly constructed residential buildings, detached accessory dwelling units, hotels, offices,
and retail buildings as set forth in Ordinance No. 2024-17
III. California Energy Code
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code section 25402.1(h)(2), the Contra Costa County Board
of Supervisors finds that the modifications made to the California Energy Code in this ordinance are
cost-effective for newly constructed residential buildings, including detached accessory dwelling
units located in climate zone 12, and all newly constructed hotels, offices and retail buildings. This
finding of cost-effectiveness is based on the following cost-effectiveness studies prepared as part of
the Statewide Reach Codes Program:
6 Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), Adapting to Fire: How Cities Can Enhance Resilience with Distributed Energy, as of
August XX, 2024, https://rmi.org/adapting-to-fire-how-cities-can-enhance-resilience-with-distributed-energy/
FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XX
5 of 5
• 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Single Family New Construction
Last modified May 30, 2024
• 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Multifamily New Construction
Last modified June 20, 2023
• 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code
Last modified March 24, 2023
Contra Costa County is located in climate zones 3 and 12. The cost-effectiveness studies conclude
that specific modifications to the 2022 California Energy Code—including more stringent building
energy efficiency requirements for newly constructed residential buildings, hotels, offices, and
retail buildings— are cost-effective for climate zones 3 and 12. The Board of Supervisors also
finds, pursuant to California Public Resources Code section 25402.1(h)(2), that the modifications
made to the California Energy Code in this ordinance will require diminution of energy
consumption levels compared to those permitted by the 2022 California Energy Code. These
findings of cost-effectiveness and energy savings will be filed with the California Energy
Commission before Ordinance No. 2024-17 takes effect.
Prepared by:
Alea German, Claudia Pingatore, Ada Shen, & Keith Saechao, Frontier Energy, Inc
Misti Bruceri, Misti Bruceri & Associates, LLC
Prepared for:
Kelly Cunningham, Codes and Standards Program, Pacific Gas and Electric
Last modified: 2024/05/30
Revision: 1.3
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
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.
Copyright 2022, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. All rights
reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and
distributed without modification.
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.
Acronym List
2023 PV$ – Present value costs in 2023
ACH50 – Air Changes per Hour at 50 pascals pressure
differential
ACM – Alternative Calculation Method
ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFUE – Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C – Lifecycle Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BEopt – Building Energy Optimization Tool
BSC – Building Standards Commission
CA IOUs – California Investor-Owned Utilities
CASE – Codes and Standards Enhancement
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
CO2 – Carbon Dioxide
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC – California Public Utilities Commission
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
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
GHG – Greenhouse Gas
HERS Rater – Home Energy Rating System Rater
HPA – High Performance Attic
HPWH – Heat Pump Water Heater
HSPF – Heating Seasonal Performance Factor
IECC – International Energy Conservation Code
IOU – Investor Owned Utility
kBtu – kilo-British thermal unit
kWh – Kilowatt Hour
LBNL – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
LCC – Lifecycle Cost
LLAHU – Low Leakage Air Handler Unit
LSC – Long-term System Cost (2025 Title 24, Part 6 compliance metric)
MF – Multifamily
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
POU – Publicly-Owned-Utilities
PV – Photovoltaic
SCE – Southern California Edison
SDG&E – San Diego Gas and Electric
SEER – Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SF – Single Family
SMUD – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SoCalGas – Southern California Gas Company
TDV – Time Dependent Valuation (2022 Title 24, Part 6 compliance metric)
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
VLLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space
ZNE – Zero-net Energy
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
9/12/2022 Original Release (1.0) N/A
3/25/2024 Updated analysis (1.1) • New simulation results with latest
CBECC-Res version (Section 2.1.1)
• Updated utility cost estimates using
recent utility tariff and net billing
tariff (Section 2.1.3)
• New measure costs for heat pumps,
batteries, and PV (Section 3.3)
• Revised packages (Section 3.4)
• Revised Results, Summary,
References, and Appendices
(Sections 4-7)
4/26/2024 Corrected errors (1.2) • Corrected incorrect results in Tables
16-19, 23, 26
5/30/2024 Corrected errors (1.3) • Corrected incorrect results in Tables
15-18, 22-28
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
2 Methodology and Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Modeling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Cost-effectiveness ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.3 Utility Rates ................................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Energy Design Rating ........................................................................................................................................................... 8
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs ............................................................................................................ 9
3.1 Prior Reach Code Research ................................................................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Prototype Characteristics ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 12
3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries ............................................................................................................................. 12
3.3.2 Electrification ............................................................................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Measure Packages ............................................................................................................................................................. 22
4 Results ...................................................................................................................................................................... 24
4.1 Compliance Results: All-Electric vs. Mixed Fuel Code Minimum ........................................................................................ 24
4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum Results ..................................................................................................................................... 26
4.3 All-Electric Efficiency, PV, and Battery Results ................................................................................................................... 29
4.4 Mixed Fuel Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 31
4.5 Greenhouse Gas Reductions .............................................................................................................................................. 33
4.6 Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................. 35
4.6.1 CARE Rate Comparison ............................................................................................................................................. 36
4.6.2 Utility Infrastructure Cost Sensitivity ............................................................................................................................ 38
4.6.3 Utility Rate Escalation ................................................................................................................................................. 39
5 Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 42
6 References ............................................................................................................................................................... 46
7 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................. 48
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones ......................................................................................................................................... 48
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules ......................................................................................................................................................... 49
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric .................................................................................................................................................. 50
7.2.2 Southern California Edison ......................................................................................................................................... 57
7.2.3 Southern California Gas .............................................................................................................................................. 61
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric............................................................................................................................................ 62
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities .............................................................................................................................................. 68
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only) ................................................................................................. 70
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions ...................................................................................................................................... 72
7.3 Summary of Efficiency Measures ........................................................................................................................................ 74
7.4 Summary of Applicable Prescriptive Base case Measures ................................................................................................. 76
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 7
Table 2: Prototype Characteristics ........................................................................................................................................................ 9
Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes ........................................................................................................................ 11
Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC) ................................................................................................................................ 12
Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions: Efficiency, PV, and Battery Measures ................................................................................ 14
Table 6: Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs .................................................................................................... 17
Table 7: Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs ................................................................................................ 18
Table 8: ADU Utility Infrastructure Total and Incremental Costs ......................................................................................................... 18
Table 9: Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL) of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment ............................................................ 19
Table 10: Space Conditioning System Nominal Capacities ................................................................................................................ 20
Table 11: Space Conditioning System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) ............................................................................................... 20
Table 12: Heat Pump Water Heating System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$) .................................................................................... 21
Table 13: Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs ...................................................................................................... 22
Table 14: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum ............................................................................................ 27
Table 15: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum .......................................................................................................... 28
Table 16: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages ........................ 29
Table 17: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery ............................................................. 30
Table 18: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ............................................................................ 31
Table 19: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ......................................................................................... 32
Table 20: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) .................................................................................................. 33
Table 21: ADU Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) ................................................................................................................ 34
Table 22: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum ......................................................................... 36
Table 23: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery Package ........................................... 37
Table 24: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs: All-Electric Code
Minimum ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 38
Table 25: Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: All-Electric Code Minimum ...................................................................................... 40
Table 26: Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ...................................................................... 41
Table 27: Summary of Single Family EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness .................................................................................... 44
Table 28: Summary of ADU EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness .................................................................................................. 45
Table 29: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone .......................................................................................................................... 50
Table 30: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) ..................................................................................................................................... 50
Table 31: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 57
Table 32: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 61
Table 33: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .............................................................................................................................. 61
Table 34: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ....................................................................................................................... 62
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Table 35: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .................................................................................................................................. 62
Table 36: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) ..................................................................................................................................... 68
Table 37: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, CPUC En Banc and 2022 TDV Basis ...................................................... 72
Table 38: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, 2025 LSC Basis ....................................................................................... 73
Table 39: All-Electric Single Family Efficiency Measures, Various Packages ..................................................................................... 74
Table 40: Mixed Fuel Single Family Measures, Efficiency + PV + Battery Package ........................................................................... 75
Table 41: Efficiency Measures for All ADU Packages ........................................................................................................................ 75
Table 42 Prescriptive Envelope, PV, and Battery Measures by Climate Zone .................................................................................... 76
Table 43 Prescriptive HVAC Measures by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 77
Table 44 Prescriptive Water Heating Measures by Climate Zone ....................................................................................................... 77
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Single family all-electric home compliance impacts. ............................................................................................................ 24
Figure 2: ADU all-electric home compliance impacts. ......................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 3: Single family four gas appliance home compliance impacts. ............................................................................................... 25
Figure 4: Map of California climate zones. .......................................................................................................................................... 48
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Executive Summary 1
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Executive Summary
The California Codes and Standards (C&S) Reach Codes program provides technical support to local governments
considering adopting a local ordinance (reach code) intended to support meeting local and/or statewide energy
efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. The program facilitates adoption and implementation of the
code when requested by local jurisdictions by providing resources such as cost-effectiveness studies, model language,
sample findings, and other supporting documentation.
This report documents cost-effectiveness analysis results for traditional new detached single family and detached
accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types. It evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen
California climate zones (CZs). Packages include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and
battery energy storage.
This analysis used two different metrics to assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both
methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each
energy efficiency measure over a 30-year analysis period. On-Bill cost-effectiveness is a customer-based lifecycle cost
(LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using
today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) is the California Energy Commission’s
LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the long-term projected cost of energy, including costs for providing
energy during peak periods of demand, carbon emissions, grid transmission and distribution impacts. This is the
methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24,
Part 6.
The following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis.
Conclusions and Discussion:
• All-electric buildings have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel buildings, due to the clean power sources
currently available from California’s power providers as well as accounting for increased penetration of
renewables in the future. Almost all the all-electric packages evaluated resulted in greater GHG emission
savings than the mixed fuel packages, with the exception of the mixed fuel package with battery storage in
climate zones with low heating loads.
• The Reach Codes Team found code-compliant all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective
based on TDV for single family homes in all cases except Climate Zone 16.
• All-electric single family new construction was On-Bill cost-effective in all cases except Climate Zones 1, 3, 14,
and 16.
• The all-electric ADU home was cost-effective based on TDV in all cases except in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and
14 where the higher cost of installing a ducted heat pump water heater (HPWH) instead of the prescriptively
required gas tankless water heater exceed the resulting energy cost savings. In the other climate zones there
were first cost savings for installing a heat pump space heater instead of a gas furnace, contributing to an
overall TDV cost-effective result.
• Few cases were cost-effective On-Bill for the ADU.
• All-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in first lifetime costs relative to a mixed fuel
home, except for CPAU and SMUD where electricity rates are much lower than for the investor-owned utilities
(IOUs). The addition of efficiency measures, market dominant HPWHs that meet the Northwest Energy
Efficiency Alliance’s (NEEA’s) Advanced Water Heating Specification 1, high efficiency heat pumps, increased
solar photovoltaics (PV), and batteries all reduce utility costs, and the combination of these options was found
to reduce annual utility costs relative to a mixed fuel home in all cases.
1 Refer to Section 0 for an explanation of HPWHs certified through NEEA’s Advanced Water Heating Specification, their market
status, and how they compare to federal minimum efficiency standards.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Executive Summary 2
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
• Under the Net Biling Tariff (NBT)2, utility cost savings for increasing PV system size beyond code minimum are
substantially less than what they were under prior net energy metering rules (NEM 2.0); however, savings are
sufficient to be On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones for the all-electric single family home except climate
zones 1, 3, and 16. Coupling PV with battery systems increases utility cost savings as a result of improved on-
site utilization of PV generation and fewer exports to the grid.
• Applying California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) rates in the IOU territories improves On-Bill cost-
effectiveness for all-electric buildings, as compared to the same case under standard rates, due to higher utility
cost savings compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building also on a CARE rate. This is due to the CARE
discount on electricity being higher than that on gas.
• If gas tariffs are assumed to increase substantially over time, in line with the escalation assumption from the
2025 LSC development, all-electric new construction was found to be On-Bill cost-effective in almost all single
family and most ADU scenarios over the 30-year analysis period. There is much uncertainty surrounding future
tariff structures as well as escalation values. While it’s clear that gas rates are anticipated to increase, how
much and how quickly is not known. Electricity tariff structures are expected to evolve over time, and the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has an active proceeding to adopt an income-graduated fixed
charge that benefits low-income customers and supports electrification measures 3. The CPUC will make a
decision in mid-2024 and the new rates are expected to be in place later that year or in 2025. While the
anticipated impact of this rate change is lower volumetric electricity rates, the rate design is not finalized. While
lower volumetric electricity rates provide many benefits like incentivizing electrification, it also will make
building efficiency measures harder to justify as cost-effective due to lower utility bill cost savings.
Recommendations:
• A reach code with a single performance target based on source energy (EDR1) can be structured to strongly
encourage electrification. This approach requires equivalent performance for all buildings and allows mixed
fuel buildings which minimizes the risk of violating federal preemption. Below are examples of how a reach
code for single family homes could be set up based on the results summarized in Table 27.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 12 could set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 11.5 (the EDR1
margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the
prescriptive requirements would comply, and a mixed fuel home would likely need to incorporate a
combination of efficiency measures and a battery system to comply.
o Similarly, a jurisdiction in Climate Zone 7 may consider setting a performance target of 2.8 EDR1
margin (also the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home
meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, but a mixed fuel home would likely
be able to comply with only a suite of above-code efficiency measures (no battery). Alternatively, a
higher EDR1 margin target of 5 would incentivize more energy efficiency or additional PV for all-
electric construction, and mixed fuel construction would likely need to incorporate a battery system to
comply.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 16 may want to set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 20.4 (the
EDR1 margin for the mixed fuel efficiency + PV + battery package). This would establish a target that a
mixed fuel home could On-Bill cost-effectively meet, likely only after incorporating a combination of
efficiency measures and a battery system, and that an all-electric home could easily meet.
• The 2022 Title 24 code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all-
electric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building
efficiency to be traded off, still meeting minimum code compliance. This compliance benefit for all-electric
homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes.
Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As
demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of
2 Refer to Section 2.1.3 for discussion on NBT and NEM
3 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-costs/demand-response-dr/demand-flexibility-rulemaking
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Executive Summary 3
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity, as
well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team
recommends that jurisdictions adopting a reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency
requirement with EDR1 margins at minimum consistent with the all-electric code minimum package results in
Table 27.
• The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single
family prototype; code compliance and cost-effectiveness can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units.
As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend EDR1 targets above those reported for the all-
electric Code Minimum package in Table 28.
This report presents measures or measure packages that local jurisdictions may consider adopting to achieve energy
savings and emissions reductions beyond what will be accomplished by enforcing minimum state requirements, the
2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), effective January 1, 2023.
Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or
may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the
specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. For example, jurisdictions may
amend Part 11 instead of Part 6 of the CA Building Code requiring review and approval by the Building Standards
Commission (BSC) but not the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission). Reach codes that amend Part 6
of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the
proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission. Although a cost-effectiveness
study is only required to amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code, this study provides valuable context for jurisdictions
pursuing other ordinance paths to understand the economic impacts of any policy decision. This study documents the
estimated costs, benefits, energy impacts and greenhouse gas emission reductions that may result from implementing
an ordinance based on the results to help residents, local leadership, and other stakeholders make informed policy
decisions.
Model ordinance language and other resources are posted on the C&S Reach Codes Program website at
LocalEnergyCodes.com. Local jurisdictions that are considering adopting an ordinance may contact the program for
further technical support at info@localenergycodes.com. In addition, jurisdictions in a CCA territory with rates or rate
structures that are significantly different than IOU rates may email the program at info@localenergycodes.com to
request a custom analysis.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Introduction 4
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
1 Introduction
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022
Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2023, for newly constructed single family buildings. This
report was developed in coordination with the California Statewide Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs) Codes and
Standards Program, key consultants, and engaged cities—collectively known as the Reach Codes Team.
The analysis considers traditional detached single family and detached accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types
and evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs).4 Packages
include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.
This report documents the key results and conclusions from the Reach Codes Team analysis. A full dataset of all
results can be downloaded from the Local Energy Codes Resources 5 webpage. Results alongside policy options and
the potential citywide impacts for specific jurisdictions can also be explored using the Cost-effectiveness Explorer at
https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/.
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (California Energy Commission, 2021a) 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.
The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally
regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, including heating, cooling, and water heating
equipment (E-CFR, 2020). Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting higher minimum efficiencies
than the federal standards require — herein referred to as federal preemption — the focus of this study is to identify
and evaluate cost-effective packages that do not include high efficiency heating, cooling, and water heating equipment.
High efficiency appliances are often the easiest and most affordable measures to increase energy performance. While
federal preemption limits reach code mandatory requirements for covered appliances, in practice, builders may install
any package of compliant measures to achieve the performance requirements.
4 See Appendix 7.1 Map of California Climate Zones for a graphical depiction of climate zone locations.
5 https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources/?q=newly%20constructed%20buildings:%20efficiency%20and%20electrification
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 5
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
2 Methodology and Assumptions
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes
This section describes the approach to calculating cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate
selection.
2.1.1 Modeling
The Reach Codes Team performed energy simulations using software approved for 2022 Title 24 Code compliance
analysis, CBECC-Res 2022.3.0.
The general approach applied in this analysis is to evaluate performance and determine cost-effectiveness of various
energy efficiency upgrade measures, individually and as packages, in single family buildings. Using the 2022 baseline
as the starting point, prospective measures and packages were identified and modeled in each of the prototypes to
determine the projected energy use (therm and kWh) and compliance impacts. A large set of parametric runs were
conducted to evaluate various options and develop packages of measures that met or exceeded minimum code
performance. The analysis utilized a Python based parametric tool to automate and manage the generation of CBECC-
Res input files. This allowed for quick evaluation of various efficiency measures across multiple climate zones and
prototypes and improved quality control. The batch process functionality of CBECC-Res was utilized to simulate large
groups of input files at once.
2.1.2 Cost-effectiveness
2.1.2.1 Benefits
This analysis used two different metrics to assess cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both methodologies
require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each energy efficiency
measure. 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 utility bill savings using today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Total
savings are estimated over a 30-year duration and include discounting of future costs and energy cost inflation.
Time Dependent Valuation (TDV): Energy Commission LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the total
value or cost of energy use over 30 years. This method accounts for 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 (natural gas, electricity, and propane), time of day, and season. For example, electricity used (or saved)
during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity used (or saved) during off-peak periods due to the less
inefficient energy generation sources providing peak electricity (Horii, Cutter, Kapur, Arent, & Conotyannis, 2014). This
is the methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24,
Part 6.
2.1.2.2 Costs
The Reach Codes Team assessed the incremental costs of the measures and packages over a 30-year lifecycle.
Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measure
relative to the 2022 Title 24 Standards minimum requirements or standard industry practices. Present value of
replacement cost is included only for measures with lifetimes less than the 30-year evaluation period.
In calculating On-Bill cost-effectiveness, incremental first costs were assumed to be financed into a mortgage or loan
with a 30-year loan term and four percent interest rate. Financing was not applied to future replacement or
maintenance costs. In calculating TDV cost-effectiveness, incremental first costs were not assumed to be financed into
a mortgage or loan.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 6
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
2.1.2.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics.
NPV Savings: The lifetime NPV savings is reported as a cost-effectiveness metric; Equation 1 demonstrates how this
is calculated. If the net savings of a measure or package is positive, it is considered cost-effective. Negative savings
represent net costs.
B/C Ratio: Ratio of the present value of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 30 years (present value of
benefits divided by present value of costs). The criteria benchmark for cost-effectiveness is a B/C ratio greater
than one. A value of one indicates the present value of the savings over the analysis period is equivalent to the present
value 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 2.
Equation 1 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆=𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃−𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃
Equation 2 𝐵𝐵𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃−𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜−𝐶𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑅𝑅𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜=𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃
Improving the efficiency of a project often requires an initial incremental investment. In most cases the benefit is
represented by annual On-Bill utility or TDV savings, and the cost is represented by incremental first cost and
replacement costs. However, some packages result in initial construction cost savings (negative incremental cost), and
either energy cost savings (positive benefits), or increased energy costs (negative benefits). In cases where both
construction costs and energy-related savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’
while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost.’ In cases where a measure or package is cost-effective immediately
(i.e., upfront construction cost savings and lifetime energy cost savings), B/C ratio cost-effectiveness is represented by
“>1”.
The lifetime costs or benefits are calculated according to Equation 3.
Equation 3 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃=�(𝐴𝐴𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑣𝑣 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃 𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃)𝑡𝑡(1 +𝑃𝑃)𝑡𝑡𝑛𝑛
𝑡𝑡=0
Where: n = analysis term in years
• r = discount rate
The following summarizes the assumptions applied in this analysis to both methodologies.
• Analysis term of 30 years
• Real discount rate of three percent
TDV is a normalized monetary format and there is a unique procedure for calculating the present value benefit of TDV
energy savings. The present value of the energy cost savings in dollars is calculated by multiplying the TDV savings
(reported by the CBECC-Res simulation software) by a NPV factor developed by the Energy Commission (see (Energy
+ Environmental Economics, 2020)). The 30-year residential NPV factor is $0.173/kTDV kBtu for the 2022 code cycle.
Equation 4
• 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑣𝑣𝑆𝑆𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑙𝑙𝑃𝑃 𝑏𝑏𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃= 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑒𝑒 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 ∗ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑐𝑐𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 7
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
2.1.3 Utility Rates
In coordination with the CA IOU rate team (comprised of representatives from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E),
Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)) and two Publicly-Owned-Utilities (POUs)
(Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU)), the Reach Codes Team
determined appropriate utility rates for each climate zone in order to calculate utility costs and determine On-Bill cost-
effectiveness for the proposed measures and packages. The utility tariffs, summarized in Table 1, were determined
based on the most prevalent active rate in each territory. Utility rates were applied to each climate zone based on the
predominant IOU serving the population of each zone, with a few climate zones evaluated multiple times under
different utility scenarios. Climate Zones 10 and 14 were 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 POU or municipal utility rates were also evaluated: SMUD in Climate Zone 12 and CPAU in
Climate Zone 4.
Some community choice aggregations (CCAs) have utility rates that are very similar to IOU rates, often within $0.02
per kWh. For these CCA customers, total utility costs will be very similar to those calculated in this study and the
results from this study will generally apply. The study results cannot be easily applied to CCAs with rates that do not
closely track the IOU rates or municipal utilities outside of SMUD and CPAU.
First-year utility costs were calculated using hourly electricity and natural gas output from CBECC-Res and applying
the utility tariffs summarized in Table 1. Annual costs were also estimated for IOU customers eligible for the CARE tariff
discounts on both electricity and natural gas bills. Appendix 7.2 Utility Rate Schedules includes details of each utility
tariff. For cases with onsite generation (i.e. solar photovoltaics (PV)), the approved Net Billing Tariff (NBT) was applied
along with monthly service fees and hourly export compensation rates for 2024 6. In December 2022, the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a decision adopting NBT as a successor to prior net energy metering rules
(NEM 2.0) that went into effect April of 2023.7 The ADU was assumed to have separate electric and gas meters from
the main house.
Table 1: Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone
IOUs
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Tariff Natural Gas Tariff
1-5,11-13,16 PG&E / PG&E E-ELEC G1
5 PG&E / SoCalGas E-ELEC GR
6, 8-10, 14, 15 SCE / SoCalGas TOU-D-PRIME GR
7, 10, 14 SDG&E / SDG&E
EV-TOU-5 (TOU-ELEC
for ADU cases without
PV systems 8)
GR
POUs
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Tariff Natural Gas Tariff
4 CPAU / CPAU E-1 G1
12 SMUD / PG&E R-TOD G1
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time according to the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through
2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation
period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. A second set of escalation rates
were also evaluated to demonstrate the impact that utility cost changes over time have on cost-effectiveness. This
6 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/documents/net-energy-metering-nem/nemrevisit/nbt-
model--12142022.xlsb
7 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/nemrevisit
8 See Section 3.2 Prototype Characteristics for a description of ADU cases that don’t require solar PV prescriptively.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 8
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
utility rate escalation sensitivity analysis, presented in Section 4.6.3, was based on those used within the 2025 Long-
term System Cost (LSC) factors (LSC replaces TDV in the 2025 code cycle) which assumed steep increases in gas
rates in the latter half of the analysis period. See Appendix 7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions for details.
2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis reports the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates based on assumptions within CBECC-Res. There
are 8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time-dependent energy use and carbon based on source emissions,
including renewable portfolio standard projections. There are two strings of multipliers—one for Northern California
climate zones, and another for Southern California climate zones.9 GHG emissions are reported as average annual
metric tons of CO2 equivalent over the 30-year measure analysis period.
2.3 Energy Design Rating
The 2019 Title 24 Code introduced California’s Energy Design Rating (EDR) as the primary metric to demonstrate
compliance with the energy code for single family buildings. This EDR was based on the hourly TDV energy use from 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. While
the Reference Building is used to set the scale for the rating, the Proposed Design is still compared to the Standard
Design based on the Title 24 prescriptive baseline assumptions to determine compliance. In the 2022 Title 24 Code a
second new EDR metric was introduced based on hourly source energy. The two EDR metrics are described below:
• EDR1 is calculated based on source energy.
• EDR2 is calculated based on TDV energy.
EDR1 has only one component, “Total EDR1” which represents source energy use for the entire building. EDR2 is
composed of two components for compliance purposes: the “Efficiency EDR2”, which represents the energy efficiency
features of a home, and the PV/Flexibility EDR2, which includes the effects of PV and battery storage systems. “Total
EDR2” combines all energy use of the building including both the Efficiency and PV/Flexibility impacts. While the
Efficiency EDR2 does not include the full impact of a battery system, it can include a self-utilization credit for batteries if
certain conditions are met.
For a new, single family building to comply with the 2022 Title 24 Code, three criteria must be met:
1. The Proposed Total EDR1 must be equal to or less than the Total EDR1 of the Standard Design, and
2. The Proposed Efficiency EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Efficiency EDR2 of the Standard Design, and
3. The Proposed Total EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Total EDR2 of the Standard Design.
This concept, consistent with California’s “loading order” which prioritizes energy efficiency ahead of renewable
generation, requires projects to meet a minimum Efficiency EDR2 before PV is credited but allows for PV to be traded
off with additional efficiency when meeting the Total EDR2. A project may improve building efficiency beyond the
minimum required and subsequently reduce the PV generation capacity necessary to achieve the required Total EDR2.
However, it may not increase the size of the PV system and trade this off with a reduction of efficiency measures.
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 reported for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 Code. The EDR Margin is calculated according to Equation 5.
Equation 5 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅 𝑀𝑀𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆=𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆 𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅−𝑁𝑁𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑆𝑆𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆 𝑇𝑇𝑃𝑃𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅
9 CBECC-Res multipliers are the same for CZs 1-5 and 11-13 (Northern California), while there is another set of multipliers for CZs
6-10 and 14-16 (Southern California).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 9
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
This section describes the prototypes and the scope of analysis drawing from previous research where necessary,
including the 2019 low-rise residential single family reach code study (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019).
3.1 Prior Reach Code Research
In 2019, the Reach Codes Team analyzed the cost-effectiveness of residential single family new construction projects
for mixed fuel and all-electric packages (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019). Using this analysis, several cities and
counties in California adopted local energy code amendments encouraging or requiring that low-rise residential new
construction be all-electric. As there were few changes to the single family requirements, this analysis for the 2022
code cycle leveraged the work completed for the 2019 reports. Initial efficiency packages were based on the final
packages from the 2019 research and were revised to reflect measure specifications and costs based on new data.
3.2 Prototype Characteristics
The Energy Commission defines building prototypes which it uses to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of proposed
changes to Title 24 requirements. For the 2022 code cycle the Energy Commission used two single family prototypes,
both of which were used in this analysis. Additional details on the prototypes can be found in the Alternative Calculation
Method (ACM) Approval Manual (California Energy Commission, 2018).
Additionally, a detached new construction ADU prototype was developed to reflect recent trends in California
construction related to the high cost of housing (TRC, 2021). ADUs are additional dwelling units typically built on the
property of an existing single-family parcel. ADUs are defined as new construction in the energy code when they are
ground-up developments, do not convert an existing space to livable space, and are not attached to the primary
dwelling. The evaluated prototype is not representative of an attached ADU constructed as an addition to an existing
home.
The Reach Codes Team leveraged prior research to define the detached ADU baseline and measure packages. The
house size and number of bedrooms were based on data from a survey conducted by UC Berkeley’s Center for
Community Innovation (UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation, 2021). The survey found that the average
square footage for new ADUs statewide is 615 square feet and that the majority (61 percent) of new ADUs have one
bedroom.
Table 2 describes the basic characteristics of each prototype. The prototypes have equal geometry on all walls,
windows and roof to be orientation neutral.
Table 2: Prototype Characteristics
Characteristic Single Family
One-Story
Single Family
Two-Story ADU
Conditioned Floor Area 2,100 ft2 2,700 ft2 625 ft2
Num. of Stories 1 2 1
Num. of Bedrooms 3 4 1
Window-to-Floor Area Ratio 20% 20% 19.2%
The Energy Commission’s protocol for the two single family prototypes is to weigh the simulated energy impacts by a
factor that represents the distribution of single-story and two-story homes being built statewide. Consistent with this
protocol, this study assumed 50 percent single-story and 50 percent two-story. Simulation results in this study are
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 10
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
characterized and presented according to this ratio, which is approximately equivalent to a 2,400-square foot (ft2)
house.10 ADU results are presented separately.
The methodology used in the analyses for each of the prototypical building types begins with a design that precisely
meets the minimum 2022 prescriptive requirements (zero compliance margin). Table 150.1-A in the 2022 Standards
(California Energy Commission, 2021a) 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 (California Energy
Commission, 2022), and are designed to meet, but not exceed, the minimum requirements. See Appendix 7.4 for a list
of prescriptive values relevant to the measures explored in this analysis.
Table 3 describes additional characteristics as they were applied to the base case, or baseline, energy model in this
analysis. In a shift from the 2019 Standards, the 2022 Standards apply a prescriptive fuel source for space heating and
water, where one is gas-fueled and one is a heat pump depending on climate zone. This establishes a prescriptive
heat pump baseline. In most climate zones the prescriptive base case includes a heat pump water heater and a natural
gas furnace for space heating. In Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 this is reversed, where the base case has a heat
pump space heater and natural gas tankless water heater.
Table 4 summarizes the PV capacities for the base case packages.
10 2,400 ft2 = (50% x 2,100 ft2) + (50% x 2,700 ft2)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 11
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes
Characteristic Single Family ADU
Space
Heating/Cooling1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Natural gas furnace, split
AC 80 AFUE, 14.3 SEER2, 11.7 EER2
CZs 3-4,13-14: Split heat pump – 7.5 HSPF2,
14.3 SEER2, 11.7 EER2
Same as single family
Air Distribution Ductwork located in vented attic Same as single family
Water Heater1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Heat pump water heater
(HPWH) UEF = 2.0 located in the garage
CZs 3-4,13-14: Natural gas tankless –
UEF = 0.81
Same equipment type as SF
except HPWH is located inside
the conditioned space with the
supply air ducted from outside
and exhaust air ducted to
outside.3
Hot Water
Distribution
Code minimum
CZs 1,16: Basic compact distribution credit Same as single family
Cooking Natural Gas Same as single family
Clothes Drying Natural Gas Same as single family
PV System
Sized to offset 100% of electricity use for space
cooling, ventilation, lighting, appliance, & other
miscellaneous electric loads. Size differs by
climate zone ranging from 2.64 kW to 5.21 kW,
see Table 4.
PV is not required when the PV
system size required based on the
prescriptive calculations is less
than 1.8 kW, as is the case in
Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and
16. In the other climate zones the
PV size ranges from 1.73 kW to
2.51 kW, see Table 4.4
Foundation Slab-on-grade Same as single family
1 Equipment efficiencies are equal to minimum federal appliance efficiency standards.
2 AFUE = annual fuel utilization efficiency. SEER = seasonal energy efficiency ratio. EER = energy efficiency ratio.
HSPF = heating seasonal performance factor. UEF = uniform energy factor.
3 This version of CBECC-Res used in this analysis did not have the capability to directly model ducted HPWHs even though this
configuration is called out as the Standard Design in the 2022 ACM (California Energy Commission, 2022). This was
modeled by indicating that the tank is located within the conditioned space with the compressor unit located outside.
4 Exception 2 to Section 150.1(I)14 states that “no PV system is required when the minimum PV system size specified by
section 150.1(c)14 is less than 1.8 kWdc.” In this analysis this exception is applied based on the sizes calculated per
Equation150.1-C of Section 150.1(c)14. The performance software sizes the PV system based on the estimated energy use,
which differs slightly from the prescriptive sizing. As a result, the baseline PV capacity from the performance software for
Climate Zone 10 is less than 1.8 kWdc.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 12
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC)
Climate
Zone
Base Package
Single
Family ADU
CZ01 3.57 0
CZ02 3.03 0
CZ03 2.83 0
CZ04 2.91 0
CZ05 2.64 0
CZ06 2.65 0
CZ07 2.83 0
CZ08 3.11 0
CZ09 2.96 0
CZ10 3.17 1.73
CZ11 3.90 2.06
CZ12 3.14 0
CZ13 4.05 2.09
CZ14 3.15 0
CZ15 5.21 2.51
CZ16 2.93 0
3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs
Measures evaluated in this study fall into two categories: those associated with general efficiency — onsite generation
(solar PV), and demand flexibility (batteries) — and those associated with building electrification. Furthermore, general
efficiency measures are broken into those that are federally preempted and those that are not; see Section 1 for
background information on preemption and Section 3.4 for details of measure packages evaluated in this study. The
Reach Codes Team selected measures based on cost-effectiveness as well as decades of experience with residential
architects, builders, and engineers along with general knowledge of the relative consumer acceptance of many
measures.
The following sections describe the details and incremental cost assumptions for each of the measures. Incremental
costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measures relative to
the base case.11 Replacement costs are applied for roofs, mechanical equipment, PV inverters and battery systems
over the 30-year evaluation period. Maintenance costs are estimated for PV systems, but not any other measures.
Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. All costs are provided as present value in 2023 (2023
PV$).
The Reach Codes Team obtained measure costs from distributors, contractors, literature review, and online sources
such as Home Depot and RS Means. Contractor markups are incorporated. These are the Reach Codes Team’s best
estimates of average costs statewide. However, it's recognized that local costs may differ, and that inflation and supply
chain issues may also impact costs.
3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries
The following are descriptions of each of the efficiency, PV, and battery measures evaluated under this analysis and
applied in at least one of the packages presented in this report, including how they compare to the current prescriptive
requirements. Throughout this report, “Efficiency” measures refer specifically to the following non-preempted
11 All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the incremental costs.
See Section 2.1.2 for details.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 13
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
measures. These measures are in addition to or in place of the relevant 2022 base case prototype characteristics
outlined in Table 3, and their applicability to measure packages are summarized in Table 39 through Table 41. Table 5
summarizes the incremental cost assumptions for each of these measures.
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)12 by 40 percent to 3 ACH50. HERS rater field verification and
diagnostic testing of building air leakage according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices
RA3.8 (California Energy Commission, 2021b).
Lower U-Factor Fenestration: Reduce window U-factor to 0.24. The prescriptive U-factor is 0.30 in all climate zones.
Higher SHGC Fenestration: Increase solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) to 0.50 in climate zones where heating loads
dominate (1, 3, 5 and 16). The baseline SHGC applied in the Standard Design is 0.35 in these climate zones.
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. The prescriptive ASR is 0.20 for
Climate Zones 10 through 15.
Increased Ceiling Insulation: Increase ceiling level insulation in a vented attic to R-38, R-49, or R-60 insulation.
Slab Insulation: Install R-10 perimeter slab insulation at a depth of 16-inches. This measure doesn’t apply to Climate
Zone 16 where slab insulation is required prescriptively.
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 (compared to the prescriptively required 0.45 W/cfm). 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 2022 Reference
Appendices RA3.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This applies to the single family prototype only.
Buried Radial Duct Design: Bury all ductwork in ceiling insulation by laying the ducts across the ceiling joists or in-
between ceiling joists directly on the ceiling drywall. Duct design is based on a radial design where individual ducts are
run to each supply register. This allows for smaller diameter ducts, reducing duct losses and more easily meeting fully
or deeply buried conditions.13 Duct burial and duct system design must be verified by a HERS rater according to the
procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.5 and RA3.1.4.1.6 (California Energy Commission,
2021b). This applies to the single family prototype only.
Ductless Mini-Split Heat Pump: In the ADU prototype install a ductless mini-split heat pump with three indoor heads.
The system is evaluated as meeting the criteria for the variable capacity heat pump (VCHP) credit, introduced in the
2019 code cycle, which must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference
Appendices RA3.4.4.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This credit requires verification of refrigerant charge,
that all equipment is entirely within conditioned space, that airflow is directly supplied to all habitable space, and that
wall mounted thermostats serve any zones greater than 150 square feet. This measure is non-preempted because it
does not require the installation of equipment with efficiencies above federal minimum requirements.
Compact Hot Water Distribution: 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 2022 Reference Appendices
RA4.4.6 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). In many single family homes this may require moving the water
heater from an exterior to an interior garage wall. CBECC-Res software assumes a 30% reduction in distribution losses
for the basic credit. This is prescriptively required in Climate Zones 1 and 16 only.
Solar PV: Installation of on-site PV is required in the 2022 residential code unless an exception is met. The PV sizing
methodology in each package was developed to offset annual building electricity use and avoid oversizing. In all cases,
12 Whole house leakage tested at a pressure difference of 50 Pascals between indoors and outdoors.
13 The duct systems in the Central Valley Research Homes Project Final Project Report are illustrative of this approach (Proctor,
Wilcox, & Chitwood, 2018).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 14
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
PV is evaluated in CBECC-Res according to the California Flexible Installation (CFI) 1 assumptions. To meet CFI
eligibility, the requirements of 2022 Reference Appendices JA11.2.2 (California Energy Commission, 2021b) must be
met.
The Reach Codes Team used two options within the CBECC-Res software for sizing the PV system. The first option,
“Standard Design PV”, was applied in the base case simulations and packages where the PV system size was not
changed from the minimum system size required 14. For the PV packages, the second option, “Specify PV System
Scaling”, was used. In these cases, a scaling of 100 was applied, indicating that the PV system be sized to offset 100%
of the estimated electricity use of the Proposed Design case.
One exception to the PV requirement is when the minimum PV system size required is less than 1.8 kW. This
exception applies to the ADU models in Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and 16. For these cases no PV system is required
by code and no PV system was modeled in the base case simulations.
Battery Energy Storage: A 10 kWh battery system was evaluated in CBECC-Res with control type set to “Basic” and
with default efficiencies of 95% for both charging and discharging. 10kWh battery capacity is representative of systems
installed in single family homes based on the Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) participant data. The “Basic”
control option charges the battery system anytime PV generation is greater than the house load and discharges the
battery whenever the house load exceeds PV generation. The battery does not discharge to the grid, maximizing on-
site utilization of the PV system and in turn utility bill benefits under NBT. To qualify for the battery storage compliance
credit the battery system must meet the requirements outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices JA12 (California
Energy Commission, 2021b). Batteries are not prescriptively required in any climate zone.
Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions: Efficiency, PV, and Battery Measures
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Reduced
Infiltration
3.0 vs 5.0
ACH50 $591 $362 $0.115/ft2 based on NREL’s BEopt cost database plus $250 HERS
rater verification.
Window U-
factor 0.24 vs 0.30 $2,280 $285 $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
Based on feedback from Statewide CASE Team that higher SHGC
does not necessarily have any incremental cost (Statewide CASE
Team, 2017).
Cool Roof
0.25 vs 0.20
aged solar
reflectance
$219 $53
$0.07per ft2 of roof area first incremental cost for asphalt shingle
product based on the 2022 Nonresidential High Performance
Envelope CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020a). Total
costs assume present value of replacement at year 20 and
residual cost for remaining product life at end of 30-year analysis
period. Higher reflectance values for lower cost are achievable for
tile roof products
Attic
Insulation
R-49 vs R-30 $872 n/a
Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations
CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).
R-60 vs R-30 $1,420 n/a
R-60 vs R-38 $1,096 n/a
Slab Edge
Insulation R-10 vs R-0 $651 $449 $4 per linear foot of slab perimeter based on internet research.
Assumes 16in depth.
14 The Standard Design PV system is sized to offset the electricity use of the building loads which are typically electric in a mixed
fuel home, which includes all loads except space heating, water heating, clothes drying, and cooking.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 15
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Low
Pressure
Drop Ducts
0.35 vs 0.45
W/cfm $99 n/a
Costs assume one-hour labor for single family and half-hour for the
ADU. Labor rate of $88 per hour is from 2022 RS Means for sheet
metal workers and includes a weighted average City Cost Index for
labor for California.
Buried
Ducts
Buried, radial
design $281 n/a
No cost for laying ducts on attic floor versus suspending, in some
cases there will be cost savings. Neutral cost for radiant design
versus trunk and branch design. A $250 HERS Rater verification
fee is included.
Duct
Insulation R-8 vs R-6 $201 n/a Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations
CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).
Ductless
Mini-Split
Heat Pump
Ductless
system
meeting the
VCHP credit
vs. ducted
split heat
pump
n/a $1,571
Costs were developed based on data from E3’s 2019 report
Residential Building Electrification in California (Energy &
Environmental Economics, 2019) and the 2022 All-Electric
Multifamily CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020c).
Equipment costs are from the CASE Report for the 10-story
multifamily prototype assuming similar sized equipment between
the multifamily dwelling unit and the ADU. Thermostat, wiring,
electrical, and ducting costs are from the E3 study. A $250 HERS
Rater verification fee is also included. Where this measure is
applied to the mixed fuel home with a gas furnace, this cost is in
addition to the cost difference for a heat pump versus a gas
furnace/split AC reported in Section 3.3.2.
Compact
Hot Water
Distribution
Basic credit –
homes with
gas tankless
$196 $0
For single family homes with a gas tankless water heater (mixed
fuel homes in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, 14) assumes adding 20-feet
venting at $14.69 per linear foot to locate water heater on interior
garage wall, less 20-feet savings for PEX and pipe insulation at
$5.98 per linear foot. Costs obtained from online retailers. For
single family homes with a HPWH there is an incremental cost
savings from less pipe being required. For the ADU it is assumed
the credit can be met without any changes to design and there is
no cost impact.
Basic credit –
homes with
HPWH
-$134 $0
PV System
First Cost $3.11/
W
$3.11/
W
First costs are from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2022 (Barbose,
Galen; Darghouth, Naim; O'Shaughnessy, Eric; Forrester, Sydney,
2022) and represent median costs in California in 2022 of
$3.78/WDC for residential systems. The first cost was reduced by
the solar energy Investment Tax Credit of 30%.2
Inverter replacement cost of $0.14/WDC present value includes
replacements at year 11 at $0.15/WDC (nominal) and at year 21 at
$0.12/WDC (nominal) per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California
Energy Commission, 2017).
System maintenance costs of $0.31/WDC present value assume
$0.02/WDC (nominal) annually per the 2019 PV CASE Report
(California Energy Commission, 2017).
Inverter
replacement
$0.14/
W
$0.14/
W
Maintenance $0.31/
W
$0.31/
W
Replacement
cost
$648/
kWh
$648/
kWh
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 16
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental
Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Battery (10
kWh) First cost $782/
kWh
$782/
kWh
First costs of $1,101/kWh are from SGIP residential participant
cost data for single family projects between 2020 and 2023. The
first cost is reduced by 30% due to the Investment Tax Credit2 and
also by $0.15/Wh due to the base SGIP incentive3. The SGIP
incentive is only accounted for in IOU territories and not for SMUD
and CPAU analyses.
Replacement cost at years 10 and 20 was calculated based on the
first cost reduced by 7% annually over the next 10 years for a
future value cost of $533/kWh. The 7% reduction is based on
SDG&E’s Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study (E-Source
companies, 2020). For projects constructed in 2024 or 2025, the
first replacement at year 10 would occur in 2034 or 2035. This
replacement cost includes an average Investment Tax Credit of
22% in 2034 and 0% in 20352.
1All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the
incremental costs. See Section 2.1.2 for details. Interest costs were not included for calculating TDV cost-
effectiveness.
2As part of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 the Section 25D Investment Tax Credit was extended and
raised to 30% through 2032 with a step-down beginning in 2033. https://www.seia.org/sites/default/files/2022-
08/Inflation%20Reduction%20Act%20Summary%20PDF%20FINAL.pdf
3SGIP incentives vary by ‘steps’ which reflect utility-specific funding across program implementation years. See:
https://www.selfgenca.com/home/program_metrics/
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 17
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
3.3.2 Electrification
This analysis compared a code compliant mixed fuel prototype, which uses natural gas for three appliances (cooking,
clothes drying and either space heating or water heating), with a code compliant all-electric prototype. The associated
costs included the relative costs between natural gas and electric appliances, differences between in-house electricity
and natural gas infrastructure, and the associated infrastructure costs for providing natural gas to the building. To
estimate costs the Reach Codes Team leveraged costs from the 2019 reach code cost-effectiveness studies for
residential new construction (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019) and detached accessory dwelling units (Statewide
Reach Codes Team, 2021b), 2022 RS Means, PG&E data, published utility schedules and rules, and online research.
3.3.2.1 Utility Infrastructure
This section addresses utility infrastructure costs during construction; appliance-specific infrastructure costs are
addressed in Section 0. Table 6 presents total costs for natural gas infrastructure for a single family building within CA
gas IOU territory, including distribution and service line extensions, meter installation, and plan review. These costs are
applied as cost savings for an all-electric home when compared to a mixed fuel home. This is the component with the
highest degree of variability for all-electric homes, as they are project-dependent and may be significantly impacted by
such factors as utility territory, site characteristics, distance to the nearest natural 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 CA IOU costs for single
family homes presented are based on cost data provided by PG&E.
Extension of service lines from a main distribution line to the home were provided separately for a new subdivision in
an undeveloped area ($1,300) as well as an infill development ($6,750). The service extension is typically more costly
in an infill scenario due to the disruption of existing roads, sidewalks, and other structures. For this analysis an average
of the new subdivision and infill development costs was used, representing 80 percent of the new subdivision and 20
percent infill. In the case of distribution line extensions, the estimated cost is for new greenfield development.
For the single family analysis, based on the Reach Codes Team's conversations with the industry 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 homes.
Table 6: Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs
Item Cost
Distribution Line Extension $1,020
Service Line Extension $2,390
Meter $300
Plan Review Costs $850
Total $4,560
CPAU provides gas service to its customers and therefore separate costs were evaluated based on CPAU gas service
connection fees.15 Table 7 presents the breakdown of gas infrastructure costs used in this analysis for CPAU. There is
no main distribution line component since Palo Alto has little greenfield space remaining and most of the development
is infill.
15 CPAU Schedule G-5 effective 09-01-2019: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/utilities/utilities-engineering/general-
specifications/gas-service-connection-fees.pdf
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 18
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 7: Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs
Item Cost
Service Extension $5,892
Meter $1,012
Plan Review Costs $924
Total $7,828
Electricity infrastructure costs for single family homes were not estimated as part of this work as they are expected to
be the same for both all-electric and mixed fuel construction. This will change in July 2024 based on the CPUC’s recent
decision to eliminate electric line extension subsidies for new construction projects that use natural gas and/or
propane.16 This will increase the utility infrastructure costs for mixed fuel homes, relative to all-electric homes,
improving the cost-effectiveness of all-electric construction. The Reach Codes Team intends to quantify this impact in
future studies.
Table 8 presents utility infrastructure costs for the detached ADU, both mixed fuel and all-electric designs. These costs
are directly from the 2019 detached ADU reach code report (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021b) and were obtained
from stakeholder interviews and RS Means. For the ADU scenario it’s assumed that natural gas infrastructure already
exists on the lot and is being extended to the location of the ADU typically at the back of the lot. There are incremental
cost savings for an all-electric ADU from not extending the natural gas service; however, there is also a small
incremental cost for upgrading the electric service to accommodate the additional electrical load. The Reach Codes
Team found that a new detached ADU would require that the building owner upgrade the service connection to the lot
in both the mixed fuel ADU design and the all-electric design. The most common size for this upgrade is to upsize the
existing panel to 225A, which would not represent an incremental cost from the mixed fuel project to the all-electric
project. Feeder wiring to the ADU and the ADU subpanel, on the other hand, will need to be slightly upgraded for the
all-electric design.
Table 8: ADU Utility Infrastructure Total and Incremental Costs
Mixed Fuel Measure Mixed Fuel
Total Cost All-Electric Measure All-Electric
Total Cost
All-Electric
Incremental Cost
Site natural gas service
extension $1,998 No site natural gas service $0 ($1,998)
Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500 Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500 $0
100A feeder to ADU with
breaker $933 125A feeder to ADU with
breaker $1,206 $273
100A ADU subpanel $733 125A ADU subpanel $946 $213
Totals $7,164 $5,652 ($1,512)
3.3.2.2 Equipment
This section provides descriptions and costs of the equipment applied to electrify mixed fuel homes in the all-electric
packages. The equipment meets but does not exceed federal efficiency requirements to avoid federal preemption
concerns.
16 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/news-and-updates/all-news/cpuc-eliminates-last-remaining-utility-subsidies-for-new-construction-of-
buildings-using-gas-2023
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 19
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
For the water heating and space conditioning equipment analyzed, cost analyses incorporated the equipment’s
effective useful lifetime (EUL), which are summarized in Table 9. The EUL for the heat pump, furnace, and air
conditioner are based on the Database for Energy Efficient Resources (DEER) (California Public Utilities Commission,
2021b). Water heating equipment lifetimes are based on DOE’s recent water heater rulemaking (Department of
Energy, 2022). Replacement costs are applied when equipment reaches its EUL within the 30-year evaluation period,
and in such cases are included in the total lifetime costs. Residual value of the gas furnace and gas tankless at the end
of the 30-year analysis period was accounted for to represent the remaining life of the equipment.
In this analysis, replacement costs assume a like-for-like replacement of equipment type and fuel (as listed in Table 9).
However, this may be precluded in the future due to efforts to prohibit the sale of gas equipment currently being
considered or undertaken by air districts (ex. BAAQMD, SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (ex. zero
NOx appliance rules).
Table 9: Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL) of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment
Measure EUL (Years)
Gas Furnace 20
Air Conditioner 15
Heat Pump 15
Gas Tankless Water Heater 20
Heat Pump Water Heater 15
Space Conditioning: This measure covers replacing a prescriptive air conditioner and gas furnace with a minimum
efficiency heat pump in applicable climate zones (1, 2, 5 to 12, 15 and 16; see Table 3). Typical incremental costs for
this equipment were based on contractor feedback and price variation by system capacity from the AC Wholesalers
website and the RS Means cost database (RSMeans, 2022). Costs were applied based on the system capacity from
heating and cooling load calculations in CBECC-Res as presented in Table 10. Air conditioner nominal capacity was
calculated as the CBECC-Res cooling load, rounded up to the nearest half ton. Heat pump nominal capacity was
calculated as the maximum of either the CBECC-Res heating or cooling load, rounded up to the nearest half ton. In
both cases a minimum capacity of 1.5-ton was applied as this represents the typical smallest available split system
heat pump equipment. Load calculations demonstrated that Climate Zones 2, 5 to 12, and 15 were cooling-dominated
while Climate Zones 1 and 16 were heating-dominated. In the heating dominated climate zones the heat pump for the
single family home needs to be upsized relative to an air conditioner that only provides cooling.
Replacement costs were estimated based on a contractor survey conducted by the Statewide Reach Codes Team in
2023 (Statewide Reach Codes Team, tbd), less any gas and electric infrastructure costs, and the equipment lifetimes
listed in Table 9. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 11.
This measure, and thus the incremental cost, does not apply to climate zones where heat pump space conditioning is
already prescriptively required (Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 20
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 10: Space Conditioning System Nominal Capacities
Climate
Zone
Single Family ADU
Air Conditioner
Capacity (tons)
Heat Pump
Capacity (tons)
Air Conditioner
Capacity (tons)
Heat Pump
Capacity (tons)
1 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
2 3 3 1.5 1.5
3 - - - -
4 - - - -
5 3 3 1.5 1.5
6 3 3 1.5 1.5
7 3 3 1.5 1.5
8 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
9 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
10 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
11 3 3 1.5 1.5
12 2.5 2.5 1.5 1.5
13 - - - -
14 - - - -
15 4 4 1.5 1.5
16 2 3.5 1.5 1.5
Table 11: Space Conditioning System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$)
Climate
Zone
Single Family ADU
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost (Financed)
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost (Financed)
1 $803 $2,705 ($2,120) ($1,717)
2 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
3 - - - -
4 - - - -
5 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
6 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
7 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
8 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
9 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
10 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
11 ($1,044) ($44) ($2,120) ($1,717)
12 ($1,445) ($673) ($2,120) ($1,717)
13 - - - -
14 - - - -
15 ($1,032) $368 ($2,120) ($1,717)
16 $2,331 $5,123 ($2,120) ($1,717)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 21
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Water Heater: This measure covers replacing a prescriptive gas tankless water heater with a minimum efficiency
HPWH in applicable climate zones (3, 4, 13, and 14; see Table 3). Typical incremental costs were based on costs from
prior reach code work and recent contractor feedback. Incremental first costs assume a 65-gal HPWH and incremental
replacement costs account for equipment lifetimes listed in Table 9. Replacement costs assume no change in cost
from the first cost estimates before accounting for inflation, less any gas and electric infrastructure costs. For the ADU
analysis the water heater is evaluated within the conditioned space with the supply air ducted from the outside and
exhaust air ducted to the outside. A mechanical contractor provided a cost estimate of $943 for ducting through the
attic in an ADU where the water heater is in an interior room. This cost is included in the equipment and installation
total for the ADU. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 12.
Table 12: Heat Pump Water Heating System Incremental Costs (2023 PV$)
Item
ADU Single Family
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost
(Financed)
First
Cost
Total Lifetime
Cost
(Financed)
Equipment & Installation $2,243 $3,930 $1,300 $2,267
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $48 $45 $51
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651) ($580) ($651)
Total $1,706 $3,327 $765 $1,666
For this electrification analysis, a HPWH that just meets the federal minimum efficiency standards 17 of close to 2.0
Uniform Energy Factor (UEF) was evaluated in order to satisfy preemption requirements. However, the Reach Codes
Team is not aware of any 2.0 UEF products that are available on the market. The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
(NEEA) established its own rating system for high efficiency HPWHs 18 and maintains a database of qualified products.
The lowest UEF currently reported in the database is 2.73. In fact, of the four rating tiers offered by NEEA, those
meeting Tier 3 or Tier 4 are the dominant products on the market today. According to NEEA all major HPWH
manufacturers are represented in NEEA’s qualified product list 19 and there are fewer than 10 integrated products
certified as Tier 1 or Tier 2, all of which have UEFs greater than 3.0.20
NEEA Tier 3 water heaters were included in the high-efficiency measure packages (see Section 3.4).
Clothes Dryer and Range: After review of various sources, the Reach Codes Team concluded that the cost difference
between gas and electric resistance equipment for clothes dryers and stoves is negligible and that the lifetimes of the
two technologies are similar. Resultant incremental costs are presented in Table 13. Note that while induction stoves
may be a more likely installation option in many homes, CBECC-Res does not currently differentiate between electric
technologies for stoves and therefore they were not considered in this analysis. Relative to electric resistance,
induction stoves use less energy and improve performance and user satisfaction, at an additional cost.
Electric Service Upgrade (appliance-specific): The 2022 Title 24 Code requires electric readiness for gas
appliances; as a result, the incremental costs to provide electrical service for electric appliances are minimal. The
incremental costs accounted for in this study — shown in Table 13 — are calculated as the cost to install 220V service
for the electric appliances less the cost for the electric ready requirements and for installing 110V service for the
17 The Department of Energy establishes minimum energy conservation standards for consumer products, as directed in the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act. See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-10/chapter-II/subchapter-D/part-430/subpart-C/section-
430.32.
18 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 products comply with ENERGY STAR and includes
requirements regarding noise and prioritizing heat pump use over supplemental electric resistance heating.
19 https://neea.org/success-stories/heat-pump-water-heaters
20 As of 3/8/2024: https://neea.org/img/documents/residential-unitary-HPWH-qualified-products-list.pdf
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 22
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
comparable gas appliance. Incremental costs are applied for the space conditioner, water heater, and cooking range.
Based on builder surveys, it’s assumed that in a typical mixed fuel home both electric and gas service are provided to
the dryer location and therefore no incremental costs for the dryer were applied. Costs assume 50A service for the
range and 30A service for the space conditioner and water heater. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single
family and ADU analyses.
In-House Natural Gas Infrastructure (from meter to appliances): Installation cost to run a natural gas line from the
meter to the appliance location was estimated at $580 per appliance, as shown in Table 13. These costs were based
on material costs from Home Depot and labor costs from 2022 RS Means. The material costs were about 1/3 higher in
RS Means than Home Depot, so the Reach Codes Team used the lower costs from Home Depot. The Reach Codes
Team conducted a pipe sizing analysis for the two single family and one ADU prototype homes to estimate the length
and diameter of gas piping required assuming the home included a gas furnace, gas tankless water heater, gas range,
and gas dryer. Total estimated costs were very similar for each of the three prototypes and an average cost per
appliance of $580 was determined. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single family and ADU analyses.
Table 13: Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs
Item
ADU & Single Family
First
Cost
Total Lifetime Cost
(Financed)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Cooking
Equipment & Installation $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $100 $113
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651)
Total ($480) ($539)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Clothes Drying
Equipment & Installation $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $0 $0
In-House Gas Piping ($580) ($651)
Total ($580) ($651)
3.4 Measure Packages
The Reach Codes Team evaluated two packages for mixed fuel homes and five packages for all-electric homes for
each prototype and climate zone, as described below.
1. All-Electric Code Minimum: This package applied the prescriptive requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Code and
replaced gas equipment with minimum efficiency electric equipment.
2. Efficiency Only, all-electric: This package used only efficiency measures that don’t trigger federal preemption
issues including envelope, water heating distribution, and duct distribution efficiency measures. For ADUs, this
also included ductless variable capacity heat pumps (VCHPs). This package was evaluated for the all-electric
homes only.
3. Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment, all-electric and mixed fuel: This package builds off the
Efficiency Only package, adding water heating and space conditioning equipment that is more efficient than
federal standards. The Reach Codes Team considers this more reflective of how builders meet above code
requirements in practice. This package was evaluated to compare compliance results against the other non-
preempted packages (see Table 27 and Table 28), however cost-effectiveness was not evaluated for this
package since it cannot serve as the basis for adoption of a local ordinance. Specifically, it applied:
a. Water heating, all-electric: Heat pump water heaters with a NEEA Tier 3 rating (3.45 UEF).
b. Water heating, mixed fuel: High efficiency (0.95 UEF) gas tankless.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 23
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
c. Space conditioning, single family: High efficiency (16 SEER2/8 HSPF2) heat pumps. In mixed fuel
packages, for climate zones with prescriptive gas heating, high efficiency (16 SEER2/95 AFUE) units
were applied.
4. Efficiency + PV, all-electric: This package also builds on the Efficiency Only package, excluding preempted
equipment. Instead, PV capacity was added to offset all of the estimated annual electricity use. This package
was evaluated for the all-electric homes only.
5. Efficiency + PV + Battery, all-electric and mixed fuel: Using the Efficiency + PV package as a starting point for
the all-electric analysis, a battery system was added. For mixed fuel homes the package of efficiency
measures differed from the all-electric homes in some climate zones to arrive at a cost-effective solution.
To reiterate previous statements, the non-preempted measures used in all of the above packages (except for the All-
Electric Code Minimum package) are referred to as “Efficiency measures”. As noted above, these measures may differ
by prototype (single family vs. ADU) and by package. See Table 40 and Table 41 for the details of these measures.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Results 24
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4 Results
Section 4.1 presents compliance results for all-electric versus mixed fuel code minimum packages to provide a broad
overview of how these different approaches impact code compliance. Sections 4.2 to 4.5 present EDR results along
with other savings data for packages of particular interest, as well as cost-effectiveness results for all packages.
Section 4.5 presents results for sensitivity analyses. All results reflect savings over a 30-year analysis period and are
compared against the 2022 prescriptive baseline.
4.1 Compliance Results: All-Electric vs. Mixed Fuel Code Minimum
The Reach Codes Team evaluated the compliance impacts of a prescriptive all-electric home as well as a traditional
mixed fuel home with four gas appliances (space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying). Compliance is
relative to the 2022 prescriptive base case home with three gas appliances which, by definition, has a compliance
margin of zero in all climate zones. The impacts for the all-electric single family home and the ADU are presented in
Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively. The all-electric single family and ADU home prototypes are code compliant with
both EDR1 (source energy) and efficiency EDR2 (TDV energy) in all climate zones, though the compliance margin is
highly variable across climate zones. The four gas appliance single family home is presented in Figure 3. This case is
not code compliant in any climate zone.
Figure 1: Single family all-electric home compliance impacts.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16EDR MarginAll -Electric Prescriptive
Source (EDR1)TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction
Results 25
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Figure 2: ADU all-electric home compliance impacts.
Figure 3: Single family four gas appliance home compliance impacts.
This analysis illustrates a couple of interesting points:
1. The 2022 compliance metrics are important drivers encouraging electrification. The compliance penalties
associated with the four gas appliance home scenarios are significant and will require deep efficiency
measures to overcome.
2. The 2022 Title 24 Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all-
electric construction, providing a compliance benefit that allows for some amount of prescriptively required
building efficiency to be traded off and still comply when using the performance method.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16EDR MarginAll -Electric Prescriptive
Source (EDR1)TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
-18
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16
EDR MarginMixed Fuel Prescriptive, 4 Gas Appliances
Source (EDR1)TDV (EDR2 Efficiency)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 26 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum Results
Table 14 shows results for the single family all-electric Code Minimum measure package. Utility cost savings are
negative, indicating an increase in utility costs for the all-electric building, everywhere except in CPAU and SMUD
territories. In all cases the incremental cost is negative, which reflects cost savings for the all-electric building due to
elimination of gas infrastructure costs. The package is cost-effective based on TDV in all cases but one (Climate Zone
16); it’s not cost-effective On-Bill in Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16.
Table 15 shows the all-electric Code Minimum package results for the ADU. Utility savings and incremental costs
reflect the same general trend as single family homes; CPAU territory is the only case where utility costs decrease.
Cost-effectiveness is less favorable than the single family application, with TDV cost-effectiveness not met in Climate
Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14, and On-Bill cost-effectiveness met only in Climate Zones 4 in CPAU territory, 10 in SCE/SCG
territory, 12 in SMUD/PG&E territory, 11 and 15. Cost-effectiveness in Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 is worse than in
the other climate zones due to the higher cost of converting from a gas tankless to a ducted HPWH (see Table 3)
which isn’t offset enough by the energy savings. Cost savings due to elimination of gas infrastructure costs are also
lower for the ADU relative to the single family home.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 27 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 14: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum
1 Though uncommon, incremental costs can be negative, reflecting initial construction cost savings. When paired with increased energy costs (negative benefits), the
construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost,’ which may yield positive cost effectiveness. See Section 2.1.2.3 for
more information.
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost1 On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$) First Year Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 25.8 12.4 (4,308) 398 ($431) ($3,873) ($4,816) ($3,605) 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702
CZ02 PGE 14.0 8.3 (2,888) 246 ($327) ($4,000) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711
CZ03 PGE 9.1 7.7 (2,433) 171 ($303) ($4,734) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887
CZ04 PGE 8.8 5.0 (2,232) 163 ($251) ($3,665) ($4,854) ($4,644) 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494
CZ04 CPAU 8.8 5.0 (2,232) 163 ($36) $2,123 ($8,122) ($8,314) >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762
CZ05 PGE 6.5 4.0 (1,960) 133 ($292) ($4,981) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633
CZ05 PGE/SCG 6.5 4.0 (1,960) 133 ($277) ($4,532) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633
CZ06 SCE/SCG 4.2 3.5 (1,432) 84 ($231) ($4,015) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353
CZ07 SDGE 2.8 3.2 (1,293) 69 ($266) ($5,731) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211
CZ08 SCE/SCG 2.1 1.1 (1,293) 67 ($228) ($4,192) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674
CZ09 SCE 3.6 1.9 (1,453) 84 ($237) ($4,153) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013
CZ10 SCE/SCG 4.8 2.3 (1,683) 107 ($258) ($4,342) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287
CZ10 SDGE 4.8 2.3 (1,683) 107 ($265) ($5,158) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287
CZ11 PGE 11.4 4.9 (2,712) 226 ($306) ($3,803) ($6,664) ($6,355) 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153
CZ12 PGE 11.5 5.6 (2,554) 212 ($294) ($3,773) ($7,065) ($6,983) 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 11.5 5.6 (2,554) 212 $79 $4,731 ($7,065) ($6,983) >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504
CZ13 PGE 8.3 3.2 (2,095) 154 ($224) ($3,164) ($4,854) ($4,644) 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490
CZ14 SCE/SCG 8.8 3.3 (2,291) 159 ($322) ($5,166) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105
CZ14 SDGE 8.8 3.3 (2,291) 159 ($344) ($6,361) ($4,854) ($4,644) 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.9 1.0 (1,167) 53 ($217) ($4,152) ($6,652) ($5,942) 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439
CZ16 PG&E 21.3 0.7 (4,729) 403 ($548) ($6,581) ($3,289) ($1,187) 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 28 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 15: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum
1 Though uncommon, incremental costs can be negative, reflecting initial construction cost savings. When paired with increased energy costs (negative benefits), the
construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost,’ which may yield positive cost effectiveness. See Section 2.1.2.3 for
more information.
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas
Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost1 On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$) First Year Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 11.9 6.1 (1,641) 114 ($353) ($6,682) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($2,077) 3.9 $2,986
CZ02 PGE 5.7 3.4 (1,245) 75 ($312) ($6,347) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,742) 2.7 $2,515
CZ03 PGE 2.9 2.3 (1,672) 123 ($377) ($7,138) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($1,489)
CZ04 PGE 2.4 1.4 (1,612) 118 ($366) ($6,964) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($801)
CZ04 CPAU 2.4 1.4 (1,612) 118 $25 $3,035 ($863) $442 6.9 $2,592 0.0 ($801)
CZ05 PGE 1.8 0.8 (1,026) 49 ($302) ($6,517) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,912) 2.0 $2,021
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.8 0.8 (1,026) 49 ($257) ($5,178) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($574) 2.0 $2,021
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.5 0.2 (904) 38 ($243) ($4,923) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($318) 2.1 $2,135
CZ07 SDGE 0.1 0.1 (884) 37 ($337) ($7,903) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.6 ($3,298) 2.2 $2,205
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.1 0.1 (878) 36 ($241) ($4,894) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($289) 2.3 $2,274
CZ09 SCE 0.4 0.1 (903) 38 ($243) ($4,914) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.9 ($310) 2.4 $2,321
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.0 0.4 (952) 43 ($189) ($3,629) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.3 $976 2.8 $2,577
CZ10 SDGE 1.0 0.4 (952) 43 ($249) ($5,689) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.8 ($1,084) 2.8 $2,577
CZ11 PGE 4.6 2.1 (1,209) 71 ($224) ($4,405) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.1 $200 3.5 $2,870
CZ12 PGE 4.6 2.3 (1,183) 69 ($306) ($6,315) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.7 ($1,710) 3.0 $2,684
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.6 2.3 (1,183) 69 ($65) ($808) ($4,692) ($4,605) 5.7 $3,797 3.0 $2,684
CZ13 PGE 3.1 1.3 (1,611) 112 ($218) ($3,689) ($863) $442 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($858)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 3.5 1.2 (1,714) 115 ($375) ($6,933) ($863) $442 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($1,089)
CZ14 SDGE 3.5 1.2 (1,714) 115 ($483) ($10,348) ($863) $442 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($1,089)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.0 0.0 (864) 36 ($172) ($3,359) ($4,692) ($4,605) 1.4 $1,246 2.6 $2,477
CZ16 PG&E 11.2 0.1 (1,781) 122 ($379) ($7,167) ($4,692) ($4,605) 0.6 ($2,562) 2.1 $2,133
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 29 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.3 All-Electric Efficiency, PV, and Battery Results
Table 16 and Table 17 compare cost-effectiveness results for the all-electric packages for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively, with the exception
of the all-electric Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment package (cost-effectiveness was not evaluated for this package but see Table 27 and Table
28 for a comparison of compliance impacts). In almost all cases the single family packages are cost-effective based on TDV. For ADUs, all climate zones show
an increase in TDV-cost effectiveness for the Efficiency + PV case but a decrease when a battery is added. On-Bill cost-effectiveness generally improves with the
addition of efficiency measures for single family, but not for ADUs, which generally follows the same trend as TDV cost-effectiveness . A summary of measures
included in each package is provided in Appendix 7.3 Summary of Measures by Package. The efficiency measures added to the all-electric package to meet
minimum code requirements are described in Table 39 and Table 41.
Table 16: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Code Minimum All-Electric Efficiency Only All-Electric-Efficiency + PV All-Electric Efficiency + PV +
Battery
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702 >1 $2,945 >1 $8,168 0.9 ($1,313) 1.8 $9,817 1.0 $1,012 1.2 $4,391
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711 8.9 $3,870 >1 $9,325 1.5 $2,242 4.2 $12,452 1.3 $4,962 1.5 $8,190
CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887 1.1 $168 >1 $3,939 0.8 ($903) 2.8 $6,465 1.1 $2,114 1.1 $1,347
CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494 1.7 $1,054 >1 $4,849 1.1 $204 3.5 $7,893 1.2 $3,709 1.3 $4,506
CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,021 >1 $8,117 >1 $14,776 >1 $11,161 0.9 ($1,076) 1.5 $6,724
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633 1.6 $1,975 >1 $4,985 2.2 $1,457 8.5 $7,927 1.3 $5,551 1.2 $3,296
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633 1.9 $2,424 >1 $4,985 2.6 $1,907 8.5 $7,927 1.4 $6,001 1.2 $3,296
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353 1.6 $1,813 >1 $4,119 109.5 $2,638 152.4 $6,727 1.5 $7,153 1.2 $2,276
CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211 1.2 $839 8.3 $4,070 5.7 $469 >1 $6,079 2.0 $13,798 1.1 $1,186
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674 1.8 $2,574 17.7 $4,642 >1 $3,329 >1 $7,492 1.7 $8,899 1.2 $2,085
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013 1.9 $2,699 >1 $5,087 >1 $3,634 >1 $8,007 1.7 $9,151 1.3 $3,630
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287 2.0 $2,668 >1 $5,376 >1 $3,765 >1 $8,347 1.7 $10,088 1.3 $3,901
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287 1.8 $2,438 >1 $5,376 >1 $2,539 >1 $8,347 2.4 $19,463 1.3 $3,901
CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153 >1 $4,159 >1 $8,524 1.8 $2,984 4.6 $11,310 1.4 $7,781 1.5 $8,757
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504 4.6 $3,742 >1 $8,084 1.9 $2,561 5.5 $11,063 1.3 $6,021 1.5 $8,216
CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504 >1 $10,665 >1 $8,084 5.8 $13,407 5.5 $11,063 0.9 ($1,237) 1.4 $7,166
CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490 >1 $2,876 >1 $5,773 1.7 $2,334 3.7 $8,341 1.4 $7,848 1.4 $7,005
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105 1.8 $811 >1 $5,461 1.6 $2,558 3.6 $9,965 1.6 $10,569 1.4 $6,204
CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105 1.5 $643 >1 $5,461 1.2 $922 3.6 $9,965 2.1 $20,099 1.4 $6,204
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439 8.0 $3,267 >1 $4,669 >1 $3,940 >1 $6,120 2.0 $13,576 0.99 ($80)
CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339) 0.2 ($1,946) 1.7 $1,894 0.8 ($3,199) 1.6 $6,711 1.0 $206 1.1 $1,690
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 30 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 17: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Comparison of All-Electric Efficiency Only, PV, and Battery Packages
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Code Minimum All-Electric Efficiency Only All-Electric Efficiency + PV All-Electric Efficiency + PV + Battery
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.7 ($2,077) 3.9 $2,986 0.6 ($1,727) >1 $2,900 1.2 $2,003 1.5 $5,010 0.997 ($79) 0.9 ($2,884)
CZ02 PGE 0.7 ($1,742) 2.7 $2,515 0.5 ($2,541) >1 $1,945 1.4 $3,532 1.8 $6,360 1.1 $1,302 0.98 ($410)
CZ03 PGE 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($1,489) 0.0 ($8,981) 0.0 ($2,680) 0.8 ($2,489) 1.1 $1,436 0.8 ($4,949) 0.8 ($5,369)
CZ04 PGE 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($801) 0.0 ($8,705) 0.4 ($1,762) 0.9 ($1,480) 1.3 $3,589 0.9 ($3,501) 0.8 ($3,849)
CZ04 CPAU 6.9 $2,592 0.0 ($801) 1.3 $944 0.4 ($1,762) 1.7 $8,498 1.3 $3,589 0.7 ($9,161) 0.8 ($4,899)
CZ05 PGE 0.7 ($1,912) 2.0 $2,021 0.4 ($3,310) 1.4 $650 1.6 $4,015 1.9 $5,436 1.1 $1,265 0.9 ($1,611)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.9 ($574) 2.0 $2,021 0.6 ($1,972) 1.4 $650 1.8 $5,353 1.9 $5,436 1.2 $3,836 0.9 ($1,611)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($318) 2.1 $2,135 0.6 ($1,579) 2.1 $1,103 2.0 $5,866 2.2 $6,551 1.1 $2,799 0.95 ($852)
CZ07 SDGE 0.6 ($3,298) 2.2 $2,205 0.4 ($4,255) 1.8 $941 1.8 $5,667 1.9 $5,493 1.5 $10,358 0.9 ($1,804)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($289) 2.3 $2,274 0.6 ($1,432) 2.1 $1,179 2.0 $6,364 2.3 $7,936 1.2 $4,058 0.97 ($609)
CZ09 SCE 0.9 ($310) 2.4 $2,321 0.6 ($1,494) 2.3 $1,280 2.0 $6,568 2.4 $7,709 1.2 $4,314 0.99 ($279)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.3 $976 2.8 $2,577 0.96 ($106) 3.7 $1,593 2.2 $734 6.7 $3,496 0.9 ($860) 0.7 ($3,944)
CZ10 SDGE 0.8 ($1,084) 2.8 $2,577 0.6 ($1,787) 3.7 $1,593 0.0 ($1,465) 6.7 $3,496 1.3 $5,079 0.7 ($3,944)
CZ11 PGE 1.1 $200 3.5 $2,870 0.96 ($96) >1 $2,531 0.7 ($602) 3.2 $4,037 0.9 ($1,125) 0.9 ($1,893)
CZ12 PGE 0.7 ($1,710) 3.0 $2,684 0.5 ($2,538) >1 $1,878 1.6 $4,644 1.9 $6,675 1.1 $2,970 1.0 $178
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 5.7 $3,797 3.0 $2,684 13 $1,980 >1 $1,878 1.7 $5,737 1.9 $6,675 0.6 ($9,432) 0.96 ($872)
CZ13 PGE 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($858) 0.0 ($4,502) 0.6 ($1,223) 0.3 ($4,759) 1.1 $305 0.8 ($4,729) 0.7 ($5,491)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($1,089) 0.0 ($7,929) 0.5 ($1,684) 1.1 $1,555 1.5 $5,935 1.0 $1,222 0.9 ($1,525)
CZ14 SDGE 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($1,089) 0.0 ($10,375) 0.5 ($1,684) 1.2 $2,956 1.5 $5,935 1.4 $10,678 0.9 ($1,525)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,246 2.6 $2,477 2.4 $1,243 >1 $2,342 >1 $1,729 52.2 $3,560 1.2 $2,631 0.8 ($2,812)
CZ16 PG&E 0.6 ($2,562) 2.1 $2,133 0.5 ($2,378) >1 $2,282 1.6 $5,433 2.0 $7,875 1.2 $3,618 1.0 $611
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 31 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.4 Mixed Fuel Results
Table 18 and Table 19 show results for the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package for Single Family and ADU prototypes, respectively. On a TDV basis,
this package is cost-effective only in Climate Zone 1 for single family and in no cases for ADUs. However, this package is cost-effective On-Bill for the single
family home in all climate zones except 4 in CPAU territory and 12 in SMUD/PG&E territory. On-Bill cost-effectiveness for the ADU home, on the other hand, is
seen only in Climate Zones 2, 5, 7 through 9, 10 in SDG&E territory, 12 in PG&E territory, 14, and 16.
Table 18: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 22.6 18.8 1,571 116 $1,084 $26,667 $11,160 $20,166 1.3 $6,501 1.0 $500
CZ02 PGE 14.1 7.4 1,257 34 $913 $21,353 $10,268 $18,868 1.1 $2,486 0.9 ($1,282)
CZ03 PGE 12.8 4.3 858 7 $785 $18,003 $8,708 $16,900 1.1 $1,104 0.7 ($4,777)
CZ04 PGE 13.2 4.3 790 6 $803 $18,394 $9,623 $17,938 1.0 $456 0.8 ($3,925)
CZ04 CPAU 13.2 4.3 790 6 $123 $2,877 $10,673 $19,172 0.2 ($16,295) 0.7 ($4,975)
CZ05 PGE 14.8 4.9 1,178 13 $905 $20,821 $9,441 $17,885 1.2 $2,936 0.8 ($3,468)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 14.8 4.9 1,178 13 $900 $20,690 $9,441 $17,885 1.2 $2,805 0.8 ($3,468)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 18.3 5.5 888 6 $864 $19,539 $9,266 $17,587 1.1 $1,951 0.8 ($3,941)
CZ07 SDGE 18.7 4.8 832 4 $1,134 $27,505 $9,214 $17,537 1.6 $9,867 0.7 ($4,817)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 17.1 3.0 777 2 $920 $20,754 $9,134 $17,410 1.2 $3,344 0.7 ($4,341)
CZ09 SCE 16.2 3.1 833 3 $922 $20,804 $9,152 $17,435 1.2 $3,369 0.8 ($3,839)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 14.4 2.7 846 2 $958 $21,608 $8,489 $16,733 1.3 $4,875 0.7 ($3,859)
CZ10 SDGE 14.4 2.7 846 2 $1,288 $31,210 $8,489 $16,733 1.9 $14,477 0.7 ($3,859)
CZ11 PGE 12.9 5.1 1,025 26 $1,031 $23,949 $9,828 $18,296 1.3 $5,653 0.9 ($1,066)
CZ12 PGE 13.2 4.8 1,098 23 $923 $21,415 $10,065 $18,616 1.2 $2,800 0.9 ($1,194)
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 13.2 4.8 1,098 23 $253 $6,133 $11,115 $19,850 0.3 ($13,717) 0.9 ($2,244)
CZ13 PGE 12.3 4.2 1,006 5 $1,016 $23,250 $9,831 $18,236 1.3 $5,013 0.9 ($2,354)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 13.4 5.4 1,514 6 $1,093 $24,697 $10,741 $19,342 1.3 $5,354 0.9 ($1,910)
CZ14 SDGE 13.4 5.4 1,514 6 $1,421 $34,477 $10,741 $19,342 1.8 $15,135 0.9 ($1,910)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 13.5 3.8 531 2 $1,140 $25,708 $8,586 $16,630 1.6 $9,078 0.6 ($5,490)
CZ16 PG&E 20.4 14.2 1,228 114 $1,070 $26,218 $12,086 $20,964 1.3 $5,254 0.98 ($444)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 32 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 19: ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Total
EDR1
Margin
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 18.5 7.7 3,666 20 $1,078 $24,880 $15,432 $25,919 0.96 ($1,040) 0.7 ($6,719)
CZ02 PGE 16.6 3.5 3,472 11 $1,042 $23,928 $13,846 $23,790 1.0 $138 0.8 ($4,128)
CZ03 PGE 11.8 1.2 2,679 0 $781 $17,816 $11,879 $21,215 0.8 ($3,399) 0.6 ($6,826)
CZ04 PGE 13.3 1.6 2,799 0 $859 $19,588 $12,213 $21,598 0.9 ($2,011) 0.7 ($5,306)
CZ04 CPAU 13.3 1.6 2,799 0 $391 $8,911 $13,263 $22,833 0.4 ($13,922) 0.7 ($6,356)
CZ05 PGE 16.9 1.1 3,309 2 $1,031 $23,539 $12,668 $22,274 1.1 $1,265 0.8 ($4,765)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 16.9 1.1 3,309 2 $1,031 $23,520 $12,668 $22,274 1.1 $1,246 0.8 ($4,765)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 19.8 1.2 3,285 1 $953 $21,468 $12,496 $22,043 0.97 ($575) 0.8 ($3,877)
CZ07 SDGE 20.3 1.2 3,278 0 $1,296 $31,370 $12,869 $22,545 1.4 $8,825 0.8 ($4,633)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 20.4 0.5 3,505 0 $1,040 $23,434 $12,952 $22,678 1.0 $755 0.8 ($3,522)
CZ09 SCE 19.6 0.5 3,497 0 $1,030 $23,213 $12,691 $22,327 1.0 $886 0.8 ($3,318)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 19.0 0.6 729 0 $537 $12,107 $8,436 $16,606 0.7 ($4,499) 0.5 ($7,344)
CZ10 SDGE 19.0 0.6 729 0 $813 $19,671 $8,436 $16,606 1.2 $3,065 0.5 ($7,344)
CZ11 PGE 17.6 3.0 871 10 $663 $15,273 $9,218 $17,568 0.9 ($2,295) 0.7 ($5,528)
CZ12 PGE 16.7 2.7 3,594 9 $1,112 $25,496 $13,764 $23,710 1.1 $1,786 0.8 ($3,321)
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 16.7 2.7 3,594 9 $537 $12,380 $14,844 $24,944 0.5 ($12,564) 0.8 ($4,371)
CZ13 PGE 14.5 2.2 273 0 $551 $12,569 $7,979 $15,904 0.8 ($3,335) 0.5 ($6,903)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 14.5 3.2 3,499 0 $1,006 $22,671 $12,815 $22,325 1.0 $346 0.8 ($3,423)
CZ14 SDGE 14.5 3.2 3,499 0 $1,351 $32,711 $12,815 $22,325 1.5 $10,386 0.8 ($3,423)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 19.2 1.8 551 0 $683 $15,387 $8,478 $16,574 0.9 ($1,187) 0.5 ($7,021)
CZ16 PG&E 18.3 6.3 3,680 24 $1,117 $25,838 $13,872 $23,801 1.1 $2,037 0.8 ($3,759)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 33 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.5 Greenhouse Gas Reductions
Table 20 and Table 21 present greenhouse gas reductions for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. Savings represent average annual savings
over the 30-year lifetime of the analysis. Greenhouse gas reductions are greatest for the all-electric Efficiency + PV + Battery package in all cases. For the single
family homes, the all-electric Code Minimum case reduces greenhouse gas emissions as much or greater than the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package
in Climate Zones 1 through 4, 11 through 13, and 16—showcasing the benefit of all-electric construction over even the most ambitious of mixed fuel construction
packages evaluated in this study. The trend differs for the ADU where the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package results in more greenhouse gas savings
than the all-electric Code Minimum in all climate zones except Climate Zones 3, 4, and 13. In most of the climate zones (1, 2, 5 through 12, 15, and 16) the all-
electric ADU involves electrification of space heating, cooking, and clothes drying. The space heating loads for the ADU are very low, even in the colder climates,
and as a result the greenhouse gas savings from efficiency measures, PV and battery are greater than just code minimum electrification. This is also the case for
single family homes in Climate Zones 5 through 10, and 15 where space heating loads are low.
Table 20: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons)
Climate
Zone
Single Family All-Electric Single Family Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
CZ01 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.3 0.8 1.1
CZ02 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.6 0.5 0.7
CZ03 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.5
CZ04 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.5
CZ05 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.2 0.6
CZ06 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.5
CZ07 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ08 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ09 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.5
CZ10 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.0 0.1 0.5
CZ11 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.5 0.4 0.7
CZ12 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.4 0.4 0.6
CZ13 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.6
CZ14 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.4 0.2 0.6
CZ15 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.5
CZ16 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.9 2.3 1.0 1.1
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 34 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 21: ADU Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons)
Climate
Zone
ADU All-Electric ADU Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency +
PV +
Battery
CZ01 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 1.0 0.2 0.5
CZ02 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.5
CZ03 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.3
CZ04 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.4
CZ05 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.4
CZ06 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ07 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ08 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.5
CZ09 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.5
CZ10 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ11 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.4
CZ12 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.5
CZ13 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.1 0.3
CZ14 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.1 0.1 0.5
CZ15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.4
CZ16 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.6
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 35 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.6 Sensitivity Analysis
In response to jurisdictional interest, several cases were evaluated under circumstances different than those presented above in order to assess their impact on
cost-effectiveness. Altered circumstances include:
1. CARE versus standard tariffs. This comparison is presented for the all-electric Code Minimum and the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery packages and
shows the impact on On-Bill cost-effectiveness for income qualified utility customers.
2. Infill versus new subdivision single family developments. This comparison applied to the all-electric Code Minimum package demonstrates how cost-
effectiveness is impacted due to the magnitude of cost savings for all-electric construction from elimination of the natural gas infrastructure.
3. Utility rate escalation factors. The impact on On-Bill cost-effectiveness is presented for the all-electric Code Minimum package from varying the
assumptions for escalation of electricity and natural gas utility rates over the 30-year analysis period.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 36 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.6.1 CARE Rate Comparison
Table 22 and Table 23 present a comparison of On-Bill cost-effectiveness results for CARE tariffs relative to standard IOU tariffs for the all-electric Code Minimum
package for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. Applying the CARE rates lowers both electric and gas utility bills for the consumer. In the case of
the all-electric home, the net impact of CARE rates is improved cost-effectiveness relative to the standard tariffs. This is because the discount on electricity is
greater than that for natural gas. The opposite trend occurs for the mixed fuel packages, where the lower CARE rates result in lower utility cost savings and
subsequently lower benefit-to-cost ratios.
Table 22: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $3,886 0.7 ($2,077) 1.2 $696
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 5.1 $5,107 0.7 ($1,742) 1.1 $580
CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 1.7 $1,968 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($4,596)
CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 2.3 $2,619 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($4,526)
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 2.2 $3,467 0.7 ($1,912) 1.1 $237
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 2.5 $3,841 0.9 ($574) 1.4 $1,321
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 2.3 $3,535 0.9 ($318) 1.4 $1,225
CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 2.1 $3,309 0.6 ($3,298) 0.9 ($627)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 2.3 $3,945 0.9 ($289) 1.4 $1,231
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 2.4 $4,074 0.9 ($310) 1.4 $1,230
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 2.4 $4,083 1.3 $976 1.7 $1,923
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 3.0 $4,642 0.8 ($1,084) 1.3 $1,114
CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 5.0 $5,077 1.1 $200 1.6 $1,634
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 5.0 $5,587 0.7 ($1,710) 1.1 $545
CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 2.7 $2,924 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($2,754)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) 1.3 $1,191 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($4,754)
CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) 2.0 $2,295 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($6,496)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 1.9 $2,831 1.4 $1,246 1.8 $2,031
CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.8 ($351) 0.6 ($2,562) 1.1 $453
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 37 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 23: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV+ Battery Package
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 1.3 $6,501 0.9 ($2,072) 0.96 ($1,040) 0.7 ($9,009)
CZ02 PGE 1.1 $2,486 0.7 ($5,286) 1.0 $138 0.7 ($7,683)
CZ03 PGE 1.1 $1,104 0.6 ($5,980) 0.8 ($3,399) 0.6 ($9,288)
CZ04 PGE 1.0 $456 0.6 ($6,790) 0.9 ($2,011) 0.6 ($8,586)
CZ05 PGE 1.2 $2,936 0.7 ($4,995) 1.1 $1,265 0.7 ($6,642)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.2 $2,805 0.7 ($5,100) 1.1 $1,246 0.7 ($6,657)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.1 $1,951 0.7 ($5,232) 0.97 ($575) 0.7 ($5,976)
CZ07 SDGE 1.6 $9,867 1.1 $1,601 1.4 $8,825 0.9 ($2,435)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.2 $3,344 0.7 ($4,574) 1.0 $755 0.8 ($5,331)
CZ09 SCE 1.2 $3,369 0.7 ($4,547) 1.0 $886 0.8 ($5,198)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.3 $4,875 0.8 ($3,354) 0.7 ($4,499) 0.5 ($8,010)
CZ10 SDGE 1.9 $14,477 1.3 $4,789 1.2 $3,065 0.8 ($3,001)
CZ11 PGE 1.3 $5,653 0.8 ($3,358) 0.9 ($2,295) 0.5 ($8,074)
CZ12 PGE 1.2 $2,800 0.7 ($5,212) 1.1 $1,786 0.7 ($6,653)
CZ13 PGE 1.3 $5,013 0.8 ($4,024) 0.8 ($3,335) 0.5 ($8,497)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.3 $5,354 0.8 ($3,665) 1.0 $346 0.7 ($5,727)
CZ14 SDGE 1.8 $15,135 1.2 $4,127 1.5 $10,386 0.9 ($1,393)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.6 $9,078 0.95 ($877) 0.93 ($1,187) 0.6 ($6,708)
CZ16 PG&E 1.3 $5,254 0.8 ($3,523) 1.1 $2,037 0.7 ($6,282)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 38 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.6.2 Utility Infrastructure Cost Sensitivity
Table 24 compares cost-effectiveness results for the natural gas service line extension cost scenarios that inform the average values presented in Table 8. The
average cost scenario reflects the cost-effectiveness results for the single family all-electric Code Minimum package presented in Table 16. Relative to a new
subdivision, gas infrastructure cost savings are higher for the infill development case, which translates to higher cost-effectiveness. This is shown by positive cost-
effectiveness in all metrics except one – On-Bill for Climate Zone 16 – for infill development. Compared to the average cost scenario, there are two cases – On-
Bill for Climate Zone 4 in PG&E territory and Climate Zone 7 – where the all-electric Code Minimum package is no longer cost-effective based on the new
subdivision costs.
Table 24: Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs:
All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Average New Subdivision Infill Development
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $5,702 0.6 ($1,492) >1 $4,612 2.2 $4,628 >1 $10,062
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $7,711 1.3 $1,131 >1 $6,621 2.8 $7,250 >1 $12,071
CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) 25.3 $3,887 0.7 ($1,314) 18.5 $2,797 2.0 $4,806 52.6 $8,247
CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $4,494 0.9 ($245) >1 $3,404 2.6 $5,875 >1 $8,854
CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762 >1 $10,437 >1 $7,762
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 6.1 $4,633 1.0 $149 4.9 $3,543 2.3 $6,269 11.0 $8,993
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 6.1 $4,633 1.1 $599 4.9 $3,543 2.5 $6,719 11.0 $8,993
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.7 $4,353 1.3 $1,115 3.8 $3,263 2.8 $7,235 8.4 $8,713
CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 4.2 $4,211 0.9 ($600) 3.4 $3,121 2.0 $5,519 7.5 $8,571
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 4.2 $4,674 1.4 $1,568 3.5 $3,584 2.8 $7,687 7.3 $9,034
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 5.5 $5,013 1.4 $1,607 4.6 $3,923 2.9 $7,726 9.5 $9,373
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 7.4 $5,287 1.3 $1,418 6.1 $4,197 2.7 $7,537 12.6 $9,647
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $5,287 1.1 $601 6.1 $4,197 2.3 $6,721 12.6 $9,647
CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $7,153 1.3 $1,328 >1 $6,063 3.0 $7,448 >1 $11,513
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $7,504 1.5 $1,986 >1 $6,414 3.1 $8,106 >1 $11,864
CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $7,504 >1 $10,490 >1 $6,414 >1 $16,610 >1 $11,864
CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $4,490 1.1 $256 >1 $3,400 3.0 $6,376 >1 $8,850
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) >1 $4,105 0.7 ($1,746) >1 $3,015 1.8 $4,374 >1 $8,465
CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,105 0.5 ($2,941) >1 $3,015 1.5 $3,179 >1 $8,465
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 3.0 $3,439 1.1 $567 2.4 $2,349 2.6 $6,687 5.6 $7,799
CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) 0.4 ($1,339) 0.0 ($6,618) 0.0 ($2,429) 0.9 ($498) 2.4 $3,021
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 39 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
4.6.3 Utility Rate Escalation
In this sensitivity analysis, an alternative set of annual utility escalation rates was applied to the gas and electricity savings in select measure packages to show
the impact that utility cost changes over time have on cost-effectiveness. This set of rates, detailed in Section 7.2.7, reflects those used by the Energy
Commission in their development of the LSC factors for the 2025 code cycle (LSC replaces TDV in the 2025 code cycle). The rates assume steep increases in
gas rates starting in 2030. Increased gas rates range from 2% to 6.7% higher than annual rates used in the 2022 code cycle; electricity rates are only marginally
(about 0.5%) higher each year.
On-Bill cost-effectiveness results are shown for in Table 25 for the all-electric Code Minimum scenario and Table 26 for the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery
measure package. The alternative rates described above (“2025 LSC”) are shown alongside those reported elsewhere in this report (“CPUC / 2022 TDV”,
described in Section 2.1.3) for comparison. In all cases, the 2025 LSC escalation rates improve cost-effectiveness. In some cases, this improvement is enough to
change the result from not cost-effective to cost-effective, these cases are summarized below:
• All-Electric Code Minimum package
o Climate Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16 for the single family home
o Climate Zones 1, 5 in PG&E/SCG territory, 6, 8, 9, 10 in SDG&E territory, and 16 for the ADU home
• Mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package
o Climate Zones 1, 6, and 15 for the ADU home
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 40 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 25: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.9 ($268) >1 $13,867 0.7 ($2,077) 1.2 $833
CZ02 PGE 1.6 $2,355 >1 $10,458 0.7 ($1,742) 0.95 ($228)
CZ03 PGE 0.98 ($90) >1 $4,883 0.0 ($7,581) 0.0 ($4,465)
CZ04 PGE 1.3 $979 >1 $5,728 0.0 ($7,406) 0.0 ($4,466)
CZ04 CPAU >1 $10,437 >1 $17,647 6.9 $2,592 20.7 $8,704
CZ05 PGE 1.3 $1,373 5.3 $5,148 0.7 ($1,912) 0.8 ($1,386)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.4 $1,823 13.5 $5,884 0.9 ($574) 1.2 $807
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,339 4.0 $4,751 0.9 ($318) 1.2 $630
CZ07 SDGE 1.1 $624 1.9 $3,008 0.6 ($3,298) 0.7 ($2,394)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,792 3.0 $4,650 0.9 ($289) 1.1 $591
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $2,831 4.0 $5,233 0.9 ($310) 1.2 $634
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.6 $2,642 5.4 $5,700 1.3 $976 1.9 $2,147
CZ10 SDGE 1.4 $1,825 7.4 $6,038 0.8 ($1,084) 1.0 $102
CZ11 PGE 1.7 $2,552 >1 $9,997 1.1 $200 1.6 $1,669
CZ12 PGE 1.9 $3,210 >1 $10,077 0.7 ($1,710) 0.9 ($430)
CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $11,714 >1 $19,028 5.7 $3,797 >1 $5,367
CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,480 >1 $5,987 0.0 ($4,131) 0.0 ($1,228)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($522) 6.0 $3,876 0.0 ($7,375) 0.0 ($4,363)
CZ14 SDGE 0.7 ($1,717) >1 $4,799 0.0 ($10,790) 0.0 ($6,285)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.4 $1,791 2.2 $3,214 1.4 $1,246 1.9 $2,210
CZ16 PG&E 0.2 ($5,394) >1 $8,516 0.6 ($2,562) 1.2 $629
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 41 Results
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 26: On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness, 2025 LSC Basis: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC CPUC / 2022 TDV 2025 LSC
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 1.3 $6,501 1.6 $12,598 0.96 ($1,040) 1.0 $993
CZ02 PGE 1.1 $2,486 1.3 $4,914 1.0 $138 1.1 $1,816
CZ03 PGE 1.1 $1,104 1.1 $2,287 0.8 ($3,399) 0.9 ($2,462)
CZ04 PGE 1.0 $456 1.1 $1,645 0.9 ($2,011) 0.95 ($980)
CZ04 CPAU 0.2 ($16,295) 0.2 ($15,990) 0.4 ($13,922) 0.4 ($13,453)
CZ05 PGE 1.2 $2,936 1.3 $4,506 1.1 $1,265 1.1 $2,574
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.2 $2,805 1.2 $4,291 1.1 $1,246 1.1 $2,543
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.1 $1,951 1.2 $3,420 0.97 ($575) 1.0 $847
CZ07 SDGE 1.6 $9,867 1.6 $9,930 1.4 $8,825 1.4 $8,570
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.2 $3,344 1.3 $4,750 1.0 $755 1.1 $2,288
CZ09 SCE 1.2 $3,369 1.3 $4,812 1.0 $886 1.1 $2,407
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.3 $4,875 1.4 $6,334 0.7 ($4,499) 0.8 ($3,703)
CZ10 SDGE 1.9 $14,477 1.9 $14,289 1.2 $3,065 1.2 $2,904
CZ11 PGE 1.3 $5,653 1.4 $7,967 0.9 ($2,295) 0.94 ($1,126)
CZ12 PGE 1.2 $2,800 1.3 $4,806 1.1 $1,786 1.1 $3,458
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 0.3 ($13,717) 0.4 ($12,515) 0.5 ($12,564) 0.5 ($11,582)
CZ13 PGE 1.3 $5,013 1.4 $6,448 0.8 ($3,335) 0.8 ($2,674)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.3 $5,354 1.4 $7,138 1.0 $346 1.1 $1,827
CZ14 SDGE 1.8 $15,135 1.8 $15,116 1.5 $10,386 1.5 $10,107
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.6 $9,078 1.7 $10,819 0.9 ($1,187) 0.99 ($182)
CZ16 PG&E 1.3 $5,254 1.5 $10,999 1.1 $2,037 1.2 $4,285
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 42 Summary
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
5 Summary
The purpose of this study was to examine and document the code compliance and cost-effectiveness impacts of
improving performance among single family new construction – both standard sized homes and ADUs. To this end, the
Reach Codes Team evaluated packages of energy efficiency measures as well as packages combining energy
efficiency with solar PV generation and battery storage, simulated them in building modeling software, and gathered
costs to determine the cost-effectiveness of multiple scenarios. The Reach Codes Team coordinated with multiple
utilities, cities, and building community experts to develop a set of assumptions considered reasonable in the current
market. Changing assumptions, such as the period of analysis, measure selection, cost assumptions, energy
escalation rates, or utility tariffs are likely to change results.
Table 27 (single family) and Table 28 (ADU) summarize results for each prototype and depict the EDR1 compliance
margins achieved for each climate zone and package. Because local reach codes must both exceed the energy code
(i.e., have a positive compliance margin in the performance approach) and be cost-effective, the Reach Codes Team
highlighted cells meeting these two requirements to help clarify the upper boundary for potential reach code policies.
All results presented in this study have a positive compliance margin.
• Cells highlighted in green depict a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using both On-Bill and
TDV approaches.
• Cells highlighted in yellow depict a positive compliance and cost-effective results using either the On-Bill or
TDV approach.
• Cells not highlighted depict a package that was not cost-effective using either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
• Cells highlighted in grey depict the high efficiency equipment packages where cost-effectiveness was not
evaluated.
The following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis.
Conclusions and Discussion:
• All-electric buildings have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel buildings, due to the clean power sources
currently available from California’s power providers as well as accounting for increased penetration of
renewables in the future. Almost all the all-electric packages evaluated resulted in greater GHG emission
savings than the mixed fuel packages, with the exception of the mixed fuel package with battery storage in
climate zones with low heating loads.
• The Reach Codes Team found code-compliant, all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective
based on TDV for single family homes in all cases except Climate Zone 16.
• All-electric code minimum single family new construction was On-Bill cost-effective in all cases except Climate
Zones 1, 3, 14, and 16.
• The all-electric code minimum ADU home was cost-effective based on TDV in all cases except in Climate
Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 where the higher cost of installing a ducted HPWH instead of the prescriptively required
gas tankless water heater outweigh the resulting energy cost savings. In the other climate zones there were
first cost savings for installing a heat pump space heater instead of gas furnace, contributing to an overall TDV
cost-effective result.
• Few cases were cost-effective On-Bill for the ADU.
• All-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in lifetime utility costs relative to a mixed fuel
home, except for CPAU and SMUD where electricity rates are much lower than for the IOUs. The addition of
efficiency measures, market dominant HPWHs that meet NEEA’s Advanced Water Heating Specification, high
efficiency heat pumps, increased PV, and batteries all reduce utility costs, and the combination of these
options was found to reduce annual utility costs relative to a mixed fuel home in all cases.
• Under NBT, utility cost savings for increasing PV system size beyond code minimum are substantially less
than under prior net energy metering rules (NEM 2.0); however, savings are sufficient to be On-Bill cost-
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 43 Summary
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
effective in all climate zones for the all-electric single family home except climate zones 1, 3, and 16. Coupling
PV with battery systems increases utility cost savings as a result of improved on-site utilization of PV
generation and fewer exports to the grid.
• Applying CARE rates in the IOU territories improves On-Bill cost-effectiveness for all-electric buildings, as
compared to the same case under standard rates, due to higher utility cost savings compared to a code
compliant mixed fuel building also on a CARE rate, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness. This is due to the
CARE discount on electricity being higher than that on gas.
• If gas tariffs are assumed to increase substantially over time, in-line with the escalation assumption from the
2025 LSC development, all-electric new construction was found to be On-Bill cost-effective in all single family
and most ADU scenarios over the 30-year analysis period. There is much uncertainty surrounding future tariff
structures as well as escalation values. While it’s clear that gas rates will increase, how much and how quickly
is not known. Electricity tariff structures are expected to evolve over time, and the CPUC has an active
proceeding to adopt an income-graduated fixed charge that benefits low-income customers and supports
electrification measures.21 The CPUC will make a decision in mid-2024 and the new rates are expected to be
in place later that year or in 2025. While the anticipated impact of this rate change is lower volumetric electricity
rates, the rate design is not finalized. While lower volumetric electricity rates provide many benefits including
incentivizing electrification, it also will make building efficiency measures harder to justify as cost-effective due
to lower utility bill cost savings.
Recommendations:
• A reach code with a single performance target based on source energy (EDR1) can be structured to strongly
encourage electrification. This approach requires equivalent performance for all buildings and allows mixed
fuel buildings which minimizes the risk of violating federal preemption. Below are examples of how a reach
code for single family homes could be setup based on the results summarized in Table 27.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 12 could set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 11.5 (the EDR1
margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home meeting or exceeding the
prescriptive requirements would comply, and a mixed fuel home would likely need to incorporate a
combination of efficiency measures and a battery system to comply.
o Similarly, a jurisdiction in Climate Zone 7 may consider setting a performance target of 2.8 EDR1
margin (also the EDR1 margin for the all-electric Code Minimum package). Any all-electric home
meeting or exceeding the prescriptive requirements would comply, but a mixed fuel home would likely
be able to comply with only a suite of above-code efficiency measures (no battery). Alternatively, a
higher EDR1 margin target of 5 would incentivize more energy efficiency or additional PV for all-
electric construction, and mixed fuel construction would likely need to incorporate a battery system to
comply.
o A jurisdiction in Climate Zone 16 may want to set a performance target at an EDR1 margin of 20.4 (the
EDR1 margin for the mixed fuel efficiency + PV + battery package). This would establish a target that a
mixed fuel home could On-Bill cost-effectively meet, likely only after incorporating a combination of
efficiency measures and a battery system, and that an all-electric home could easily meet.
• The 2022 Title 24 code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all-
electric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building
efficiency to be traded off, still meeting minimum code compliance. This compliance benefit for all-electric
homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes.
Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As
demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of
additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity, as
well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team
recommends that jurisdictions adopting a reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency
21 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/electric-costs/demand-response-dr/demand-flexibility-rulemaking
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 44 Summary
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
requirement with EDR1 margins at minimum consistent with the all-electric code minimum package results in
Table 27.
• The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single
family prototype; code compliance and cost-effectiveness can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units.
As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend EDR1 targets above those reported for the all-
electric Code Minimum package in Table 28.
Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or
may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the
specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. For example, jurisdictions may
amend Part 11 instead of Part 6 of the CA Building Code requiring review and approval by the BSC but not the Energy
Commission. Reach codes that amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state
code minimums must demonstrate the proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy
Commission.
This report documents the key results and conclusions from the Reach Codes Team analysis. A full dataset of all
results can be downloaded at https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources. Results alongside policy options can
also be explored using the Cost-effectiveness Explorer at https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/.
Table 27: Summary of Single Family EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum Efficiency
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 PGE 25.8 29.1 31.4 32.6 41.4 14.8 22.6
CZ02 PGE 14.0 16.3 18.0 18.9 28.3 9.1 14.1
CZ03 PGE 9.1 10.6 12.2 13.1 24.2 3.6 12.8
CZ04 PGE 8.8 10.4 11.9 12.8 24.6 3.8 13.2
CZ04 CPAU 8.8 10.4 11.9 12.8 24.6 3.8 13.2
CZ05 PGE 6.5 7.9 10.2 10.8 23.3 5.2 14.8
CZ05 PGE/SCG 6.5 7.9 10.2 10.8 23.3 5.2 14.8
CZ06 SCE/SCG 4.2 5.3 6.6 8.4 24.6 4.0 18.3
CZ07 SDGE 2.8 3.6 4.9 6.9 23.6 3.2 18.7
CZ08 SCE/SCG 2.1 2.9 4.2 5.6 21.3 2.7 17.1
CZ09 SCE/SCG 3.6 4.4 5.7 7.1 21.8 3.2 16.2
CZ10 SCE/SCG 4.8 5.8 7.2 8.5 21.9 3.9 14.4
CZ10 SDGE 4.8 5.8 7.2 8.5 21.9 3.9 14.4
CZ11 PGE 11.4 13.4 15.0 15.6 24.5 7.7 12.9
CZ12 PGE 11.5 13.3 14.8 15.5 25.2 7.2 13.2
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 11.5 13.3 14.8 15.5 25.2 7.2 13.2
CZ13 PGE 8.3 10.3 11.9 12.3 22.3 4.1 12.3
CZ14 SCE/SCG 8.8 11.5 13.2 14.3 24.7 4.7 13.4
CZ14 SDGE 8.8 11.5 13.2 14.3 24.7 4.7 13.4
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.9 2.4 3.7 3.8 15.7 3.5 13.5
CZ16 PG&E 21.3 25.6 27.0 29.1 37.5 16.3 20.4
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 45 Summary
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 28: Summary of ADU EDR1 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All-Electric Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum Efficiency
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency +
High
Efficiency
Equipment
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 PGE 11.9 15.7 18.5 19.3 33.5 9.9 18.5
CZ02 PGE 5.7 7.9 9.7 10.8 25.4 5.6 16.6
CZ03 PGE 2.9 4.0 5.9 7.1 22.8 3.0 11.8
CZ04 PGE 2.4 3.9 5.5 6.8 23.5 3.7 13.3
CZ04 CPAU 2.4 3.9 5.5 6.8 23.5 3.7 13.3
CZ05 PGE 1.8 2.9 4.8 6.4 23.6 2.7 16.9
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.8 2.9 4.8 6.4 23.6 2.7 16.9
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.5 1.3 2.6 5.0 25.4 1.8 19.8
CZ07 SDGE 0.1 0.9 2.1 5.0 25.9 1.5 20.3
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.1 0.7 1.8 4.2 25.4 1.6 20.4
CZ09 SCE 0.4 1.1 2.3 4.5 24.9 1.9 19.6
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.0 2.0 3.5 5.4 25.3 2.5 19.0
CZ10 SDGE 1.0 2.0 3.5 5.4 25.3 2.5 19.0
CZ11 PGE 4.6 7.0 8.6 9.6 25.0 5.4 17.6
CZ12 PGE 4.6 6.6 8.3 9.3 24.4 5.0 16.7
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.6 6.6 8.3 9.3 24.4 5.0 16.7
CZ13 PGE 3.1 5.5 6.9 7.8 25.1 3.9 14.5
CZ14 SCE/SCG 3.5 6.3 8.0 9.6 26.8 4.3 14.5
CZ14 SDGE 3.5 6.3 8.0 9.6 26.8 4.3 14.5
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.0 2.2 2.6 4.4 24.8 2.3 19.2
CZ16 PG&E 11.2 14.7 15.7 18.3 32.0 8.3 18.3
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 46 References
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
6 References
Barbose, G., Darghouth, N., O'Shaughnessy, E., & Forrester, S. (2021, October). Tracking the Sun. Pricing and Design
Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2021 Edition. Retrieved from
https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
Barbose, Galen; Darghouth, Naim; O'Shaughnessy, Eric; Forrester, Sydney. (2022). Tracking the Sun: Pricing and
Design Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2022 Edition. Retrieved from
https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
California Energy Commission. (2017). Rooftop Solar PV System. Measure number: 2019-Res-PV-D Prepared by
Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. Retrieved from
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=221366
California Energy Commission. (2018). 2019 Alternative Calculation Method Approval Manual for the 2019 Building
Energy Efficiency Standards. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2018/2019-alternative-
calculation-method-approval-manual-2019-building-energy
California Energy Commission. (2021a). Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to 2022 Title 24, Part 1 and Part 6.
Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21-BSTD-01
California Energy Commission. (2021b). Final Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to the 2022 Energy Code
Reference Appendices. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21-
BSTD-01
California Energy Commission. (2022, Feb). 2022 Single-Family Residential Alternative Calculation Method Reference
Manual. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2022/2022-single-family-residential-
alternative-calculation-method-reference-manual
California Public Utilities Commission. (2021a). Utility Costs and Affordability of the Grid of the Future: An Evaluation
of Electric Costs, Rates, and Equity Issues Pursuant to P.U. Code Section 913.1. Retrieved from
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/office-of-governmental-affairs-
division/reports/2021/senate-bill-695-report-2021-and-en-banc-whitepaper_final_04302021.pdf
California Public Utilities Commission. (2021b). Database for Energy-Efficient resources (DEER2021 Update). Retrieved
April 13, 2021, from http://www.deeresources.com/index.php/deer-versions/deer2021
California Public Utilities Commission. (2022). Proposed Decision of Commissioner Rechtschaffen: PHASE III DECISION
ELIMINATING GAS LINE EXTENSION ALLOWANCES, TEN-YEAR REFUNDABLE PAYMENT OPTION, AND FIFTY
PERCENT DISCOUNT PAYMENT OPTION UNDER GAS LINE EXTENSION RULES.
Department of Energy. (2022). Preliminary Analysis Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for
Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment. Retrieved from
https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0019-0018
E-CFR. (2020). https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197. Retrieved from Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197
Energy & Environmental Economics. (2019). Residential Building Electrification in California. Retrieved from
https://www.ethree.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf
Energy + Environmental Economics. (2020). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency
Standards: 2022 Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) and Source Energy Metric Data Sources and Inputs.
E-Source companies. (2020). Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study. Prepared for San Diego Gas & Electric.
Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/behind-meter-battery-market-study?dl=1582149166
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 47 References
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Horii, B., Cutter, E., Kapur, N., Arent, J., & Conotyannis, D. (2014). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing
Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Proctor, J., Wilcox, B., & Chitwood, R. (2018). Central Valley Research Homes Project. California Energy Commission.
Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342135376_Central_Valley_Research_Homes_Project_--
_Final_CEC_Report
RSMeans. (2022). Cost data obtained from the 2022 RSMeans online database.
Statewide CASE Team. (2017). Residential High Performance Windows & Doors Codes and Standards Enhancement
(CASE) Initiative 2019 California Energy Code. Retrieved from 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. Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/energy-savings-
potential-and-cost-effectiveness-analysis-high-efficiency-windows-california
Statewide CASE Team. (2020a). Nonresidential High Performance Envelope Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE)
Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Energy Solutions. Retrieved from
https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-T24-NR-HP-Envelope-Final-CASE-
Report.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020b). Residential Energy Savings and Process Improvements for Additions and Alterations
Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Frontier
Energy. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SF-Additions-and-
Alterations_Final_-CASE-Report_Statewide-CASE-Team.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020c). Multifamily All-Electric Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022
California Energy Code. Prepared by TRC.
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2019, August). 2019 Cost-effectiveness Study: Low-Rise Residential New Construction.
Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/800/file_path/fieldList/2019%20Res%20NC%20Reach%20Codes
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021a). Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Batteries in Single Family Homes. Prepared by
Frontier Energy. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/930/file_path/fieldList/Single%20Family%20Battery%20Cost-
eff%20Report.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021b). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling
Units. Prepared by TRC. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/760/file_path/fieldList/2019%20New%20Detached%20ADUs%20Co
st-effectiveness%20Report.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (tbd). 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Existing Single Family Building Upgrades.
Prepared by Frontier Energy. Not yet published.
TRC, P. E. (2021). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling Units.
UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation. (2021). Implementing the Backyard Revolution: Perspectives of
California’s ADU Owners.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 48 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7 Appendices
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones
Climate zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 4. The map in Figure 4 along with a zip-code search
directory is available at: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html
Figure 4: Map of California climate zones.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 49 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the CA IOU and POU rate tariffs detailed below to determine the On-Bill savings for
each package. The California Climate Credit was applied for both electricity and natural gas service for the IOUs using
the 2023 credits shows below.22 The credits were applied to reduce the total calculated annual bill, including any fixed
fees or minimum bill amounts.
Electricity rates reflect the most recently approved tariffs. Monthly gas rates were estimated based on recent gas rates
(November 2023) and a curve to reflect how natural gas prices fluctuate with seasonal supply and demand. The
seasonal curve was estimated from monthly residential tariffs between 2014 and 2023 (between 2017 and 2023 for
CPAU). 12-month curves were created from monthly gas rates for each of the ten years (seven years for CPAU).
These annual curves were then averaged to arrive at an average normalized annual curve. This was conducted
separately for baseline and excess energy rates. Costs used in this analysis were then derived by establishing the
most recent baseline and excess rate from the latest tariff as a reference point (November 2023), and then using the
normalized curve to estimate the cost for the remaining months relative to the reference point rate.
22 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/natural-gas/greenhouse-gas-cap-and-trade-program/california-climate-credit
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 50 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric
The following pages provide details on the PG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 29
describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of
$0.07051/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between
December 2022 and November 2023.
Table 29: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
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 for G-1 in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table
30. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of
historical gas data. Corresponding CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the GL-1 tariff.
Table 30: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.05 $2.43
February $2.08 $2.46
March $1.92 $2.31
April $1.80 $2.20
May $1.77 $2.18
June $1.78 $2.18
July $1.80 $2.20
August $1.85 $2.26
September $1.92 $2.33
October $1.99 $2.40
November $2.06 $2.46
December $2.05 $2.44
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 51 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 52 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 53 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 54 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 55 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 56 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 57 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.2 Southern California Edison
The following pages provide details on the SCE electricity tariffs applied in this study. Table 31 describes the baseline
territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $ 0.06030/ kWh was applied to
any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between December 2022 and
November 2023.
Table 31: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ06 6
CZ08 8
CZ09 9
CZ10 10
CZ14 14
CZ15 15
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 58 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 59 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 60 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 61 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.3 Southern California Gas
Following are the SoCalGas natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 32 describes the baseline territories that
were assumed for each climate zone.
Table 32: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ05 2
CZ06 1
CZ08 1
CZ09 1
CZ10 1
CZ14 2
CZ15 1
The SoCalGas monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table 33.
These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of historical
gas data. Long-term historical natural gas rate data was only available for SoCalGas’ procurement charges.23 The
baseline and excess transmission charges were found to be consistent over the course of a year and applied for the
entire year based on 2023 rates. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the GR tariff.
Table 33: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
January $0.72 $0.86 $1.31 $1.92 $2.36
February $0.50 $0.86 $1.31 $1.57 $2.02
March $0.44 $0.86 $1.31 $1.48 $1.93
April $0.39 $0.86 $1.31 $1.39 $1.84
May $0.41 $0.86 $1.31 $1.43 $1.87
June $0.46 $0.86 $1.31 $1.49 $1.93
July $0.47 $0.86 $1.31 $1.51 $1.96
August $0.51 $0.86 $1.31 $1.58 $2.03
September $0.46 $0.86 $1.31 $1.52 $1.96
October $0.45 $0.86 $1.31 $1.48 $1.92
November $0.48 $0.86 $1.31 $1.54 $1.99
December $0.57 $0.86 $1.31 $1.63 $2.08
23 The SoCalGas procurement and transmission charges were obtained from the following site: https://www.socalgas.com/for-your-
business/energy-market-services/gas-prices RES2023.xlsx (live.com)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 62 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric
Following are the SDG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 34 describes the baseline
territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.04542/ kWh was applied to
any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between December 2022 and
November 2023.
Table 34: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ07 Coastal
CZ10 Inland
CZ14 Mountain
The SDG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table
35. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the November 2023 tariff based on ten years of
historical gas data. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the G-CARE tariff.
Table 35: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.34 $2.63
February $2.28 $2.57
March $2.21 $2.51
April $2.14 $2.45
May $2.18 $2.48
June $2.23 $2.55
July $2.26 $2.57
August $2.32 $2.62
September $2.26 $2.59
October $2.21 $2.55
November $2.24 $2.57
December $2.38 $2.70
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 63 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 64 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 65 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 66 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 67 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 68 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities
Following are the CPAU electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. The CPAU monthly gas rate in
$/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Table 36. These rates are based on applying a
normalization curve to the October 2023 tariff based on seven years of historical gas data. The monthly service charge
applied was $14.01 per month per the November 2023 G-1 tariff.
Table 36: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month G1
Volumetric
Total
Baseline
G1
Volumetric
Total
Excess
January $1.83532 $3.35639
February $1.38055 $2.59947
March $1.32506 $2.47695
April $1.29680 $2.44038
May $1.29511 $2.43804
June $1.32034 $2.45406
July $1.35688 $2.61519
August $1.40696 $2.67944
September $1.42130 $2.70301
October $1.42310 $2.48300
November $1.46286 $2.45547
December $1.62415 $2.62128
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 69 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 70 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only)
Following are the SMUD electricity tariffs applied in this study. The rates effective January 2023 were used.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 71 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 72 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions
The average annual escalation rates in Table 37 were used in this study. These are based on assumptions from the
CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation
rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the
2022 TDV factors. No data was available to estimate electricity escalation rates for CPAU and SMUD, therefore
electricity escalation rates for PG&E and statewide natural gas escalation rates were applied. Table 38 presents the
average annual escalation rates used in the utility rate escalation sensitivity analysis shown in Section 4.6.3. Rates
were applied for the same 30-year period and are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2025 LSC
factors from 2027 through 2053.24 These rates were developed for electricity use statewide (not utility-specific) and
assume steep increases in gas rates in the latter half of the analysis period. Data was not available for years 2024,
2025, and 2026 and so the CPUC En Banc assumptions were applied for those years using the average rate across
the three IOUs for statewide electricity escalation.
Table 37: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, CPUC En Banc and 2022 TDV
Basis
24 https://www.energy.ca.gov/files/2025-energy-code-hourly-factors. Actual escalation factors were provided by consultants E3.
Year
Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Electric Residential Average Rate
(%/year, real)
PG&E SCE SDG&E
2024 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2025 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2026 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2027 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2028 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2029 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2030 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2031 2.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2032 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2033 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2034 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2035 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2036 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2037 1.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2038 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2039 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2040 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2041 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2042 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2043 2.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2044 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2045 2.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2046 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2047 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2048 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2049 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2050 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2051 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2052 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2053 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 73 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 38: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions, 2025 LSC Basis
Year
Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Statewide
Electricity
Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
2024 4.6% 2.1%
2025 4.6% 2.1%
2026 4.6% 2.1%
2027 4.2% 0.6%
2028 3.2% 1.9%
2029 3.6% 1.6%
2030 6.6% 1.3%
2031 6.7% 1.0%
2032 7.7% 1.2%
2033 8.2% 1.1%
2034 8.2% 1.1%
2035 8.2% 0.9%
2036 8.2% 1.1%
2037 8.2% 1.1%
2038 8.2% 1.0%
2039 8.2% 1.1%
2040 8.2% 1.1%
2041 8.2% 1.1%
2042 8.2% 1.1%
2043 8.2% 1.1%
2044 8.2% 1.1%
2045 8.2% 1.1%
2046 8.2% 1.1%
2047 3.1% 1.1%
2048 -0.5% 1.1%
2049 -0.6% 1.1%
2050 -0.5% 1.1%
2051 -0.6% 1.1%
2052 -0.6% 1.1%
2053 -0.6% 1.1%
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 74 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.3 Summary of Efficiency Measures
Table 39 provides the details of the efficiency (non-preempted) measures, by climate zone, included in the following
all-electric packages for the single family prototype:
• Efficiency Only
• Efficiency + High Efficiency (Preempted) Equipment
• Efficiency + PV
• Efficiency + PV + Battery
The efficiency measures for the single family mixed fuel packages are presented in Table 40, and Table 41 presents
the efficiency measures for all the ADU packages. In all tables, the lack of an “X” indicates that the prescriptive values
for that climate zone were not changed. See Appendix 7.4 for a list of prescriptive values by climate zone. Efficiency
measures are described in Section 3.3.1.
Table 39: All-Electric Single Family Efficiency Measures, Various Packages
Climate
Zone
3
ACH50
R-10
Slab
Attic Ceiling
Insulation
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance
0.24 U-Factor /
0.50 SHGC
Windows
0.35
W/cfm
Buried
Ducts
Basic Compact
Hot Water
Credit
1 X R-60 X
2 X R-60 X X X
3 R-60 X X X
4 X R-60 X X X
5 X1 R-49 X X X
6 R-60 X X X
7 R-49 X X
8 R-60 X X X
9 R-60 X X X
10 R-60 X X X X
11 X R-60 X X X X
12 X R-60 X X X X
13 X R-60 X X X X
14 X X R-60 X X X X
15 X R-60 X X X X
16 R-60 X X X
1 This measure in Climate Zone 5 was only evaluated for the Efficiency + PV + Battery package.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 75 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 40: Mixed Fuel Single Family Measures, Efficiency Only & Efficiency + PV + Battery
Packages
Climate
Zone
3
ACH50
R-10
Slab
Attic:
EE Only
Attic:
EE + PV
+ Bat
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflec-
tance
0.24 U-
Factor / 0.50
SHGC
Windows
0.30 U-
Factor / 0.50
SHGC
Windows
0.35
W/cfm
Buried
Ducts
CDHW1:
EE Only
CDHW:
EE + PV
+ Bat
1 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
2 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
3 R-60 vs R-30 R-38 X EE Only X X
4 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X
5 R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
6 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
7 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X
8 R-60 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
9 R-49 vs R-30 R-49 X X X X
10 R-60 vs R-38 X X X X X
11 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
12 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
13 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
14 X X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X
15 X R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X X X
16 R-60 vs R-38 R-49 X X X
1 CDHW stands for basic Compact Domestic Hot Water credit
Table 41: Efficiency Measures for All ADU Packages
Climate
Zone
3
ACH50
R-10
Slab Attic1
0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance
0.24 U-Factor /
0.50 SHGC
Windows
Ductless
VCHP2
Basic
Compact Hot
Water Credit3
1 X R-60 vs R-38 X
2 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
3 R-60 vs R-30 X X
4 X R-60 vs R-38 X X
5 R-60 vs R-38 X X
6 R-60 vs R-30 X X
7 R-60 vs R-30 X X
8 R-60 vs R-30 X X
9 R-60 vs R-30 X X
10 R-60 vs R-38 X X X
11 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
12 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
13 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
14 X X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
15 X R-60 vs R-38 X X X
16 R-60 vs R-38 X X
1 This measure was added to all ADU packages except the Mixed Fuel Efficiency + High Efficiency Equipment
package.
2 The ductless VCHP measure was only applied to the all-electric packages; the mixed fuel packages instead applied
0.35 W/cfm fans in Climate Zones 2, 4-6, and 8-15.
3 The compact hot water measure was only applied to the all-electric packages.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 76 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
7.4 Summary of Applicable Prescriptive Base Case Measures
This appendix lists the prescriptive values, by climate zone, of building components relevant to the measures included
in this analysis. Table 42 outlines envelope, PV, and battery values; Table 43 outlines space conditioning values, and
Table 44 outlines domestic water heating (DHW) values.
Table 42: Prescriptive Envelope, PV, and Battery Measures by Climate Zone
CZ Air
Infiltration1 Foundation Wall
Insulation2
Attic
Insulation3
Roof Aged
Solar
Reflectivity
Window
U-Factor /
SHGC
PV4 Battery
1 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none
2 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
3 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none
4 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
5 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none
6 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-15 + R-4 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
7 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-15 + R-4 R-30 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
8 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
9 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
10 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
11 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
12 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
13 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
14 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
15 5 ACH50 Uninsulated slab R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.2 0.30 / 0.23 code min. none
16 5 ACH50 R-7, 16” slab
insulation R-21 + R-5 R-38 + R-19 0.1 0.30 / 0.35 code min. none
1 5 ACH50 is prescriptively required however verification is not required.
2 Cavity wall insulation + continuous rigid insulation.
3 Ceiling/attic insulation R-value. R-38 + R-19 reflect High Performance Attics (HPAs) as defined by Option B in Table 150.1-A.
4 Prescriptive PV capacities (kW-DC) by climate zone are summarized in Table 4.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 77 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Table 43: Prescriptive HVAC Measures by Climate Zone
CZ Heating
Type AC Type Heating
Efficiency1
HVAC
Efficiency
(SEER2/EER2)
HVAC Fan
Efficacy
(W/cfm)
Ducts2
1 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
2 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
3 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried)
4 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
5 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried)
6 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried)
7 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-6, 5%, in attic (not buried)
8 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
9 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
10 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
11 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
12 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
13 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
14 Heat pump Heat pump 7.5 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
15 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
16 Gas Furnace AC 80% 14.3 / 11.7 0.45 R-8, 5%, in attic (not buried)
1 AFUE for gas furnaces, HSPF2 for heat pumps.
2 Duct insulation R-value, duct leakage, duct location.
Table 44: Prescriptive Water Heating Measures by Climate Zone
CZ DHW Type
Location:
Single
Family
Location: ADU
Basic
Compact
Distribution
Credit
1 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside Yes
2 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
3 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
4 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
5 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
6 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
7 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
8 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
9 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
10 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
11 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
12 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
13 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
14 Gas tankless Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
15 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside No
16 Heat pump Garage In conditioned space, ducted to/from outside Yes
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 78 Appendices
California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2024-04-26
Get In Touch
The adoption of reach codes can differentiate jurisdictions as efficiency leaders and help accelerate the
adoption of new equipment, technologies, code compliance, and energy savings strategies.
As part of the Statewide Codes & Standards Program, the Reach Codes Subprogram is a resource available to
any local jurisdiction located throughout the state of California.
Our experts develop robust toolkits as well as provide specific technical assistance to local jurisdictions (cities
and counties) considering adopting energy reach codes. These include cost-effectiveness research and
analysis, model ordinance language and other code development and implementation tools, and specific
technical assistance throughout the code adoption process.
If you are interested in finding out more about local energy reach codes, the Reach Codes Team stands ready
to assist jurisdictions at any stage of a reach code project.
Visit LocalEnergyCodes.com to
access our resources and sign up
for newsletters.
Contact
info@localenergycodes.com for
no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors.
Follow us on LinkedIn
Prepared by:
Frontier Energy, Inc
Misti Bruceri & Associates, LLC
Prepared for:
Kelly Cunningham, Codes and Standards Program, Pacific Gas and Electric
Last modified: 2023/06/20
Revision: 1.1
2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study:
Multifamily New Construction
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
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.
Copyright 2022, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. All rights
reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and
distributed without modification.
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.
Acronym List
2023 PV$ – Present value costs in 2023
ACH50 – Air Changes per Hour at 50 pascals pressure differential
ACM – Alternative Calculation Method
ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFUE – Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C – Lifecycle Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BEopt – Building Energy Optimization Tool
BSC – Building Standards Commission
CA IOUs – California Investor-Owned Utilities
CASE – Codes and Standards Enhancement
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
CO2 – Carbon Dioxide
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC – California Public Utilities Commission
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
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
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
LCC – Lifecycle Cost
LLAHU – Low Leakage Air Handler Unit
VLLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space
MF – Multifamily
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
POU – Publicly-Owned-Utilities
PV – Photovoltaic
SCE – Southern California Edison
SDG&E – San Diego Gas and Electric
SEER – Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SF – Single Family
SMUD – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SoCalGas – Southern California Gas Company
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
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
2/28/2022 Original Release N/A
6/20/2023 Minor revisions to content; no change to results 2, 3, 32, 33
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 4
2 Methodology and Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 Modeling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Cost-Effectiveness ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.3 Utility Rates ................................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 2022 T24 Compliance Metrics .............................................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 8
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs ............................................................................................................ 9
3.2 Measure Definitions and Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 11
3.2.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries ............................................................................................................................. 11
3.2.2 All-Electric ................................................................................................................................................................... 15
3.3 Measure Packages ............................................................................................................................................................. 18
4 Results ...................................................................................................................................................................... 20
4.1 All-Electric Prescriptive Code .............................................................................................................................................. 20
4.2 All-Electric Plus PV ............................................................................................................................................................. 23
4.3 Mixed Fuel Efficiency .......................................................................................................................................................... 25
4.4 Mixed Fuel Plus PV (Plus Battery for the 3-Story Prototype) .............................................................................................. 26
4.5 CARE Rate Comparison ..................................................................................................................................................... 29
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Reductions .............................................................................................................................................. 30
5 Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 32
6 References ............................................................................................................................................................... 34
7 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................. 36
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones ......................................................................................................................................... 36
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules ......................................................................................................................................................... 37
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric .................................................................................................................................................. 38
7.2.2 Southern California Edison ......................................................................................................................................... 43
7.2.3 Southern California Gas .............................................................................................................................................. 46
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric............................................................................................................................................ 48
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities .............................................................................................................................................. 53
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only) ................................................................................................. 55
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions ...................................................................................................................................... 57
7.3 Cost Details......................................................................................................................................................................... 58
7.4 PG&E Gas Infrastructure Cost Memo ................................................................................................................................. 59
7.5 Central Heat Pump Water Heater Comparison ................................................................................................................... 62
7.6 Summary of Measures by Package .................................................................................................................................... 63
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1. Summary of Efficiency TDV Compliance Margins and Cost-Effectiveness ....................................................................... 3
Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 8
Table 2. Prototype Characteristics ........................................................................................................................................................ 9
Table 3. Base Case Characteristics of the Prototypes ........................................................................................................................ 10
Table 4. Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC) ................................................................................................................................ 10
Table 5. Incremental Cost Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................. 13
Table 6. Heat Pump Water Heater Incremental System Costs (Present Value (2023$)) .................................................................... 16
Table 7. Heat Pump Space Heater Costs per Dwelling Unit (Present Value (2023$) ......................................................................... 16
Table 8. Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures ............................................................................... 17
Table 9. IOU Natural Gas Infrastructure Cost Savings for All-Electric Building................................................................................... 18
Table 10. Multifamily IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs ...................................................................................................... 18
Table 11. Multifamily CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs ................................................................................................... 18
Table 12. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code ......................................................... 21
Table 13. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code ......................................................... 22
Table 14. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric 100% PV ...................................................................... 23
Table 15. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric 100% PV ...................................................................... 24
Table 16. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency ..................................................................... 25
Table 17. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency ..................................................................... 26
Table 18. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ............................................. 27
Table 19. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV ............................................................ 28
Table 20. On-Bill IOU Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with CARE Tariffs, Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code 29
Table 21. On-Bill IOU Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with CARE Tariffs, Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Packages ........... 29
Table 22. Summary of Efficiency TDV Compliance Margins and Cost-Effectiveness ......................................................................... 33
Table 23. PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone .......................................................................................................................... 38
Table 24. PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) ..................................................................................................................................... 38
Table 25. PG&E Monthly CARE (GL-1) Gas Rate ($/therm)............................................................................................................... 39
Table 26: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 43
Table 27. SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 46
Table 28. SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .............................................................................................................................. 46
Table 29. SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ....................................................................................................................... 48
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Table 30. SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .................................................................................................................................. 48
Table 31. CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) ..................................................................................................................................... 53
Table 32: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 57
Table 33. Heat Pump Water Heater First Costs per Building (Present Value (2023$)) ....................................................................... 58
Table 34. Heat Pump Space Heater First Costs per Dwelling Unit (Present Value (2023$) ............................................................... 58
Table 35. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Prescriptive Code with R-134a Heat Pump Water Heater .................................... 62
Table 36. Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Measures .......................................................................................................................... 63
Table 37. Upgrade Package PV Capacities (kW-DC) ......................................................................................................................... 64
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 3-Story greenhouse gas reductions (metric tons) per dwelling unit ..................................................................................... 31
Figure 2. 5-Story greenhouse gas savings (metric tons) per dwelling unit .......................................................................................... 31
Figure 3. Map of California climate zones. .......................................................................................................................................... 36
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Executive Summary 1
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Executive Summary
The California Codes and Standards (C&S) Reach Codes program provides technical support to local governments
considering adopting a local ordinance (reach code) intended to support meeting local and/or statewide energy
efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. The program facilitates adoption and implementation of the
code when requested by local jurisdictions by providing resources such as cost-effectiveness studies, model language,
sample findings, and other supporting documentation.
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022
Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6 or Energy Code), effective January 1, 2023, for newly
constructed multifamily buildings. The analysis considers low-rise and mid-rise multifamily building types and evaluates
mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs) Packages include a code
compliant electrification package and a mixed fuel efficiency package, as well as the addition of above-code on-site
solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity and battery energy storage. The 2022 Energy Code established electric heat pumps
as the prescriptive baseline for space heating in most climate zones. As a result, this analysis primarily focuses on the
electrification of central water heating. Space heating electrification was also evaluated where the prescriptive heat
pump baseline didn’t apply: In Climate Zone 16 for multifamily buildings three habitable stories or fewer, and Climate
Zones 1 and 16 for multifamily buildings greater than three habitable stories.
This analysis used two different metrics to assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both
methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each
energy efficiency measure over a 30-year analysis period. On-Bill cost-effectiveness is a customer-based lifecycle cost
(LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using
today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) is the California Energy Commission’s
LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the long-term projected cost of energy including costs for providing
energy during peak periods of demand, carbon emissions, grid transmission and distribution impacts. This is the
methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24, Part
6.
Two multifamily prototypes were evaluated in this study. A 3-story loaded corridor and a 5-story mixed use prototype,
which combined are estimated to represent 91 percent of new multifamily construction in California.
The following summarizes key results from the study:
• The Reach Codes Team found all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective based on the
California Energy Commission’s Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) metric in all cases. In many cases all-
electric prescriptive code construction results in an increase in utility costs and is not cost-effective On-Bill.
Some exceptions include the SMUD and CPAU territories where lower electricity rates relative to gas rates
result in lower overall utility bills.
• All-electric packages have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel packages in all cases, due to the clean power
sources currently available from California’s power providers.
• The 2022 Energy Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump space heating baseline in
most climate zones encourages all-electric construction. While the code does not include an electric baseline
for water heating, the penalty for central electric water heating observed in the performance approach in past
code cycles has been removed and a credit is provided for well-designed central heat pump water heaters in
most cases.
• Electrification combined with increased PV capacity results in utility cost savings and was found to be On-Bill
cost-effective in all cases.
• The results in this study are based on today’s net energy metering (NEM 2.0) rules and do not account for
recently approved changes to the NEM tariff (referred to as the net billing tariff). The net billing tariff decreases
the value of PV to the consumer as compared to NEM 2.0. As a result, the cost-effectiveness of the packages
that include above-code PV capacity is expected to be less under the net billing tariff. Conversely, the net
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Executive Summary 2
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
billing tariff is expected to increase On-Bill cost-effectiveness of the all-electric prescriptive code scenario. An
all-electric home has better on-site utilization of generated electricity from PV than a mixed fuel home with a
similar sized PV system, and as a result exports less electricity to the grid. Since the net-billing tariff values
exports less than under NEM 2.0, the relative impact on annual utility costs to the mixed fuel baseline is
greater.
• This analysis does justify a modest reach based on either efficiency TDV or source energy for all-electric
buildings. However, this may be challenging for some projects given the recent changes to which the industry
must adapt, including the efficiency updates and multifamily restructuring in the 2022 Title 24, Part 6 code.
While project compliance margins using a CO2 refrigerant heat pump water heating system are high, the
Reach Code Team found lower compliance margins using other heat pump water heater system designs.
Focusing on supporting projects to electrify water heating is expected to support the market shift towards more
central heat pump water heaters.
• For jurisdictions interested in a reach code that allows for mixed fuel buildings, a mixed fuel efficiency and PV
package (and battery for the 3-story prototype) was found to be cost-effective based on TDV in all cases and
cost-effective On-Bill in most climate zones. This path, referred to as “Electric-Preferred”, allows for mixed fuel
buildings but requires a higher building performance than for all-electric buildings. The efficiency measures
evaluated in this study did not provide significant compliance benefit. As a result, the Reach Codes Team
recommends establishing a compliance margin target based on source energy or total TDV. This would allow
for PV and battery above minimum code requirements to be used to meet the target.
• Jurisdictions interested in increasing affordable multifamily housing should know that applying the CARE rates
has the overall impact of increasing utility cost savings for an all-electric building in most climate zones
compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness.
Table ES-1 summarizes results for each prototype and depicts the efficiency TDV compliance margins achieved for
each climate zone and package. All results presented in the table have a positive compliance margin (greater than zero
percent). Cells highlighted in green depict cases with a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using
both On-Bill and TDV approaches. Cells highlighted in yellow depict cases with a positive compliance margin and cost-
effective results using either the On-Bill or TDV approach. Cells not highlighted depict cases with a positive
compliance margin but that were not cost-effective using either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Executive Summary 3
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table ES-1. Summary of Efficiency TDV Compliance Margins and Cost-Effectiveness
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
3-Story 5-Story
All-Electric
Prescriptive
Code
All-
Electric
+ PV
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
All-Electric
Prescriptive
Code
All-
Electric
+ PV
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
+ PV
CZ01 PGE 26% 26% 1% 1% 14% 14% 0% 0%
CZ02 PGE 20% 20% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ03 PGE 21% 21% 1% 1% 11% 11% 0% 0%
CZ04 PGE 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ04 CPAU 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ05 PGE 23% 23% 1% 1% 12% 12% 0% 0%
CZ05 PGE/SCG 23% 23% 1% 1% 12% 12% 0% 0%
CZ06 SCE/SCG 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 0% 0%
CZ07 SDGE 20% 20% 0% 0% 11% 11% 0% 0%
CZ08 SCE/SCG 13% 13% 1% 1% 8% 8% 1% 1%
CZ09 SCE 13% 13% 1% 1% 7% 7% 1% 1%
CZ10 SCE/SCG 14% 14% 3% 3% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ10 SDGE 14% 14% 3% 3% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ11 PGE 14% 14% 3% 3% 8% 8% 2% 2%
CZ12 PGE 17% 17% 2% 2% 9% 9% 2% 2%
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 17% 17% 2% 2% 9% 9% 2% 2%
CZ13 PGE 13% 13% 4% 4% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ14 SCE/SCG 13% 13% 3% 3% 6% 6% 2% 2%
CZ14 SDGE 13% 13% 3% 3% 6% 6% 2% 2%
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3%
CZ16 PG&E 24% 24% 5% 5% 9% 9% 2% 2%
Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or
may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the
specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. Reach codes that amend Part 6
of the CA Building Code and require energy performance (including PV and storage) beyond state code minimums
must demonstrate that the proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission prior
to filing with the BSC.
Model ordinance language and other resources are posted on the C&S Reach Codes Program website at
LocalEnergyCodes.com. Local jurisdictions that are considering adopting an ordinance may contact the program for
further technical support at info@localenergycodes.com.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Introduction 4
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
1 Introduction
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022
Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2023, for newly constructed multifamily buildings. This report
was developed in coordination with the California Statewide Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs) Codes and Standards
Program, key consultants, and engaged cities—collectively known as the Reach Codes Team. The CA IOU Codes and
Standards Program is comprised of IOUs representatives from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California
Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) and two Publicly-Owned-Utilities (POUs) – Sacramento
Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU),
The analysis considers low-rise and mid-rise multifamily building types and evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric
package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs)1 Packages include combinations of efficiency measures,
on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Energy Code) (California Energy Commission,
2022a) 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 (California Energy Commission, 2022a)). 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.
The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally
regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, including heating, cooling, and water heating
equipment (E-CFR, 2020). Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting 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 heating, cooling, and water heating equipment. High efficiency appliances are often the easiest
and most affordable measures to increase energy performance. While federal preemption limits reach code mandatory
requirements for covered appliances, in practice, builders may install any package of compliant measures to achieve
the performance requirements.
1 See Appendix 7.1 Map of California Climate Zones for a graphical depiction of climate zone locations.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 5
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
2 Methodology and Assumptions
2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes
This section describes the approach to calculating cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate
selection.
2.1.1 Modeling
The Reach Codes Team performed energy simulations using software approved for 2022 Title 24 Code compliance
analysis, CBECC 2022.2.0.
Using the 2022 baseline as the starting point, prospective energy efficiency measures were identified and modeled to
determine the projected site energy (therm and kWh) and compliance impacts. Annual utility costs were calculated
using hourly data output from CBECC, and electricity and natural gas tariffs for each of the investor-owned utilities
(IOUs).
This analysis focused on residential apartments only (a prior study and report analyzed the cost-effectiveness of above
code packages for nonresidential buildings (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2022b). The Statewide Reach Codes
Team selected measures for evaluation based on the single family 2022 reach code analysis (Statewide Reach Codes
Team, 2022a) and the multifamily 2019 reach code analysis [ (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2020), (Statewide
Reach Codes Team, 2021)] as well as experience with and outreach to architects, builders, and engineers.
2.1.2 Cost-Effectiveness
2.1.2.1 Benefits
This analysis used two different metrics to assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both
methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated
with each energy efficiency measure. 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): This customer-based lifecycle cost (LCC) approach values energy based upon
estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using the latest electricity and natural gas utility tariffs
available at the time of writing this report. Total savings are estimated over a 30-year duration and include discounting
of future utility costs and energy cost inflation.
Time Dependent Valuation (TDV): This reflects the Energy Commission’s current LCC methodology, which is
intended to capture the total value or cost of energy use over 30 years. This method accounts for long-term projected
costs, such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand, costs for carbon emissions, and grid
transmission and distribution impacts. This metric values energy use differently depending on the fuel source
(natural 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 due to the less inefficient energy generation
sources providing peak electricity (Horii, Cutter, Kapur, Arent, & Conotyannis, 2014). This is the methodology used by
the Energy Commission in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in the 2022 Energy Code.
2.1.2.2 Costs
The Reach Codes Team assessed the incremental costs of the measures and packages over a 30-year lifecycle.
Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacements, and maintenance costs of the proposed
measure relative to the 2022 Energy Code minimum requirements or standard industry practices. Present value of
replacement cost is included for measures with lifetimes less than the evaluation period.
2.1.2.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics.
NPV: The lifetime NPV is reported as a cost-effectiveness metric, Equation 1 demonstrates how this is calculated. If
the NPV of a measure or package is positive, it is considered cost-effective. A negative values represent net costs.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 6
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
B/C Ratio: This is the ratio of the present value (PV) of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 30 years (PV
benefits divided by PV costs). The criteria benchmark for cost-effectiveness is a B/C ratio greater than one. 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 2.
Equation 1 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁=𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙−𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙
Equation 2 𝐵𝐵𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙−𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜−𝐶𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜=𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙
Improving the efficiency of a project often requires an initial incremental investment. In most cases the benefit is
represented by annual On-Bill utility or TDV savings, and the cost is represented by incremental first cost and
replacement costs. Some packages result in initial construction cost savings (negative incremental cost), and either
energy cost savings (positive benefits), or increased energy costs (negative benefits). In cases where both construction
costs and energy-related savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the
increased energy costs are the ‘cost.’ In cases where a measure or package is cost-effective immediately (i.e., upfront
construction cost savings and lifetime energy cost savings), B/C ratio cost-effectiveness is represented by “>1”.
The lifetime costs or benefits are calculated according to Equation 3.
Equation 3 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙=�(𝐴𝐴𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝐴𝐴𝑅𝑅𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙)𝑡𝑡(1 +𝑜𝑜)𝑡𝑡𝑛𝑛
𝑡𝑡=0
Where:
• n = analysis term in years
• r = discount rate
The following summarizes the assumptions applied in this analysis to both methodologies.
• Analysis term of 30 years
• Real discount rate of three percent
TDV is a normalized monetary format and there is a unique procedure for calculating the present value benefit of TDV
energy savings. The present value of the energy cost savings in dollars is calculated by multiplying the TDV savings
(reported by the CBECC simulation software) by a NPV factor developed by the Energy Commission (see E3’s 2022
TDV report for details (Energy + Environmental Economics, 2020)). The 30-year residential NPV factor is $0.173/kTDV
for the 2022 Energy Code.
Equation 4 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙= 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑁𝑁 𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑐𝑐𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠𝑙𝑙𝑏𝑏𝑒𝑒𝑐𝑐 ∗ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑜𝑜𝑅𝑅𝑐𝑐𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜
2.1.3 Utility Rates
In coordination with the CA IOU rate team (comprised of representatives from PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, SMUD, and
CPAU), the Reach Codes Team determined appropriate utility rates for each climate zone in order to calculate utility
costs and determine On-Bill cost-effectiveness for the proposed measures and packages. The utility tariffs,
summarized in Table 1, were determined based on the most prevalent active rate in each territory. Utility rates were
applied to each climate zone based on the predominant IOU serving the population of each zone, with a few climate
zones evaluated multiple times under different utility scenarios. Climate Zones 10 and 14 were evaluated with both
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 7
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
SCE for electricity and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) for gas and SDG&E tariffs for both electricity
and gas since each utility has customers within these climate zones. Climate Zone 5 is evaluated under both PG&E
and SoCalGas natural gas rates. Two POU or municipal utility rates were also evaluated: SMUD in Climate Zone 12
and CPAU in Climate Zone 4.
For the IOUs in-unit gas was evaluated under the G1 rate and central gas for water heating was evaluated under the
relevant master metered gas tariff, GM. Electricity use for central water heating was evaluated using the residential
TOU rates. The water heating utility bill was calculated separately from the in-unit electricity bill. Photovoltaic (PV) and
battery energy storage benefits were applied according to virtual net energy metering (VNEM) rules.2 PV was first
assigned to the central water heating meter to offset 100 percent of the electricity use. The remaining PV and all of the
battery impacts were then split evenly across the apartment meters. The same approach was applied for CPAU and
SMUD using the rates described in Table 1.
The multifamily prototypes used in this analysis include common area spaces that serve the residents (lobby, leasing
office, corridors, etc.). Most of the energy use for these spaces could not be separated from that for the dwelling units
within the CBECC model. As a result, average per dwelling unit hourly energy use was calculated to include both the
dwelling unit and common space energy use.
First-year utility costs were calculated using hourly electricity and natural gas output from CBECC and applying the
utility tariffs summarized in Table 1. Annual costs were also estimated for customers eligible for the CARE tariff
discounts on both electricity and natural gas bills. The CARE tariff was only applied to the in-unit apartment meters.
Appendix 7.2 Utility Rate Schedules includes details of each utility tariff.
For cases with PV generation, the approved NEM 2.0 tariffs were applied along with minimum daily use billing and
mandatory non-bypassable charges. In December the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a decision
adopting a net billing tariff (NBT) as a successor to NEM 2.0 that will go into effect April of 2023 3 Given the recent
timing of this decision there was not time to incorporate these changes into this analysis. The Reach Codes Team
conducted a limited sensitivity analysis on the impacts of NBT relative to NEM 2.0 on utility bills. It was found that utility
costs will increase for all homes with PV systems; however, the increase was less for an all-electric building compared
to a mixed fuel building with a similarly sized PV system. As a result of better onsite utilization of PV generation and
thus fewer exports to the grid, the Reach Codes Team expects the cost-effectiveness for the electrification scenarios
for the all-electric home evaluated in this report to improve under NBT. Conversely, cost-effectiveness of increasing PV
capacity is expected to be reduced under NBT.
2 PG&E: https://www.pge.com/tariffs/assets/pdf/tariffbook/ELEC_SCHEDS_NEM2V.pdf
SDG&E: https://tariff.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/tariffs/ELEC_ELEC-SCHEDS_NEM-V-ST.pdf
SCE:
https://edisonintl.sharepoint.com/teams/Public/TM2/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?ga=1&id=%2Fteams
%2FPublic%2FTM2%2FShared%20Documents%2FPublic%2FRegulatory%2FTariff%2DSCE%20Tariff%20Books%2F
Electric%2FSchedules%2FOther%20Rates%2FELECTRIC%5FSCHEDULES%5FNEM%2DV%2DST%2Epdf&parent=
%2Fteams%2FPublic%2FTM2%2FShared%20Documents%2FPublic%2FRegulatory%2FTariff%2DSCE%20Tariff%20
Books%2FElectric%2FSchedules%2FOther%20Rates
3 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/nemrevisit
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Methodology and Assumptions 8
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Natural Gas
IOUs
1-5,11-13,16 PG&E / PG&E E-TOU Option C G1 (in-unit) & GM
(central water heating)1
5 PG&E / SoCalGas E-TOU Option C GM
6, 8-10, 14, 15 SCE / SoCalGas TOU-D Option 4-9 GM
7, 10, 14 SDG&E / SDG&E TOU-DR-1 GM
POUs
4 CPAU / CPAU E-1 (in-unit) & E-2 (central
water heating) G-2
12 SMUD / PG&E R-TOD, RT02 (in-unit) &
RSMM (central water heating) GM
1G1 rate applied to gas use within the apartment units, which only occurs in Climate Zones 1 and 16, see
Section 3 for details. GM rate applied to gas use for central water heating.
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time according to the assumptions from the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings
on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of
the 30-year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. See
Appendix 7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions for details.
2.2 2022 T24 Compliance Metrics
2022 Title 24, Part 6 Section 170.1 defines the energy budget of the building based on source energy and TDV energy
for space-conditioning, indoor lighting, mechanical ventilation, PV and battery storage systems, service water heating
and covered process loads. In 2022, the Energy Commission introduced the new compliance metric of source energy,
which differs by fuel source (as does TDV) and is a reasonable proxy for greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, for
multifamily buildings four habitable stories and higher prescriptive requirements for PV and battery systems were also
introduced. This led to the need to differentiate an efficiency compliance metric, which ensured that the building met
minimum efficiency standards, and a total energy compliance metric which incorporated the PV and battery standards.
In order to be compliant with the building code a building needs to comply with all three compliance metrics described
below:
• Efficiency TDV. Efficiency TDV accounts for all regulated end-uses but does not include the impacts of PV
and battery storage.
• Total TDV. Total TDV includes regulated end-uses and accounts for PV and battery storage contributions.
• Source Energy. Source energy is based on fuel used for power generation and distribution.
2.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis reports the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates based on assumptions within CBECC. There are
8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time dependent energy use and carbon based on source emissions, including
renewable portfolio standard projections. There are two series of multipliers—one for Northern California climate
zones, and another for Southern California climate zones.4 GHG emissions are reported as average annual metric tons
of CO2 equivalent over the 30-year building lifetime.
4 CBECC multipliers are the same for CZs 1-5 and 11-13 (Northern California), while there is another set of multipliers for CZs 6-10
and 14-16 (Southern California).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 9
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
This section describes the prototypes, measures, costs, and the scope of analysis drawing from previous reach code
research where appropriate.
3.1 Prototype Characteristics
The Energy Commission defines building prototypes which it uses to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of proposed
changes to Title 24 requirements. There are 4 multifamily prototypes used in code development: a 2-story garden style,
a 3-story loaded corridor, a 5-story mixed use and a 10-story mixed use. Based on work completed for the 2022 Title
24 code development, the 3-story and the 5-story represent 33 percent and 58 percent, respectively, of new multifamily
construction in California. As a result, these two prototypes are used in this analysis. Additional details on all four
prototypes can be found in the Multifamily Prototypes Report (TRC, 2019).
Table 2 describes the basic characteristics of each prototype.
Table 2. Prototype Characteristics
Characteristic 3-Story Loaded
Corridor 5-Story Mixed Use
Conditioned Floor Area 39,372 ft2
113,100 ft2 total:
33,660 ft2 nonresidential
79,440 ft2 residential
Num. of Stories 3
6 Stories total:
1 story parking garage (below grade)
1 story of nonresidential space
4 stories of residential space
Num. of Bedrooms
(6) Studio
(12) 1-bed
(12) 2-bed
(6) 3-bed
(8) studios
(40) 1-bed units
(32) 2-bed units
(8) 3-bed units
Window-to-Wall Area Ratio 25% 25%
Wall Type Wood framed Wood frame over a first-floor concrete
podium
Roof Type Flat roof Flat roof
Foundation Slab-on-grade Concrete podium with underground
parking
The methodology used in the analyses for each of the prototypical building types begins with a design that precisely
meets the minimum 2022 prescriptive requirements.5 Table 170.2-A and 170.2-B in the 2022 Standards (California
Energy Commission, 2022a) list the prescriptive measures that determine the baseline design in each climate zone.
Other features are designed to meet, but not exceed, the minimum requirements and are consistent with the Standard
Design in the ACM Reference Manual (California Energy Commission, 2022c). The analysis also assumed electric
resistance cooking in the apartment units to reflect current market data. The 3-story building prototype includes a
central laundry facility, and the 5-story assumes laundry in the units. Laundry equipment was assumed to be electric in
all cases; electrification of laundry equipment was not addressed in this study. The nonresidential 2022 reach code
analysis (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2022b) did consider electrification of central laundry facilities within the small
hotel prototype.
Table 3 describes characteristics as they were applied to the base case energy model in this analysis. In a shift from
the 2019 Standards, the 2022 Standards define a prescriptive fuel source for space heating establishing an electric
5Due to planned software updates to how the prescriptive requirements are applied in the Standard Design and challenges for
certain space types with sizing heating and cooling equipment the same in the Proposed Design as in the Standards, the results
compliance margins for the base case models were not exactly zero percent..
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 10
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
heat pump baseline in all climate zones except 16 for multifamily buildings three habitable stories and fewer and 1 and
16 for multifamily buildings four habitable stories and greater.
Table 3. Base Case Characteristics of the Prototypes
Characteristic 3-Story Loaded Corridor 5-story Mixed Use
Space
Heating/Cooling1
Individual split systems with ducts in
conditioned space
CZ 1-15: Heat pump
CZ 16: Natural gas furnace with air
conditioner
Individual split systems with ducts in
conditioned space
CZ2-15: Heat pump
CZ1, 16: Dual-fuel heat pump with
natural gas backup
Ventilation Individual balanced fans, continuously
operating
Individual balanced fans, continuously
operating
Water Heater1
Natural gas central boiler with solar
thermal sized to meet the prescriptive
requirements by climate zone.
Natural gas central boiler with solar
thermal sized to meet the prescriptive
requirements by climate zone.
Hot Water
Distribution Central recirculation Central recirculation
Cooking Electric Electric
Clothes Drying Electric (central) Electric (in-unit)
PV System
Sized according to the prescriptive
requirements in Equation 170.2-C of the
2022 Title 24 Standards. Size differs by
climate zone ranging from 1.60 kW to
2.90 kW per dwelling unit, see Table 4.
Sized according to the prescriptive
requirements in Equation 170.2-D of the
2022 Title 24 Standards. Size differs by
climate zone ranging from 2.26 kW to
3.34 kW per dwelling unit, see Table 4.
Battery System None None
1 Equipment efficiencies are equal to minimum federal appliance efficiency standards.
Table 4 summarizes the PV capacities for the base case packages.
Table 4. Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC)
Climate
Zone
Base Package
3-Story 5-Story
CZ01 2.00 2.26
CZ02 1.79 2.68
CZ03 1.70 2.26
CZ04 1.75 2.68
CZ05 1.60 2.26
CZ06 1.77 2.68
CZ07 1.67 2.68
CZ08 1.91 2.68
CZ09 1.92 2.68
CZ10 1.98 2.68
CZ11 2.21 2.68
CZ12 1.96 2.68
CZ13 2.33 2.68
CZ14 1.94 2.68
CZ15 2.90 3.34
CZ16 1.76 2.26
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 11
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
3.2 Measure Definitions and Costs
Measures evaluated in this study fall into two categories: those associated with general efficiency, onsite generation,
and demand flexibility and those associated with building electrification. The Reach Codes Team selected measures
based on cost-effectiveness as well as decades of experience with residential architects, builders, and engineers along
with general knowledge of the relative consumer acceptance of many measures. This analysis focused on measures
that impacted the residential dwelling units only.
The following sections describe the details and incremental cost assumptions for each of the measures. Incremental
costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measures relative to
the base case. Replacement costs are applied for roofs, mechanical equipment, PV inverters and battery systems over
the 30-year evaluation period. Incremental maintenance costs are estimated for PV systems, but not any other
measures. Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. All costs are provided as present value in 2023
(2023 PV$).
The Reach Codes Team obtained measure costs from distributors, contractors, literature review, and online sources
such as Home Depot and RS Means. Contractor markups are incorporated. These are the Reach Codes Team best
estimate of average costs statewide. Regional variation in costs is not accounted for, although it's recognized that local
costs may differ. Cost increases due to recent high inflation rates and supply chain delays are not included.
3.2.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries
The following are descriptions of each of the efficiency, PV, and battery measures evaluated under this analysis and
applied in at least one of the packages presented in this report. Table 5 summarizes the incremental cost assumptions
for each of these measures. These measures were evaluated for all climate zones but were ultimately adopted in a
subset of climate zones based on cost-effectiveness outcomes.
Lower U-Factor Fenestration: Reduce window U-factor to 0.24. The prescriptive U-factor is 0.30 in all climate zones
except Climate Zones 7 and 8 where it is 0.34. This measure is included in Climate Zone 16 only.
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 0.70. Low-sloped roofs were assumed in all cases. The 2022 Title 24 specifies a
prescriptive ASR of 0.63 for Climate Zones 9 through 11 and 13 through 15. This measure is included in Climate Zones
9 through 15.
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. 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 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.3 (California Energy Commission,
2022b). This measure is included in Climate Zones 1 and 10 through 16.
Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space: Seal the ducts to achieve a measured leakage no greater than
25 cfm leakage to outside. This may be verified using a guarded blower door test to isolate leakage to outside.
Alternatively, this can also be satisfied by demonstrating that total leakage is not greater than 25 cfm. Ducts are
assumed to already be located in conditioned space in the baseline. This measure is included in all climate zones.
Solar PV: Installation of on-site PV is required in the 2022 residential code unless an exception is met. 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.6 In all cases, PV is evaluated in CBECC according to the California Flexible
Installation (CFI) assumptions. This measure is included in all climate zones.
Battery Energy Storage: 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. This control option assumes the battery system will
6 NEM rules apply to the IOU territories only.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 12
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
charge or discharge based on a utility tariff time-of use signal. To qualify, the battery system must meet the
requirements outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices JA12.2.3.2 (California Energy Commission, 2022b). This
measure is included in all climate zones but only for the 3-story prototype. A 100kWh battery was applied following the
battery sizing requirements for multifamily buildings more than three habitable stories per Equation 170.2-E of the 2022
Energy Code.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 13
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 5. Incremental Cost Assumptions
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost per
Dwelling Unit
(2023 PV$)
Source & Notes 3-Story 5-Story
Non-Preempted Measures
Window U-factor 0.24 vs 0.30 $536 $489 $4.23/ft2 of window area based on analysis conducted for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 cycles
(Statewide CASE Team, 2018).
Low-Sloped Cool
Roof Aged Solar
Reflectance
0.63 vs 0.10 $314 $222
$0.525/ft2 of roof area first incremental cost based on the 2022 Residential Additions and
Alterations CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).Total costs assume present value
of replacement at year 15.
0.70 vs 0.63 $24 $17
$0.04/ft2 of roof area first incremental cost based on the 2022 Nonresidential High
Performance Envelope CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020a). Costs assume a
blended average across roofing product types. Total costs assume present value of
replacement at year 15.
Low Pressure
Drop Ducts
0.35 vs 0.45
W/cfm $44 $44
Costs assume half-hour labor per multifamily dwelling unit. Labor rate of $88 per hour is from
2022 RS Means for sheet metal workers and includes a weighted average City Cost Index
for labor for California.
Verified Low
Leakage Ducts in
Conditioned
Space
≤25 cfm leakage
to outside $132 $132
Costs assume half-hour labor per multifamily dwelling unit and a $100 HERS Rater fee.
Labor rate of $88 per hour is from 2022 RS Means for sheet metal workers and includes a
weighted average City Cost Index for labor for California. Ducts are already assumed to be
located in conditioned space and the incremental costs reflect additional sealing and testing
only.
PV + Battery
PV System
First Cost $1.47/W $1.47/W
First costs from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2022 costs (Barbose, Darghouth, O'Shaughnessy,
& Forrester, 2022) and represent median costs in California in 2021 of $2.10/WDC for
nonresidential greater than 100kWDC systems. The first cost was reduced by the solar
energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC) of 30%.1 Costs are presented as the average of 2023,
2024, and 2025.
Inverter replacement cost of $0.14/WDC present value includes replacements at year 11 at
$0.15/WDC (nominal) and at year 21 at $0.12/WDC (nominal) per the 2019 PV CASE Report
(California Energy Commission, 2017).
System maintenance costs of $0.31/WDC present value assume $0.02/WDC (nominal)
annually per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017).
Inverter
replacement $0.14/W $0.14/W
Maintenance $0.31/W $0.31/W
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Multifamily New Construction
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs 14
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost per
Dwelling Unit
(2023 PV$)
Source & Notes 3-Story 5-Story
Battery
First cost $700/kWh n/a
First cost of $1,000/kWh from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2022 costs (Barbose, Darghouth,
O'Shaughnessy, & Forrester, 2022) for residential systems > 30kWh. The report derived
costs from California’s Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) residential participant cost
data. First cost is reduced by the solar energy ITC of 30%.1 No SGIP incentives are included.
Costs are assumed to remain consistent at $1,000/kWh through 2025 and then reduced by
7% annually based on SDG&E’s Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study (E-Source
companies, 2020) over a 10 year period. Replacement is assumed at years 10 and 20. At
year 10 the replacement cost is based on the average of expected 2033, 2034, and 2035
costs after applying the ITC for a future value cost of $435. Replacement cost at year 20 is
based on a future value cost of $484 and does not include any ITC reduction.
Replacement
cost $564/kWh n/a
1As part of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 the Section 25D Investment Tax Credit was extended and raised to 30% through 2032 with a step-down to
26% in 2033 and 22% in 2034. It’s assumed that the ITC is not renewed and is 0% starting in 2035. https://www.irs.gov/pub/taxpros/fs-2022-40.pdf.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 15 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
3.2.2 All-Electric
This analysis compared a code compliant mixed fuel prototype, which uses natural gas for water heating only in most
climate zones, with a code compliant all-electric prototype. In these cases, the relative costs between natural gas and
electric appliances and natural gas infrastructure and the associated infrastructure costs for not providing natural gas
to the building were included.
To estimate costs the Reach Codes Team leveraged costs from the 2022 Multifamily All-Electric CASE Report
(Statewide CASE Team, 2020c) and the 2019 reach code multifamily cost-effectiveness studies ( (Statewide Reach
Codes Team, 2020), (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021)), and online equipment research. Present value
replacement costs are included in the total lifetime incremental costs.
3.2.2.1 Water Heating
Federal regulations establish minimum efficiency requirements for heat pump water heaters with rated storage volume
less than 120 gallons. While some heat pump water heaters falling into this regulated category can be used in a central
water heater design, they are not required and therefore this measure does not trigger federal preemption and heat
pump equipment of any efficiency level may be used for this analysis to justify the basis of a reach code.
For the central heat pump water heating system in the 3-story prototype the system design was based on the 2022 All-
Electric Multifamily CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020c) and used CO2 refrigerant based heat pump water
heaters (four Sanden GS3-45HPA-US units), 525 gallons of storage, and a 250 gallon electric resistance swing tank.
The 2022 CASE work based the 5-story system design on Colmac R-134a refrigerant heat pump water heaters. While
this is an acceptable design, R-134a or R-410a refrigerant heat pump water heaters were found to be less cost-
effective for the prototypes evaluated in this analysis due to higher incremental costs and lower overall performance
relative to CO2 refrigerant products. As such, the Reach Codes Team evaluated a CO2 refrigerant system for the 5-
story prototype for this analysis. As part of the 2025 Energy Code update cycle, designs for both multifamily prototypes
are being reexamined using CO2 refrigerant heat pump water heaters. While full design and cost information was not
yet available for this analysis, preliminary design data was used to inform sizing of a Sanden system for this prototype.
The system used 10 heat pump water heaters (Sanden GS3-45HPA-US units), 800 gallons of storage, and a 200
gallon electric resistance swing tank.
Table 6 reports costs for the central heat pump water heating systems relative to a gas boiler system with solar thermal
that meets the prescriptive requirements of 20% solar fraction in Climate Zones 1 through 9 and 35% solar fraction in
Climate Zones 10 through 16. Costs include equipment and labor, gas piping within the building for the boiler system,
and additional electrical service necessary for the heat pump system. Replacement costs are based on an effective
useful life of 15 years for the water heaters and tanks, and 20 years for the solar thermal collectors. For the solar
thermal systems, it’s also assumed that the glycol is replaced at years 9, 18 and 27. Additional details on cost
assumptions are presented in Appendix 7.3 Cost Details.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 16 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 6. Heat Pump Water Heater Incremental System Costs (Present Value (2023$))
Item
3-Story 5-Story
Source & Notes Central
Gas
Boiler
Central
Heat
Pump
Central
Gas
Boiler
Central
Heat
Pump
First Cost CZs 1-9 $173,772 $211,531 $279,163 $343,920 3-story costs directly from 2022
Multifamily All-Electric CASE
Report. 5-story costs estimated
based on component costs for
the 3-story from the CASE
report.
CZs 10-16 $182,810 $300,883
Replacement Cost CZs 1-9 $32,297
$44,263
$59,930
$110,659
CZs 10-16 $36,943 $69,361
Total Incremental
Cost
CZs 1-9
n/a
$49,725
n/a
$115,486
CZs 10-16 $36,041 $84,335
Incremental Cost
per Dwelling Unit
CZs 1-9 $1,381 $1,312
CZs 10-16 $1,001 $958
3.2.2.2 Space Heating
Table 7 presents the costs for heat pump space heater conversion from gas equipment. In most climate zones the
baseline per the 2022 Energy Code is a heat pump space heater, so these costs are only applied in a couple of
instances. For the 3-story prototype the baseline in Climate Zone 16 is a gas furnace and air conditioner. For the 5-
story prototype the baseline in Climate Zones 1 and 16 is a dual fuel heat pump with a gas furnace as backup. Costs
include equipment and labor, gas piping within the building for the boiler system, and additional electrical service
necessary for the heat pump system. Most of the cost difference between the two systems is attributed to higher labor
costs to install the gas system as a result of gas piping and venting. Additional details on cost assumptions are
presented in Appendix 7.3 Cost Details.
Table 7. Heat Pump Space Heater Costs per Dwelling Unit (Present Value (2023$)
Item
3-Story 5-Story
Source & Notes Furnace +
Split AC
Heat
Pump
Furnace +
Split HP
Heat
Pump
First Cost
$20,667 $16,776 $21,245 $16,597
Costs largely based on the 2022
Multifamily All-Electric CASE Report with
some updates to reflect online equipment
cost research and labor cost alignments.
Replacement Cost $8,059 $7,326 $9,052 $7,326 See lifetimes referenced in Table 8.
Residual value at the end of the 30-year
analysis period was accounted for to
represent the remaining life of any
equipment. Residual Value ($1,591) $0 $0 $0
Total $27,135 $24,102 $30,296 $23,924
Incremental Cost ($3,032) ($6,373)
Equipment lifetimes applied in this analysis for the space conditioning measures are summarized in Table 8. The
lifetime for the heat pump, furnace, and air conditioner are based on the Database for Energy Efficient Resources
(DEER) (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021b). In DEER, heat pump and air conditioner measures are
assigned an effective useful lifetime (EUL) of 15 years and a furnace an EUL of 20 years. The heating and cooling
system components are typically replaced at the same time when one reaches the end of its life and the other is near
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 17 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
it. Therefore, it is assumed that both the furnace and air conditioner are replaced at the same time at year 17.5,
halfway between 15 and 20 years. For HVAC system costing, air-conditioning is included in all cases in both the base
case and proposed models.
Table 8. Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures
Measure Lifetime
Gas Furnace 17.5
Air Conditioner 17.5
Heat Pump 15
Dual Fuel Heat Pump 15
3.2.2.3 Natural Gas Infrastructure
Eliminating natural gas to a building saves costs associated with connecting a service line from the street main to the
building, piping distribution within the building, and monthly meter customer charges from the utility. This section
focuses on the first item, not connecting gas service to the building. The latter two are captured in the appliance costs
and the utility bill analysis. Cost savings for removing natural gas infrastructure to a multifamily building in IOU territory
are presented in Table 9 and Table 10. These costs are applied as cost savings for the all-electric case when
compared to the mixed fuel baseline.
These costs are project dependent and may be significantly impacted by such factors as utility territory, site
characteristics, distance to the nearest natural 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.
Service Extension: Service extension costs to the building were taken from a PG&E memo dated December 5, 2019
to Energy Commission staff (see Appendix 7.4 PG&E Gas Infrastructure Cost Memo for a copy of the memo). The
estimated cost of $6,750 excludes costs for trenching and assumes nonresidential new construction within a developed
area. For the 5-story building the cost is apportioned between the residential and nonresidential spaces in the building
based on associated conditioned floor areas where 84 percent is residential. All of the spaces in the 3-story building
are residential based.
Today, total costs are reduced to account for deductions per the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules.7 These rules
categorize distribution line extensions as “refundable” costs, which are offset or subsidized by all other ratepayers. The
CPUC issued a Decision in September 2022 that eliminates the subsidies effective July 1, 2023 (California Public
Utilities Commission, 2022). Since most of the development that will occur during the three-year 2022 code cycle
(2023-2025) will not be subject to these deduction allowances they are not included in this analysis.
Meter: Cost per meter provided by PG&E of $3,600 for a commercial meter to serve the central water heating and
$600 per multifamily dwelling unit. The $600 dwelling unit meter is only applied in Climate Zone 16 for the 3-story
prototype and Climate Zones 1 and 16 for the 5-story prototypes where gas is used either for primary or backup space
heating. Two scenarios are presented in the tables. One is the case with electric space heating, no in-unit gas and the
only residential gas use is to serve the central water heating system. The other case represents the scenario where
there is in-unit gas to service space heating.
7 PG&E Rule 15: https://www.pge.com/tariffs/assets/pdf/tariffbook/GAS_RULES_15.pdf.
SoCalGas Rule 20: https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/tariffs/tm2/pdf/20.pdf.
SDG&E Rule 15: https://tariff.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/GAS_GAS-RULES_GRULE15.pdf.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 18 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Natural Gas Plan Review: Total costs are based on TRC’s 2019 reach code analysis for Palo Alto (TRC, 2018 ). The
cost for the 5-story prototype is apportioned between the residential and nonresidential spaces in the building in the
same way as was done for the service extension costs.
Table 9. IOU Natural Gas Infrastructure Cost Savings for All-Electric Building
Item 3-Story 5-Story
Service Extension $6,750 $5,695
Meter
No In-Unit Gas
(Gas DHW only) $3,600 $3,600
In-Unit Gas $25,200 $56,400
Plan Review $2,316 $1,954
Table 10. Multifamily IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs
Prototype Scenario Total
Building
Per Dwelling
Unit
3-Story No In-Unit Gas $12,666 $352
In-Unit Gas $34,266 $952
5-Story No In-Unit Gas $11,248 $128
In-Unit Gas $64,048 $728
CPAU provides gas service to its customers and therefore separate costs were evaluated based on CPAU gas service
connection fees.8 Table 11 presents the breakdown of gas infrastructure costs used in this analysis for CPAU. The
same approach to apportioning the total building costs to the residential spaces as described in the IOU section was
applied here for the service extension and plan review costs for the 5-story prototype. Meter costs were based on
$1,772 for an 800 cubic foot per hour commercial meter for the central water heating system.
Table 11. Multifamily CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs
Item 3-Story 5-Story
Service Extension $5,892 $4,971
Meter $1,772 $1,772
Plan Review $2,557 $2,157
3.3 Measure Packages
The Reach Codes Team evaluated three packages for mixed fuel homes and five packages for all-electric homes for
each prototype and climate zone, as described below.
1. All-Electric Prescriptive Code: This package meets all the prescriptive requirements of the 2022 Energy Code.
2. All-Electric Prescriptive Code + PV: Using the code minimum package as a starting point, PV capacity was
added to offset 100 percent of the estimated annual electricity use.
3. Mixed Fuel Efficiency Only: This package uses only efficiency measures that do not trigger federal preemption
including envelope and duct distribution efficiency measures.
8 CPAU Schedule G-5 effective 09-01-2019: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/utilities/utilities-
engineering/general-specifications/gas-service-connection-fees.pdf
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 19 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
4. Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery: Using the Efficiency Package as a starting point, PV capacity was added
to offset 100 percent of the estimated annual electricity use. A battery system was also added. This package
only applies to the 3-story prototype. The 5-story prototype includes a battery system in the baseline per the
2022 prescriptive requirements.
5. Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV: Using the Efficiency Package as a starting point, PV capacity was added to offset
100 percent of the estimated annual electricity use. This package only applies to the 5-story prototype.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 20 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
4 Results
Cost-effectiveness results are presented per prototype and measure packages described in Section 3.3. The TDV and
On-Bill based cost-effectiveness results are presented in terms of B/C ratio and NPV. Energy savings, compliance
margin, utility bill savings, and incremental costs are also shown.
In the following figures, green highlighting indicates that the case is cost-effective with a B/C ratio greater than or equal
to 1 and a NPV greater than or equal to 0. Red highlighting indicates the case is not cost-effective.
Compliance margins are presented as percentages both for the efficiency TDV and the source energy metrics. A
compliance margin that is equal to or greater than 0 indicates the case is code compliant.
4.1 All-Electric Prescriptive Code
Table 12 and Table 13 shows results for the multifamily all-electric prescriptive code case compared to the 2022
baseline. For both prototypes this scenario is cost-effective based on TDV in all climate zones. This scenario is only
On-Bill cost-effective in a few climate zones. The 3-story all-electric case is cost-effective On-Bill in Climate Zones 1
through 3, 4 in CPAU territory, 12 in SMUD territory, and 16. The 5-story all-electric case is cost-effective On-Bill in
Climate Zones 1, 4, 12 in SMUD territory, and 16.
In most cases there is a small net increase in utility cost in the first year.
There is an incremental cost for the central heat pump water heater ranging from $361 to $697 per dwelling unit.
The all-electric packages applied to the 3-story prototype in Climate Zone 16 and the 5-story prototype in Climate
Zones 1 and 16 incorporate both gas to electric water heating and gas to electric space heating measures. In these
cases, there are significant cost savings due to the avoided first costs of installing a gas furnace as compared to a heat
pump. As a result, these cases are On-Bill cost-effective.
These results reflect a CO2 refrigerant based central heat pump water heating system. The 5-story prototype was also
evaluated with a R-134a refrigerant based central heat pump water heater and these results are shown in Appendix
7.5 Central Heat Pump Water Heater Comparison.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 21 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 12. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 26% 15% -904 135 ($19) $1,676 $97 $429 3.9 $1,247 >1 $4,158
CZ02 PGE 20% 11% -801 115 ($30) $1,061 $697 $1,029 1.0 $32 9.9 $2,998
CZ03 PGE 21% 10% -789 115 ($26) $1,148 $697 $1,029 1.1 $119 9.9 $2,990
CZ04 PGE 18% 9% -759 109 ($31) $922 $697 $1,029 0.9 ($108) 9.2 $2,767
CZ04 CPAU 18% 9% -759 109 $233 $8,191 $765 $1,097 7.5 $7,094 7.7 $2,700
CZ05 PGE 23% 9% -789 112 ($30) $1,009 $697 $1,029 0.98 ($21) 9.3 $2,782
CZ05 PGE/SCG 23% 9% -789 112 ($79) ($515) $697 $1,029 0.0 ($1,545) 9.3 $2,782
CZ06 SCE/SCG 18% 7% -709 100 ($61) ($226) $697 $1,029 0.0 ($1,255) 8.6 $2,551
CZ07 SDGE 20% 8% -704 102 ($69) ($427) $697 $1,029 0.0 ($1,456) 9.1 $2,712
CZ08 SCE/SCG 13% 6% -689 96 ($61) ($302) $697 $1,029 0.0 ($1,331) 8.2 $2,432
CZ09 SCE 13% 5% -698 96 ($64) ($351) $697 $1,029 0.0 ($1,380) 8.0 $2,363
CZ10 SCE/SCG 14% 7% -701 83 ($88) ($1,109) $446 $649 0.0 ($1,758) >1 $1,959
CZ10 SDGE 14% 7% -701 83 ($112) ($1,803) $446 $649 0.0 ($2,452) >1 $1,959
CZ11 PGE 14% 10% -740 91 ($64) ($177) $446 $649 0.0 ($826) >1 $2,212
CZ12 PGE 17% 11% -755 94 ($62) ($70) $446 $649 0.0 ($719) >1 $2,297
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 17% 11% -755 94 $68 $2,942 $446 $649 4.5 $2,293 >1 $2,297
CZ13 PGE 13% 9% -717 86 ($65) ($291) $446 $649 0.0 ($940) >1 $2,050
CZ14 SCE/SCG 13% 7% -748 83 ($102) ($1,413) $446 $649 0.0 ($2,063) >1 $1,759
CZ14 SDGE 13% 7% -748 83 ($128) ($2,191) $446 $649 0.0 ($2,841) >1 $1,759
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 2% -607 64 ($89) ($1,403) $446 $649 0.0 ($2,053) >1 $1,305
CZ16 PG&E 24% 29% -1,928 185 ($178) ($1,066) ($4,045) ($2,983) 2.8 $1,917 >1 $4,352
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 22 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 13. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 14% 9% -1,146 147 ($49) $1,209 ($4,639) ($5,788) >1 $6,998 >1 $9,816
CZ02 PGE 9% 6% -888 120 ($45) $809 $608 $1,185 0.7 ($375) 3.0 $2,270
CZ03 PGE 11% 7% -874 120 ($46) $778 $608 $1,185 0.7 ($407) 3.1 $2,421
CZ04 PGE 9% 6% -824 113 $18 $2,130 $608 $1,185 1.8 $945 3.1 $2,393
CZ04 CPAU 9% 6% -824 113 $230 $8,205 $635 $1,211 6.8 $6,994 3.0 $2,367
CZ05 PGE 12% 6% -871 117 ($47) $706 $608 $1,185 0.6 ($479) 2.8 $2,065
CZ05 PGE/SCG 12% 6% -871 117 ($99) ($919) $608 $1,185 0.0 ($2,103) 2.8 $2,065
CZ06 SCE/SCG 9% 5% -739 104 ($10) $986 $608 $1,185 0.8 ($199) 2.9 $2,183
CZ07 SDGE 11% 6% -735 106 ($74) ($500) $608 $1,185 0.0 ($1,685) 2.9 $2,215
CZ08 SCE/SCG 8% 4% -710 100 ($79) ($644) $608 $1,185 0.0 ($1,829) 3.0 $2,259
CZ09 SCE 7% 4% -725 100 ($53) ($51) $608 $1,185 0.0 ($1,236) 3.0 $2,274
CZ10 SCE/SCG 7% 4% -729 84 ($111) ($1,615) $361 $831 0.0 ($2,445) 2.7 $1,374
CZ10 SDGE 7% 4% -729 84 ($137) ($2,404) $361 $831 0.0 ($3,234) 2.7 $1,374
CZ11 PGE 8% 5% -790 92 ($86) ($663) $361 $831 0.0 ($1,494) 3.1 $1,656
CZ12 PGE 9% 6% -809 96 ($83) ($527) $361 $831 0.0 ($1,358) 3.0 $1,620
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 9% 6% -809 96 $62 $2,831 $361 $831 3.4 $2,000 3.0 $1,620
CZ13 PGE 7% 5% -754 88 ($83) ($686) $361 $831 0.0 ($1,517) 3.0 $1,570
CZ14 SCE/SCG 6% 3% -803 84 ($131) ($2,085) $361 $831 0.0 ($2,916) 2.2 $928
CZ14 SDGE 6% 3% -803 84 ($165) ($3,106) $361 $831 0.0 ($3,937) 2.2 $928
CZ15 SCE/SCG 3% 1% -602 65 ($105) ($1,775) $361 $831 0.0 ($2,606) 1.9 $695
CZ16 PG&E 9% 11% -1,388 142 ($127) ($675) ($4,886) ($6,142) 9.1 $5,467 >1 $6,704
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 23 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
4.2 All-Electric Plus PV
Table 14 and Table 15 present cost-effectiveness results for the all-electric plus PV packages for the 3-story and 5-story prototypes, respectively. All cases are
cost-effective both On-Bill and based on TDV.
Table 14. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric 100% PV
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 26% 24% 2,127 135 $782 $20,242 $3,638 $5,034 4.0 $15,208 3.2 $9,448
CZ02 PGE 20% 20% 1,835 115 $653 $16,910 $3,294 $4,406 3.8 $12,504 3.3 $8,632
CZ03 PGE 21% 20% 1,711 115 $614 $15,998 $3,076 $4,123 3.9 $11,875 3.4 $8,209
CZ04 PGE 18% 18% 1,558 109 $559 $14,587 $2,841 $3,818 3.8 $10,770 3.6 $8,230
CZ04 CPAU 18% 18% 1,558 109 $489 $14,138 $2,909 $3,886 3.6 $10,253 3.6 $8,162
CZ05 PGE 23% 20% 1,604 112 $579 $15,137 $2,826 $3,798 4.0 $11,338 3.6 $8,026
CZ05 PGE/SCG 23% 20% 1,604 112 $531 $13,613 $2,826 $3,798 3.6 $9,814 3.6 $8,026
CZ06 SCE/SCG 18% 17% 1,207 100 $378 $9,795 $2,364 $3,197 3.1 $6,598 3.8 $7,092
CZ07 SDGE 20% 21% 1,528 102 $723 $19,318 $2,777 $3,734 5.2 $15,584 3.5 $7,623
CZ08 SCE/SCG 13% 17% 1,393 96 $426 $10,842 $2,569 $3,464 3.1 $7,378 3.9 $7,908
CZ09 SCE 13% 15% 1,204 96 $379 $9,756 $2,335 $3,160 3.1 $6,596 3.9 $7,158
CZ10 SCE/SCG 14% 18% 1,381 83 $404 $10,130 $2,237 $2,978 3.4 $7,152 4.1 $7,031
CZ10 SDGE 14% 18% 1,381 83 $621 $16,493 $2,237 $2,978 5.5 $13,514 4.1 $7,031
CZ11 PGE 14% 19% 1,843 91 $625 $15,782 $2,940 $3,893 4.1 $11,889 3.4 $7,748
CZ12 PGE 17% 19% 1,704 94 $579 $14,777 $2,756 $3,654 4.0 $11,124 3.6 $7,607
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 17% 19% 1,704 94 $399 $10,615 $2,756 $3,654 2.9 $6,961 3.6 $7,607
CZ13 PGE 13% 17% 1,572 86 $544 $13,822 $2,567 $3,408 4.1 $10,415 3.6 $7,148
CZ14 SCE/SCG 13% 18% 1,572 83 $449 $11,152 $2,300 $3,060 3.6 $8,092 4.2 $7,668
CZ14 SDGE 13% 18% 1,572 83 $688 $18,158 $2,300 $3,060 5.9 $15,098 4.2 $7,668
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 11% 1,163 64 $330 $8,164 $1,966 $2,626 3.1 $5,539 3.9 $5,567
CZ16 PG&E 24% 38% 1,371 185 $700 $19,307 ($1,064) $894 21.6 $18,412 58.9 $11,596
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 24 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 15. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: All-Electric 100% PV
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 14% 21% 1,437 147 $629 $16,919 ($1,574) ($1,803) >1 $18,721 >1 $18,222
CZ02 PGE 9% 14% 428 120 $262 $7,918 $1,930 $2,904 2.7 $5,015 4.0 $8,679
CZ03 PGE 11% 16% 682 120 $327 $9,417 $2,121 $3,152 3.0 $6,265 4.0 $9,285
CZ04 PGE 9% 13% 92 113 $207 $6,524 $1,476 $2,313 2.8 $4,211 4.1 $7,054
CZ04 CPAU 9% 13% 92 113 $337 $10,667 $1,502 $2,340 4.6 $8,327 4.0 $7,027
CZ05 PGE 12% 16% 451 117 $259 $7,806 $1,815 $2,754 2.8 $5,052 4.0 $8,096
CZ05 PGE/SCG 12% 16% 451 117 $207 $6,182 $1,815 $2,754 2.2 $3,427 4.0 $8,096
CZ06 SCE/SCG 9% 12% -163 104 $98 $3,449 $1,127 $1,859 1.9 $1,590 3.8 $5,035
CZ07 SDGE 11% 15% 74 106 $192 $6,131 $1,387 $2,198 2.8 $3,934 3.9 $6,204
CZ08 SCE/SCG 8% 14% 265 100 $154 $4,666 $1,516 $2,365 2.0 $2,301 4.0 $7,053
CZ09 SCE 7% 12% 60 100 $122 $3,930 $1,307 $2,093 1.9 $1,837 3.7 $5,636
CZ10 SCE/SCG 7% 13% 289 84 $131 $3,912 $1,266 $2,007 1.9 $1,905 3.9 $5,749
CZ10 SDGE 7% 13% 289 84 $238 $6,951 $1,266 $2,007 3.5 $4,945 3.9 $5,749
CZ11 PGE 8% 17% 1,091 92 $417 $10,990 $2,226 $3,256 3.4 $7,734 4.2 $10,472
CZ12 PGE 9% 16% 594 96 $263 $7,487 $1,712 $2,587 2.9 $4,901 4.3 $8,544
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 9% 16% 594 96 $260 $7,419 $1,712 $2,587 2.9 $4,889 4.3 $8,544
CZ13 PGE 7% 17% 1,036 88 $398 $10,479 $2,064 $3,045 3.4 $7,434 4.2 $9,715
CZ14 SCE/SCG 6% 11% 182 84 $102 $3,250 $1,170 $1,883 1.7 $1,368 4.0 $5,515
CZ14 SDGE 6% 11% 182 84 $194 $5,858 $1,170 $1,883 3.1 $3,975 4.0 $5,515
CZ15 SCE/SCG 3% 10% 387 65 $153 $4,119 $1,238 $1,971 2.1 $2,148 3.6 $4,998
CZ16 PG&E 9% 23% 1,007 142 $501 $13,864 ($2,682) ($3,275) >1 $17,139 >1 $16,140
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 25 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
4.3 Mixed Fuel Efficiency
Table 16 and Table 17 show results for the Mixed Fuel Efficiency packages. The packages are cost-effective based on at least one of the two metrics in Climate
Zones 1, 2, 4, and 8 through 16 for the 3-story prototype and in Climate Zones 2, 4, 6, and 8 through 15 for the 5-story prototype. In all cases the NPV values,
whether negative or positive, are small. The compliance impacts are also small.
A summary of measures included in each package is provided in Appendix 7.6 Summary of Measures by Package.
Table 16. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 1% 1% 41 0 $12 $273 $176 $176 1.6 $98 1.2 $38
CZ02 PGE 1% 0% 24 0 $7 $162 $132 $132 1.2 $30 1.5 $62
CZ03 PGE 1% 0% 17 0 $5 $111 $132 $132 0.8 ($21) 0.8 ($27)
CZ04 PGE 1% 0% 21 0 $6 $141 $132 $132 1.1 $9 1.3 $46
CZ04 CPAU 1% 0% 21 0 $3 $74 $132 $132 0.6 ($58) 1.3 $46
CZ05 PGE 1% 0% 19 0 $5 $123 $132 $132 0.9 ($9) 0.8 ($32)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1% 0% 19 0 $5 $123 $132 $132 0.9 ($9) 0.8 ($32)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1% 0% 9 0 $2 $56 $132 $132 0.4 ($75) 0.7 ($44)
CZ07 SDGE 0% 0% 7 0 $3 $72 $132 $132 0.5 ($60) 0.4 ($81)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1% 0% 20 0 $6 $140 $132 $132 1.1 $9 1.5 $59
CZ09 SCE 1% 0% 28 0 $8 $192 $146 $156 1.2 $36 1.6 $88
CZ10 SCE/SCG 3% 1% 65 0 $20 $447 $190 $199 2.2 $247 2.4 $277
CZ10 SDGE 3% 1% 65 0 $27 $683 $190 $199 3.4 $484 2.4 $277
CZ11 PGE 3% 1% 91 0 $30 $699 $190 $199 3.5 $499 3.5 $489
CZ12 PGE 2% 0% 98 0 $33 $766 $381 $514 1.5 $252 1.5 $273
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 2% 0% 98 0 $17 $396 $381 $514 0.8 ($118) 1.5 $273
CZ13 PGE 4% 1% 99 0 $33 $765 $190 $199 3.8 $566 3.9 $574
CZ14 SCE/SCG 3% 1% 88 0 $26 $585 $190 $199 2.9 $385 3.1 $427
CZ14 SDGE 3% 1% 88 0 $36 $886 $190 $199 4.4 $686 3.1 $427
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 2% 182 0 $54 $1,226 $190 $199 6.1 $1,026 5.8 $957
CZ16 PG&E 5% 4% 16 12 $34 $1,012 $712 $712 1.4 $300 1.3 $184
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 26 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 17. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency
4.4 Mixed Fuel Plus PV (Plus Battery for the 3-Story Prototype)
Table 18 presents the Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package for the 3-story prototype. The battery system is a 100kWh battery. This scenario is cost-
effective for all climate zones and under both metrics except for On-Bill in Climate Zone 4 in CPAU territory. Table 19 presents the Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV
package for the 5-story prototype. This package is cost-effective under TDV in all climate zones and cost-effective On-Bill everywhere except in Climate Zones 6
and 7. In the cases where it is not cost-effective, it is very close to being so with small negative NPV. In Climate Zone 6 in the 5-story prototype there is no
upgrade to the PV system capacity as the prescriptive PV system already offset all of the estimated electricity use.
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0% 0% 5 0 $2 $39 $176 $176 0.2 ($137) 0.2 ($136)
CZ02 PGE 1% 0% 11 0 $2 $38 $132 $132 0.3 ($94) 1.9 $118
CZ03 PGE 0% 0% 7 0 $2 $46 $132 $132 0.3 ($86) 0.8 ($23)
CZ04 PGE 1% 0% 12 0 $2 $40 $132 $132 0.3 ($92) 1.9 $114
CZ04 CPAU 1% 0% 12 0 $2 $39 $132 $132 0.3 ($93) 1.9 $114
CZ05 PGE 0% 0% 6 0 $1 $17 $132 $132 0.1 ($114) 0.4 ($73)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 0% 0% 6 0 $1 $17 $132 $132 0.1 ($114) 0.4 ($73)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0% 0% 12 0 $2 $51 $132 $132 0.4 ($81) 1.4 $49
CZ07 SDGE 0% 0% 10 0 $0 $0 $132 $132 0.0 ($132) 0.9 ($7)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1% 0% 24 0 $8 $184 $132 $132 1.4 $53 2.2 $152
CZ09 SCE 1% 0% 28 0 $4 $96 $142 $149 0.6 ($52) 2.1 $163
CZ10 SCE/SCG 2% 1% 66 0 $21 $491 $186 $192 2.6 $298 3.2 $425
CZ10 SDGE 2% 1% 66 0 $30 $751 $186 $192 3.9 $558 3.2 $425
CZ11 PGE 2% 1% 83 0 $29 $665 $186 $192 3.5 $473 4.2 $621
CZ12 PGE 2% 0% 84 0 $29 $681 $321 $414 1.6 $267 2.3 $546
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 2% 0% 84 0 $16 $372 $321 $414 0.9 ($42) 2.3 $546
CZ13 PGE 2% 1% 95 0 $33 $765 $186 $192 4.0 $573 4.9 $742
CZ14 SCE/SCG 2% 1% 75 0 $11 $246 $186 $192 1.3 $54 3.9 $561
CZ14 SDGE 2% 1% 75 0 $34 $847 $186 $192 4.4 $654 3.9 $561
CZ15 SCE/SCG 3% 2% 172 0 $55 $1,257 $186 $192 6.5 $1,065 7.3 $1,212
CZ16 PG&E 2% 2% 40 4 $23 $616 $665 $665 0.9 ($49) 0.999 ($0)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 27 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 18. 3-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 1% 16% 2,068 0 $543 $12,588 $4,603 $6,917 1.8 $5,671 1.5 $3,724
CZ02 PGE 1% 16% 1,757 0 $462 $10,718 $3,881 $5,990 1.8 $4,728 1.6 $3,820
CZ03 PGE 1% 17% 1,624 0 $423 $9,797 $3,700 $5,754 1.7 $4,043 1.5 $3,157
CZ04 PGE 1% 17% 1,476 0 $383 $8,878 $3,518 $5,518 1.6 $3,360 1.6 $3,067
CZ04 CPAU 1% 17% 1,476 0 $171 $3,967 $3,518 $5,518 0.7 ($1,551) 1.6 $3,067
CZ05 PGE 1% 18% 1,520 0 $393 $9,107 $3,503 $5,498 1.7 $3,609 1.6 $3,526
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1% 18% 1,520 0 $393 $9,107 $3,503 $5,498 1.7 $3,609 1.6 $3,526
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1% 18% 1,112 0 $336 $7,677 $3,127 $5,009 1.5 $2,668 1.4 $1,917
CZ07 SDGE 0% 20% 1,431 0 $550 $13,713 $3,498 $5,493 2.5 $8,220 1.6 $3,159
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1% 18% 1,311 0 $413 $9,427 $3,328 $5,270 1.8 $4,156 1.4 $2,277
CZ09 SCE 1% 17% 1,129 0 $367 $8,375 $3,129 $5,017 1.7 $3,359 1.4 $1,937
CZ10 SCE/SCG 3% 19% 1,342 0 $420 $9,584 $3,321 $5,254 1.8 $4,331 1.5 $2,588
CZ10 SDGE 3% 19% 1,342 0 $533 $13,303 $3,321 $5,254 2.5 $8,049 1.5 $2,588
CZ11 PGE 3% 17% 1,833 0 $500 $11,587 $3,914 $6,025 1.9 $5,562 1.6 $3,852
CZ12 PGE 2% 17% 1,701 0 $442 $10,239 $3,926 $6,105 1.7 $4,133 1.6 $3,583
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 2% 17% 1,701 0 $285 $6,609 $3,926 $6,105 1.1 $503 1.6 $3,583
CZ13 PGE 4% 17% 1,568 0 $431 $9,983 $3,594 $5,609 1.8 $4,374 1.7 $3,944
CZ14 SCE/SCG 3% 19% 1,556 0 $477 $10,886 $3,388 $5,341 2.0 $5,545 1.6 $3,434
CZ14 SDGE 3% 19% 1,556 0 $607 $15,155 $3,388 $5,341 2.8 $9,815 1.6 $3,434
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 19% 1,241 0 $421 $9,616 $3,136 $5,013 1.9 $4,603 1.6 $3,076
CZ16 PG&E 5% 17% 1,286 12 $357 $8,508 $3,894 $5,833 1.5 $2,674 1.6 $3,219
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 28 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 19. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness Results per Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0% 5% 1,446 0 $341 $7,917 $1,889 $2,403 3.3 $5,514 3.0 $4,757
CZ02 PGE 1% 2% 444 0 $55 $1,275 $567 $697 1.8 $578 4.4 $2,365
CZ03 PGE 0% 4% 693 0 $119 $2,766 $801 $1,002 2.8 $1,764 4.4 $3,423
CZ04 PGE 1% 1% 112 0 $14 $324 $226 $254 1.3 $69 3.5 $632
CZ04 CPAU 1% 1% 112 0 $13 $307 $226 $254 1.2 $53 3.5 $632
CZ05 PGE 0% 3% 464 0 $56 $1,310 $550 $676 1.9 $634 4.2 $2,165
CZ05 PGE/SCG 0% 3% 464 0 $56 $1,310 $550 $676 1.9 $634 4.2 $2,165
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0% 0% 12 0 $2 $51 $132 $132 0.4 ($81) 1.4 $49
CZ07 SDGE 0% 1% 95 0 $0 $0 $212 $237 0.0 ($237) 2.8 $423
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1% 3% 299 0 $42 $968 $388 $465 2.1 $504 4.3 $1,527
CZ09 SCE 1% 1% 99 0 $12 $284 $204 $230 1.2 $54 3.0 $465
CZ10 SCE/SCG 2% 3% 364 0 $57 $1,296 $450 $536 2.4 $759 4.2 $1,720
CZ10 SDGE 2% 3% 364 0 $103 $2,566 $450 $536 4.8 $2,030 4.2 $1,720
CZ11 PGE 2% 7% 1,178 0 $281 $6,521 $1,276 $1,610 4.1 $4,911 4.8 $6,162
CZ12 PGE 2% 4% 683 0 $120 $2,791 $898 $1,164 2.4 $1,627 4.2 $3,716
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 2% 4% 683 0 $102 $2,362 $898 $1,164 2.0 $1,198 4.2 $3,716
CZ13 PGE 2% 7% 1,137 0 $274 $6,347 $1,179 $1,484 4.3 $4,863 4.8 $5,599
CZ14 SCE/SCG 2% 2% 266 0 $33 $748 $342 $395 1.9 $353 4.7 $1,447
CZ14 SDGE 2% 2% 266 0 $62 $1,554 $342 $395 3.9 $1,158 4.7 $1,447
CZ15 SCE/SCG 3% 5% 567 0 $125 $2,851 $535 $646 4.4 $2,204 5.6 $2,994
CZ16 PG&E 2% 6% 1,051 4 $237 $5,569 $1,601 $1,883 3.0 $3,686 3.1 $4,011
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 29 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
4.5 CARE Rate Comparison
Table 20 presents a comparison of On-Bill cost-effectiveness results for CARE tariffs relative to standard tariffs for the
all-electric prescriptive code case. The CARE rates apply to the apartment meters only and don’t impact the central
water heating utility costs. Applying the CARE rates lowers both electric and gas utility bills for the consumer and the
net impact for an all-electric building in most climate zones is lower overall bills and improved cost-effectiveness
relative to the standard tariffs. Although not presented here, the all-electric + PV packages are all still On-Bill cost-
effective using the CARE tariffs.
Table 20. On-Bill IOU Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with CARE Tariffs, Results per
Dwelling Unit: All-Electric Prescriptive Code
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
3-Story 5-Story
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 3.9 $1,247 9.5 $3,637 >1 $6,998 >1 $10,045
CZ02 PGE 1.0 $32 3.1 $2,139 0.7 ($375) 2.5 $1,831
CZ03 PGE 1.1 $119 3.1 $2,187 0.7 ($407) 2.6 $1,901
CZ04 PGE 0.9 ($108) 2.8 $1,884 1.8 $945 2.9 $2,218
CZ05 PGE 0.98 ($21) 3.0 $2,041 0.6 ($479) 2.5 $1,773
CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.0 ($1,545) 1.5 $517 0.0 ($2,103) 1.1 $148
CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($1,255) 0.9 ($57) 0.8 ($199) 2.1 $1,349
CZ07 SDGE 0.0 ($1,456) 1.8 $856 0.0 ($1,685) 1.3 $343
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($1,331) 0.8 ($165) 0.0 ($1,829) 1.2 $271
CZ09 SCE 0.0 ($1,380) 0.8 ($204) 0.0 ($1,236) 1.6 $750
CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($1,758) 0.1 ($574) 0.0 ($2,445) 0.5 ($447)
CZ10 SDGE 0.0 ($2,452) 0.8 ($162) 0.0 ($3,234) 0.0 ($1,590)
CZ11 PGE 0.0 ($826) 2.7 $1,119 0.0 ($1,494) 1.7 $616
CZ12 PGE 0.0 ($719) 2.9 $1,263 0.0 ($1,358) 2.0 $793
CZ13 PGE 0.0 ($940) 2.4 $936 0.0 ($1,517) 1.6 $491
CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($2,063) 0.0 ($803) 0.0 ($2,916) 0.3 ($613)
CZ14 SDGE 0.0 ($2,841) 0.0 ($3,407) 0.0 ($3,937) 1.1 $61
CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($2,053) 0.0 ($1,036) 0.0 ($2,606) 0.0 ($1,452)
CZ16 PG&E 2.8 $1,917 >1 $5,527 9.1 $5,467 >1 $8,557
Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference. presents the comparison for the mixed fuel efficiency and PV packages.
Generally, the opposite trend occurs here for the mixed fuel packages where the CARE rate lowers utility cost savings
and the benefit-to-cost ratios decline.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 30 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 21. On-Bill IOU Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with CARE Tariffs, Results per
Dwelling Unit: Mixed Fuel Packages
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
3-Story (Efficiency + PV + Battery) 5-Story (Efficiency + PV)
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 1.8 $5,671 1.2 $1,113 3.3 $5,514 2.2 $2,765
CZ02 PGE 1.8 $4,728 1.2 $907 1.8 $578 1.5 $337
CZ03 PGE 1.7 $4,043 1.1 $579 2.8 $1,764 2.0 $1,028
CZ04 PGE 1.6 $3,360 1.0 $259 1.3 $69 0.8 ($44)
CZ05 PGE 1.7 $3,609 1.1 $414 1.9 $634 1.7 $442
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.7 $3,609 1.1 $414 1.9 $634 1.7 $442
CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.5 $2,668 0.9 ($515) 0.4 ($81) 0.3 ($92)
CZ07 SDGE 2.5 $8,220 1.7 $4,106 0.0 ($237) 0.0 ($237)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.8 $4,156 1.1 $446 2.1 $504 1.3 $137
CZ09 SCE 1.7 $3,359 0.99 ($26) 1.2 $54 0.9 ($28)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.8 $4,331 1.1 $577 2.4 $759 1.3 $180
CZ10 SDGE 2.5 $8,049 1.8 $4,180 4.8 $2,030 0.0 ($536)
CZ11 PGE 1.9 $5,562 1.2 $1,435 4.1 $4,911 2.7 $2,744
CZ12 PGE 1.7 $4,133 1.1 $517 2.4 $1,627 1.8 $905
CZ13 PGE 1.8 $4,374 1.2 $883 4.3 $4,863 2.9 $2,777
CZ14 SCE/SCG 2.0 $5,545 1.3 $1,395 1.9 $353 1.3 $136
CZ14 SDGE 2.8 $9,815 1.4 $2,292 3.9 $1,158 0.0 ($395)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.9 $4,603 1.2 $887 4.4 $2,204 1.9 $586
CZ16 PG&E 1.5 $2,674 0.97 ($162) 3.0 $3,686 2.0 $1,908
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Reductions
Figure 1 and Figure 2 compare greenhouse gas reductions across all the packages for the multifamily 3-story and 5-
story prototypes, respectively. Savings represent average annual savings per dwelling unit over the 30-year lifetime of
the analysis. Electrification of gas uses represents the greatest greenhouse gas reductions, followed by PV.
Greenhouse gas reductions are greatest for the all-electric + PV package.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 31 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Figure 1. 3-Story greenhouse gas reductions (metric tons) per dwelling unit
Figure 2. 5-Story greenhouse gas savings (metric tons) per dwelling unit
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
CZ 01 CZ 02 CZ 03 CZ 04 CZ 05 CZ 06 CZ 07 CZ 08 CZ 09 CZ 10 CZ 11 CZ 12 CZ 13 CZ 14 CZ 15 CZ 16Greenhouse Gas Reduc�ons (metric tons)Mixed Fuel Efficiency
Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Ba�ery
All-Electric Code Minimum
All-Electric + PV
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
CZ 01 CZ 02 CZ 03 CZ 04 CZ 05 CZ 06 CZ 07 CZ 08 CZ 09 CZ 10 CZ 11 CZ 12 CZ 13 CZ 14 CZ 15 CZ 16Greenhouse Gas Reduc�ons (metric tons)Mixed Fuel EfficiencyMixed Fuel Efficiency + PV
All-Electric Code Minimum
All-Electric + PV
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 32 Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
5 Summary
The Reach Codes Team identified packages of electrification and energy efficiency measures as well as packages
combining these measures with solar PV generation and battery storage, simulated them using building modeling
software, and gathered costs to determine the cost-effectiveness of multiple scenarios. The Reach Codes Team
coordinated with multiple utilities, cities, and building community experts to develop a set of assumptions considered
reasonable in the current market. Changing assumptions, such as the period of analysis, measure selection, cost
assumptions, energy escalation rates, or utility tariffs are likely to change results.
Table 22 summarizes results for each prototype and depicts the efficiency TDV compliance margins achieved for each
climate zone and package. Because local reach codes must both exceed the Energy Commission performance budget
(i.e., have a positive compliance margin) and be cost-effective, the Reach Codes Team highlighted cells meeting these
two requirements to help clarify the upper boundary for potential reach code policies. All results presented in this study
have a positive compliance margin.
• Cells highlighted in green depict cases with a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using both
On-Bill and TDV approaches.
• Cells highlighted in yellow depict cases with a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using
either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
• Cells not highlighted depict cases with a positive compliance margin but that were not cost-effective using
either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
Following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis.
• The Reach Codes Team found all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost-effective based on the
California Energy Commission’s Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) metric in all cases. In many cases all-
electric prescriptive code construction results in an increase in utility costs and is not cost-effective On-Bill.
Some exceptions include the SMUD and CPAU territories where lower electricity rates relative to gas rates
result in lower overall utility bills.
• All-electric packages have lower GHG emissions than mixed fuel packages in all cases, due to the clean power
sources currently available from California’s power providers.
• The 2022 Energy Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump space heating baseline in
most climate zones encourages all-electric construction. While the code does not include an electric baseline
for water heating, the penalty for central electric water heating observed in the performance approach in past
code cycles has been removed and a credit is provided for well-designed central heat pump water heaters in
most cases.
• Electrification combined with increased PV capacity results in utility cost savings and was found to be On-Bill
cost-effective in all cases.
• The results in this study are based on today’s net energy metering (NEM 2.0) rules and do not account for
recently approved changes to the NEM tariff (referred to as the net billing tariff). The net billing tariff decreases
the value of PV to the consumer as compared to NEM 2.0. As a result, the cost-effectiveness of the packages
that include above-code PV capacity is expected to be less under the net billing tariff. Conversely, the net
billing tariff is expected to increase On-Bill cost-effectiveness of the all-electric prescriptive code scenario. An
all-electric home has better on-site utilization of generated electricity from PV than a mixed fuel home with a
similar sized PV system, and as a result exports less electricity to the grid. Since the net-billing tariff values
exports less than under NEM 2.0, the relative impact on annual utility costs to the mixed fuel baseline is
greater.
• This analysis does justify requiring a modest reach based on either efficiency TDV or source energy for all-
electric buildings. However, this may be challenging for some projects given the recent changes to which the
industry must adapt, including the efficiency updates and multifamily restructuring in the 2022 Title 24, Part 6
code. While project compliance margins using a CO2 refrigerant heat pump water heating system are high, the
Reach Code Team found lower compliance margins using other heat pump water heater system designs.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 33 Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Focusing on supporting projects to electrify water heating is expected to support the market shift towards more
central heat pump water heaters.
• For jurisdictions interested in a reach code that allows for mixed fuel buildings, a mixed fuel efficiency and PV
package (and battery for the 3-story prototype) was found to be cost-effective based on TDV in all cases and
cost-effective On-Bill in most climate zones. This path, referred to as “Electric-Preferred”, allows for mixed fuel
buildings but requires a higher building performance than for all-electric buildings. The efficiency measures
evaluated in this study did not provide significant compliance benefit. As a result, the Reach Codes Team
recommends establishing a compliance margin target based on source energy or total TDV. This would allow
for PV and battery above minimum code requirements to be used to meet the target.
• Jurisdictions interested in increasing affordable multifamily housing should know that applying the CARE rates
has the overall impact of increasing utility cost savings for an all-electric building in most climate zones
compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness.
Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different parts of the California Building Standards Code or
may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the
specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. Reach codes that amend Part 6
of the California Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the
proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission.
Table 22. Summary of Efficiency TDV Compliance Margins and Cost-Effectiveness
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
3-Story 5-Story
All-Electric
Prescriptive
Code
All-
Electric
+ PV
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
All-Electric
Prescriptive
Code
All-
Electric
+ PV
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
Mixed
Fuel
Efficiency
+ PV
CZ01 PGE 26% 26% 1% 1% 14% 14% 0% 0%
CZ02 PGE 20% 20% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ03 PGE 21% 21% 1% 1% 11% 11% 0% 0%
CZ04 PGE 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ04 CPAU 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 1% 1%
CZ05 PGE 23% 23% 1% 1% 12% 12% 0% 0%
CZ05 PGE/SCG 23% 23% 1% 1% 12% 12% 0% 0%
CZ06 SCE/SCG 18% 18% 1% 1% 9% 9% 0% 0%
CZ07 SDGE 20% 20% 0% 0% 11% 11% 0% 0%
CZ08 SCE/SCG 13% 13% 1% 1% 8% 8% 1% 1%
CZ09 SCE 13% 13% 1% 1% 7% 7% 1% 1%
CZ10 SCE/SCG 14% 14% 3% 3% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ10 SDGE 14% 14% 3% 3% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ11 PGE 14% 14% 3% 3% 8% 8% 2% 2%
CZ12 PGE 17% 17% 2% 2% 9% 9% 2% 2%
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 17% 17% 2% 2% 9% 9% 2% 2%
CZ13 PGE 13% 13% 4% 4% 7% 7% 2% 2%
CZ14 SCE/SCG 13% 13% 3% 3% 6% 6% 2% 2%
CZ14 SDGE 13% 13% 3% 3% 6% 6% 2% 2%
CZ15 SCE/SCG 5% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3%
CZ16 PG&E 24% 24% 5% 5% 9% 9% 2% 2%
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 34 References
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
6 References
Barbose, G., Darghouth, N., O'Shaughnessy, E., & Forrester, S. (2022, October). Tracking the Sun. Pricing and Design
Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2022 Edition. Retrieved from
https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
California Energy Commission. (2017). Rooftop Solar PV System. Measure number: 2019-Res-PV-D Prepared by
Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. Retrieved from
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=221366
California Energy Commission. (2022a). 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential
Buildings. CEC-400-2022-010-CMF. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
12/CEC-400-2022-010_CMF.pdf
California Energy Commission. (2022b). 2022 Reference Appendices for the 202 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
CEC-400-2022-010-AP. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-08/CEC-400-
2022-010-AP.pdf
California Energy Commission. (2022c, Feb). 2022 Single-Family Residential Alternative Calculation Method Reference
Manual. CEC-400-2022-008-CMF-REV. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2022/2022-
single-family-residential-alternative-calculation-method-reference-manual
California Public Utilities Commission. (2021a). Utility Costs and Affordability of the Grid of the Future: An Evaluation
of Electric Costs, Rates, and Equity Issues Pursuant to P.U. Code Section 913.1. Retrieved from
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/office-of-governmental-affairs-
division/reports/2021/senate-bill-695-report-2021-and-en-banc-whitepaper_final_04302021.pdf
California Public Utilities Commission. (2021b). Database for Energy-Efficient resources (DEER2021 Update). Retrieved
April 13, 2021, from http://www.deeresources.com/index.php/deer-versions/deer2021
California Public Utilities Commission. (2022). Proposed Decision Rulemaking 19-01-011: PHASE III DECISION
ELIMINATING GAS LINE EXTENSION ALLOWANCES. Retrieved from
https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M496/K876/496876177.PDF
E-CFR. (2020). https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197. Retrieved from Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197
Energy + Environmental Economics. (2020). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency
Standards: 2022 Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) and Source Energy Metric Data Sources and Inputs.
E-Source companies. (2020). Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study. Prepared for San Diego Gas & Electric.
Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/behind-meter-battery-market-study?dl=1582149166
Horii, B., Cutter, E., Kapur, N., Arent, J., & Conotyannis, D. (2014). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing
Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Statewide CASE Team. (2018). Energy Savings Potential and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High Efficiency Windows in
California. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/energy-savings-
potential-and-cost-effectiveness-analysis-high-efficiency-windows-california
Statewide CASE Team. (2020a). Nonresidential High Performance Envelope Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE)
Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Energy Solutions. Retrieved from
https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-T24-NR-HP-Envelope-Final-CASE-
Report.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020b). Residential Energy Savings and Process Improvements for Additions and Alterations
Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Frontier
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 35 References
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Energy. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SF-Additions-and-
Alterations_Final_-CASE-Report_Statewide-CASE-Team.pdf
Statewide CASE Team. (2020c). Multifamily All-Electric Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022
California Energy Code. Prepared by TRC.
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2020). 2019 Mid-Rise New Construction Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Study.
Prepared by Frontier Energy, Misti Bruceri & Associates, and EnergySoft. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/492/file_path/fieldList/2019%20Mid-rise%20NC%20Cost-
Eff%20Report.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021). 2019 Cost-Effectiveness Study: 2020 Analysis of High-Rise Residential New
Construction. Prepared by Frontier Energy and Misti Bruceri & Associates. Retrieved from
https://www.localenergycodes.com/download/737/file_path/fieldList/2019%20High-Rise%20NC-Cost-
Eff%20Report-2021-02-22.pdf
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2022a). 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study: Single Family new Construction. Prepared by
Frontier Energy and Misti Bruceri & Associates. Retrieved from California Energy Codes & Standards:
https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources
Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2022b). Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost-effectiveness Study.
Prepared by Avani Goyal, Farhad Farahmand, TRC Companies. Retrieved from California Energy Codes &
Standards: https://localenergycodes.com/content/resources
TRC. (2018 ). 2019 Title 24 Energy Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Draft. City of Palo Alto. Retrieved from
https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/66742
TRC. (2019). Multifamily Prototypes. Prepared for Southern California Edison. Retrieved from
https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/SCE-
MFModeling_MultifamilyPrototypesReport_2019-06-07_clean.pdf
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 36 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7 Appendices
7.1 Map of California Climate Zones
Climate zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 3. The map in Figure 3 along with a zip-code search
directory is available at: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html
Figure 3. Map of California climate zones.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 37 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the CA IOU and POU rate tariffs detailed below to determine the On-Bill savings for
each package. The California Climate Credit was applied for both electricity and natural gas service for the IOUs using
the 2022 credits shows below.9 The credits were applied to reduce the total calculated annual bill, including any fixed
fees or minimum bill amounts.
Electricity rates reflect the most recent approved tariffs. Monthly gas rates were estimated based on the latest available
gas rate (December 2022) and a curve to reflect how natural gas prices fluctuate with seasonal supply and demand.
The seasonal curve was estimated from monthly residential tariffs between 2012 and 2022 (between 2020 and 2022
for CPAU). 12-month curves were created from monthly gas rates for each of the eleven years (three years for CPAU).
These annual curves were then averaged to arrive at an average normalized annual curve. This was conducted
separately for baseline and excess energy rates. Costs used in this analysis were then derived by establishing the
most recent baseline and excess rate from the latest tariff as a reference point (December 2022), and then using the
normalized curve to estimate the cost for the remaining months relative to the reference point rate.
9 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/natural-gas/greenhouse-gas-cap-and-trade-program/california-climate-
credit
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 38 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric
The following pages provide details on the PG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Error!
Reference source not found. describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net
surplus compensation rate of $0.0474/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year
average of the rates between November 2021 and October 2022.
Table 23. PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
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 $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Error!
Reference source not found.. These are applied to both the G-1 and GM rates. These rates are based on applying a
normalization curve to the December 2022 tariff based on eleven years of historical gas data. See the beginning of
Section Error! Reference source not found. Error! Reference source not found. for further details. The
corresponding CARE rates are shown in Error! Reference source not found. and reflect the 20 percent discount per
the GL-1 tariff. The GM master metered wather heating baseline quantity of 0.43 therms per dwelling unit per day in all
baseline territories and in both seasons was applied to the centrally metered gas water heating.
Table 24. PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.20579 $2.66008
February $2.24291 $2.69637
March $2.11750 $2.58278
April $2.08101 $2.55500
May $2.08062 $2.55844
June $2.09104 $2.56928
July $2.10404 $2.58189
August $2.15162 $2.63251
September $2.18718 $2.67910
October $2.23153 $2.71934
November $2.32121 $2.79158
December $2.34123 $2.80922
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 39 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 25. PG&E Monthly CARE (GL-1) Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total CARE Charge
Baseline Excess
January $1.76463 $2.12806
February $1.79433 $2.15710
March $1.69400 $2.06622
April $1.66480 $2.04400
May $1.66449 $2.04675
June $1.67283 $2.05543
July $1.68323 $2.06551
August $1.72129 $2.10601
September $1.74974 $2.14328
October $1.78523 $2.17547
November $1.85697 $2.23327
December $1.87298 $2.24738
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 40 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 41 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 42 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 43 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.2 Southern California Edison
The following pages provide details on are the SCE electricity tariffs applied in this study. Error! Reference source
not found. describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation
rate of $ 0.04361/ kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates
between November 2021 and October 2022
Table 26: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ06 6
CZ08 8
CZ09 9
CZ10 10
CZ14 14
CZ15 15
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 44 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 45 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 46 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.3 Southern California Gas
Following are the SoCalGas natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Error! Reference source not found. describes
the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.
Table 27. SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ05 2
CZ06 1
CZ08 1
CZ09 1
CZ10 1
CZ14 2
CZ15 1
The SoCalGas monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Error!
Reference source not found.. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the December 2022 tariff
based on eleven years of historical gas data. See the beginning of Section Error! Reference source not found.
Error! Reference source not found. for further details. Long-term historical natural gas rate data was only available
for SoCalGas’ procurement charges.10 The baseline and excess transmission charges were found to be consistent
over the course of a year and applied for the entire year based on 2022 rates. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent
discount per the GR tariff.
Table 28. SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
January $0.90581 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.73068 $2.14458
February $0.83669 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.66156 $1.84967
March $0.80596 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.63083 $1.82938
April $0.71941 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.54428 $1.75890
May $0.77049 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.59536 $1.78548
June $0.86253 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.68740 $1.83337
July $0.87687 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.70174 $1.86833
August $0.95391 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.77878 $1.91089
September $0.85896 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.68383 $1.83611
October $0.84147 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.66634 $1.84936
November $0.89018 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.71505 $1.88836
December $1.05329 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.87816 $1.98294
10 The SoCalGas procurement and transmission charges were obtained from the following site:
https://www.socalgas.com/for-your-business/energy-market-services/gas-prices
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 47 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 48 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric
Following are the SDG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Error! Reference source not found.
describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of
$0.04174 / kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between
January 2022 and December 2022.
Table 29. SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Climate
Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ07 Coastal
CZ10 Inland
CZ14 Mountain
The SDG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Error!
Reference source not found.. These rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the December 2022 tariff
based on eleven years of historical gas data. See the beginning of Section Error! Reference source not found.
Error! Reference source not found. for further details. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the G-CARE
tariff.
Table 30. SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Total Charge
Baseline Excess
January $2.33762 $2.34748
February $2.26751 $2.28440
March $2.25119 $2.27016
April $2.20192 $2.22744
May $2.24252 $2.26403
June $2.31819 $2.33060
July $2.32406 $2.33630
August $2.37527 $2.38090
September $2.33542 $2.34971
October $2.30366 $2.32151
November $2.31722 $2.33381
December $2.45653 $2.73517
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 49 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 50 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 51 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 52 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 53 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities
Following are the CPAU electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. The CPAU monthly gas rate in
$/therm was applied on a monthly basis according to the rates shown in Error! Reference source not found.. These
rates are based on applying a normalization curve to the December 2022 tariff based on three years of historical gas
data. See the beginning of Section Error! Reference source not found. Error! Reference source not found. for
further details. The monthly service charge applied was $106.90 per month per the December 2022 G-2 tariff.
Table 31. CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month G2
Volumetric
Totals
January $1.80964
February $1.67009
March $1.68480
April $1.68698
May $1.78478
June $1.88288
July $1.88355
August $2.06943
September $2.06798
October $2.08553
November $2.09681
December $2.45700
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 54 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 55 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only)
Following are the SMUD electricity tariffs applied in this study. The rates effective January 2023 were used.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 56 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 57 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions
The average annual escalation rates in Error! Reference source not found. were used in this study. These are based
on assumptions from the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities
Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation period are based on the
escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. No data was available to estimate electricity escalation rates
for CPAU and SMUD, therefore electricity escalation rates for PG&E and statewide natural gas escalation rates were
applied.
Table 32: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions
Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Electric Residential Average Rate
(%/year, real)
PG&E SCE SDG&E
2023 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2024 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2025 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2026 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2027 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2028 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2029 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2030 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2031 2.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2032 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2033 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2034 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2035 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2036 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2037 1.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2038 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2039 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2040 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2041 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2042 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2043 2.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2044 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2045 2.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2046 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2047 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2048 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2049 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2050 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2051 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2052 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 58 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.3 Cost Details
Table 33 presents additional detail on the first cost assumptions for the central water heating systems. For the 5-story
prototype costs are provided both for a CO2 refrigerant Sanden-based and R-134a refrigerant Colmac-based heat
pump water heater designs. The results presented in the main body of this report are based on the Sanden design. A
sensitivity analysis was also conducted for a Colmac design (see Appendix 7.5 Central Heat Pump Water Heater
Comparison) and the cost comparison is presented here. All costs are based on data from the 2022 Multifamily All-
Electric CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020c).
Table 33. Heat Pump Water Heater First Costs per Building (Present Value (2023$))
Item
3-Story (36-units) 5-Story (88-units)
Gas
Boiler
(CZs 1-9)
Gas Boiler
(CZs 10-16)
Heat
Pump
Gas
Boiler
(CZs 1-9)
Gas Boiler
(CZs 10-16)
Heat
Pump
(Sanden)
Heat
Pump
(Colmac)
Water Heating
Equipment $87,602 $87,602 $140,907 $135,146 $135,146 $244,742 $319,485
Solar Thermal
Collector $39,800 $46,888 n/a $74,740 $91,776 n/a n/a
Gas Piping $8,890 $8,890 n/a $9,065 $9,065 n/a n/a
Electrical Circuits n/a n/a $25,000 n/a n/a $25,000 $25,000
Overhead & Markup $37,480 $39,430 $45,624 $60,212 $64,896 $74,179 $94,733
Total $173,772 $182,810 $211,531 $279,163 $300,883 $343,920 $439,218
Table 34 presents additional detail on the first cost assumptions for the space hating systems.
Table 34. Heat Pump Space Heater First Costs per Dwelling Unit (Present Value (2023$)
Item
3-Story 5-Story
Source & Notes Furnace +
Split AC
Heat
Pump
Furnace +
Split HP
Heat
Pump
Dwelling Unit HVAC
$5,651 $5,460 $6,109 $5,460
Gas system costs based on 2022
Multifamily All-Electric CASE Report.
Heat pump costs based on online
equipment research indicating a 2-ton
HP is $191 less than a furnace/AC of
the same size.
Refrigerant Piping $563 $563 $423 $423 2022 Multifamily All-Electric CASE
Report. Gas Piping $92 $0 $227 $0
Electrical Circuits $0 $150 $0 $150
Labor
$9,904 $6,985 $9,904 $6,985
Based on the 2022 Multifamily All-
Electric CASE Report with
adjustments to align with updated
equipment costs.
Overhead & Markup $4,457 $3,618 $4,582 $3,579 Based on a 27% markup
Total $20,667 $16,776 $21,245 $16,597
Incremental Cost ($3,891) ($4,647)
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 59 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.4 PG&E Gas Infrastructure Cost Memo
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 60 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 61 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 62 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.5 Central Heat Pump Water Heater Comparison
Table 35 presents energy and cost-effectiveness results for a R-134a refrigerant based system design using a Colmac central heat pump water heater in the 5-
story prototype. This was only found to be cost-effective based on at least one of the two metrics in Climate Zones 1, 4 in CPAU territory, and 16.
Table 35. 5-Story Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Prescriptive Code with R-134a Heat Pump Water Heater
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
TDV
Comp
Margin
Source
Comp
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First
Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C
Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 6% 6% -1,496 147 ($155) ($1,240) ($3,556) ($4,223) 3.4 $2,984 >1 $5,870
CZ02 PGE 4% 2% -1,197 120 ($145) ($1,513) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($4,262) 0.5 ($1,287)
CZ03 PGE 6% 3% -1,166 120 ($138) ($1,360) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($4,109) 0.8 ($523)
CZ04 PGE 4% 2% -1,116 113 ($76) ($49) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($2,798) 0.7 ($949)
CZ04 CPAU 4% 2% -1,116 113 $185 $7,144 $1,718 $2,776 2.6 $4,368 0.6 ($976)
CZ05 PGE 5% 2% -1,161 117 ($137) ($1,391) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($4,140) 0.5 ($1,412)
CZ05 PGE/SCG 5% 2% -1,161 117 ($189) ($3,016) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($5,765) 0.5 ($1,412)
CZ06 SCE/SCG 4% 1% -1,000 104 ($92) ($879) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($3,628) 0.6 ($1,013)
CZ07 SDGE 5% 2% -996 106 ($183) ($3,216) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($5,965) 0.7 ($936)
CZ08 SCE/SCG 3% 1% -948 100 ($156) ($2,413) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($5,162) 0.7 ($695)
CZ09 SCE 3% 0% -966 100 ($132) ($1,863) $1,691 $2,749 0.0 ($4,612) 0.7 ($738)
CZ10 SCE/SCG 3% 1% -962 84 ($188) ($3,375) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($5,770) 0.3 ($1,596)
CZ10 SDGE 3% 1% -962 84 ($239) ($4,959) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($7,354) 0.3 ($1,596)
CZ11 PGE 4% 3% -1,029 92 ($165) ($2,487) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($4,882) 0.4 ($1,367)
CZ12 PGE 4% 3% -1,081 96 ($172) ($2,591) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($4,986) 0.3 ($1,667)
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4% 3% -1,081 96 $26 $1,988 $1,444 $2,395 0.8 ($407) 0.3 ($1,667)
CZ13 PGE 3% 2% -976 88 ($156) ($2,361) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($4,756) 0.4 ($1,452)
CZ14 SCE/SCG 2% -1% -1,045 84 ($210) ($3,880) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($6,275) 0.1 ($2,056)
CZ14 SDGE 2% -1% -1,045 84 ($270) ($5,725) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($8,120) 0.1 ($2,056)
CZ15 SCE/SCG 2% -1% -718 65 ($146) ($2,713) $1,444 $2,395 0.0 ($5,108) 0.3 ($1,564)
CZ16 PG&E -5% 6% -1,913 142 ($276) ($4,142) ($3,803) ($4,577) 1.1 $435 1.2 $746
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 63 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
7.6 Summary of Measures by Package
Table 36 provides the details of the measures in each of the efficiency package by climate zone. The measures are the
same for the 3-story and 5-story prototypes. Table 37 presents the PV capacities per dwelling unit in the upgrade
packages. In Climate Zone 6 for the mixed fuel case in the 5-story prototype there is no upgrade to the PV system
capacity as the prescriptive PV system already offset all of the estimated electricity use.
Table 36. Mixed Fuel Efficiency Package Measures
Climate
Zone
0.70 Roof
Solar
Reflectance
0.24 U-Factor
Windows
0.35
W/cfm
Verified Low
Leakage Ducts in
Conditioned
Space
1 X X
2 X
3 X
4 X
5 X
6 X
7 X
8 X
9 X X
10 X X X
11 X X X
12 X X X
13 X X X
14 X X X
15 X X X
16 X X X
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 64 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Table 37. Upgrade Package PV Capacities (kW-DC)
Climate
Zone
All-Electric + PV Mixed Fuel + PV
3-Story 5-Story 3-Story 5-Story
CZ01 4.41 4.35 3.69 3.43
CZ02 3.56 3.58 3.02 2.98
CZ03 3.31 3.29 2.80 2.72
CZ04 3.21 3.27 2.73 2.75
CZ05 3.04 3.08 2.57 2.55
CZ06 2.91 3.04 2.49 2.68
CZ07 3.09 3.21 2.64 2.74
CZ08 3.18 3.30 2.76 2.86
CZ09 3.04 3.16 2.63 2.73
CZ10 3.20 3.30 2.79 2.86
CZ11 3.90 3.95 3.42 3.43
CZ12 3.53 3.60 3.05 3.08
CZ13 3.77 3.84 3.32 3.36
CZ14 3.20 3.23 2.79 2.79
CZ15 3.93 3.94 3.58 3.58
CZ16 3.79 3.76 2.60 2.90
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 65 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20
Get In Touch
The adoption of reach codes can differentiate jurisdictions as efficiency leaders and help accelerate the
adoption of new equipment, technologies, code compliance, and energy savings strategies.
As part of the Statewide Codes & Standards Program, the Reach Codes Subprogram is a resource available to
any local jurisdiction located throughout the state of California.
Our experts develop robust toolkits as well as provide specific technical assistance to local jurisdictions (cities
and counties) considering adopting energy reach codes. These include cost-effectiveness research and
analysis, model ordinance language and other code development and implementation tools, and specific
technical assistance throughout the code adoption process.
If you are interested in finding out more about local energy reach codes, the Reach Codes Team stands ready
to assist jurisdictions at any stage of a reach code project.
Visit LocalEnergyCodes.com to
access our resources and sign up
for newsletters
Contact info@localenergycodes.com
for no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors
Follow us on Twitter
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
Prepared by:
Avani Goyal, Farhad Farahmand
TRC Companies Inc.
Prepared for:
Jay Madden
Codes and Standards Program Southern California Edison
Last modified: 2023/03/24
Revision: 1.3
2 0 2 2 C o d e :
Nonresidential New
Construction Reach Code
Cost-effectiveness Study
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
Legal Notice
This report was prepared by Southern California Edison Company
and funded by the California utility customers under the auspices
of the California Public Utilities Commission.
Copyright 2023, Southern California Edison Company. All rights
reserved, except that this document may be used, copied, and
distributed without modification.
Neither SCE 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.
Acronym List
AC – Air Conditioner
ASHRAE - American Society of Heating, Refrigerating
and Air-Conditioning Engineers
B/C – Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BOD – Basis of Design
BSC – Building Standards Commission
Btu – British thermal unit
CAV – Constant Air Volume
CBECC - California Building Energy Code Compliance
CBECS - Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey
CBSC - California Building Standards Commission
CEC - California Energy Commission
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
CZ – Climate Zone
DCKV – Demand-Controlled Kitchen Ventilation
DHW – Domestic Hot Water
DEER – Database for Energy Efficient Resources
DOE – U.S. Department of Energy
E3 – Energy and Environmental Economics
EUI – Energy Use Index
FDD – Fault Detection and Diagnostics
GHG - Greenhouse Gas
GPM – Gallons Per Minute
HVAC – Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IOU – Investor-Owned Utility
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
kWh – Kilowatt Hour
LADWP – Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
LBNL – Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
LPD – Lighting Power Density
NPV – Net Present Value
QSR – Quick-Service Restaurant
PNNL – Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
POU – Publicly Owned Utility
PTHP – Packaged Terminal Heat Pump
PG&E – Pacific Gas & Electric (utility)
PTAC – Packaged Terminal Air Conditioning
PV - Solar Photovoltaic
SCE – Southern California Edison (utility)
SCG – Southern California Gas (utility)
SDG&E – San Diego Gas & Electric (utility)
SHW – Service Hot Water
SMUD – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SZ – Single Zone
TDV – Time Dependent Valuation
VAV – Variable Air Volume
TDV - Time Dependent Valuation
Title 24 – California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6
TOU – Time of Use
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
11/16/2022 Original Release -
01/31/2023 Minor changes to reflect efficiency compliance
margin calculation updates in workbook and report
tables
Section 5
03/24/2023 Minor changes in narrative of quick service
restaurant in reach code considerations
Section 5
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
2 Methodology and Assumptions ............................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Cost-effectiveness ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
2.1.1 Benefits ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Costs ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.1.3 Metrics .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.4 Utility Rates ................................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Energy Simulations ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.3 2022 T24 Compliance Metrics .............................................................................................................................................. 7
2.4 GHG Emissions .................................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.5 Limitations and Further Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 8
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs .......................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Prototype Characteristics .................................................................................................................................................... 10
3.2 Measure Definitions and Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 12
3.2.1 Fuel Substitution ......................................................................................................................................................... 12
3.2.2 Efficiency ..................................................................................................................................................................... 21
3.2.3 Load Flexibility ............................................................................................................................................................ 28
3.2.4 Additional Solar PV and Battery Storage .................................................................................................................... 29
3.3 Measure Packages ............................................................................................................................................................. 30
4 Cost-Effectiveness Results .................................................................................................................................... 32
4.1 Medium Office ..................................................................................................................................................................... 33
4.2 Medium Retail ..................................................................................................................................................................... 34
4.3 Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR) ........................................................................................................................................ 35
4.4 Small Hotel .......................................................................................................................................................................... 36
5 Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations ................................................................ 37
5.1 Medium Office ..................................................................................................................................................................... 41
5.2 Medium Retail ..................................................................................................................................................................... 42
5.3 Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR) ........................................................................................................................................ 44
5.4 Small Hotel .......................................................................................................................................................................... 46
6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 48
7 References ............................................................................................................................................................... 50
8 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................................. 52
8.1 Map of California CZs ......................................................................................................................................................... 52
8.2 Utility Rate Schedules ......................................................................................................................................................... 53
8.2.1 PG&E .......................................................................................................................................................................... 54
8.2.2 SCE............................................................................................................................................................................. 57
8.2.3 SCG ............................................................................................................................................................................ 60
8.2.4 SDG&E ....................................................................................................................................................................... 62
8.2.5 CPAU .......................................................................................................................................................................... 68
8.2.6 SMUD (Electric Only) .................................................................................................................................................. 70
8.2.7 Escalation Rates ......................................................................................................................................................... 71
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
8.3 HVAC and SHW System Cost Scalers ............................................................................................................................... 71
8.4 Mixed Fuel Baseline Figures ............................................................................................................................................... 72
8.5 GHG Savings Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... 76
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on CZ (October 2022) .................................................................................................................... 7
Table 2. Baseline Prototype Characteristics ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 3. HVAC and Water Heating Characteristics Summary ............................................................................................................ 14
Table 4. Medium Office Average Mechanical System Costs .............................................................................................................. 15
Table 5. Medium Retail Average Mechanical System Costs ............................................................................................................... 16
Table 6. Quick-Service Restaurant Average Mechanical System Costs - HS Package ...................................................................... 16
Table 7. Small Hotel HVAC and Water Heating System Costs ........................................................................................................... 18
Table 8. Quick-Service Restaurant Cooking Equipment Costs ........................................................................................................... 18
Table 9. Small Hotel Clothes Dryer Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 19
Table 10. Electrical Infrastructure Costs ............................................................................................................................................. 20
Table 11. Gas Infrastructure Costs by Component ............................................................................................................................. 21
Table 12. Total Gas Infrastructure Cost Estimates by Building Type .................................................................................................. 21
Table 13. Efficiency Measures Applicability, Costs, and Sources ....................................................................................................... 26
Table 14. Load Flexibility Measure Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 29
Table 15. Additional Solar PV Measure Summary .............................................................................................................................. 30
Table 16. Reach Code Pathway Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 39
Table 17. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Medium Office ........................................................................................ 41
Table 18. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Medium Retail......................................................................................... 42
Table 19. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Quick-Service Restaurant (without cooking electrification) ..................... 44
Table 20. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Quick-Service Restaurant (with cooking electrification) .......................... 45
Table 21. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Small Hotel. ............................................................................................ 46
Table 22. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Small Hotel (PTHP) ................................................................................ 47
Table 23. Utility Tariffs Analyzed Based on CZ – Detailed View ......................................................................................................... 53
Table 24. Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions Above Inflation .......................................................................................... 71
Table 25. Materials and Labor Adjustment Factors by Climate Zone ................................................................................................. 71
Table 26. Contractor Markup Values .................................................................................................................................................. 72
Table 27. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Medium Office ...................................................................................................................... 72
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings
Table 28. All-electric Baseline Model – Medium Retail ....................................................................................................................... 73
Table 29. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Quick-Service Restaurant .................................................................................................... 74
Table 30. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Small Hotel ........................................................................................................................... 75
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Medium Office Cost-Effectiveness Summary....................................................................................................................... 33
Figure 2. Medium Retail Cost-effectiveness Summary ....................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 3. QSR Cost-effectiveness Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 4. Small Hotel Cost-effectiveness Summary ............................................................................................................................ 36
Figure 5. Map of California CZs .......................................................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 6. PG&E Electric Schedule - B-1 ............................................................................................................................................. 54
Figure 7. PG&E Electric Schedule - B-10 ........................................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 8. PG&E Gas Schedule – G-NR1 ............................................................................................................................................ 56
Figure 9. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-1 .................................................................................................................................... 57
Figure 10. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-2 .................................................................................................................................. 58
Figure 11. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-3 .................................................................................................................................. 59
Figure 12. SCG Gas Schedule – G-10................................................................................................................................................ 60
Figure 13. SDG&E Electric Schedule – AL-TOU ................................................................................................................................ 62
Figure 14. SDG&E Electric Schedule - EECC .................................................................................................................................... 65
Figure 15. SDG&E Gas Schedule – GN-3 .......................................................................................................................................... 66
Figure 16. CPAU Electric Schedule – E-2........................................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 17. CPAU Gas Schedule – G-2 ............................................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 18. SMUD Electric Schedule – CITS-0/CITS-1 ........................................................................................................................ 70
Figure 19. Percentage GHG Savings – Medium Office ...................................................................................................................... 76
Figure 20. Percentage GHG Savings – Medium Retail ....................................................................................................................... 76
Figure 21. Percentage GHG Savings – Quick Service Restaurant ..................................................................................................... 77
Figure 22. Percentage GHG Savings – Small Hotel ........................................................................................................................... 77
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 1
Executive Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Executive Summary
The California Codes and Standards (C&S) Reach Codes program provides technical support to local governm ents
considering adopting a local ordinance, also known as a reach code, intended to support meeting local and/or
statewide energy efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. The program facilitates the adoption and
implementation of reach codes when requested by local jurisdictions by providing resources such as cost-effectiveness
studies, model language, sample findings, and other supporting documentation.
The Reach Code Team (the Team) provides this report and accompanying Reach Code Results Workbook to present
measures and measure packages that local jurisdictions can adopt to achieve energy savings and emissions
reductions beyond what will be accomplished by enforcing the minimum state requirements according to the 2022
Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), effective January 1, 2023. This report documents a variety of
above-code electrification, energy efficiency, load flexibility, and solar photovoltaic (PV) packages applied to a set of
four nonresidential building prototypes: Medium Office, Standalone Retail, Quick-Service Restaurant, and Small Hotel.
The Team evaluated energy simulation results and code compliance using the CBECC v1.0 software version released
in June 2022. Results may change with future software versions. Results across all prototypes indicate the efficiency
measures included in the analysis, both On-Bill and TDV, are cost-effective across all climate zones when added to the
prescriptive baseline prototype. In all cases all-electric packages are capable of achieving the greatest greenhouse gas
emissions reductions as compared to mixed-fuel buildings.
These results, including the attached Reach Code Results Workbook, indicate that all -electric packages can achieve
the greatest greenhouse gas emissions reductions as compared to mixed-fuel buildings. Results align with the
decarbonization objectives set by California Energy Commission (Energy Commission), and several new construction
new construction ordinances focusing on all-electric design. The results of this study by prototype are summarized
below:
Medium Office: Due to the lack of a prescriptive compliance pathway and performance modeling approach in
CBECC, all-electric space heating is simulated as electric-resistance variable-air-volume reheat. This system
selection limits operational benefits, energy code compliance, and cost-effectiveness. All-electric packages are
cost-effective with energy efficiency and load flexibility measures in many climate zones, but do not achieve
code compliance across all three metrics—with efficiency TDV margin being the most challenging. Results will
be updated in the first half of 2023 when central heat pump boilers can be simulated in CBECC. Jurisdictions
may adopt reach codes that exempt building systems that do not have a prescriptive pathway in the energy
code and cannot be modeled to comply using the performance approach. Efficiency packages over the mixed-
fuel baseline are cost-effective and compliant across all climate zones.
Medium Retail: All-electric is prescriptively required in most scenarios in Retail buildings. The Team identified
cost-effective and code compliant packages with energy efficiency measures over an all-electric baseline in
most climate zones. This study analyzed mixed-fuel retail buildings with large (>240 kBtuh) gas furnace
packaged units replacing the smaller (<240 kBtuh) packaged heat pumps. The mixed-fuel building is neither
cost-effective nor code compliant in most climate zones.
Quick-Service Restaurant: The Team identified cost-effective, nearly cost-effective, and code compliant
packages in several climate zones for all-electric space conditioning and service water heating when including
energy efficiency and solar PV measures. The Team could not identify cost-effective packages including all-
electric commercial cooking equipment except for City of Palo Alto Utility (CPAU) territory. Also, when including
energy efficiency measures, restaurants with all-electric cooking achieve compliance and are nearly On-Bill
cost-effective in Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) territory as well. Jurisdictions may adopt All-
Electric reach codes that exempt commercial cooking equipment or require energy efficiency for either mixed-
fuel and/or all-electric buildings, in many climate zones.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 2
Executive Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Small Hotel: All-electric packages are cost-effective and code-compliant in most climate zones. The remaining
climate zones are very close to meeting the TDV Efficiency compliance criteria and may achieve compliance
by re-evaluating nonresidential-area modeling using central heat pump boiler instead of electric resistance
VAV systems. In addition to electrification packages that include single-zone packaged heat pumps, the Team
analyzed an alternative scenario with packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs) that improved all-electric code
minimum cost-effectiveness due to high first-cost savings, but PTHPs do not achieve TDV Efficiency
compliance. Mixed-fuel plus energy efficiency is code compliant and cost-effective across all climate zones.
Jurisdictions may use these results for amending Part 6, Part 11, other parts of the California building code, or their
municipal code as determined appropriate for the given jurisdiction. A cost-effectiveness study is required to amend
Part 6 of the California building code or when adopting energy efficiency or energy conservation measures, including
solar PV or batteries. The Energy Commission has previously concluded that all-electric requirements do not constitute
an energy efficiency or energy conservation standard and are outside the scope of Public Resources Code s ection
25402.1(h)(2).1 Jurisdictions may adopt an All-Electric reach code when amending Part 11 or their municipal code.
Even reach code policies that only require electrification, and do not require energy efficiency or conservation, will
benefit from findings in this study to inform potential economic impacts of a policy decision. This study documents the
estimated costs, benefits, energy impacts and GHG emission reductions that may result from implementing an
ordinance based on the results to help residents, local leadership, and other stakeholders make informed policy
decisions.
Model ordinance language and other resources are posted on the C&S Reach Codes Program website at
www.localenergycodes.com. Local jurisdictions that are considering adopting an ordinance are encouraged to contact
the program for further technical support at info@localenergycodes.com .
1 CEC Letter to South San Francisco 2021: https://bayareareachcodes.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CEC-Letter-to-SSF-
Signed.pdf
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 3
Introduction
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
1 Introduction
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 20 22
California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (CEC 2022), effective January 1, 2023, for
newly constructed nonresidential buildings. This report was developed in coordination with the California Statewide
Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs) Codes and Standards Program, key consultants, and engaged cities—collectively
known as the Reach Code Team (or “the Team” for short). The objectives of this report are to inform discourse for local
reach code adoption and, where applicable, support approval of local energy code amendments from the California
Energy Commission (the Energy Commission).
The Reach Code Team performed cost-effectiveness analysis for the following scenarios above prescriptive 2022 Title
24 code requirements in all 16 California climate zones (CZs):
▪ Fuel substitution with federal code-minimum efficiency appliances, compared to a prescriptive minimum design
compliance pathway.
• For the retail building type, the prescriptive code minimum is all-electric. Fuel substitution packages
revert to mixed-fuel appliances.
• For all other building types, the prescriptive code minimum is mixed -fuel. Fuel substitution packages
switch to all-electric appliances.
▪ Energy efficiency measures
▪ Load flexibility measures
▪ Solar PV and Battery
The Reach Code Team analyzed four prototypes—Medium Office, Medium Retail, Quick-Service Restaurant, and
Small Hotel—to represent common nonresidential new construction buildings in the California. The selected building
types align with the requests received from dozens of jurisdictions seeking to adopt reach codes. The results of this
cost-effectiveness study could potentially be extrapolated to other building types that have sim ilar properties such as
occupancy pattern, HVAC design and layout. These results were attained using the first version of California Building
Energy Compliance Calculator (CBECC) software that is approved by CEC for 2022 code compliance. There are a few
gaps in functionalities and standard design assumptions in this software version, described in Section 2.5, the Reach
Code team has been actively coordinating with the CBECC software team to inform future software updates.
Title 24 is maintained and updated every three years by two state agencies: the 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).
When adopting local energy efficiency or conservation ordinances, 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 formal approval from the Energy Commission and file
the ordinance with the BSC for the ordinance to be legally enforceable. Local jurisdictions do not require Energy
Commission approval when adopting ordinances that do not require efficiency or conservation, such as only
electrification-required ordinances.
The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally
regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, including heating, cooling, and water hea ting
equipment (E-CFR 2020). Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting higher minimum equipment
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 heating, cooling, and water heating equipment. High efficiency appliances
are often the easiest and most affordable measures to increase energy performance. While federal preemption limits
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 4
Introduction
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
reach code mandatory requirements for covered appliances, in practice, builders may install any package of compliant
measures to achieve the performance requirements.
This study references the statewide reach code study performed in 2019 for new ly constructed nonresidential buildings
as a starting point for additional measure definitions. Importantly, the current 2022 cost-effectiveness report introduced
a new restaurant building type and updated the modeling and cost assumptions.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 5
Methodology and Assumptions
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
2 Methodology and Assumptions
The Reach Code Team analyzed four prototypes—Medium Office, Medium Retail, Quick-Service Restaurant, and
Small Hotel—using the cost-effectiveness methodology detailed in this section below.
2.1 Cost-effectiveness
This section describes the approach to calculating cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate
selection.
2.1.1 Benefits
This analysis used both On-Bill and time dependent valuation (TDV) of energy-based approaches to evaluate cost-
effectiveness. Both On-Bill and TDV require estimating and quantifying the energy savings and costs associated with
energy measures. The primary difference between On-Bill and TDV is how energy is valued:
▪ On-Bill: Customer-based lifecycle cost 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 15-year duration
accounting for a three percent discount rate and energy cost inflation per Appendix 8.2.
▪ TDV: TDV was developed by the Energy Commission to reflect the time dependent value of energy, including
long-term projected costs of energy such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand and
other societal costs including projected costs for carbon emissions and grid transmission impacts. This metric
values energy uses 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. This refers to the “Total TDV” that includes all the energy end uses such as
space-conditioning, mechanical ventilation, service water heating indoor lighting, photovoltaic (PV) and battery
storage systems, and covered process loads.
2.1.2 Costs
The Reach Code Team assessed the incremental costs and savings of the energy packages over a 15 year lifecycle.
Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacements, and maintenance costs of the proposed
measure relative to the 2022 Title 24 standards minimum requirements or standard industry practices. The Reach
Code Team obtained baseline and measure costs from manufacturer distributors, contractors, literature review, and
online sources such as RS Means.
For heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and water heating baseline and measure costs, including gas and
electrical infrastructure, the Reach Code Team contracted two different firms, one mechanical contractor (Western
Allied Mechanical, based in Menlo Park) and one mechanical designer (P2S Engineering, based in Irvine) to provide
cost data. The Reach Code Team developed a basis of design for all prototypes described in section 3.1 and worked
with the mechanical contractor and designer to get cost estimates. The Reach Code Team determined HVAC design
heating and cooling loads and capacities by climate zone from the energy models. For each HVAC system type, the
Reach Code Team requested costs for the smallest capacity unit required and the largest capacity unit required and
specified federal minimum equipment efficiency.
The mechanical contractor and mechanical designer collected equipment costs and labor assumptions from their
vendors and manufacturers’ representatives, as well as through their own recent projects. The mechanical contractor
and designer provided material and labor cost estimates for the entire HVAC and DHW systems, disaggregated by the
HVAC and DHW equipment itself; refrigerant piping; structural; electrical supply; gas supply; controls; commissioning
and startup; general conditions and overhead; design and engineering; permit, te sting, and inspection; and a contractor
profit or market factor. The mechanical contractor and designer provided costs for each of the system capacities,
based on which the Reach Code Team developed a relationship between HVAC system capacity and cost to calculate
the cost for each building in each climate zone. In most cases, the analysis uses the average of the costs provided by
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 6
Methodology and Assumptions
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
the contractor and the costs provided by the designer. In some limited cases where costs provided by one source were
unlikely to be representative of the measure, costs from only the other source were used. The Reach Code Team
added taxes, contractor markups, maintenance costs, and replacement costs where needed, and adjusted material
and labor costs for each climate zone based on weighting factors from RS Means (presented in Appendix 8.3).
Actual project costs vary widely based on a range of real-building considerations. The costs that the Reach Code Team
determined through contractors are likely costs for the given prototypes and are not representative of all projects.
2.1.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics.
▪ NPV: Net savings (NPV benefits minus NPV costs). If the net savings of a measure or package is positive over
a lifetime of 15 years, it is considered cost-effective. Negative net savings represent net costs to the consumer.
A measure that has negative energy cost benefits (energy cost increase) can still be cost-effective if the
incremental costs to implement the measure (i.e., construction and maintenance cost savings) outweigh the
negative energy cost impacts.
▪ B/C Ratio: Ratio of the present value of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 15 years (NPV
benefits divided by NPV costs). The criterion for cost-effectiveness is a B/C greater than 1.0. A 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.
Improving the energy performance of a building often requires an initial capital investment, though in some cases an
energy measure may be cost neutral or have a lower cost. In most cases the benefit is represented by annual On-Bill
utility or TDV savings and the cost by incremental first cost and replacement costs. In cases where both construction
costs and energy-related savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the benefit while the
increased energy costs are the cost.
In cases where a measure or package is cost-effective immediately (i.e., shows positive upfront construction cost
savings and lifetime energy cost savings), B/C ratio cost -effectiveness is represented by “>1”. Because of these
situations, NPV savings are also reported, which, in these cases, are positive values.
2.1.4 Utility Rates
In coordination with the IOU and POU rate teams the Reach Code Team determined appropriate utility rates for each
CZ and package as of October 2022. The utility tariffs, summarized in Table 1, were determined based on the annual
load profile of each prototype and the corresponding package, the most prevalent rate in each utility territory, and
information indicating that the rates were unlikely to be phased out during the code cycle.
A time-of-use (TOU) rate was applied to most cases, some POUs may not have TOU rates. In addition to energy
consumption charges, there are kW demand charges for monthly peak loads. Utilities calculate the peak load by the
highest kW of the 15-minute interval readings in the month. However, the energy modeling software pro duces results
on hourly intervals; hence, the Team calculated the demand charges by multiplying the highest load of all hourly loads
in a month with the corresponding demand charge per kW. The utility rates applicable to a prototype may vary by
package and CZ especially between a mixed fuel and all-electric package if the monthly peak demand loads exceed
the applicable threshold.
The Reach Code Team coordinated with utilities to select tariffs for each prototype given the annual energy demand
profile of each specific prototype, climate zone, and measure package and the most prevalent rates in each utility
territory. The Reach Code Team did not compare a variety of tariffs to determine their impact on cost-effectiveness.
Utility rate updates can affect cost-effectiveness results. For a more detailed breakdown of the rates selected, refer to
Appendix 8.2.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 7
Methodology and Assumptions
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
For packages with PV generation, the approved Net Energy Metering (NEM) 2.0 tariffs were applied along with
minimum daily use billing and mandatory non-bypassable charges. For the PV cases, annual electric production was
always less than the modeled annual electricity consumption; therefore, no credits for surplus generation were
necessary.
The analysis assumes that utility rates escalate over time for commercial buildings, as described in Appendix 8.2.
Escalation rates above inflation for electric ity beyond 2023 are assumed to be between 0.2% and 0.7%, before
dropping to a steady 0.6% escalation per year in 2030. Natural gas is assumed to escalate at a relatively higher rate,
peaking at 7.7% in 2024, then escalating more slowly to a rate of approximately 2% in the latter years of the analysis
period.
Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on CZ (October 2022)
CZs Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Natural Gas
Investor-Owned Utilities
1-5,11-13,16 Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) B-1 / B-10 G-NR1
6, 8-10, 14,
15
Southern California Edison (SCE) / Southern
California Gas (SCG)
TOU-GS-1 / TOU-GS-2
/TOU-GS-3 G-10 (GN-10)
7, 10, 14 San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) AL-TOU + EECC (AL-TOU)
GN-3
Publicly Owned Utilities
4 City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) E-2 G-2
12 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) CI-TOD 1 (CITS-0 /CITS-1) G-NR1
2.2 Energy Simulations
The Reach Code Team performed energy simulations using California’s Building Energy Code Compliance Software
CBECC 2022.1.0 (1250) with ruleset version BEMCmpMgr 2022.1.0 (7361) (California Building Energy Code
Compliance 2022).2 This is the first 2022 Title 24 code compliance software approved by Energy Commission for
compliance of nonresidential buildings on June 8, 2022. The CBECC software combined the capabilities of CBECC-
Com and CBECC-Res software into one to model both nonresidential and multifamily building prototypes in one
interface.
The Reach Code Team set up parametric simulations using Modelkit software to run thousands of measure packages
for each prototype in all California’s CZs. Individual measures were simulated separately and combined into cost-
effective measure packages for each CZ. Where necessary, the Reach Code Team employed minor ruleset changes,
such as load flexibility measures that alter thermostat setpoint schedules, to improve the cost-effectiveness of measure
packages. While these measures produce operational savings, they may not be used to achieve code compliance
without further software upgrades.
2.3 2022 T24 Compliance Metrics
2022 Title 24 Section 140.1 defines the energy budget of the building based on source energy and TDV energy for
space-conditioning, indoor lighting, mechanical ventilation, photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage systems , and service
2 Prior to the CBECC software, the Reach Code Team used CBECC-Com 2022 and CBECC 2022.0.8 Beta to model nonresidential
prototypes for the 2022 reach code analysis. The Reach Code Team noted the changes in results due to updates in functionalities
and standard design assumptions.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 8
Methodology and Assumptions
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
water heating and covered process loads. CEC has introduced two new compliance metrics in addition to Total
Compliance TDV Margin for 2022 code cycle. A building needs to comply with all three compliance metrics below:
▪ Efficiency TDV. Efficiency TDV accounts for all regulated end-uses but does not include the impacts of PV
and battery storage.
▪ Total TDV. Total TDV Compliance metric includes regulated end-uses accounting for PV and battery storage
contributions.
▪ Source Energy. Source energy is based on fuel used for power generation, assuming utilities meet all
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) goals and other obligations projected over 15-year lifecycle.
2.4 GHG Emissions
The analysis uses the GHG emissions estimates built into CBECC. The GHG emission multipliers were developed by
Energy + Environmental Economics (E3) to support development of compliance metrics for use in the 2022 California
energy code (E3 2021). There are 8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time dependent energy use and carbon
emissions based on source emissions, including RPS projections. For the 2022 code cycle, the multipliers incorporate
GHG from methane and refrigerant leakage, which are two significant sources of GHG emissions (NORESCO 2020).
There are 32 strings of multipliers, with a different string for each California CZ and each fuel type (metric tons of CO2
per kWh for electricity and metric tons of CO2 per therm for natural gas).
2.5 Limitations and Further Considerations
The Team encountered some modeling limitations, outside of the Team’s control that should be noted while using
these results to inform reach code policies,
▪ CBECC Software:
• The Reach Code Team coordinated with the CBECC software development team on potential
differences in our understanding of 2022 code requirements and its i mplementation in standard design
such as battery controls. The version of 2022 CBECC software v1.0, described in Section 2.2,
available to the Reach Code Team at the time of the analysis has limited functionalities and could not
model heat pump hydronic system or other measures like drain water heat recovery. As the software
evolves, some results may look different.
• The most likely all-electric replacement for a central gas boiler serving a variable air volume reheat
system would be a central heat pump boiler; however, this system cannot be modeled in CBECC at
the time of the writing of this report. The Reach Code Team is treating this analysis as temporary until
a compliance pathway is established for a central heat pump boiler in the Energy Code and results can
be updated accordingly.
• The team identified some apparent anomalies in software-reported compliance margins when they
became available in June 2022. The Reach Code Team is in the midst of discussing outputs and
ramifications with software development team specifically related to ventilation such as fan power and
heat recovery, among other modeling methods. Results may change with future software versions. In
the interim, the Reach Code Team manually calculated the compliance margins using the mixed fuel
baseline model created in this study based on our best understanding .
▪ Prototype Building: The cost-effectiveness analysis is based on standard prototypical buildings, which may
differ from actual buildings being constructed. Jurisdictions should keep this in mind while extrapolating to the
buildings in their territory.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 9
Methodology and Assumptions
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
▪ System Cost Assumptions: The incremental electrification and additional measure costs are based on
specific system selection and assumptions made by experienced professionals. These costs can vary based
on contractor, system design and specifications, and regional variation.
The Team will re-evaluate packages with central heat pump boiler system in Medium Office and Small Hotel in early
2023. In addition to the packages assessed in the report, there are other future potential enhancements that can be
considered for more cost-effective or compliant packages:
▪ Adding more solar PV than already analyzed if the building has more roof space to accommodate.
▪ Adding battery at higher levels than prescriptively required in 2022 Title 24 with more advanced controls.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures as software capability evolves such as drain water heat recovery.
▪ Applying federally pre-emptive (high) efficiency energy systems or appliances.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 10
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
This section describes the prototype characteristics and the scope of analysis including measures and their
corresponding costs. The Reach Code Team used versions of the following four DOE building prototypes to evaluate
cost-effectiveness of measure packages in the occupancy types listed below:
▪ Medium Office
▪ Medium Retail
▪ Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR)
▪ Small Hotel
The Reach Code Team designed the baseline prototypes to be mixed fuel based on 2022 Title 24 Final Express Terms
requirements. The Reach Code Team reviewed the 2022 T24 ACM HVAC system map to ensure alignment as
applicable for most cases, differences if any are discussed in subsequent sections. The Team built new construction
prototypes to have compliance margins as close to zero as possible to reflect a prescriptively compliant new
construction building in each CZ. The code compliance is based on the first publicly available CBECC v1.0 compliance
software as described in Section 2.2. Misalignments have been reported back to the software team for future software
iterations, as described in Section 2.5.
3.1 Prototype Characteristics
The DOE provides building prototype models which, when modified to comply with 2022 Title 24 requirements, can be
used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of efficiency measures (U.S. Department of Energy 2022 A). These prototypes
have historically been used by the En ergy Commission to assess potential code enhancements. The selection of four
building types for this analysis is based on the priority suggested by a group of California cities. The cost-effectiveness
results of this study could potentially be extrapolated to other building types that have similar properties such as
occupancy pattern, HVAC design and layout.
Water heating includes both service hot water (SHW) for office and retail buildings and domestic hot water for hotel
guest rooms. In this report, water heating or SHW is used to refer to both. The compliance software assumes a
Standard Design, where HVAC and SHW systems are based on the system maps included in 2022 Nonresidential
ACM Reference Manual. However, the Reach Code Team applied both 2022 Title 24 prescriptive requirements and
2022 ACM system map for baseline mixed fuel model, HVAC and SHW system characteristics as described below.
▪ Medium Office
• The HVAC design is a variable air volume (VAV) reheat system with two gas hot water boilers, three
packaged rooftop units (one serving each floor), and VAV terminal units with hot water reheat coils.
• The SHW design includes one 8.7 kW electric resistance hot water heater with a 5-gallon storage tank.
▪ Medium Retail
• For CZs 2 to 15, the 2022 Title 24 ACM System Map Standard Design informed the baseline model to
have three packaged Single Zone Heat Pump (SZHP) systems for the smaller capacity (<240 kBtuh)
thermal zones, in alignment with 2022 Title 24 prescriptive code requirements.3 The large (>240 kBtuh)
core thermal zone has two smaller (<240 kBtuh) SZHPs with VAV fans instead of one large SZHP,
since larger rooftop packaged heat pumps are not available in the market. The 2022 Title24 ACM
Standard Design assumes a large SZHP for larger zones as well, however this deviation does not
impact the results considerably.3
3 https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2022/2022 -nonresidential-and-multifamily-alternative-calculation-method-reference
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 11
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
• For CZs 1 and 16, the baseline model assumed all-electric packaged single zone heat pumps similar
to CZs 2-15. The assumption deviates from 2022 Title24 ACM System Map that suggests a single
zone dual fuel heat pump. Presumably this will not impact results significantly because the dual fuel
system will be in heat-pump mode most times.
• The SHW design includes one 8.7 kW electric resistance hot water heater with a 5-gallon storage tank.
▪ Quick-Service Restaurant
• HVAC includes two SZAC (VAV or constant volume, depending on capacity) with gas furnace, one for
kitchen and another for dining area. An exhaust fan is applied for kitchens in all climates based on
prescriptive requirements in 2022 Title 24 code.
• The SHW design includes a gas storage water heater with a 100-gallon storage tank.
▪ Small Hotel
• The nonresidential HVAC design is a VAV reheat system with two gas hot water boilers, four packaged
rooftop units (one serving each floor), and VAV terminal units with hot water reheat coils. The SHW
design includes a small electric resistance water heater with 30-gallon storage tank.
• The guest room HVAC design includes one packaged SZAC unit with gas furnace serving each guest
room. The water heating design includes a central gas water heater with a 250-gallon storage tank and
recirculation pump, serving all guest rooms.
Table 2 summarizes the baseline mixed-fuel prototype characteristics, based on prescriptive 2022 Title 24 new
construction requirements.
Table 2. Baseline Prototype Characteristics
Medium Office
Medium Retail
Quick-Service Restaurant
Small Hotel
Conditioned floor
area (ft2) 53,628 24,563 2,501
42,554
(77 guest rooms)
(Nonresidential area:
15,282 (36%))
Number of stories 3 1 1 4
Window-to-Wall
Area ratio 0.33 0.07 0.11 0.14
Window U-
factor/SHGC
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
U-factor:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8, 10, 16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
Nonresidential:
U-factor:
CZ 1-8,10,16 – 0.36
CZ 9, 11-15 –0.34
SHGC:
CZ 1-8,10,16 – 0.25
CZ 9, 11-15 – 0.22
Guest Rooms:
U-factor: 0.36
SHGC: 0.25
Solar PV size 123 kW – 204 kW
Depending on CZ
64 kW – 87 kW
Depending on CZ None 17 kW – 25 kW
Depending on CZ
Battery Storage 217 kWh – 360 kWh
Depending on CZ
70 kWh – 94 kWh
Depending on CZ None 16 kWh – 24 kWh
Depending on CZ
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 12
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Medium Office
Medium Retail
Quick-Service Restaurant
Small Hotel
HVAC System
VAV reheat system with
packaged rooftop units,
gas boilers, VAV terminal
units with hot water
reheat
CZ 1
Heat recovery for Core
Retail space only
< 65 kBtu/h: SZHP
> 65 kBtu/h and < 240
kBtu/h: SZHP VAV
> 240 kBtu/h: SZHP VAV
< 65 kBtu/h:
SZAC + gas furnace
> 65 kBtu/h:
SZAC VAV
Nonresidential and Laundry:
VAV reheat system with
packaged rooftop units, gas
boilers, VAV terminal units with
hot water reheat
Guest Rooms: SZAC with gas
furnaces
SHW System 5-gallon electric resistance
water heater
5-gallon electric resistance
water heater
100-gallon gas water
heater
Nonresidential: 30-gallon
electric resistance water heater
Laundry Room: 120-gal gas
storage water heater
Guest rooms: Central gas water
heater, 250 gallons storage,
recirculation loop
3.2 Measure Definitions and Costs
The measures evaluated in the analysis fall into four different categories:
Fuel Substitution
▪ Heat pump or electric
space heating or gas
furnace
▪ Heat pump or electric
water heaters
▪ Electric cooking
▪ Electric clothes dryer
▪ Electrical panel capacity
▪ Natural gas infrastructure
Energy Efficiency
▪ Envelope
▪ Mechanical equipment
(HVAC and SHW)
▪ Lighting
Load Flexibility
▪ Peak Load
shedding
▪ Load shift
Additional solar PV
and/or battery
storage.
These measures are detailed further in this section.
3.2.1 Fuel Substitution
The Reach Code Team investigated the cost and performance impacts and associated infrastructure costs associated
with changing the mixed-fuel baseline HVAC and water heating systems to all-electric equipment for all prototypes
except Medium Retail where the baseline is already an all-electric design.
For Medium Office, Quick Service Restaurant and Small Hotel, the fuel substitution measure entails electrification
including heat pump space heating, electric resistance re-heat coils, electric water heaters with storage tank, heat
pump water heating, increasing electrical capacity, and eliminating natural gas connections that would have been
present in mixed-fuel new construction.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 13
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
For Medium Retail with all-electric baseline, the fuel substitution measure entails mixed-fuel space conditioning system
including single zone packaged AC with gas furnace, dual fuel heat pump, adding gas infrastructure costs and
eliminating any additional electric infrastructure.
3.2.1.1 HVAC and Water Heating
The 2022 T24 nonresidential standards analysis uses a mixed-fuel baseline for most of the Standard Design
mechanical equipment, primarily gas for space heating, except for some heat pump scenarios in Retail prototype (see
Table 2). Quick-Service Restaurant has a gas storage water heater in baseline, and heat pump water heater in all-
electric scenario. The Small Hotel has a central gas water heating system serving the guest rooms and a separate gas
storage water heater for laundry room. In the all-electric scenario, gas equipment serving HVAC and water heating
end-uses is replaced with electric equipment. Full details of HVAC and water heating systems in baseline and
proposed fuel substitution measure package are described in Table 3.
Regions of California covered by the South Coast Air Quality Management District have emissions restrictions imposed
on mechanical equipment. The Reach Code Team investigated the potential cost implications of meeting these
requirements for gas furnaces and boilers but found that costs are minimal for mechanical systems under 2,000,000
Btu/h, and therefore did not include them. All gas-fired mechanical systems in this study are under 2,000,000 Btu/h and
are subject to only an initial permitting fee, while larger systems require additional permitting costs and annual
renewals.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 14
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 3. HVAC and Water Heating Characteristics Summary
Medium Office
Medium Retail
Quick-Service
Restaurant
Small Hotel
HVAC
Baseline
Packaged DX +
VAV with hot
water reheat.
Central gas
boilers.
All zones and CZs: Single
zone packaged heat
pumps
Packaged SZAC +
gas furnace
Nonresidential: Packaged DX
+ VAV with hot water
reheat. Central gas boilers.
Guest Rooms: Packaged
SZAC +
gas furnaces
Proposed – Fuel
Substitution
Packaged DX +
VAV with electric
resistance reheat.
Core zone (>30 ton):
Packaged SZAC + VAV +
gas furnace
Other small zones: SZHP,
or dual fuel heat pump
for CZ 1 and 16
Single zone packaged
heat pumps
Nonresidential: Packaged DX
+ VAV with electric
resistance reheat
Guest Rooms: SZHPs
SHW
Baseline
Electric resistance
with storage
Electric resistance with
storage
Gas storage water
heater
Nonresidential: Electric
resistance storage
Guest Rooms: Central gas
storage with recirculation
Proposed – Fuel
Substitution
Unitary heat pump
water heater
Nonresidential: Electric
resistance storage
Guest Rooms: Central heat
pump water heater with
recirculation
The Reach Code Team received cost data for mechanical equipment from two experienced mechanical design firms
including equipment and material, labor, subcontractors (for example, HVAC and SHW control systems), and
contractor overhead.
3.2.1.1.1 Medium Office
For the Medium Office all-electric HVAC design, the Reach Code Team investigated several potential all-electric
design options, including variable refrigerant flow, packaged heat pumps, and variable volume and temperature
systems. The most likely all-electric replacement for a central gas boiler serving a variable air volume reheat system
would be a central heat pump boiler; however, this system cannot be modeled in CBECC at the time of writing of this
report. As such, Reach Code Team is treating this analysis as temporary until a compliance pathway is established for
a central heat pump boiler in the Energy Code and results can be updated accordingly. This modeling capability is
anticipated by Q1 2023 according to discussions with the CBECC software development team, and the cost-
effectiveness analysis should become available in the first half of 2023.
After seeking feedback from the design community and considering the software modeling constraints, the Reach
Code Team determined that the most feasible all-electric HVAC system is a VAV system with an electric resistance
reheat instead of hot water reheat coil. A parallel fan-powered box (PFPB) implementation of electric resistance reheat
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 15
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
would further improve efficiency due to reducing ventilation requirements, but an accurate implementation of PFPBs is
not currently available in compliance software.
The actual gas consumption for the VAV hot water reheat baseline may be higher than the current simulation results
due to a combination of boiler and hot water distribution losses. A recent research study shows that the total losses can
account for as high as 80 percent of the boiler energy use.4 If these losses are considered savings for the electric
resistance reheat (which has zero associated distribution loss), cost-effectiveness may be higher than presented.
The all-electric SHW system remains the same electric resistance water heater as the baseline and has no associated
incremental costs. Cost data for Medium Office designs are presented in Table 4. The all-electric HVAC system
presents cost savings compared to the hot water reheat system from elimination of the hot water boiler and associated
hot water piping distribution. CZ10 and CZ15 all-electric design costs are slightly higher because they require larger
size rooftop heat pumps than the other CZs.
Table 4. Medium Office Average Mechanical System Costs
Components (HVAC Only)
Baseline – Mixed Fuel
Proposed – All-electric Incremental Cost
Description
Packaged units, boilers,
hot water piping, VAV
boxes, ductwork, grilles
Packaged units, electric
resistance VAV boxes,
electric circuitry,
ductwork, grilles
VAV Boxes, electric
infrastructure
Material $491,630 $438,555 $(53,075)
Labor $173,816 $102,120 $(71,696)
Electric Infrastructure $0 $112,340 $112,340
Gas Infrastructure $17,895 $0 $(17,895)
Overhead & CZ adjustment ** $267,052 $250,114 $(16,938)
TOTAL $950,393 $903,129 $(47,264)
** The overhead and CZ adjustment factors are presented in Section 8.3.
3.2.1.1.2 Medium Retail
The baseline HVAC system includes five packaged single zone heat pumps. Based on fan control requirements in
Section 140.4(m), units with cooling capacity ≥ 65,000 Btu/h have variable air volume fans, while smaller units have
constant volume fans. For the Medium Retail proposed fuel substitution scenario, the Reach Code Team assumed one
large Single Zone Packaged ACs with gas furnaces to replace the two smaller packaged heat pumps in the large core
thermal zone. The all-electric SHW system remains the same electric resistance water heater as the baseline and has
no associated incremental costs. In addition, according to the prescriptive requirement in Section 140.4 (q), the air
system of Core Retail Zone in CZ1 meets the requirement in Table 140.4 J, which should include exhaust air heat
recovery. Cost data for Medium Retail designs are presented in Table 5. Costs for rooftop air-conditioning systems are
very similar to rooftop heat pump systems.
4 Raftery, P., A. Geronazzo, H. Cheng, and G. Paliaga. 2018. Quantifying energy losses in hot water reheat systems. Energy and
Buildings, 179: 183-199. November. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.09.020. Retrieved from
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3qs8f8qx
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 16
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
For climate zones 2 to 15, the proposed fuel substitution HVAC design includes three SZHP units (VAV or constant
volume, depending on capacity) based on prescriptive requirements and one large SZAC that is between 35-45 tons
for the core zone.
For climate zones 1 and 16, the smaller capacity (<240 kBtuh) thermal zones may have either of dual-fuel SZHPs or
SZACs, depending on capacity. The core zone with 35-to-45-ton cooling capacity is assumed to have one large SZAC.
CZ 1 also assumes an exhaust air heat recovery system for core zone based on prescriptive requirement in Title 24
Part 6 Section 140.4.
Table 5. Medium Retail Average Mechanical System Costs
Components (HVAC
Only)
Baseline – All-electric
Proposed – Mixed Fuel Incremental Cost
Description SZHPs
Single zone AC +
furnace, SZHP, or dual
fuel SZHP, depending
upon capacity and CZ
SZAC with gas furnace,
Added gas
infrastructure cost
HVAC – Material $189,160 $183,157 $(6,003)
HVAC – Labor $54,785 $52,886 $(1,899)
Electric Infrastructure $0 $0 -
Gas Infrastructure $0 $17,895 $17,895
Overhead & CZ
adjustment **
$94,600 $98,519 $3,919
TOTAL $338,546 $352,458 $13,912
** The overhead and CZ adjustment factors are presented in Section 8.3.
3.2.1.1.3 Quick-Service Restaurant
The baseline HVAC system includes two packaged single zone rooftop ACs with gas furnaces . Based on fan control
requirements in Section 140.4(m), units with cooling capacity ≥ 65,000 Btu/h have variable air volume fans, while
smaller units have constant volume fans. The SHW design includes one central gas storage water heater with 150
kBtu/h input capacity and a 100-gallon storage tank. For the QSR all-electric design, the Reach Code Team assumed
packaged heat pumps and an A.O. Smith CHP-120 heat pump water heater with a 120-gallon storage tank. Cost data
for the QSR designs are presented in Table 6, which shows the costs for full electrification of the HVAC and water
heating equipment.
The Team has not included costs of electrifying the cooking equipment because of the negative impact on cost-
effectiveness, as demonstrated in a 2021 Restaurants cost-effectiveness study (TRC, P2S Engineers, and Western
Allied Mechanical 2022). The HVAC and SHW electrification packages are referred to as the HS package to reflect all-
electric HVAC and SHW.
Table 6. Quick-Service Restaurant Average Mechanical System Costs - HS Package
Components
Baseline – Mixed Fuel
Proposed – All-electric Incremental Cost
Description Single zone AC + furnace, gas
storage water heater
SZHP, heat pump water
heater
HVAC +SHW
electrification
HVAC Material $50,065 $52,785 $2,719
HVAC Labor $6,748 $6,249 $(499)
SHW – Material $10,198 $13,720 $3,523
SHW – Labor $2,650 $2,529 $(121)
Electric Infrastructure $0 $12,960 $12,960
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 17
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Gas Infrastructure $17,895 $15,878 -$2,017
Overhead & CZ adjustment ** $41,633 $47,612 $5,979
TOTAL $150,838 $173,382 $22,544
** The overhead and CZ adjustment factors are presented in Section 8.3.
3.2.1.1.4 Small Hotel
The Small Hotel has two different baseline equipment systems, one for the nonresidential spaces and one for the guest
rooms. The nonresidential HVAC system includes two gas hot water boilers, four packaged rooftop units, and twenty-
eight VAV terminal boxes with hot water reheat coil. The SHW design includes a small electric water heater with
storage tank for nonresidential areas and gas storage water heater dedicated to laundry room. The guest rooms HVAC
design includes one single-zone AC unit with gas furnace for each guest room, and the water heating design includes
one central gas storage water heater with a recirculation pump for all guest rooms.
For the Small Hotel all-electric design, the Reach Code Team assumed the nonresidential HVAC system to be
packaged heat pumps with electric resistance VAV terminal units, and the SHW system will remain a small electric
resistance water heater. As described in Section 3.2.1.1.1 above, a central heat pump boiler may be the most
commonly employed system type but was not evaluated in this study because of modeling limitations. For the guest
room all-electric HVAC system, the Team assumed SZHPs and a central heat pump water heater serving all guest
rooms. For the laundry room, all-electric HVAC system is same as other nonresidential areas and all-electric water
heating is a split heat pump water heater. The central heat pump water heater includes a temperature maintenance
loop with an electric resistance backup heater.
Cost data for Small Hotel designs are presented in Table 7. The all-electric design presents substantial cost savings
because there is no hot water plant or piping distribution system serving the nonresidential spaces. The incremental
cost savings are further enhanced considerably if packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs) are used instead of SZHPs
in guest rooms compared to split DX/furnace systems with individual flues.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 18
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 7. Small Hotel HVAC and Water Heating System Costs
Components
Baseline – Mixed Fuel
Proposed – All-electric Incremental Cost
Description
Non-residential spaces: Packaged
units, boilers, hot water piping,
VAV boxes, ductwork, grilles, gas
water heater for laundry
Guest rooms: SZAC + furnace,
central gas water heater
Non-residential spaces:
Packaged units, electric
resistance VAV boxes, electric
circuitry, ductwork, grilles, heat
pump water heater for laundry
Guest rooms: SZHP, central
heat pump water heater
HVAC (NR and Guest Rooms)
Electrification
SHW (Laundry Room and
Guest Rooms)
HVAC - Material $802,004 $625,642 $(176,361)
HVAC - Labor $366,733 $282,394 $(84,339)
SHW - Material $55,829 $139,087 $83,258
SHW - Labor $11,780 $15,080 $3,300
Electric
Infrastructure
$- $119,625 $119,625
Gas Infrastructure $74,943 $- $(74,943)
Overhead & CZ
adjustment **
$518,741 $461,001 $(57,739)
TOTAL $1,830,029 $1,642,830 $(187,199)
TOTAL
HVAC (PTHP option) $1,830,029 $1,161,178 ($668,851)
** The overhead and CZ adjustment factors are presented in 8.3.
3.2.1.2 Commercial Cooking Equipment
For Quick-Service Restaurant prototype, the Reach Code Team evaluated electrification of commercial cooking
equipment extensively in 2019 Restaurants Cost Effectiveness analysis and leveraged it for cost and other
specifications for the this study. It assumes a Type I exhaust hood and shows high incremental cost affecting the cost-
effectiveness of this measure. Table 8 summarizes the quick-service restaurant cooking equipment costs for both
mixed-fuel and all-electric scenarios.
Table 8. Quick-Service Restaurant Cooking Equipment Costs
Components
Baseline – Mixed Fuel
Proposed – All-electric (non
“HS” scenario) Incremental Cost
Description Gas based appliances Electric cooking appliance Cooking appliance
electrification
Cooking equipment
cost
$21,649 $43,534 $21,886
TOTAL $21,649 $43,534 $21,886
This measure also adds electric infrastructure cost as detailed in Table 10 below.
3.2.1.3 Commercial Clothes Dryer
For the all-electric measure, the Reach Code Team assumed electric resistance clothes dryers for Small Hotel
prototype. Commercial-scale heat pump clothes dryers take significantly longer time to dry compared to a conventional
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 19
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
gas or electric dryer and are not common in the United States On-Premise Laundry (OPL) market, where labor is
relatively expensive and use of heat pump dryers implies hotels may need to require more than one shift to perform
laundry duties. Most commercial clothes dryers are available in models that use either gas or electricity as the fuel
source, so there is negligible incremental cost for electric resistance dryers. Table 9 summarizes the Small Hotel
construction costs for both mixed-fuel and all-electric OPL scenarios.
Table 9. Small Hotel Clothes Dryer Costs
Components
Baseline – Mixed Fuel
Proposed – All-electric Incremental Cost
Description Gas clothes dryer Electric resistance clothes
dryer -
Clothes Dryer cost $29,342 $29,342 $0
TOTAL $29,342 $29,342 $(0)
This measure also adds electric infrastructure cost as detailed in Table 10 below.
3.2.1.4 Infrastructure Impacts
3.2.1.4.1 Electrical infrastructure
Electric heating appliances and equipment often require a larger electrical connection than an equivalent gas appliance
because of the higher voltage and amperage necessary to electrically generate heat. Thus, many buildings may
require larger electrical capacity than a comparable building with natural gas appliances. This includes:
▪ Electric resistance VAV space heating in the medium office and common area spaces of the small hotel.
▪ Heat pump water heating for the guest room spaces of the small hotel.
Table 10 details the cost impact of additional electrical panel sizing and wiring required for all-electric scenarios as
compared to their corresponding mixed-fuel scenario The costs are based on estimates from one contractor. The
Reach Code Team excluded costs associated with electrical service connection upgrades because these costs are
very often rate-based and highly complex.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 20
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 10. Electrical Infrastructure Costs
Mixed-Fuel Equipment All-electric Equipment Electrical Infrastructure
Impact
Incremental
Cost
Medium
Office
Hot water reheat system
with gas boiler plant and
VAV boxes with hot water
reheat coils
VAV boxes with electric
resistance reheat coils
Upgraded transformers,
transformer feeders,
switchboards, and branch
circuits
$ 112,340
Medium
Retail
Mix of SZHPs and single zone
AC plus furnace serving all
zones
SZHPs serving all zones Electrical requirements are
driven by cooling capacity,
so no impact.
$0
Quick-Service
Restaurant
Gas water heater Heat pump water heater Upgraded switchboard,
transformer feeder, and
branch circuits
$12,960
Gas Water heater, Gas
cooking
Heat pump water heater,
Electric cooking
Upgraded switchboard,
transformer feeder, and
branch circuits
$95,260
Small Hotel Guest rooms HVAC: Single
zone AC plus furnace
Non-residential spaces
HVAC: Hot water reheat
system with gas boiler plant
and VAV boxes with hot
water reheat coils.
Water heating: Gas water
heating serving both laundry
and guest rooms.
Process: Gas dryers.
Guest rooms HVAC: SZHPs
Non-residential spaces
HVAC: VAV boxes with
electric resistance reheat
coils.
Water heating: Heat pump
water heating serving both
laundry and guest rooms.
Process: Electric resistance
dryers.
Upgraded transformers,
transformer feeders,
switchboards, and branch
circuits
$119,625
3.2.1.4.2 Gas Piping
The Reach Code Team assumes that gas would not be supplied to the site in an all-electric new construction scenario.
Eliminating natural gas in new construction would save costs associated with connecting a service line from the street
main to the building, piping distribution within the building, and monthly connection charges by the utility.
The Reach Code Team determined that for a new construction building with natural gas piping, there is a service line
(branch connection) from the natural gas main to the building meter. Table 11 gives a summary of the gas
infrastructure costs by component, assuming 1-inch corrugated stainless-steel tubing (CSST) material is used for the
plumbing distribution. The Reach Code Team assumes that the gas meter costs vary depending on the gas load.
Based on typical space heating loads for all building types, the Reach Code Team categorized CZs 1 and 16 as ‘High-
load CZs’ and CZs 2-15 as ‘Low-load CZs’. The Reach Code Team assumed an interior plumbing distribution length
based on the expected layout. Table 12 gives the total gas infrastructure cost by building type. The costs are based on
estimates from one contractor.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 21
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 11. Gas Infrastructure Costs by Component
Component Details Cost
Meter, including Pressure
Regulator, and Earthquake Valve
Low load CZ (CZ 2-15) $11,056
High load CZ (CZ 1,16) $15,756
Gas lateral Cost per linear foot of 1" CSST $40
Connection charges Includes street cut and plan review $1,015
Interior plumbing distribution Cost per linear foot of 1" CSST $40
Table 12. Total Gas Infrastructure Cost Estimates by Building Type
Total gas infrastructure cost
Building Prototype Interior plumbing distribution length (ft) Low load CZ High load CZ
Medium Office 100 $17,307 $22,007
Medium Retail 100 $17,307 $22,007
Quick-Service Restaurant 100 $2,017*
Small Hotel 1,412 $70,243 $74,943
*The Quick-Service Restaurant package includes gas cooking appliances , which will require a gas lateral and meter. These costs
represent only the interior plumbing distribution costs that would have served the HVAC and SHW systems.
3.2.2 Efficiency
The Reach Code Team started with a potential list of energy efficiency measures proposed for the 2025 Title 24 energy
code update by the Statewide Building Codes Advocacy program (CASE Team)5, which initially included over 500
options. Other options originated in previous energy code cycles or were drawn from other codes or standards
(examples: ASHRAE 90.1 and International Energy Conservation Code [IECC]), literature reviews, or expert
recommendations. The Reach Code Team leveraged the CASE Team's assessment tools for the 2025 Cycle, focusing
on measures prioritized by the CASE Team. The Reach Code Team filtered the list of potential measures based on
building type (to remove measures that applied to building types not covered in this study), measure category (to
remove end-uses and loads that are not relevant to the prototypes) and impacts to new construction. Based on this
filtering, the Team was left with around 100 measures to consider. The Reach Code Team ranked this list of potential
measures based on applicability to the prototypes in this study, ability to model in simulat ion software, demonstrated
energy savings potential, and market readiness .
Please note that the measures requiring a ruleset update cannot currently be modeled for compliance
purposes. The modeling method for each efficiency measure is defined in their respective measure descriptions in
Section 3.2.2.1 and if the ruleset amendment was applied. Please refer to Section 2.5 for further details.
The subsections below describe the energy efficiency measures that the Team analyzed, including description,
modeling approach, and specification.
3.2.2.1 Envelope
1. Cool Roof: Requires higher reflectance and emittance values for the Medium Office building only. This
measure was not shown to produce substantial savings in the other prototypes.
5 https://title24stakeholders.com/
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 22
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Modeling: Modeled cool roof measure in efficiency measures package by updating Aged Solar
Reflectance (ASR) and/or Thermal Emittance (TE) in CBECC software.
Specification: Increased ASR from 0.63 to 0.70 with a TE of 0.85 in CZs 4 and 6-15.
2. Efficient Vertical Fenestration: Requires lower U-factor and Solar Heat Gain Coefficient (SHGC) for windows
in select climate zones for three building types (Medium Office, Retail, and Small Hotel). The measure details
and the climate zone selection are based on the proposition of 2022 NR CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team
2020 B).
Modeling: Modeled high performance windows in efficiency measures package by updating U-factor and
SHGC inputs in CBECC software.
Specification: Reduced U-factor from 0.36 to 0.34 and SHGC from 0.25 to 0.22 in CZs 2, 6, 7 and 8 for
Medium Office and Retail, Reduced U-factor from 0.36 to 0.34 and SHGC from 0.25 to 0.22 in
all CZs for Small Hotel.
3. Vertical Fenestration as a Function of Orientation: Limit the amount of fenestration area as a function of
orientation for the Medium Office. East-facing and west-facing windows are each limited to one-half of the
average amount of north-facing and south-facing windows.
Modeling: Change z-coordinate input of windows in CBECC software for Medium Office to increase or
decrease fenestration area for the Medium Office.
Specification: Decreased east-facing and west-facing fenestration area from 468 to 390 square feet.
Increased north-facing and south-facing fenestration area from 703 to 781 square feet.
3.2.2.2 Mechanical Equipment (SHW and HVAC)
4. Water Efficient Fixtures in Kitchen: Specifies commercial dishwashers that use 20% less water than
ENERGY STAR® specifications. In addition, the dishwasher includes heat recovery function such that it only
needs connection to cold water and reduces hot water demand and central SHW system capacity. For QSRs,
which typically specify a three-compartment sink for dishwashing, this measure would replace or add a
dishwasher to reduce total hot water load. The measure also adds 1.0 gallon per minute (GPM) faucet aerators
to hand-washing sinks in the kitchen to reduce water usage. Title 20 requires kitchen sinks to have a flow rate
of 1.8 GPM at most. The reduced hot water load from the water efficient fixtures above allows the heat pump
water heater (HPWH) to operate without an electric resistance back-up.
Modeling: Reduced water usage in the ruleset based on calculations of expected water usage from
literature review and fixture specifications. HPWH coefficient of performance (COP) is
increased since there is no electric resistance back-up.
Specification: Decreased hot water usage by 26% in the software ruleset (13.4 gallons per person to 9.9
gallons per person) and increased HPWH COP from 3.1 to 4.2.
5. Ozone Washing Machines: Adds an ozone system to the large on-premises washing machines. The ozone
laundry system generates ozone, which helps clean fabrics by chemically reacting with soils in cold water. This
measure saves energy by reducing hot water usage and by reducing cycle time for laundry systems. Refer to
DEER Deemed measure SWAP005-01 for more information (California Public Utilites Commission 2022).
Modeling: Reduced the total runtime of each cycle and hot water hourly usage per person (gallons per
hour per person) for laundry area in software ruleset.
Specification: Reduced hot water usage by 85%, from 48.4 to 7.3 gal/hour-person based on the deemed
measure data from the California electronic Technical Reference Manual (California Technical
Forum 2022).
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 23
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
6. Efficient Hot Water Distribution: Reduces domestic hot water (DHW) distribution system pipe heat losses in
two ways. First, the Team used pipe sizing requirements in Appendix M of the California Plumbing Code
instead of Appendix A. Appendix M reduces pipe diameters for the cold and hot water supply lines based on
advancements made in water efficiency standards for plumbing fixtures found in hotel bathrooms. Second, the
Team added more stringent pipe insulation thickness requirements for hotels to match that of single and
multifamily dwellings using Title 24 Table 160.4-A Pipe Insulation Thickness Requirements for Multifamily
DHW Systems instead of Table 120.3-A.
Modeling: The Team calculated the pipe heat loss savings for the Small Hotel prototype by following the
modelling methodology applied to the low-rise loaded corridor multi-family building prototype in
the 2022 CASE Multifamily Domestic Hot Water Distribution report (Statewide CASE Team
2020 A). The Team designed a riser distribution system for the Small Hotel prototype building
using the baseline Appendix A and modern Appendix M pipe sizing tables. The pipe design
and total pipe surface area of the supply and return lines for the Small Hotel closely matched
the Low-Rise Loader Corridor Building prototype. The hotel insulated pipe heat loss for both
Appendix A and M was approximated from the multifamily building heat loss modelling results
for the 16 CZs and water heater energy savings calculated for the two sub-measures.
Specification: (a) Pipe diameter decreased from Appendix A requirements to Appendix M multifamily
plumbing requirements (b) For pipe diameters at or above 1.5 inches, increase the insulation
thickness from 1.5 to two inches thick for fluids operating in the 105 -140⁰F temperature range.
. The Team reduced the DHW energy consumption by 0.4 – 0.7% depending on CZ in a post-
processing of the model.
7. Demand Control Ventilation (DCV) and Transfer Air: The California Energy Code requires kitchen exhaust
to have DCV if the exhaust rate is greater than 5,000 cfm. This measure expands this requirement and applies
DCV regardless of the exhaust rate for the QSR. Additionally, the kitchen makeup air supply is decreased by
requiring at least 15% of replacement air to come from the transfer air in the dining space that would otherwise
be exhausted.
Modeling: Changed exhaust fan from constant speed fan to variable speed and reduce kitchen
ventilation airflow rate for the QSR.
Specification: Changed Kitchen Exhaust Fan Control Method to Variable Flow Variable Speed Drive,
reduced kitchen ventilation from 2,730 cfm to 2,293 cfm.
8. Guest Room Ventilation and Fan Power: Uses the 2021 IECC fan power limitation requirements for
ventilation fans under 1/12 horsepower, and approximates the ASHRAE 90.1 Small Hotel guestroom control
requirements, which require shutting off ventilation within five minutes of all occupants leaving the room and
changing the cooling setpoint to at least 80⁰F and heating setpoint to at most 60⁰F.
Modeling: Since variable occupancy cannot be modeled in CBECC, the Reach Code Team revised the
software ruleset ventilation schedule and setpoints from 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM—the time range
where the CBECC software assumed occupancy to be less than half for all guestrooms.
Specification: Heating setpoint reduced from 68°F to 66°F, cooling setpoint increased from 78°F to 80°F PM,
and ventilation shut off from 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Guestroom ventilation fans have fan efficacy
of 0.263 W/cfm.
9. Variable speed Fans: Require variable speed fans at lower capacities than required by Title 24 Part 6 Section
140.4(m), currently at 65,000 Btu/hr. This measure is based on the 2022 Title 24 Part 6, Section 140.4(m),
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 24
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
where direct expansion units greater than 65,000 Btu/hr that control the capacity of the mechanical cooling
directly shall have a minimum of two stages of mechanical cooling capacity and variable speed fan control.
Modeling: Reduced the cooling capacity threshold from 65,000 Btu/hr to 48,000 Btu/hr. Changed the
supply fan control from constant speed to variable speed for zones that have cooling capacity
> 48,000 Btu/hr and < 65,000 Btu/hr in the Medium Retail and QSR.
Specification: Changed the supply fan control from Constant Volume to Variable Speed Drive for the Front
Retail and Point-of-Sale thermal zones in Medium Retail prototype and the Dining Zone in the
QSR prototype.
3.2.2.3 Lighting
10. Interior lighting reduced lighting power density: Update lighting power densities (LPD, measured as
Watts/ft2) requirements based on technology advances (e.g., optical efficiency, thermal management, and
improved bandgap materials). Identify spaces with opportunities for more savings from lowered LPDs—not all
spaces are subject to LPD reductions. Take into consideration IES recommended practices and biological
effectiveness metrics (such as WELL) when developing the proposed LPD values (WELL 2022).
The 2022 Indoor Lighting CASE Study (Statewide CASE Team 2021 D) provided a survey of 2x2 troffer
products available in the Design Lights Consortium Qualified Products List (DLC -QPL) and the efficacy level
each measured. This study indicated that at the time of the report approximately 20% of available DLC -QPL
products exceeded the performance level of the ‘Standard’ DLC-QPL listing by approximately 15%, meeting
the ‘Premium’ listing criteria. The Title 24 2022 CASE Report uses the ‘Standard’ designation performance
level as the design baseline for all the LPD calculations in the code. This document proposes using the
‘Premium’ designation performance as the basis of the LPD allowances.
A DOE study on solid-state light sources (LEDs) provides projections of efficacy improvement for LED light
sources that are in the range of 2.5 to 3% per year, continuing for the next five or ten years (U.S. Department
of Energy 2019 B). So, the products offered for sale by the luminaire manufacturers are improving as older
products are discontinued and newer ones are introduced. Even in just three years, the overall performance of
the products available can improve by 7 to 9%.
A recent Navigant LED pricing study shows a slightly negative cost to efficacy correlation, indicating that higher
performing products may be slightly lower in cost (Navigant Consulting 2018). This is likely to be in part caused
by the decreasing cost of the LED chips with each subsequent generation produced. There is likely to be no
cost associated with employing higher performing LED luminaires.
Modeling: Reduce LPDs by approximately 13% in each space listed below under regulated lighting below
Title 24 prescriptive requirements.
Specification: Medium Office
• All spaces: 0.52 W/ft2
Medium Retail
• Storage: 0.36 W/ft2
• Retail sales: 0.86 W/ft2
• Main entry lobby: 0.63 W/ft2
QSR
• Dining: 0.41 W/ft2
• Kitchen: 0.86 W/ft2
Small Hotel
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction Buildings 25
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Stairs: 0.54 W/ft2
Corridor: 0.36 W/ft2
Lounge: 0.50 W/ft2
The measures are summarized below by building type, including measure costs, in Table 13.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 26
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 13. Efficiency Measures Applicability, Costs, and Sources
Measure Applicability
• Included in packages with energy efficiency measures
- Not Applicable
Measure
Baseline T24
Requirement Proposed Measure
Med
Office
Med
Retail
Quick-
Service
Restaurant
Small
Hotel:
Guest
Rooms
Small Hotel:
Nonresidential
Incremental
Cost Sources & Notes
Envelope
1. Cool Roof For low slope roofs:
ASR = 0.63
TE = 0.75
For low slope roofs:
ASR = 0.7
TE = 0.85 ● ─ ─ ─ ─ $0.04/ft2
Final Nonresidential High
Performance Envelope Case
Report (Statewide CASE Team
2020 B)
2. Efficient
Vertical
Fenestration
U-factor = 0.36
SHGC = 0.25
U-factor = 0.34
SHGC = 0.22 ● ● ─ ● ● $1.75/ft2
Final Nonresidential High
Performance Envelope Case
Report (Statewide CASE Team
2020 B)
3. Vertical
Fenestration
as a Function
of Orientation
40% window-to-wall
ratio in each
orientation per Title
24 Table 140.3-B.
Redistribute window
areas by orientation ● ─
─ ─ ─ $0
No additional cost. This
measure is a design
consideration.
HVAC and SHW
4. Water
Efficient
Fixtures in
Kitchen
Kitchen faucet max
flow rate is 1.8 GPM
(Title 20)
Kitchen faucet flow
rate is 1 GPM
─ ─ ● ─ ─
High efficiency,
door-type, high
temperature
dishwasher:
$7,633/unit
Faucet aerator:
$8/unit
Combination of literature
review, online sources such as
Home Depot and
manufacturer websites
5.Ozone
Washing
Machine
Not required Reduced hot water
use ─ ─ ─ ─ ● $25,469/unit
DEER Deemed measure
SWAP005-01 (California
Public Utilites Commission
2022)
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 27
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Measure Applicability
• Included in packages with energy efficiency measures
- Not Applicable
Measure
Baseline T24
Requirement Proposed Measure
Med
Office
Med
Retail
Quick-
Service
Restaurant
Small
Hotel:
Guest
Rooms
Small Hotel:
Nonresidential
Incremental
Cost Sources & Notes
6. Efficient Hot
Water
Distribution
Appendix A Pipe
Sizing with standard
pipe insulation
thickness 1.5’’
Appendix M pipe
sizing with 2” pipe
insulation thickness ─ ─ ─ ● ─ $5,819
Multifamily Domestic Hot
Water Final CASE Report
7. DCV &
Transfer Air
DCV required in
kitchen for exhaust
air rate > 5000 cfm
DCV for all exhaust
fans ─ ─ ● ─ ─ $8,500
Mechanical contractor cost
estimate
8. Guest Room
Ventilation,
Temperature
Setback, and
Fan Power
Guest rooms
required to have
occupancy sensing
zone controls, but
no ventilation fan
power requirement.
Updated fan power
and HVAC schedules
─ ─ ─ ● ─ $0
No cost increase, as guest
rooms already have controls.
9. Variable
Speed Fans
Variable speed
required if cooling
capacity is greater
than 65,000 Btu/h
Variable speed
control for smaller
capacity systems ─ ● ● ─ ─ $6,390/unit
Mechanical contractor cost
estimate
Lighting
10. Interior
Lighting
Reduced LPD
Per Area Category
Method, varies by
Primary Function
Area.
Top 20% of market
products ● ● ● ─ ● $0
Industry report on LED pricing
analysis shows that costs are
not correlated with efficacy.
(Navigant Consulting 2018)
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 28
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
3.2.3 Load Flexibility
The Reach Code Team investigated a range of high-impact demand flexibility strategies potentially applicable to the
four prototypes. The list of strategies is informed by DOE’s Grid -interactive Efficient Buildings efforts and the 2022
Nonresidential Grid Integration CASE report (U.S. Department of Energy 2021, Statewide CASE Team 2020). The
Team selected the three measures based on their load flexibility potential, cost, compliance software modeling
capabilities, savings potential and the ease of project implementation and field verification:
Please note that these measures require a ruleset update and cannot be modeled currently for compliance purposes.
11. Temperature Setback using Smart Thermostat: This measure leverages the existing mandatory
requirement for HVAC zone thermostatic controls to pre-condition spaces prior to, and to shed demand during,
peak period. This measure introduces a setback in temperature setpoint during peak period and incurs no
additional cost because Occupant-Controlled Smart Thermostats (OCSTs) are already required for buildings
similar to the Medium Office prototype.
Modeling: Instead of utilizing the demand responsive features, OCST would be used to change
temperature setpoints and setpoint schedules. These changes were integrated by altering the
setpoint schedules directly in the backend ruleset files of CBECC software.
Specification: In the base case, the Medium Office prototype HVAC equipment schedules dictate "on" hours
(at desired temperature) from 6:00 AM through 12:00 AM on weekdays and 6:00 AM – 7:00
PM on Saturdays. All Sunday hours are "off." Cooling setpoints are 75°F during "on" and 85°F
when "off" hours; heat setpoints are 70°F during "on" and 60°F during "off" hours. The Team
modified this schedule such that the "on" setpoints are stepped back by 2°F from 4:00 PM
through 12:00 AM on weekdays; and from 4:00 PM – 7:00 PM on Saturdays.
12. Demand Response Capable HPWH: The Reach Code Team modeled a measure intended to reduce the
peak demand of the significant hot water loads in the QSR prototype. The measure increases costs due to
adding a 100-gallon storage tank and plumbing hardware. The additional hot water storage enables pre-
heating water ahead of demand by effectively increasing the HPWH’s thermal storage capacity. The extra
plumbing hardware is needed to keep the stored hot water stratified to maintain efficient HPWH operations .
The Team did not directly address the issue of storage tank location but assumed floor plan design would be
able to accommodate it.
Modeling: The measure uses the HPWH and additional storage tank capacity to produce and store hot
water ahead of actual use during evening peak period. QSR hot water baseline schedule
exhibits a low morning load (6:00 AM – 8:00 AM), moderate load near lunch time (11:00 AM),
and a peak evening load (4:00 PM – 11:00 PM). These changes were made by changing the
hot water load fraction in the ruleset.
Specification: Implements an early pre-heat that starts at 12:00 PM and finishes by 7:00 PM, avoiding the
super peak hours of 7:00 PM – 9:00 PM.
13. Demand Response Lighting: This measure extends existing Title 24 mandatory requirements for demand
responsive lighting by shedding demand during peak hours. There are no additional measure costs because
demand responsive control capability is already required for nonresidential buildings with more than 4kW of
total lighting load. This measure does not require additional commissioning.
Modeling: The baseline lighting schedule exhibits a plateau of 0.65 load fraction from 8:00 AM – 8:00 PM
and trails off after 8:00 PM through the end of the day for weekdays. The Team altered the
ruleset to reduce the load fraction during 4:00 PM – 9:00 PM.
Specification: The Team implemented a 10% setback during the 4-9pm peak hours.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 29
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
The load flexibility measure applications to each prototype are summarized in Table 14.
Table 14. Load Flexibility Measure Summary
Measure Med
Office
Med
Retail QSR Small Hotel Incremental Cost Other Notes
11. Smart
Thermostat ● - - - $0 Capability already required
12. Demand Control
HPWH - - ● - $5,400
An additional 100-gallon tank,
plumbing hardware, and related
labor hours
13. Demand
Response Lighting ● - - - $0 Capability already required
None of the measures apply to the Medium Retail or Small Hotel prototypes. While the Small Hotel contains some
office space and common areas, the Medium Office load flexibility measures were not applied to the Small Hotel
spaces because of the potential for unpopular impacts, varying occupancy schedules, difficult field maintenance, and
limited energy impacts. Team also explored the impact of load flexibility in all-electric clothes dryer scenario but did not
see enough savings impact, hence the measure was not included in the package.
3.2.4 Additional Solar PV and Battery Storage
The Reach Code Team considered additional solar PV and battery storage measures that exceed the 2022 Title 24
prescriptive requirements to improve the cost-effectiveness of proposed scenarios. For Medium Office and Retail, the
prescriptive solar PV sizes are large enough to occupy the entirety of the available roof space. Additional rooftop solar
PV could not be considered for the two prototypes. For the Quick-Service Restaurant, solar PV is not prescriptively
required since the prototype qualifies for the exception and the Reach Code Team considered adding solar PV to
improve cost-effectiveness. For Small Hotel, the required PV size in the code-compliant models did not occupy the
entire available roof space. Additional PV system capacity was considered as a measure to improve cost-effectiveness.
For the cost-effectiveness analysis, the Team evaluated additional solar PV for all-electric scenarios for the two
building types, Quick Service Restaurant and Small Hotel. The additional PV size is calculated based on available roof
space, assuming the maximum available space is 50% of total roof space and 15 Watt per square foot panel size.
Modeling: Updated PV capacity (kW) input in CBECC software.
Specification: Baseline requirement is 0 kW and 22-32.6 (depending on climate zone) kW for Quick-Service
Restaurant and Small Hotel respectively. Proposed measure specification is 18.8 kW and 79.8
kW for Quick-Service Restaurant and Small Hotel respectively.
The costs for PV include first cost to purchase and install the system, inverter replacement costs, and annual
maintenance costs. A summary of incremental costs and sources is given in Table 15 below.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 30
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 15. Additional Solar PV Measure Summary
Measure Med
Office
Med
Retail QSR Small
Hotel Incremental Cost Cost Source
Solar PV - - ● ●
First Cost: $3.20/W
Inverter replacement cost at 10-yr:
$0.15/W
Annual Maintenance Cost: $0.02/W
ITC Federal Incentive: 30%
National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) Q1 2016
(National Renewable Energy
Laboratory 2016)
E3 Rooftop Solar PV System
Report (Energy and
Environmental Economics,
Inc. 2017)
Upfront solar PV system costs are lowered because of the federal income tax credit (ITC)—approximately 30 percent
based on the passage of Inflation Reduction Act. PV energy output is built into CBECC and is based on NREL’s
PVWatts calculator, which includes long term performance degradation estimates.
A battery storage system is prescriptively required for three prototypes : Medium Office, Medium Retail, and Small
Hotel. The current software, CBECC v1.0, applies the appropriate prescriptive battery size (kWh) and capacity (kW) in
the standard design. However, the control assumed in standard design is “Basic Control”, which does not function for
optimum battery use. The Team did not evaluate additional battery measures because the compliance software does
not apply the “Time of Use” battery control method in standard design, which impacts the incremental energy costs and
TDV benefits.
3.3 Measure Packages
The Reach Code Team compared a baseline Title 24 prescriptive package to mixed-fuel packages and two to four
electrification packages depending on applicability of building type. Note that most QSR all-electric packages exclude
kitchen electrification, while the Small Hotel all-electric package does include electric laundry cost and energy impacts .
▪ Mixed Fuel Code Minimum: Mixed-fuel prescriptive building per 2022 Title 24 requirements.
▪ Mixed Fuel + Efficiency Measures: Mixed-fuel prescriptive building per 2022 Title 24 requirements, including
additional efficiency measures.
▪ All-electric Code Minimum Efficiency: All-electric building to minimum Title 24 prescriptive standards and
federal minimum efficiency standards. This package has the same PV size as mixed-fuel prescriptive baseline.
▪ All-electric Energy Efficiency: All-electric building with added energy efficiency measures related to HVAC,
SHW, lighting or envelope.
▪ All-electric Energy Efficiency + Load Flexibility: All-electric building with added energy efficiency and load
flexibility measures.
▪ All-electric Energy Efficiency + Solar PV: All-electric building with added energy efficiency and additional
Solar PV. The added PV size is larger than prescriptive 2022 Title 24 code requirements and accounts for roof
space availability.
For QSR, the Reach Code Team has analyzed two scenarios for all-electric packages, one with electric cooking and
the one with gas cooking (the latter of which is referred to as the “HS” package to reflect all-electric HVAC and SHW).
The results section includes results for both scenarios since all-electric package with electric cooking appliance can be
cost-effective in POU territories. This study did not evaluate pre-empted package with all-electric HVAC and SHW to
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 31
Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
have higher efficiency than required by federal regulations, that will potentially enhance cost-effectiveness and/or
compliance margins.
For Small Hotel, the Reach Code Team also analyzed an alternative scenario with PTHP instead of SZHP in all-electric
scenario. It is denoted by the “PTHP” in parenthesis in package name.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 32
Cost-Effectiveness Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
4 Cost-Effectiveness Results
Cost-effectiveness results are presented in this section and the attached workbook per prototype and measure
packages described in Section 3. The TDV and On-Bill based cost-effectiveness results are presented in terms of B/C
ratio and NPV.
In the following figures, the result Both (shown in green shading) indicates that the result is cost-effective on both On-
Bill and (Total) TDV basis. The result On-Bill or TDV (shown in yellow shading) indicates that the result is either cost-
effective on On-Bill or (Total) TDV basis, respectively. The result “ - “ (results with no shading) indicates that the result
is not cost-effective on either an On-Bill basis or (Total) TDV basis.
Across all prototypes and climate zones, efficiency measures improve cost-effectiveness when added to the mixed-fuel
baseline prototype and all-electric federal code minimum designs.
All-electric cost-effectiveness results by prototype can be summarized as:
Medium Office (Figure 1): All-electric space heating is predominantly achieved through electric resistance
due to modeling limitations, which limits operational benefits. Efficiency measures yield some On-Bill cost-
effective all-electric packages in milder climate zones. Adding load flexibility measures increases the cost-
effectiveness to most climates.
Medium Retail (Figure 2): All-electric packages are cost-effective in all climate zones with added efficiency
measures over all-electric baseline. Proposed mixed-fuel packages are cost-effective too with added
efficiency measures in most climate zones primarily driven by cost-equivalency in the all-electric package
compared to a mixed-fuel package.
Quick-Service Restaurant (Figure 3): All-electric package with and without cooking electrification is cost-
effective in CPAU and SMUD territories only, On-Bill. All-electric HVAC and SHW package with added
efficiency measures is On-Bill cost-effective in CZs 1, 3-5 and 12. Adding efficiency and solar PV is On-Bill
cost-effective in CZs 1-5, 11-13, and 16. While not depicted in Figure 3, the Results Workbook indicates
that all-electric HVAC and SHW plus efficiency packages are nearly cost-effective (greater than
-$350/month) in all climate zones using On-Bill Net Present Values.
Small Hotel (Error! Reference source not found.): The all-electric hotel has tremendous cost savings
compared to a mixed-fuel package, primarily due to the avoidance of gas infrastructure to each guest room.
All-electric packages achieve TDV cost-effectiveness in all CZs except 16. On-Bill cost-effectiveness is
limited to CZs 2-5, 12 and 15 with single zone ducted heat pumps, but nearly all CZs with a packaged
terminal heat pump.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 33
Cost-Effectiveness Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
4.1 Medium Office
In the all-electric Medium Office building, the upfront cost savings associated with avoiding boiler and gas infrastructure supports cost-effective packages in
several climate zones, particularly with additional efficiency and load flexibility measures .
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel code minimum is On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones.
▪ The all-electric code minimum efficiency package is cost-effective for CZs 4 (CPAU), 6-10, 12 (SMUD) and 15.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures to the all-electric code minimum package extends On-Bill cost-effectiveness to CZ 3 as well.
▪ All-electric energy efficiency along with load flexibility measure package is On-Bill cost-effective in most climate zones except 1, 11 and 16.
Figure 1. Medium Office Cost-Effectiveness Summary
CZ1 CZ2 CZ3 CZ4 CZ5 CZ6 CZ7 CZ8 CZ9 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16
Utility
Prototype Package
Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both
On-Bill ─On-Bill ──
On-Bill ─On-Bill On-Bill ─
Both ─Both ──
Both ─Both On-Bill ─
Both Both Both Both On-Bill
Both Both Both Both On-Bill
─
─
Medium Office
(MO)
Mixed Fuel + Efficiency
Measures Both Both Both
All Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency
──Both
Both
Both
Both
Both
Both
─
Climate Zone
PG&E PG&E PG&E
PG&E
CPAU
PG&E
─
SDG&E
SCE
SCE
PG&E
SMUD
PG&E
Both
PG&E
PG&E
SCG
SCE SDG&E PG&E SCE
SDG&E
SCE
Both
Both On-Bill
Both
Both
Both Both Both
──
All-Electric Energy
Efficiency + Load
Flexibility
─Both Both On-Bill Both Both
All Electric Energy
Efficiency
──Both ──
Both
On-Bill Both
Both Both
Both Both
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 34
Cost-Effectiveness Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
4.2 Medium Retail
2022 Title 24 code prescriptively requires heat pumps in most scenarios already. This report evaluates added energy efficiency measures over the baseline all-
electric scenario and proposed mixed-fuel packages.
▪ The mixed-fuel code minimum is not cost-effective by itself in most climate zones.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures to the mixed-fuel code minimum package is On-Bill and/or TDV cost-effective in most climate zones.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures over prescriptive all-electric package is also cost-effective in most climate zones except CZ16 using TDV.
Figure 2. Medium Retail Cost-effectiveness Summary
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 35
Cost-Effectiveness Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
4.3 Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR)
High incremental cost for HVAC and SHW electrification (“HS” package) makes restaurant electrification challenging. Because cooking electrification packages
are very expensive – both upfront and operationally in IOU territories – the Team evaluated HS packages that do not consider cooking equipment electrification.
This affects cost-effectiveness as gas infrastructure cost savings do not materialize.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel code minimum is On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones.
▪ All-electric HVAC and SHW “HS” package is On-Bill cost-effective in CZ4 (CPAU) and CZ12 (SMUD) territory only.
▪ Adding energy efficiency and load flexibility measures extends On-Bill cost-effectiveness to CZs 1, 3 and 5.
▪ All-electric HVAC and SHW “HS” package with energy efficiency and solar PV measure is On-Bill cost-effective in climate zones 1-5, 11-13 and 16.
▪ All-electric package including cooking electrification is On-Bill cost-effective in CZ 4 (CPAU) territory only.
▪ The Results Workbook indicates that all-electric HVAC and SHW plus efficiency packages are nearly cost-effective (greater than -$350/month) in all
climate zones using On-Bill Net Present Values.
Figure 3. QSR Cost-effectiveness Summary
CZ1 CZ2 CZ3 CZ4 CZ5 CZ6 CZ7 CZ8 CZ9 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16
Utility
Prototype Package
Both Both Both Both Both
Both Both Both Both Both
─────
On-Bill ──On-Bill ─
─On-Bill ───
On-Bill ──On-Bill ─
─────
On-Bill ──On-Bill ─
On-Bill On-Bill ─On-Bill ─
On-Bill On-Bill ─On-Bill ─
─────
On-Bill ────
─────
On-Bill ────
────
Quick-Service
Restaurant (QSR)
All Electric Energy
Efficiency
───────
On-Bill
On-Bill ─
─
──
─
─
───
PG&E
SMUD
PG&E
SDG&E
SCE
SCE PG&E
──────
PG&ESCE
SDG&E
SCE
Both
─
Both
───
Both Both Both Both
Climate Zone
PG&E PG&E PG&E
PG&E
CPAU
PG&E
SCG
SCE SDG&E PG&E
Both
All Electric HS Energy
Efficiency + Solar PV
All Electric Code
Minimum Efficiency
On-Bill
─
On-Bill On-Bill
Both
─
─
─
Mixed Fuel + Efficiency
Measures Both Both
All Electric HS Code
Minimum Efficiency
All-Electric HS Energy
Efficiency + Load
Flexibility
On-Bill ─
All Electric HS Energy
Efficiency
On-Bill ─
─
Both
─
──
On-Bill ─On-Bill
──────────
────On-Bill
─
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 36
Cost-Effectiveness Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
4.4 Small Hotel
The all-electric hotel has cost savings compared to a mixed-fuel package, primarily due to the avoidance of boilers and gas infrastructure to each guest room. The
analysis assumes single zone ducted heat pump for all all-electric scenarios; however, the Team analyzed a Packaged Terminal Heat Pump (PTHP) scenario as
well. PTHP shows higher incremental cost savings as compared to a baseline of mixed fuel single zone packaged system and hence are cost-effective in many
climate zones.
▪ Adding energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel code minimum is On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones.
▪ All-electric code minimum packages with or without energy efficiency measure packages are TDV cost-effective in all climate zones except 16, and On-
Bill cost-effective in CZ4 (CPAU) and CZ12 (SMUD) due to relatively lower electricity costs.
▪ Additional solar PV over all-electric energy efficiency package extends On-Bill cost-effectiveness to CZs 2, 3, 4 (PG&E), 5 and 15.
▪ The alternative all-electric scenario with PTHP is cost-effective in all climates, On-Bill in most CZs except 7,10 and 14 SDG&E territories.
Figure 4. Small Hotel Cost-effectiveness Summary
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 37
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
5 Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
This section combines the cost-effectiveness and 2022 Title 24 energy code compliance metric results — efficiency
TDV, total TDV, and source energy, described in Section 2.3 — to highlight the viable reach code options for local
jurisdictions. The Reach Code Team calculated metrics using both:
1. Software outputs using the ACM standard design and
2. Manually by subtraction against the baseline model because of software limitations that are beyond the Reach
Code Team’s control.6
All Efficiency TDV margins presented in this section are the lower of the two approaches, Software output and Manual,
to be conservative and inform the minimum compliance margins that can be met by a typical modeler. Full details of
compliance margins and cost-effectiveness results are presented in the Final Results Workbook for reference.
Importantly, the workbook shows that for all prototypes, all-electric packages are capable of achieving greater
greenhouse savings as compared to mixed-fuel buildings. Below is a summary of how compliance results as well as
cost-effectiveness for each prototype and package could influence reach code options. The Reach Code Team outlines
recommendations using the following framework, based on reach codes that were adopted across California under the
2019 building code cycle:
▪ Mixed fuel buildings are allowed, with efficiency. Local amendments governing efficiency and conservation
must be performed in the Title 24 Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and be approved by the Energy
Commission.
• Energy Efficiency — Require energy efficiency for buildings regardless of fuel type. A jurisdiction can
require different compliance thresholds for all-electric and/or mixed-fuel. The thresholds should be set
considering how they may affect mixed-fuel or all-electric buildings.
• Electric-Preferred — Allow mixed-fuel appliances but require a higher building performance via
efficiency, total, or source compliance metric (for example, (Milpitas 2019), section 140.1).7 Applies
only to mixed-fuel buildings.
▪ Mixed fuel buildings are not allowed. Local amendments governing green building requirements may be
performed in the Title 24 Part 11 Green Building Standards Code and must be filed with the Building Standards
Commission. Alternatively, the local amendment may be performed in a municipal code chapter of their
respective jurisdictions.
• All-Electric — Require certain all-electric only appliances, with exceptions (for example (Menlo Park
2019). Does not involve efficiency or conservation measures, and cost-effectiveness is a not a legal
requirement.8 Local amendments may be performed through other building code sections, such as
Part 11. See discussion on Exceptions below.
• All-Electric + Efficiency — Require certain all-electric appliances, but with a higher building
performance via efficiency, total, or source compliance metric. Also requires amendment to Title 24
Part 6 and approval by the Energy Commission.
6 The difference between the two methods of calculating TDV margins occurs due to various software limitations. The Team had
challenges modeling a baseline showing zero-percent (exactly compliant) compliance margin, and differing interpretations of 2022
Title 24 code regarding fan power, exhaust fan, heat recovery, battery control, and other aspects. Most scenarios show similar
trends between software calculated compliance margin and the Team’s manual subtraction against baseline model, with a
difference in magnitude. For example, if the Total TDV Compliance margin as shown by software directly is negative, it is typically
negative per manual calculation as well. Nonetheless, modeling limitations introduce error into the calculations, which may affect
results. Many scenarios have very low negative compliance margin and are very close to being zero. While this uncertainty in error
may lead to imprecision in results, relative performance across packages can yield information helpful for decision-making.
7 Note Milpitas has since adopted an All-electric with Exceptions code for the 2022 code cycle.
8 See letter from CEC to South San Francisco for reference.
Formatted: Left: 0.59", Bottom: 0.47", Width: 8.5",
Height: 11"
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 38
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Exceptions enable reach codes to broadly require electrification except for specific building systems. These
systems may have uncertainty on energy code compliance, building industry electrification approaches, or other
related impacts on economic development. During the 2019 code cycle, cities developed exemptions based on
discussions with local stakeholders, resulting in a wide array of exemption types.9 For the four prototypes in this
study, the Team has determined two exemptions that may be necessary for cities passing All-Electric reach codes.
▪ Building systems without a prescriptive compliance pathway in the energy code. This exemption
considers that all-electric central space heating does not have a prescriptive pathway in Title 24, and central
heat pump boilers cannot be currently modeled, which has impacted compliance results for the Medium Office
and Small Hotel. This exemption has broad precedence and can apply to other large nonresidential buildings
(e.g., (Berkeley 2019), section 12.80.040.A Exception 1). These exemptions typically state that the building is
also not able to comply via the performance approach using commercially available technology.
▪ Commercial cooking. Cooking electrification does not considerably impact code compliance but is not nearly
cost-effective against a mixed-fuel baseline. To account for this challenge, cities may wish to adopt reach
codes that exempt commercial kitchen cooking appliances (e.g., (Menlo Park 2019) 100.0(e)2.A Exception 4).
9 See list of exemptions on Bay Area Reach Codes.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 39
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 16. Reach Code Pathway Considerations
Prototype Compliance and Cost-Effectiveness Results Summary Energy Efficiency Electric-
Preferred All-Electric All-Electric +
Efficiency
Medium
Office
The Team could not identify any all-electric package that complies
with all three compliance metrics, with the Efficiency TDV
Compliance margin being the most challenging.
Future iterations of this study will re-evaluate the Medium Office with
a central heat pump boiler, an anticipated compliance software
capability in early 2023, instead of electric resistance VAVs.
To Be Determined.
Modeling constraints
impacted achievable
compliance margins
for all-electric
packages.
All CZs. Exempt building
systems without a
prescriptive
pathway in the
energy code.
To Be Determined.
Modeling constraints
impacted achievable
compliance margins
for all-electric
packages
Medium
Retail
The Team identified cost-effective and code compliant packages of
all-electric + energy efficiency measures across most CZs.
Mixed-fuel + efficiency was cost-effective but not code compliant in
most CZs.
CZs 7 and 9. CZs 7 and 9. CZs 2-15. 2022
T24 prescriptive
baseline
CZs 1-10, 12-14.
Quick-
Service
Restaurant
The Mixed-fuel + efficiency package is cost-effective and compliant
in many climate zones. Code compliance and cost-effectiveness
results support reach code adoption for all-electric space
conditioning and service water heating when adding efficiency and
solar PV for CZs 1 and 3-5, many others are likely to be compliant
with future modeling input updates. Cost-effectiveness is achieved
or nearly achieved (Net Present Value is greater than -$350/month)
On-Bill in all CZs.
Cooking electrification does not impact code compliance but is not
cost-effective against a mixed-fuel baseline except for CPAU
territory.
CZs 1, 3-7. CZs 1-7, 13. CZs 1, 3-7. Exempt
commercial kitchen
appliances, except
CZ4 (CPAU).
Nearly all remaining
CZs have a nearly
cost-effective
and/or nearly
compliant pathway
for HVAC and SHW
only.
CZs 1, 3-5.
Small Hotel
Results support Electric-Preferred reach code for all CZs. The all-
electric packages are near compliant and TDV cost-effective for
most CZs when including energy efficiency measures and additional
solar PV. They are likely to be compliant with future modeling
iterations.
Future iterations of this study will re-evaluate the nonresidential
areas of the hotel with a central heat pump boiler, as mentioned for
the Medium Office, which can potentially improve code compliance.
To Be Determined.
Modeling constraints
impacted achievable
compliance margins
for all-electric
packages.
All CZs. Exempt building
systems without a
prescriptive
pathway in the
energy code.
To Be Determined.
Modeling constraints
impacted achievable
compliance margins
for all-electric
packages.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 40
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
The combined result of cost-effectiveness and code compliance across all climate zones and packages are detailed in
Section 0 through 5.4 below. The tables are formatted to show:
▪ Cost-effectiveness results with color highlight:
• Green highlight — for scenarios that are cost-effective on both On-Bill and TDV metrics, may or may
not be compliant.
• Yellow highlight — for scenarios that are cost-effective on either one of the On-Bill/TDV metrics, may
or may not be compliant.
• Gray highlight — for scenarios that are not cost-effective on either metric, either compliant currently or
likely to be compliant in future.
• White highlight — for scenarios that are not cost-effective on either metric and are not compliant.
▪ Compliance results with cell values:
• “EffTDV Margin” percentages — for scenarios that are compliant, across both Manual and CBECC
software output, the reported value is the minimum of the two.
• “-” for scenarios that do not comply across any one code compliance metric.
“TBD” – for scenarios that are likely to be compliant with modeling updates or software versions in future, maybe
compliant across either one of the Manual or CBECC software output approach or has a system type modeling
limitation such as central heat pump boiler for Medium Office and Small Hotel. The package names in table results
columns are as follows, as defined in Section 3.3:
▪ Mixed fuel — Code Min: Mixed Fuel Code Minimum Efficiency
▪ Mixed fuel — EE: Mixed Fuel + Efficiency Measures
▪ All-electric — Code Min: All-electric Code Minimum Efficiency
▪ All-electric — EE: All-electric Energy Efficiency
▪ All-electric — EE + LF: All-electric Energy Efficiency and Load Flexibility
▪ All-electric — EE + PV: All-electric Energy Efficiency and Solar PV
The QSR has two electrification scenarios, with and without cooking appliance electrification, which is denoted by “HS”
prefix.
The Small Hotel has an extra package that evaluates a different HVAC type in the all-electric Code Minimum Efficiency
package, a Packaged Terminal Heat Pump (PTHP) instead of a Single Zone Heat Pump.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 41
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
5.1 Medium Office
For Medium Office, the Reach Code Team analyzed EE measures over mixed fuel baseline model and three
electrification packages: 1) Code Min, 2) EE and 3) EE + LF packages, results shown in Table 17.
The most likely all-electric replacement for a central gas boiler serving a VAV reheat system would be a central heat
pump boiler; however, this system cannot be modeled in CBECC at the time of the writing of this report. As such, the
Reach Code Team is treating this analysis as temporary until a compliance pathway is established for a central heat
pump boiler in the Energy Code and results can be updated accordingly. This modeling capability is anticipated in early
2023 according to discussions with the CBECC software development team, and the cost -effectiveness analysis
should become available in the first half of 2023. Heat pump systems are multiple times more efficient, but may also be
multiple times more costly, than the electric resistance reheat systems currently analyzed.
▪ Results support reach code adoption for energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel baseline, also known as
the “Electric-Preferred”. A compliance margin of 4–5% is achievable depending on the climate zone.
▪ No all-electric package complies with all three-compliance metrics, with the efficiency compliance TDV margin
being the most challenging. The Reach Code Team explored other efficiency measures that reduce the
efficiency compliance TDV margin, but not enough to make the TDV margin positive. The compliance values
are labeled as “TBD” for all-electric packages, as they are likely to be compliant with future modeling and/or
software updates. Some climate zones are compliant currently on either one of the Software output or Manual
compliance approaches.
Table 17. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Medium Office
CZ Utility
Mixed
Fuel All-electric
EE Code Min EE EE + LF
cz01 PG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz02 PG&E 5% TBD TBD TBD
cz03 PG&E 5% TBD TBD TBD
cz04 PG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz04-2 CPAU 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz05 PG&E 5% TBD TBD TBD
cz05-2 SCG 5% TBD TBD TBD
cz06 SCE 6% TBD TBD TBD
cz07 SDG&E 7% TBD TBD TBD
cz08 SCE 6% TBD TBD TBD
cz09 SCE 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz10 SDG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz10-2 SCE 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz11 PG&E 3% TBD TBD TBD
cz12 PG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz12-2 SMUD 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz13 PG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz14 SDG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz14-2 SCE 4% TBD TBD TBD
cz15 SCE 3% TBD TBD TBD
cz16 PG&E 4% TBD TBD TBD
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 42
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
* These results will be re-evaluated with central heat pump boiler system instead of electric resistance VAV systems,
which largely are unable to achieve energy code compliance.
5.2 Medium Retail
For Medium Retail, the Team analyzed EE measure package over an all-electric baseline model and two mixed
fuel packages — Code Min and EE, with results in Table 18.
▪ Results support reach code adoption for energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel code minimum package,
also known as “Electric-Preferred” or “Energy Efficiency” reach code pathways in climate zones 7 and 9.
▪ Results also support “All-Electric + Efficiency” reach code option, with compliance margins of 4-14% above the
all-electric code minimum baseline in climate zones 1-10 and 12-14.
▪ For some scenarios in climate zone 6, 8, 11, 15 and 16, labeled as “TBD”, the package is cost-effective and
likely to be compliant in future with modeling input and/or software version updates.
Table 18. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Medium Retail
CZ Utility Mixed Fuel All-
electric
Code Min EE EE
cz01 PG&E - - 6%
cz02 PG&E - - 4%
cz03 PG&E - - 12%
cz04 PG&E - - 11%
cz04-2 CPAU - - 11%
cz05 PG&E - - 12%
cz05-2 SCG - - 12%
cz06 SCE - TBD 9%
cz07 SDG&E - 12% 14%
cz08 SCE - TBD 8%
cz09 SCE - 11% 12%
cz10 SDG&E - - 3%
cz10-2 SCE - - 3%
cz11 PG&E - - TBD
cz12 PG&E - - 10%
cz12-2 SMUD - - 10%
cz13 PG&E - - 4%
cz14 SDG&E - - 7%
cz14-2 SCE - - 7%
cz15 SCE - - TBD
cz16 PG&E - - TBD
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 43
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 44
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
5.3 Quick-Service Restaurant (QSR)
The Team analyzed efficiency measures over a mixed fuel baseline and electrification packages, with and without
cooking appliance electrification. For the “HS” scenario including HVAC and SHW electrification only, packages
with EE, EE + LF and EE + PV were analyzed, with results in Table 19.
▪ Results support reach code adoption for energy efficiency measures over a mixed fuel baseline, also known as
“Electric-Preferred” in climate zones 1 to 7 and 13, or “Energy Efficiency” in CZs 1 and 3 to 7.
▪ All-electric “HS” HVAC and SHW electrification can be adopted in CZs 1 and 3-7 since it is code compliant and
nearly cost effective on at least one metric when energy efficiency measures and/or load flexibility or solar PV
measure is added, demonstrated by yellow or gray cells.
▪ All-electric “HS” HVAC and SHW option with additional efficiency measures can be adopted in CZs 1 and 3-5.
Adding solar PV makes the package on-bill cost-effective on at least one metric marked as yellow cells..
▪ Packages labeled as “TBD” may or may not be cost-effective but are likely to be compliant in the future with
modeling input and/or software updates.
Table 19. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Quick-Service Restaurant (without
cooking electrification)
CZ Utility Mixed Fuel All-electric "HS" (HVAC+SHW)
EE Code Min EE EE + LF EE + PV
cz01 PG&E 16% - 6% 16% 6%
cz02 PG&E 6% - TBD TBD TBD
cz03 PG&E 18% - 8% 13% 8%
cz04 PG&E 16% - 5% 8% 5%
cz04-2 CPAU 16% - 5% 8% 5%
cz05 PG&E 18% - 8% 15% 8%
cz05-2 SCG 18% - 8% 15% 8%
cz06 SCE 16% - 3% 6% 3%
cz07 SDG&E 21% - 9% 13% 9%
cz08 SCE TBD - - - -
cz09 SCE TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz10 SDG&E TBD - - - -
cz10-2 SCE TBD - - - -
cz11 PG&E TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz12 PG&E TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz12-2 SMUD TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz13 PG&E 7% - TBD TBD TBD
cz14 SDG&E TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz14-2 SCE TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz15 SCE TBD - TBD TBD TBD
cz16 PG&E TBD - - TBD -
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 45
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
The Reach Code Team analyzed a completely all-electric package including cooking appliances, results shown in
Table 20, which show compliance in many climate zones with added efficiency and load flexibility. Remaining CZs
are “TBD”, except climate zone 16, which comply on either one of the Manual or Software output approaches
currently and are likely to show compliance with future modeling updates. However, the all-electric package is cost-
effective in CZ4 CPAU territory only and very close to being cost-effective in SMUD territory. Cooking electrification
is expensive and challenging to show cost-effective.
Table 20. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Quick-Service Restaurant (with
cooking electrification)
CZ Utility All-electric
Code Min EE EE + LF
cz01 PG&E - 6% 15%
cz02 PG&E - TBD 2%
cz03 PG&E - 10% 14%
cz04 PG&E - 8% 10%
cz04-2 CPAU - 8% 10%
cz05 PG&E - 10% 17%
cz05-2 SCG - 10% 17%
cz06 SCE - 6% 10%
cz07 SDG&E - 11% 14%
cz08 SCE - TBD TBD
cz09 SCE - TBD TBD
cz10 SDG&E - TBD TBD
cz10-2 SCE - TBD TBD
cz11 PG&E - TBD 0%
cz12 PG&E - TBD TBD
cz12-2 SMUD - TBD TBD
cz13 PG&E - TBD TBD
cz14 SDG&E - TBD TBD
cz14-2 SCE - TBD TBD
cz15 SCE - TBD 2%
cz16 PG&E - - -
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 46
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
5.4 Small Hotel
The Team analyzed EE package over mixed fuel baseline and three electrification packages - Code Min, EE,
EE+PV, with results in Table 21.
▪ Results support reach code adoption for energy efficiency measures over mixed fuel baseline, also known as
“Electric-Preferred” reach code pathway with 2-5% compliance margin.
▪ All-electric packages with efficiency measures and/or solar PV in most CZs are cost-effective and likely to be
compliant in future with modeling and/or software version updates. Some climate zones are compliant currently
across either one of the Manual or Software output approaches.
▪ All all-electric scenarios are labeled as “TBD” because 36% of conditioned floor area is nonresidential space
and has the same system type limitation as Medium Office (see Section 5.1). Hence, the Small Hotel will be re-
evaluated as well with a central heat pump boiler system instead of electric resistance VAV system in early
2023. The current results show compliance on either one of the Manual or Software output approaches in
some climate zones with efficiency measures and solar PV, still labeled as “TBD” until the software
inconsistencies are resolved.
Table 21. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Small Hotel.
Mixed Fuel
EE Code Min EE EE + PV
cz01 PG&E 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz02 PG&E 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz03 PG&E 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz04 PG&E 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz04-2 CPAU 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz05 PG&E 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz05-2 SCG 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz06 SCE 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz07 SDG&E 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz08 SCE 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz09 SCE 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz10 SDG&E 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz10-2 SCE 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz11 PG&E 3%TBD TBD TBD
cz12 PG&E 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz12-2 SMUD 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz13 PG&E 3%TBD TBD TBD
cz14 SDG&E 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz14-2 SCE 4%TBD TBD TBD
cz15 SCE 5%TBD TBD TBD
cz16 PG&E 2%TBD TBD TBD
CZ Utility All-electric
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 47
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
The Team analyzed an additional scenario that proposes PTHP compared to the same SZAC mixed fuel baseline
model, results shown in Table 22. Though PTHP is a much cheaper alternative than SZHP, it is not compliant by
itself.
Table 22. Cost-effectiveness and Compliance Summary – Small Hotel (PTHP)
CZ Utility
All-electric
Code Min
(PTHP)
cz01 PG&E -
cz02 PG&E -
cz03 PG&E -
cz04 PG&E -
cz04-2 CPAU -
cz05 PG&E -
cz05-2 SCG -
cz06 SCE -
cz07 SDG&E TBD
cz08 SCE TBD
cz09 SCE TBD
cz10 SDG&E -
cz10-2 SCE -
cz11 PG&E -
cz12 PG&E -
cz12-2 SMUD -
cz13 PG&E -
cz14 SDG&E -
cz14-2 SCE -
cz15 SCE -
cz16 PG&E -
Cell Color
Cost effective on both TDV/On-Bill metrics
Cost effective on either TDV/On-Bill metrics
Compliant, not cost effective
Not compliant nor cost effective
Cell Value
X%EffTDV Compliance Margin percentages (Lowest common)
Compliant on both Manual and Software output approaches
TBD Likely to comply with future modeling updates or software versions,
maybe compliant on either Manual or Software output approach
-Not compliant on either approach
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 48
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
6 Conclusions
The Reach Code Team developed a variety of packages involving fuel substitution, energy efficiency, load flexibility,
and solar PV, simulated them in building modeling software, and gathered costs to determine the cost-effectiveness of
multiple scenarios. The Team coordinated with multiple utilities, cities, and building community experts to develop a set
of assumptions considered reasonable in the current market. Changing assumptions, such as the period of analysis,
measure selection, fuel costs, other costs, energy escalation rates, software or utility tariffs may change the results.
These results, including the attached Reach Code Results Workbook, indicate all-electric packages are capable of
achieving the greatest GHG savings as compared to mixed-fuel buildings, see Appendix 8.5. Jurisdictions may adopt a
variety of reach codes such as “Energy Efficiency”, “Electric-Preferred”, “All-Electric” or “All-Electric + Efficiency.” In
summary:
▪ The Reach Code Team has identified a cost-effective and code compliant energy efficiency measure package
for most prototypes and climate zones analyzed, which supports an “Electric -Preferred” and/or “Energy
Efficiency” reach code pathways for jurisdictions.
▪ “All-Electric” reach codes are feasible for all building types and climate zones when Part 11 is modified ,
including some exceptions.
• All-electric HVAC consisting of packaged single zone systems, including rooftop units in the Medium
Retail and Quick-Service Restaurant, and single zone heat pumps in the Small Hotel guest rooms, are
widely shown to be cost-effective and energy code compliant, with exceptions in CZs 1 and 16.
• All-electric SHW systems have a prescriptive pathway for all building types and h ave not been shown
to be an impediment to cost-effectiveness or energy code compliance of all-electric packages in this
study.
• All-electric laundry in the Small Hotel can be cost-effective with added energy efficiency and additional
solar PV than required prescriptively by 2022 Title 24 code.
• Medium Office all-electric packages are cost-effective with energy efficiency and load flexibility
measures, but not code compliant due to the use of electric resistance VAV reheat systems. The Small
Hotel faces a similar issue for its smaller nonresidential area HVAC systems in some climate zones.
This indicates that further efficiency measures would need to be added to achieve energy code
compliance which may not be cost-effective. As described in Sections 5.1 and 5.4, modeling limitations
impacted the code compliance results for the medium office and nonresidential portion of the small
hotel. These prototypes will be re-evaluated using a more appropriate central heat pump boiler HVAC
system, likely available in compliance software in early 2023. In the meantime, jurisdictions can
choose to exempt building systems that do not have a prescriptive compliance pathway in the energy
code. See Berkeley’s all-electric ordinance (Berkeley 2019) section 12.80.040.A Exception 1 for an
example.
▪ Commercial kitchen electrification is challenging to design cost -effectively currently. These results align with a
previous study focusing on restaurants (Statewide IOU Team 2022). Jurisdictions may choose to exempt
cooking appliances until cost-effectiveness factors improve. See Menlo Park's ordinance (Menlo Park 2019)
100.0(e)2.A Exception 4 for an example.
▪ For the Medium Retail prototype in CZs 2 to 15, there is already a prescriptive pathway to co mply with
packaged single zone heat pumps in smaller (<240 kBtuh) thermal zones. This study supports an “All-Electric
+ Efficiency” reach code pathway for many climates. However, mixed-fuel scenarios with SZAC and gas
furnaces for larger (>240 kBtuh) thermal zones are challenging to show cost-effectiveness and/or code
compliance, except for climate zones 7 and 9, when including efficiency measures.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 49
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Further discussion is required at the jurisdiction and community members to review results and determine appropriate
reach code pathways. Please refer to the limitations of this study, described in Section 2.5, while using them to inform
reach code policies. Of note:
▪ The Team employed several CBECC ruleset modifications to support achieving cost-effective packages,
especially load flexibility measures. Ruleset modifications cannot be used by the building industry for code
compliance without supporting justification or alternate methods. Where jurisdictions want to encourage the
adoption of Load Flexibility measures through modeling estimates, the Reach Code Team can support cities
and building applicants by providing modeling approximations that may achieve similar energy and compliance
total impacts, in coordination with the Energy Commission. For example, for the Demand Response Lighting
measure, the Team may be able to share a TDV/ft2 impact of the measure in that climate zone or provide
guidance to the building applicant’s energy consultant on appropriate modeling and documentation.
▪ Results are predominantly based on the code compliance metrics that are manually calculated based on the
mixed fuel baseline model and not the standard design model assumed by the current software version. The
Team also provided software reported compliance metrics in the workbook for reference. The Team is in
communication with software development team to resolve differences in future iterations of this study and the
software and improve code compliance reporting.
Even considering the limitations, this study has identified a set of reach code pathways for all climate zones, and
jurisdictions have broad discretion on how to interpret the study’s findings. Jurisdictions can adopt reach codes
requiring energy efficiency via a Title 24 Part 6 local amendment, or electrification via a Title 24 Part 11 (or municipal
code) amendment, or both. Jurisdictions may choose to except particular building systems from certain reach codes
pathways.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 50
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
7 References
Berkeley. 2019. Local Energy Codes.
https://localenergycodes.com/download/398/local_government_adoption_ordinance/fieldList/Berkeley%20
2019%20All-Electric%20-%20Ordinance%207672.pdf.
California Building Energy Code Compliance. 2022. CBECC Title-24 Compliance Software. August 2.
https://bees.noresco.com/software2022.html.
California Public Utilites Commission. 2022. "Workpaper and Disposition Archive." SWAP005. June 9.
http://deeresources.net/workpapers.
California Technical Forum. 2022. THE CA ELECTRONIC TECHNICAL REFERENCE MANUAL (ETRM). June 9.
http://www.caltf.org/etrm-overview.
E3. 2021. https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=233260&DocumentContentId=65748 .
E-CFR. 2020. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-
bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM
L#se10.3.431_197.
Energy + Environmental Economics. 2019a. "Residential Building Electrification in California." April. Accessed 8 2,
2022. https://www.ethree.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf.
Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. 2017. "2019 Update to the Title 24 Part 6 Building Energy Efficienc y
Standards: Rooftop Solar PV System." September. Accessed 8 2, 2022.
file:///C:/Users/mflores/Downloads/TN221366_20171002T104342_Rooftop_Solar_PV_Stystem_Report%20(
1).pdf.
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. 2020. Proving the Business Case for Building Analytics. October. http://smart-
energy-analytics.org/assets/EMIS%20Report.pdf.
Menlo Park. 2019. Local Energy Codes.
https://localenergycodes.com/download/353/local_government_adoption_ordinance/fieldList/Menlo%20Pa
rk%202019%20-%20Ordinance%201057.pdf.
Milpitas. 2019. Local Energy Codes.
https://localenergycodes.com/download/356/local_government_adoption_ordinance/fieldList/Milpitas%20L
ocal%20Ordinance%20NO%2065%20148.pdf.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 2016. "U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmark: Q1 2016." NREL.gov.
September. Accessed 8 2, 2022. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/66532.pdf.
Navigant Consulting. 2018. "California LED Pricing Analysis." January.
https://www.calmac.org/publications/LED_Pricing_Analysis_Report_-_Revised_1.19.2018_Final.pdf.
NORESCO. 2020. "Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency Standards."
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=233257&DocumentContentId=65743 .
San Diego Gas and Electric Company. 2012. "Commercial Kitchen Demand Ventilation Controls-Electric." June 15.
https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sdge.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2F
files%2FWPSDGENRCC0019%252520Rev%2525200%252520Demand%252520Ventilation%252520Controls_0.
doc&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK.
Statewide CASE Team. 2020. August. https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/NR-Grid-
Integration_Final-CASE-Report_Statewide-CASE-Team.pdf.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 51
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
—. 2011 C. "Fan Control and Integrated Economizers." September. https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/2013_CASE-Report_Fan-Control-and-Integrated-Economizers.pdf.
—. 2020 A. Multifamily Domestic Hot Water. September. https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/09/2022_T24_Final-CASE-Report-MF-DHW-Dist.pdf.
—. 2020 B. "Nonresidential High Performance Envelope." October. https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-
content/uploads/2020/10/2020-T24-NR-HP-Envelope-Final-CASE-Report.pdf.
—. 2021 D. "Nonresidential Indoor Lighting March." March. https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/03/2022-T24-Indoor-Lighting_Final-CASE-Report_Statewid-CASE-Team_w-
Addendum.pdf.
Statewide IOU Team. 2022. "2019 Restaurants Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis." 2 18.
file:///C:/Users/mflores/Downloads/2019%20Restaurants%20Cost-eff%20Report%20(10).pdf.
TRC, P2S Engineers, and Western Allied Mechanical. 2022. "2019 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis." February
22. https://localenergycodes.com/download/968/file_path/fieldList/2019%20Restaurants%20Cost-
eff%20Report.pdf.
U.S. Department of Energy . 2021. "A National Roadmap for Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings." May 17.
https://gebroadmap.lbl.gov/A%20National%20Roadmap%20for%20GEBs%20-%20Final.pdf.
U.S. Department of Energy. 2019 B. U.S. Department of Energy. December.
https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2020/02/f72/2019_ssl-energy-savings-forecast.pdf.
—. 2022 A. Prototype Building Models. June 9. https://www.energycodes.gov/prototype-building-models.
WELL. 2022. wellcertified.com. June 9. Accessed June 8, 2022. wellcertified.com.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 52
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8 Appendices
8.1 Map of California CZs
Climate Zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 5 below. An interactive GIS location based map and zip-
code based search directory is available at: Climate Zone tool, maps, and information supporting the California Energy
Code
Figure 5. Map of California CZs
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 53
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the IOU and POU rates depicted in to determine the On-Bill savings for each prototype.
Table 23. Utility Tariffs Analyzed Based on CZ – Detailed View
CZs Utility
Electric Rate (Time of Use) Gas Rate
Medium
Office
Medium
Retail QSR Small Hotel All Prototypes
CZ01 PG&E B-10 B-1 B-1 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
CZ02 PG&E B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
CZ03 PG&E B-10 B-1 B-1 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
CZ04 PG&E B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
CZ04-2 CPAU E-2 E-2 E-2 E-2 G-2
CZ05 PG&E B-10 B-1 B-1 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
CZ05-2 SCG B-10 B-1 B-1 B-1 or B-10 G-10 (GN-10)
CZ06 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 G-10 (GN-10)
CZ07 SDG&E
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU) GN-3
CZ08 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 G-10 (GN-10)
CZ09 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 G-10 (GN-10)
CZ10 SDG&E
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU) G-10 (GN-10)
CZ10-2 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 GN-3
CZ11 PG&E B-10 B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-10 G-NR1
CZ12 PG&E B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-10 G-NR1
CZ12-2 SMUD CITS-1
(CI-TOD 1)
CITS-1
(CI-TOD 1)
CITS-1
(CI-TOD 1) CITS-1 G-NR1
CZ13 PG&E B-10 B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-10 G-NR1
CZ14 SDG&E
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-
TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU)
AL-TOU+EECC
(AL-TOU) G-10 (GN-10)
CZ14-2 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 or TOU-
GS-3 GN-3
CZ15 SCE TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 TOU-GS-2 G-10 (GN-10)
CZ16 PG&E B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 B-1 or B-10 G-NR1
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 54
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.1 PG&E
Figure 6. PG&E Electric Schedule - B-1
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 55
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 7. PG&E Electric Schedule - B-10
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 56
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 8. PG&E Gas Schedule – G-NR1
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 57
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.2 SCE
Figure 9. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-1
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 58
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 10. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-2
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 59
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 11. SCE Electric Schedule – TOU-GS-3
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 60
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.3 SCG
Figure 12. SCG Gas Schedule – G-10
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 61
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 62
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.4 SDG&E
Figure 13. SDG&E Electric Schedule – AL-TOU
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 63
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 64
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 65
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 14. SDG&E Electric Schedule - EECC
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 66
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 15. SDG&E Gas Schedule – GN-3
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 67
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 68
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.5 CPAU
Figure 16. CPAU Electric Schedule – E-2
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 69
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 17. CPAU Gas Schedule – G-2
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 70
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.6 SMUD (Electric Only)
Figure 18. SMUD Electric Schedule – CITS-0/CITS-1
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 71
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.2.7 Escalation Rates
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time, using assumptions from research conducted by Energy and
Environmental Economics (E3) in Appendix 8.2. The 2019 study Residential Building Electrification in California
(Energy + Environmental Economics 2019a) and escalation rates used in the development of the 2022 TDV multipliers
Table 24 below demonstrate the escalation rates used for nonresidential buildings. As stated by E3 in the TDV report,
this latter assumption “does not presuppose specific new investments, changes in load and gas throughput, or other
measures associated with complying with California’s climate policy goals” (i.e., business -as-usual is assumed).
Table 24. Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions Above Inflation
Source
Statewide Electric
Nonresidential Average
Rate (%/year, real)
Statewide Natural Gas
Nonresidential Core Rate
(%/year, real)
2023 E3 2019 2.0% 4.0%
2024 2022 TDV 0.7% 7.7%
2025 2022 TDV 0.5% 5.5%
2026 2022 TDV 0.7% 5.6%
2027 2022 TDV 0.2% 5.6%
2028 2022 TDV 0.6% 5.7%
2029 2022 TDV 0.7% 5.7%
2030 2022 TDV 0.6% 5.8%
2031 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.3%
2032 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.6%
2033 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.4%
2034 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.4%
2035 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.2%
2036 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.2%
2037 2022 TDV 0.6% 3.1%
8.3 HVAC and SHW System Cost Scalers
Table 25 shows the material and labor adjustment factors used to determine the costs.
Table 25. Materials and Labor Adjustment Factors by Climate Zone
Materials Labor
CZ 01 0.963 0.994
CZ 02 0.963 1.387
CZ 03 1.001 1.291
CZ 04 0.998 1.298
CZ 05 0.964 0.997
CZ 06 0.960 0.997
CZ 07 0.999 0.985
CZ 08 0.998 0.996
CZ 09 0.964 0.996
CZ 10 0.998 0.996
CZ 11 1.002 0.990
CZ 12 1.000 1.000
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 72
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
CZ 13 1.000 0.990
CZ 14 0.964 0.980
CZ 15 0.963 0.996
CZ 16 0.967 0.990
Table 26 shows the contractor markup values used to determine the costs.
Table 26. Contractor Markup Values
Contractor 1 Contractor 2
General Conditions and Overhead 15% 20%
Design and Engineering 5% 10%
Permit, testing and inspection 5% 3%
Contractor Profit/Market Factor 10% 10%
8.4 Mixed Fuel Baseline Figures
Table 27. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Medium Office
Climate
zone Utility
Annual
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Annual
Natural Gas
Consumption
(therms)
Total
kTDV/ft2
Total TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
Efficiency
TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
GHG
Emissions
Total TDV
Compliance
Margin
Proposed
Elec
Utility
Cost
Proposed
Gas
Utility
Cost tons/yr
CZ01 PG&E 186,894 5,331 130 10 72 63 1 $67,234 $10,377
CZ02 PG&E 163,979 3,253 142 12 107 52 2 $67,798 $6,493
CZ03 PG&E 176,640 2,672 131 5 83 48 1 $67,999 $5,352
CZ04 PG&E 163,768 2,003 125 -2 107 46 1 $68,366 $4,093
CZ04-2 CPAU 163,768 2,003 125 -2 107 46 1 $30,988 $6,966
CZ05 PG&E 170,544 2,575 113 -8 76 46 1 $66,040 $5,156
CZ05-2 SCG 170,544 2,575 113 -8 76 46 1 $66,040 $4,242
CZ06 SCE 163,722 1,066 122 -7 76 39 0 $76,817 $1,980
CZ07 SDG&E 169,611 747 114 -9 76 38 0 $120,127 $1,150
CZ08 SCE 191,703 941 130 -2 76 41 1 $83,752 $1,763
CZ09 SCE 169,514 1,119 135 0 76 41 1 $82,274 $2,046
CZ10 SDG&E 185,682 1,445 141 10 76 45 2 $134,646 $2,113
CZ10-2 SCE 185,682 1,445 141 10 76 45 2 $86,338 $2,474
CZ11 PG&E 209,343 3,309 166 40 136 59 2 $81,001 $6,669
CZ12 PG&E 178,461 2,864 145 19 118 53 2 $72,381 $5,784
CZ12-2 SMUD 178,461 2,864 145 19 118 53 2 $26,576 $5,784
CZ13 PG&E 211,193 2,377 165 37 139 55 2 $81,491 $4,852
CZ14 SDG&E 156,689 3,058 147 13 139 52 3 $128,390 $4,337
CZ14-2 SCE 156,689 3,058 147 13 139 52 3 $83,690 $4,756
CZ15 SCE 209,720 662 161 32 139 47 2 $101,041 $1,311
CZ16 PG&E 177,562 5,799 127 9 94 67 4 $68,281 $11,409
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 73
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 28. All-electric Baseline Model – Medium Retail
Climate
zone Utility
Annual
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Annual
Natural Gas
Consumption
(therms)
Total
kTDV/ft2
Total TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
Efficiency
TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
GHG
Emissions
Total TDV
Compliance
Margin
Proposed
Elec
Utility
Cost
Proposed
Gas
Utility
Cost tons/yr
CZ01 PG&E 138,367 0 192 110 162 28 -8 $43,917 $0
CZ02 PG&E 131,521 0 211 125 198 28 -15 $50,499 $0
CZ03 PG&E 112,237 0 176 91 156 25 -1 $36,206 $0
CZ04 PG&E 122,256 0 197 111 193 27 -5 $47,522 $0
CZ04-2 CPAU 122,256 0 197 111 193 27 -5 $22,961 $0
CZ05 PG&E 108,753 0 159 76 146 24 -8 $35,179 $0
CZ05-2 SCG 108,753 0 159 76 146 24 -8 $35,179 $0
CZ06 SCE 111,442 0 175 89 146 24 -8 $42,572 $0
CZ07 SDG&E 109,079 0 172 87 146 23 0 $71,108 $0
CZ08 SCE 129,105 0 196 107 146 26 -10 $47,404 $0
CZ09 SCE 123,673 0 193 105 146 26 -3 $46,830 $0
CZ10 SDG&E 114,235 0 174 87 146 25 4 $77,903 $0
CZ10-2 SCE 114,235 0 174 87 146 25 4 $45,763 $0
CZ11 PG&E 144,411 0 229 144 218 30 -6 $54,592 $0
CZ12 PG&E 141,639 0 221 136 211 30 -4 $53,798 $0
CZ12-2 SMUD 141,639 0 221 136 211 30 -4 $21,079 $0
CZ13 PG&E 153,371 0 244 158 236 32 -15 $56,701 $0
CZ14 SDG&E 145,499 0 223 135 236 31 -8 $86,177 $0
CZ14-2 SCE 145,499 0 223 135 236 31 -8 $52,840 $0
CZ15 SCE 146,092 0 244 158 236 29 -24 $56,750 $0
CZ16 PG&E 157,944 0 224 144 214 34 -31 $57,190 $0
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 74
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 29. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Quick-Service Restaurant
Climate
zone Utility
Annual
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Annual
Natural Gas
Consumption
(therms)
Total
kTDV/ft2
Total TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
Efficiency
TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
GHG
Emissions
Total TDV
Compliance
Margin
Proposed
Elec
Utility
Cost
Proposed
Gas
Utility
Cost tons/yr
CZ01 PG&E 63,187 12,237 1,974 820 820 80 5 $20,126 $23,401
CZ02 PG&E 66,343 11,170 1,989 839 839 74 20 $21,332 $21,422
CZ03 PG&E 67,877 10,605 1,922 769 769 71 1 $21,657 $20,336
CZ04 PG&E 77,615 10,277 2,062 910 910 71 -4 $24,931 $19,725
CZ04-2 CPAU 77,615 10,277 2,062 910 910 71 -4 $15,041 $30,442
CZ05 PG&E 69,442 10,655 1,898 744 744 71 -2 $22,105 $20,416
CZ05-2 SCG 69,442 10,655 1,898 744 744 71 -2 $22,105 $14,924
CZ06 SCE 78,813 9,600 1,934 778 744 67 -1 $19,698 $13,599
CZ07 SDG&E 76,653 9,425 1,898 739 744 66 18 $26,903 $13,116
CZ08 SCE 77,418 9,554 1,948 792 744 66 28 $20,356 $13,542
CZ09 SCE 77,625 9,687 1,993 837 744 67 7 $20,405 $13,709
CZ10 SDG&E 81,897 9,907 2,032 877 744 69 26 $31,166 $13,782
CZ10-2 SCE 81,897 9,907 2,032 877 744 69 26 $21,407 $13,986
CZ11 PG&E 85,725 10,748 2,259 1,109 1,109 75 -12 $27,885 $20,664
CZ12 PG&E 74,131 10,726 2,080 928 928 72 2 $24,000 $20,605
CZ12-2 SMUD 74,131 10,726 2,080 928 928 72 2 $11,272 $20,605
CZ13 PG&E 88,060 10,441 2,240 1,089 1,089 73 -2 $28,620 $20,070
CZ14 SDG&E 87,498 10,655 2,251 1,097 1,089 74 -31 $30,692 $14,728
CZ14-2 SCE 87,498 10,655 2,251 1,097 1,089 74 -31 $22,471 $14,925
CZ15 SCE 118,353 9,194 2,444 1,289 1,089 71 -13 $28,746 $13,090
CZ16 PG&E 75,373 12,242 2,143 983 983 82 2 $24,194 $23,494
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 75
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Table 30. Mixed Fuel Baseline Model – Small Hotel
Climate
zone Utility
Annual
Electricity
Consumption
(kWh)
Annual
Natural Gas
Consumption
(therms)
Total
kTDV/ft2
Total TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
Efficiency
TDV
Compliance
kTDV/ft2
GHG
Emissions
Total TDV
Compliance
Margin
Proposed
Elec
Utility
Cost
Proposed
Gas
Utility
Cost tons/yr
CZ01 PG&E 230,187 16,824 299 161 173 137 7 $72,520 $32,208
CZ02 PG&E 243,164 13,161 287 152 169 117 5 $77,188 $25,351
CZ03 PG&E 232,511 12,725 272 136 151 113 6 $73,496 $24,461
CZ04 PG&E 251,386 11,608 280 146 165 109 5 $80,034 $22,342
CZ04-2 CPAU 251,386 11,608 280 146 165 109 5 $48,175 $34,218
CZ05 PG&E 232,585 12,375 264 127 143 111 6 $73,479 $23,746
CZ05-2 SCG 232,585 12,375 264 127 143 111 6 $73,479 $17,084
CZ06 SCE 251,627 10,100 260 124 143 100 4 $53,976 $14,227
CZ07 SDG&E 250,625 9,977 257 120 143 100 3 $77,312 $13,878
CZ08 SCE 271,204 9,874 269 136 143 101 3 $60,488 $13,943
CZ09 SCE 265,607 10,246 273 140 143 103 4 $60,896 $14,411
CZ10 SDG&E 276,218 9,903 276 142 143 102 3 $91,917 $13,642
CZ10-2 SCE 276,218 9,903 276 142 143 102 3 $63,534 $13,980
CZ11 PG&E 285,482 12,457 315 179 197 118 4 $82,170 $24,172
CZ12 PG&E 263,561 11,890 293 158 176 112 2 $76,104 $23,029
CZ12-2 SMUD 263,561 11,890 293 158 176 112 2 $34,853 $23,029
CZ13 PG&E 293,124 11,309 310 175 193 113 1 $84,632 $21,924
CZ14 SDG&E 276,292 12,071 298 166 193 115 2 $89,492 $16,232
CZ14-2 SCE 276,292 12,071 298 166 193 115 2 $63,611 $16,703
CZ15 SCE 349,319 7,895 309 174 193 98 -4 $78,507 $11,458
CZ16 PG&E 228,611 17,363 310 170 195 142 9 $72,664 $33,471
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 76
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
8.5 GHG Savings Summary
This section shows the percent GHG savings for each package. GHG multipliers in CBECC software have utility
emissions multipliers assigned only to each of the California’s sixteen climate zones, does not vary by utility within
each zone. Individual utility assumptions may vary widely. In the Medium Office, the GHG emissions increases in all-
electric package because the proposed all-electric system is electric resistance VAV system instead of a more efficient
heat pump boiler system.
Figure 19. Percentage GHG Savings – Medium Office
Figure 20. Percentage GHG Savings – Medium Retail
Mixed Fuel
EE Code Min EE EE + LF
cz01 0%3%4%12%
cz02 1%0%1%8%
cz03 1%0%1%8%
cz04 2%-1%1%7%
cz05 1%0%2%9%
cz06 2%0%2%8%
cz07 3%0%3%8%
cz08 3%0%2%8%
cz09 2%-1%2%7%
cz10 2%-2%0%6%
cz11 1%-3%-1%5%
cz12 1%-2%-1%5%
cz13 2%-3%-1%4%
cz14 2%-4%-2%5%
cz15 3%-1%2%7%
cz16 1%1%2%7%
CZ All-electric
All-electric
EE Code Min EE
cz01 -4%-2%9%
cz02 -21%-13%10%
cz03 -18%-8%11%
cz04 -14%-5%10%
cz05 -15%-5%12%
cz06 -7%4%13%
cz07 -5%7%14%
cz08 -7%4%12%
cz09 -8%3%13%
cz10 -12%-9%3%
cz11 -23%-21%2%
cz12 -19%-11%9%
cz13 -17%-8%10%
cz14 -15%-5%10%
cz15 -3%0%3%
cz16 -34%-33%2%
Mixed FuelCZ
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 77
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Figure 21. Percentage GHG Savings – Quick Service Restaurant
Figure 22. Percentage GHG Savings – Small Hotel
Mixed Fuel
EE Code Min EE EE + LF EE + PV Code Min EE
cz01 10%21%26%28%27%47%52%
cz02 7%16%19%21%21%45%49%
cz03 8%14%20%22%22%45%51%
cz04 7%12%17%19%19%43%49%
cz05 8%14%20%22%22%45%51%
cz06 7%9%15%16%17%43%48%
cz07 6%8%14%15%16%43%48%
cz08 4%9%12%13%14%43%46%
cz09 5%9%12%13%15%43%46%
cz10 5%10%13%14%15%42%46%
cz11 6%13%17%18%18%43%46%
cz12 6%14%17%18%19%44%48%
cz13 6%12%15%16%17%43%46%
cz14 6%13%16%17%18%42%46%
cz15 4%7%9%11%12%40%42%
cz16 8%18%23%24%24%44%49%
All-electric "HS" (HVAC+SHW)CZ All-electric
Mixed Fuel All-electric
EE Code Min EE EE + PV Code Min (PTHP)
cz01 13%47%48%50%47%
cz02 11%42%44%47%43%
cz03 12%43%45%48%43%
cz04 11%41%44%46%42%
cz05 11%43%45%48%43%
cz06 10%41%43%46%41%
cz07 10%41%43%47%41%
cz08 10%40%42%46%40%
cz09 10%40%42%46%40%
cz10 11%37%39%43%37%
cz11 12%39%41%43%39%
cz12 12%38%41%43%39%
cz13 11%37%39%42%37%
cz14 12%38%40%44%38%
cz15 10%33%35%40%33%
cz16 13%43%46%48%45%
CZ
All-electric
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Nonresidential New Construction 78
Energy Code Compliance Results and Reach Code Considerations
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-03-24
Get In Touch
The adoption of reach codes can differentiate jurisdictions as efficiency leaders and help accelerate the
adoption of new equipment, technologies, code compliance, and energy savings strategies.
As part of the Statewide Codes & Standards Program, the Reac h Codes Subprogram is a resource available to
any local jurisdiction located throughout the state of California.
Our experts develop robust toolkits as well as provide specific technical assistance to local jurisdictions (cities
and counties) considering adopting energy reach codes. These include cost-effectiveness research and
analysis, model ordinance language and other code development and implementation tools, and specific
technical assistance throughout the code adoption process.
If you are interested in finding out more about local energy reach codes , the Reach Code Team stands ready to
assist jurisdictions at any stage of a reach code project.
Visit LocalEnergyCodes.com to
access our resources and sign up
for newsletters
Contact info@localenergycodes.com
for no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors
Follow us on Twitter
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3207 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a lease between the
County, as Lessor, and Buchanan Fields Golf Club, LLC., as Tenant, for 11,097 square feet of land
located at 2301 Meridian Park Blvd., Concord, for a two-year term at an initial monthly rent of $2,800
for the first year, with annual increases thereafter, and one five-year option to renew. (100% Airport
Enterprise Fund)
Attachments:1. Buchanan Golf_Coffee Kiosk Lease 2024_Final
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Greg Baer, Director of Airports
Report Title:Approval and Authorization to Execute a Lease with Buchanan Fields Golf Club, LLC to operate a drive-
through and walk-up coffee/espresso and food business located at 2301 Meridian Park Boulevard, Concord (District IV).
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Director of Airports, or designee, to execute a lease between the County, as
Lessor, and Buchanan Fields Golf Club, LLC, as Tenant, for 11,097 square feet of land, including a 96 square
foot structure located at 2301 Meridian Park Boulevard, Concord, for a two-year term, at an initial monthly rent
of $2,800 beginning April 1, 2025, with annual increases thereafter, and one five-year option to renew.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Following the six-month construction period rent of $300 per month, ending on March 31, 2025, the Airport
Enterprise Fund will receive annual lease revenues of $33,600. Annual lease increases of 2.8% are built into the
lease, resulting in a maximum annual lease amount of $38,387 in year seven of the lease. Additionally, the
County’s General Fund will realize an increase in sales tax and possessory interest taxes generated from this
site during the duration of the lease.
BACKGROUND:
The property located at 2301 Meridian Park Boulevard is County owned property, managed by the Airports
Division through its grant assurances with the Federal Aviation Administration. The site was previously
developed and used as a drive-through coffee kiosk since the mid-1990’s.
The site has been vacant for approximately four years, and for the past year Airports staff has been working
with several interested parties to bring coffee and food back to the site. One of those potential lessors completed
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3207,Version:1
the land use permitting process with the County’s Department of Conservation and Development in November
2023. While the Airport was unable to agree on lease terms with that entity, the November 2023 permit will be
exercised by the new lessor. To that end, the lease requires the lessee to reimburse the entity that applied for the
permit for their costs and fees associated with the same.
The proposed new lessor, Buchanan Fields Golf Club will integrate this site with their adjacent golf course
business, not only to improve the aesthetics of the area, but also to create synergy between the two uses. The
golf club’s ownership has also agreed to make their menu, branding, and marketing aviation themed. This
approach is consistent with Airport Management’s initiative to cross-market and increase business activity for
all commercial airport tenants.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Airport Enterprise fund and General Fund would not realize the increase in revenue from the proposed
commercial activity, and the site would remain vacant until another lessee is secured.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
LEASE
BETWEEN
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
AND
BUCHANNAN FIELDS GOLF CLUB LLC
October 1, 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BUCHANNAN FIELDS GOLF CLUB LLC
RECITALS 1
1. LEASE: 1
2. TERM: 2
3. HOLDING OVER: 2
4. RENT: 2
5. ADDITIONAL PAYMENT PROVISIONS: 3
6. LESSOR PROCESSING AND TRANSACTION FEES: 5
7. USE OF PREMISES: 5
8. CONDITION OF PREMISES: 5
9. ADVERTISING AND SIGNAGE: 5
10. UTILITY OBLIGATIONS: 6
11. ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS: 6
12. MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND STORAGE: 6
13. LAWFUL CONDUCT: 8
14. WASTE, QUIET CONDUCT, NUISANCE, POLLUTION: 8
15. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: 8
16. STORMWATER DISCHARGE: 10
17. NOISE ORDINANCE: 11
18. SECURITY: 11
19. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION: 11
20. INSURANCE: 11
21. TAXES: 12
22. INSPECTION, ACCESS AND NOTICE: 13
23. ASSIGNMENT AND ENCUMBRANCES: 13
24. SURRENDER OF POSSESSION: 14
25. DEFAULT: 15
26. LESSOR’S REMEDIES: 16
27. DESTRUCTION: 17
28. CONDEMNATION: 18
29. NON-DISCRIMINATION: 18
30. OPERATION OF AIRPORT BY LESSOR: 19
31. AIRPORT USE AND DEVELOPMENT: 19
32. DEVELOPMENT OF PREMISES: 20
33. INSTRUMENT OF TRANSFER: 21
34. CHOICE OF LAW: 21
35. NOTICES: 21
36. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: 21
37. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS: 21
38. INVALID PROVISIONS; SEVERABILITY: 22
39. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: 22
40. CUMULATIVE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES: 22
41. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES: 22
42. NO CONTINUING WAIVER: 22
43. COVENANT AGAINST LIENS: 22
44. HEADINGS AND CAPTIONS: 23
EXHIBIT A – Site Map
1
LEASE BETWEEN COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
AND BUCHANNAN FIELDS GOLF CLUB, LLC
This lease agreement is dated as of October 1, 2024, and is between the COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA, a political subdivision of the State of California (“Lessor”), and BUCHANAN
FIELDS GOLF CLUB LLC, a California limited liability company (“Tenant”).
RECITALS
A. Lessor owns and operates Buchanan Field, a public airport located at Concord, California
(the “Airport”), as shown on the Airport Layout Plan, which plan is on file in the office
of the Contra Costa County Director of Airports (the “Director of Airports”).
B. Tenant desires to lease that certain real property consisting of approximately 11,097
square feet of land located at Buchanan Field Airport, commonly known as 2301
Meridian Park Boulevard, Concord, California, as depicted in Exhibit A (the “Premises”)
for the purpose of operating an aviation themed drive-through and walk-up
coffee/espresso and food business.
C. Tenant also desires to maintain the landscaping within the area adjacent to the Premises
and Concord Avenue that is marked “Non-Exclusive” on Exhibit A, which consists of
approximately 3,833 square feet.
D. The improvements within the Premises include, but are not limited to, a building that is
approximately 8’ x 12’ in size, grading, paving, drainage, utilities, curbs, a trash
enclosure, and landscaping (together, the “Improvements”).
E. On November 6, 2023, the County, acting in its capacity as a regulatory agency,
approved the application submitted as File# CDLP23-02033 by Gerardo Hernandez for
permission to use the Premises for a drive through coffee and food business (the
“Permit”). The cost of the Permit was $7,162.00 (the “Permit Fee”).
The parties therefore agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. LEASE:
For and in consideration of the rent, fees, and faithful performance by Tenant of the terms
and conditions and the mutual covenants hereof, Lessor hereby leases to Tenant, and
Tenant hereby leases from Lessor, the Premises, subject to all easements and
encumbrances of record.
2
2. TERM:
The “Term” of this lease is comprised of an Initial Term and, at Tenant’s election, a
Renewal Term, each as defined below.
a. Initial Term. The “Initial Term” is two and a half years, commencing on October 1,
2024 (the “Commencement Date”) and ending March 30, 2027.
b. Renewal Term. Tenant has one option to renew this lease for four and a half years,
ending on September 30, 2031 (“Renewal Term”). The Renewal Term is based upon
all the terms and conditions set forth in this lease.
i. Tenant will provide the County with written notice of its election to renew the
lease no later than 60 days prior to the expiration of the Term.
ii. Upon the commencement of the Renewal Term, all references to the Term of
this lease will be deemed to mean the Term as extended pursuant to this
Section.
3. HOLDING OVER:
In the event Tenant remains in possession of the Premises after the expiration of the
Term, such holding over does not constitute a renewal or extension of this lease, but will
be construed to be a tenancy from month to month on the same terms and conditions set
forth in this lease.
If Tenant fails to surrender the Premises to Lessor on expiration or within 30 days after
cancellation or termination of this lease, Tenant shall defend, indemnify, and hold Lessor
harmless from any and all claims, liability, costs, and damages resulting from Tenant’s
failure to surrender the Premises, including, without limitation, claims made by a
succeeding tenant or renter.
4. RENT:
Tenant shall pay Construction Period Rent and Ground Rent (each as defined below), as
applicable, to Lessor without offset or demand on or before the first day of each month.
Rent for any partial month will be prorated at the rate of 1/30 of the applicable monthly
rent per day.
A. Construction Period Rent: Tenant shall pay Construction Period Rent during the
Construction Period. The “Construction Period” is the period that begins
October 1, 2024, and ends March 31, 2025. “Construction Period Rent” is equal
to $300.00 per month.
3
B. Ground Rent: Beginning April 1, 2025, and continuing for the remainder of the
Term, Tenant shall pay monthly rent in the amounts set forth below (such
amounts, “Ground Rent”).
INITIAL TERM
Beginning Ground Rent
April 1, 2025 $2,800.00
April 1, 2026 $2,875.60
RENEWAL TERM
Beginning Ground Rent
April 1, 2027 $2,953.24
April 1, 2028 $3,023.98
April 1, 2029 $3,114.87
April 1, 2030 $3,198.97
5. ADDITIONAL PAYMENT PROVISIONS:
A. Land Use Permit Reimbursement. As consideration for this lease, Tenant shall
transmit a check in the amount of $7,162.00 to Mr. Gerardo Hernandez as
reimbursement for the Permit Fee. Tenant is to send the check to Mr. Hernandez
within five days after the full execution of this lease. Tenant is to mail the check
to Mr. Hernandez at 3648 Lolita Drive, Concord, CA 94519 and provide a copy
of the check to the Director of Airports. Reimbursement of the Permit Fee in
accordance with the paragraph constitutes 100% of any payment Tenant is
required to make regarding the Permit pursuant to this lease.
B. Late Rental Payments: In the event Tenant fails to pay Lessor any amount due
under this lease within five days after such amount is due, Tenant shall pay to
Lessor a late charge of $100 per occurrence (the “Late Charge”), plus interest on
the unpaid balance at a rate of 1.5% per month, from the date the payment was
due and payable until paid in full. Tenant shall pay all Late Charges as additional
rent on or before the date the next installment of rent is due. Lessor and Tenant
hereby agree that it is and will be impracticable and extremely difficult to
ascertain and fix Lessor’s actual damage from any late payments and, thus, that
Tenant shall pay as liquidated damages to Lessor the Late Charge specified in this
Section, which is the result of the parties’ reasonable endeavor to estimate fair
average compensation for the late payment (other than attorneys’ fees and costs).
4
Lessor’s acceptance of the Late Charge as liquidated damages does not constitute
a waiver of Tenant’s default with respect to the overdue amount or prevent Lessor
from exercising any of the rights and remedies available to Lessor under this
lease.
C. Form and Place of Payment: Tenant shall pay all rents and fees in cash or by
personal check, certified check, or money order, payable to the County of Contra
Costa, by delivering same on or before due date to the Director of Airports Office,
181 John Glenn Drive, Suite 100, Concord, California 94520, or at such other
place as Lessor may designate from time to time.
D. Returned Checks: If a check written by Tenant is returned for insufficient funds,
Lessor may impose a reasonable service charge in addition to any Late Charge
and in addition to any charges imposed by the bank. Lessor may require Tenant
to pay rent by certified check or money order if Tenant’s bank or banks have
returned one or more personal checks within the preceding 12-month period.
E. Security Deposit:
1. Upon execution of this lease, Tenant will continue to maintain the sum of
$5,000.00 in cash as security for the faithful performance of the terms,
covenants, and conditions of this lease (the “Security Deposit”).
2. Upon the occurrence of a Default, as defined in Section 25, Lessor may in
its sole discretion (but is not required to) apply the Security Deposit, or
any portion of it, to any expense, loss or (i) any rent or other sum owed to
Lessor, (ii) any amount that Lessor may spend or become obligated to
spend in exercising Lessor’s rights under this lease, or (iii) damage
sustained by Lessor resulting from Tenant’s Default. Upon demand by
Lessor, Tenant shall immediately pay to Lessor a sum equal to that portion
of the Security Deposit expended or applied by Lessor as provided in this
subsection so as to maintain the Security Deposit at its original level.
Upon the expiration or termination of this lease and (i) Tenant’s
satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 8. Condition of Premises,
and (ii) a final accounting by Lessor, any remaining Security Deposit
balance shall be refunded to Tenant, without interest. Tenant waives the
provisions of California Civil Code section 1950.7, and all other
provisions of law in force or that become in force after the date of
execution of this lease, that provide that Lessor may claim from a Security
Deposit only those sums reasonably necessary to remedy defaults in the
payment of Rent, to repair damage caused by Tenant or to clean the
Premises. Lessor and Tenant agree that Lessor may, in addition, claim
those sums reasonably necessary to compensate Lessor for any other
foreseeable or unforeseeable loss or damage caused by the act or omission
5
of Tenant or Tenant’s officers, agents, employees, independent contractors
or invitees.
6. LESSOR PROCESSING AND TRANSACTION FEES:
In the event that Tenant requires or requests Lessor’s review, investigation, processing,
recordation, or any other action in connection with any Tenant document, proposal or
other matter that requires Lessor’s staff time and resources, other than time and resources
of the Contra Costa County Airports Division (e.g., a proposed assignment or other
transfer, or an estoppel certificate), Tenant shall pay Lessor a transaction fee of
$2,500.00 plus all of Lessor’s costs, including, but not limited to, staff time at rates
determined by the County Auditor for time spent in connection with processing Tenant’s
request until the matter is complete (“Transaction Fee”).
7. USE OF PREMISES:
Except as otherwise provided herein, the Premises may be used by Tenant only for the
operation and maintenance of a drive-through or walk-up coffee/espresso and food
business. A “coffee/espresso and food business,” for the purposes of this lease, is defined
as a business that provides espresso, coffees, teas, and other beverages, assorted pastries,
sandwiches, burritos, frozen yogurt, ice cream, and limited coffee-related gift items for
sale to the public. Tenant may accommodate only drive-through, walk-up, or delivery
customers. Customers are not to remain on the Premises for more than 15 minutes at one
time.
Tenant may not use the Premises for any other purpose without the Director of Airport’s
express prior written consent. Any use of the premises other than as described herein
without the Director of Airports’ prior written consent is a default of this lease.
8. CONDITION OF PREMISES:
A. Commencement Date. Tenant is leasing the Premises in an “as is” physical
condition with no warranty, express or implied, on the part of Lessor as to the
condition of the Improvements, the condition of the soil or the geology of the soil.
B. During Term. Tenant shall maintain the Premises in accordance with Section 12.
Maintenance, Repair and Storage.
9. ADVERTISING AND SIGNAGE:
Tenant, at Tenant’s sole cost and expense, may only erect and maintain on the Premises
such sign or signs (“Signage”) of the type, style, size, design, and location permitted and
approved in writing by the Director of Airports. All Signage must be consistent with the
written sign policy of the Airport and in compliance with all applicable laws, rules,
ordinances, and regulations and required approvals, authorizations, and permits, prior to
erecting any Signage. Any on-site Signage must be prepared by a professional sign
6
company or advertising organization. County reserves the right to disapprove any of
Tenant’s Signage and to require Tenant to remove any Signage.
10. UTILITY OBLIGATIONS:
Tenant shall pay utility providers directly for all utilities used or consumed on the
Premises by Tenant or its subtenants, including, but not limited to gas, water, electricity,
garbage disposal, storm and sanitary sewer services, janitorial services, and telephone
services.
In the event Lessor, or any utility company, requires that any existing or new distribution
system be installed underground, Tenant shall, at its own cost and expense, provide all
necessary facility changes on the Premises, so as to receive such service.
11. ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS:
Tenant shall not make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any
improvements on the Premises without the prior written consent of the Director of
Airports. In the event Tenant makes alterations or constructs additions that violate the
conditions contained in this lease (an “Unauthorized Addition”), at the Director of
Airports sole discretion, Tenant shall remove any Unauthorized Addition at Tenant’s sole
cost and expense. If Tenant is required to remove any Unauthorized Addition, Tenant, at
its sole cost and expense, shall restore the Premises to the conditions existing
immediately prior to the existence of the Unauthorized Addition, or such other condition
designated by Lessor in its election. If Tenant is not required to remove any
Unauthorized Addition, such Unauthorized Additions shall remain on and be surrendered
with the Premises on expiration or termination of this lease.
If Tenant wishes to make any alterations, erect any additional structures, or make any
additional improvements to the Premises as provided in this Section, Tenant may not
commence construction until Tenant has the prior written consent of the Director of
Airports. In addition, Tenant shall cause a Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility to be
posted and recorded during construction in accordance with Civil Code Sections 3094
and 3129. Tenant shall mail a copy of the Notice of Lessor Non-Responsibility to the
Director of Airports upon filing it with the County Recorder.
12. MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND STORAGE:
A. Tenant shall, at its sole cost and expense throughout the Term of this lease,
maintain the Premises and the Improvements in a first-class condition.
Maintenance of the Improvements includes exterior painting and roof repairs.
Grounds maintenance includes crack sealing and other infrastructure repairs. All
maintenance, repairs, and replacements shall be of a quality substantially equal to
the original material and workmanship. The Director of Airports, or his or her
designee, is the sole judge of the quality of maintenance.
7
Any changes in exterior paint colors shall be subject to the prior written approval
of the Director of Airports. Tenant shall maintain all painted exterior surfaces and
surfaces requiring treatment of any kind in first-class condition and repaint or
treat as often as reasonably required in the sole discretion of Airport, in order to
preserve the structure and to maintain high standards of appearance at the Airport.
Upon written notice by Airport, Tenant shall perform whatever reasonable
maintenance Airport deems necessary. If the maintenance is not undertaken by
Tenant within 30 days after receipt of written notice, Lessor may enter upon the
Premises and perform such necessary maintenance, and Tenant shall reimburse
Lessor for the cost of performing the maintenance as additional rent, without
offset, upon Tenant’s receipt of Airport’s request for reimbursement.
B. Tenant shall, at its sole cost and expense during the Construction Period, complete
the following improvements or repairs to the satisfaction of the Director of
Airports:
i. Premises Cleanup.
1. Remove trash and debris.
2. Trim existing vegetation to allow for at least three feet of clearance
between the ground and vegetation canopy.
ii. Install minor landscaping within the Premises and the Non-Exclusive
Area.
iii. Complete building improvements/repairs to facilitate approved use.
iv. Replace on-site lighting by installing LED bulbs or fixtures.
v. Re-stripe pavement markings for parking stalls and drive-thru traffic.
C. Tenant may not store, or permit others to store, any materials, supplies, products,
equipment, or other personal property on the Premises other than inside Airport
approved buildings or structures without the prior written consent of the Director
of Airports. Tenant shall store personal property items, supplies, materials and
combustibles, authorized by the Director of Airports or by this lease inside the
building in a safe, neat and sanitary manner.
D. Tenant shall provide or cause to be provided adequate enclosures, screened areas
and/or suitable covered metal receptacles within the Premises for the short-term
accumulation and storage of solid waste, such as rubbish, trash, and garbage. Such
enclosures and/or screened areas shall be designed in such a way as to prevent, to
the extent possible, odors, fumes, attraction of pests and dispersal of wastes due to
8
wind or water runoff and shall be serviced regularly by qualified waste removal
and disposal services.
E. Tenant shall obtain a building permit from the County’s Department of
Conservation and Development for any work requiring a permit under the
California Building Code.
13. LAWFUL CONDUCT:
Tenant shall obey and observe, and shall ensure that all persons entering upon the
Premises obey and observe all the terms and conditions of this lease and all statutes,
ordinances, resolutions, regulations, orders, and policies now in existence or adopted
from time to time by the United States (including, but not limited to, the Federal Aviation
Administration), the State of California, the County of Contra Costa, the Central Contra
Costa Sanitary District, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board,
and any other government agencies with jurisdiction over the Airport (collectively, the
“Applicable Laws”) including, but not limited to, Applicable Laws concerning health,
safety, fire, accessibility, police, and the environment.
Tenant shall pay all fines and penalties levied against it by any government agency for
Tenant’s violation of any Applicable Law associated with activities on the Premises.
14. WASTE, QUIET CONDUCT, NUISANCE, POLLUTION:
A. Tenant shall not commit, or suffer to be committed, any waste upon the Premises
or any nuisance or other act or thing that may disturb the quiet enjoyment of the
use of Buchanan Field Airport or surrounding property.
B. Tenant shall provide, as necessary, a separate drainage, collection, and/or
separation system to ensure that no untreated liquid waste from any type of
operation, not permitted to be discharged directly into the storm drainage or
sanitary system, will enter the Airport storm drainage or sanitary system.
C. Tenant shall not permit any activity on the Premises that directly or indirectly
produces unlawful or excessive amounts or levels of air pollution, (e.g., gases,
particulate matter, odors, fumes, smoke, dust), water pollution, noise, glare, heat
emissions, trash or refuse accumulation, electronic or radio interference with
navigational and communication facilities used in the operation of the Airport or
by aircraft, or any other activity that is hazardous or dangerous by reason or risk
of explosion, fire, or harmful emissions.
15. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:
A. Definition of Hazardous Materials: As used in this lease, the term “Hazardous
Materials” means any hazardous or toxic substance, hazardous or radioactive
material, or hazardous waste, pollutant or contaminant at any concentration that is
9
or becomes regulated by the United States, the State of California, or any local
government authority having jurisdiction over the Premises. Hazardous Materials
include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) any “hazardous waste,”
“extremely hazardous waste,” or “restricted hazardous waste,” as defined in
Sections 25115, 25117 or 25122.7, or listed pursuant to Section 25140 of the
California Health & Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5 (Hazardous Waste
Control Law); (2) any “hazardous substance” as that term is defined in Section
25316 of the California Health & Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.8
(Carpenter-Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act), (3) any material
or substance listed as a chemical known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity
pursuant to Section 6380 of the California Labor Code, Division 5, Part 1,
Chapter 2.5 (Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act); (4) any
“hazardous waste” as that term is defined in the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901 et seq. (42 U.S.C. Section 6903); (5) any
“hazardous substance” as that term is defined in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C.
Section 9601 et seq. (42 U.S.C. Section 9601); (6) any pollutant, contaminant, or
hazardous, dangerous, or toxic chemical, material, or substance, within the
meaning of any other applicable federal, state, or local statute, ordinance,
resolution, regulation, order, policy, or requirement, including consent decrees
and administrative orders imposing liability or standards of conduct concerning
any hazardous, dangerous, or toxic waste, substance, or material, now or hereafter
in effect; (7) any petroleum product; (8) any radioactive material, including any
“source materials”, “special nuclear materials”, or “byproduct material” as
defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 2011 et seq.; (9) any asbestos in any form or
condition; and (10) any polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and any substances or
any compounds containing PCBs.
B. Use of Hazardous Materials: Tenant shall not cause or permit any Hazardous
Materials, to be generated, brought onto, stored, used, emitted, released,
discharged or disposed of in, on, under, or about the Premises by Tenant or its
officers, employees, agents, contractors, renters, guests or invitees, except for
limited quantities of (1) standard office and janitorial supplies containing
chemicals categorized as Hazardous Materials; or (2) such other Hazardous
Materials as are approved in advance in writing by Lessor. During the term of
this lease, Tenant shall strictly comply with all applicable laws, statutes,
ordinances, regulations, orders, etc., in effect that relate to public health and
safety and protection of the environment including, but not limited to those
identified in this Section (“Environmental Laws”).
C. Notification to the Director of Airports: If, during term of this lease, Tenant
becomes aware of (a) any actual or threatened release of any Hazardous Materials
on, under, or about the Premises; or (b) any inquiry, investigation, proceeding, or
claim by any government agency or other person regarding the presence of
Hazardous Materials on, under, or about the Premises, Tenant shall (1)
immediately provide verbal notification to the Director of Airports and (2)
10
provide written notification of such release or investigation to the Director of
Airports within twenty-four (24) hours after learning of it. In the event Tenant
receives any claims, notices of violation, reports, or other writing concerning the
aforementioned release or investigation, Tenant shall furnish copies of all such
materials to Lessor no later than the business day following Tenant’s receipt
thereof.
Notification to the Director of Airports under this Section does not relieve Tenant
of any obligation to notify any governmental agency under any Applicable Law.
D. Indemnification: Tenant shall, at Tenant’s sole expense and with legal counsel
reasonably acceptable to Lessor, indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless Lessor
and Lessor’s officers, employees, agents, and contractors from and against any and all
demands, losses, claims costs, suits liability and expenses including without limitation,
attorney’s fees and consultant fees arising out of or relating to the violation of any
Environmental Laws or the use, handling, generation, emission, release, discharge,
storage or disposal of any Hazardous Materials by Tenant or Tenant’s officers,
employees, agents, contractors, renters, guests or invitees. This indemnification
applies whether or not the concentration of such Hazardous Materials exceed state or
federal maximum contaminant or action levels or whether any government agency has
issued a cleanup order. Losses, claims, costs, suits, liability, and expenses covered by
this indemnification provision include, but are not limited to: (1) losses attributable to
diminution in the value of the Premises; (2) loss or restriction of use of rentable space
on the Premises; (3) adverse effect on the marketing of any rental space on the
Premises; and (4) penalties and fines levied by, and remedial or enforcement actions of
any kind issued by any regulatory agency (including but not limited to the costs of any
required testing, remediation, repair, removal, cleanup or detoxification of the
Premises and surrounding properties). This indemnification clause shall survive any
expiration or termination of this lease.
16. STORMWATER DISCHARGE:
Lessor has applied for and received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit
(“NPDEP”) under the Federal Clean Water Act, which covers Tenant’s operations on
the Premises.
Tenant shall ensure that no pollution or Hazardous Materials of any type is discharged
into the storm water system at the Airport, and shall comply with the NPDEP in all
respects and is responsible for any such discharge by Tenant or by any of Tenant’s
officers, employees, agents, contractors, renters, guests or invitees during the entire term
of this lease. Any fine or cost of remedial action required of Lessor, by any agency or
agencies having jurisdiction thereover, as a result of actions on or discharges from the
Premises, will be charged to Tenant, and Tenant shall immediately reimburse Lessor for
such costs upon demand. In addition, any discharge of pollutants or Hazardous
Materials, as defined herein, on or from the Premises is a Default of this lease and is
grounds for its termination.
11
Tenant shall observe and obey all policies, rules, and regulations promulgated and
enforced by Lessor and any other governmental entity having jurisdiction over the
Airport.
17. NOISE ORDINANCE:
Tenant shall comply with Contra Costa County Ordinances 87-8 and 88-82, as amended,
or any other rules or ordinances relating to noise standards at the Airport, as may be
approved from time to time by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.
18. SECURITY:
Lessor has no obligation to provide security to the Premises.
19. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION:
Tenant shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the Indemnitees (as defined below)
from the Liabilities as defined in this Section 19.
A. “Indemnitees” means Lessor, its governing body, elective and appointive boards,
commissions, officers, employees, representatives and agents.
B. “Liabilities” means any liability or claim for damage of any kind allegedly
suffered, incurred or threatened because of an Act (as such term is defined below)
and such liabilities include, but are not limited to personal injury, death, property
damage, inverse condemnation claims of third parties or any combination of
these, and including the defense of any suits or actions at law or equity
concerning these.
C. An “Act” means any act, intentional or negligent, and any omission, of Tenant, its
agents, subtenants, representatives, invitees, or contractors in connection with the
occupancy and use of the Premises by Tenant, its shareholders, or any subtenant,
renter or assignee.
D. The promise and agreement in this Section 19 are not conditioned or dependent
on whether Tenant or Lessor has prepared, supplied, or approved any plans or
specifications in connection with work performed pursuant to Section 11 or 12 or
has insurance or other indemnification covering any of these matters. This
indemnification clause shall survive any expiration or termination of this lease.
20. INSURANCE:
Tenant shall procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, at all times during the
term of this lease, the following policies issued by insurance companies authorized to do
12
business in California, with a financial rating of at least an A + 3A status (unless
otherwise stated below) as rated in the most recent edition of Best’s Insurance Reports:
A. Commercial General Liability and Property Damage: Tenant shall obtain and
maintain, owner, landlord, and tenant Commercial General Liability Insurance
covering and insuring all parties hereto (including naming Contra Costa County
and its officers, agents, and employees as additional insureds under the policy or
policies) with a minimum combined single limit coverage of $1,000,000 for all
damages due to bodily injury, sickness or disease, or death to any person and
damage to property, including the loss of use thereof, arising out of each accident
or occurrence arising out of ownership, maintenance, or use of the Premises and
all operations necessary or incidental thereto.
B. Fire Insurance: Tenant shall insure for fire and extended coverage risks all
personal property, improvements, and alterations in, on, or about the Premises.
Such insurance shall be in an amount equal to 100% of insurable, full replacement
value of any Improvements located thereon, and shall include vandalism and
malicious mischief endorsements.
C. Worker’s Compensation: Tenant shall obtain workers’ compensation insurance
as required by law, covering all employees of Tenant, and such insurance shall be
kept in force during the entire term of this lease.
D. Form of Policies: Lessor shall cause policies of insurance required by this
Section to be in a standard form and written by qualified insurance companies that
are satisfactory to Lessor. Tenant shall provide evidence of insurance to Lessor in
the form of (i) copy of the policies, (ii) a duly executed certificate of insurance.
The policy or policies or certificates must contain a provision that written notice
of policy lapses, cancellation or any changes thereto will be delivered to Lessor
no fewer than 30 days in advance of their effective date.
E. Notice: Tenant shall give Lessor prompt and timely notice of any claim made or
suit instituted of which it has knowledge and which could in any way directly,
contingently or otherwise, affect either Tenant or Lessor or both, and both Tenant
and Lessor have the right to participate in the defense of such claim or suit to the
extent of its respective interest.
21. TAXES:
Tenant agrees to pay before delinquency all taxes (including, but not limited to,
possessory interest tax), assessments, license fees, and other charges that are levied and
assessed upon Tenant’s interest in the Premises, or upon Tenant’s personal property
installed or located in or on the Premises, by Contra Costa County or other legally
authorized governmental authority. Tenant may pay any taxes and assessments under
protest, without liability, cost or expense to the Lessor, to contest the amount in good
faith.
13
22. INSPECTION, ACCESS AND NOTICE:
Upon 24 hours written notice to Tenant, Lessor and its agents have the right to enter and
inspect the Premises and any and every building, structure, or improvement thereon.
Lessor also has the right to serve or to post and to keep posted on the Premises, or on any
part thereof, any notice permitted by law or this lease, including but not limited to a
notice pursuant to Section 3094 of the Civil Code. Lessor is not liable in any manner for
any inconvenience, disturbance, loss of business, or other damage arising out of Lessor’s
entry on the Premises as allowed in this Section. Lessor shall conduct its activities as
allowed in this Section in a manner that will cause the least possible inconvenience,
annoyance, or disturbance to Tenant, and shall not materially interfere with access to or
use of the Premises.
23. ASSIGNMENT AND ENCUMBRANCES:
Tenant may not voluntarily sell, assign, transfer or encumber (each, a “Transfer”), its
interest in this lease or in the Premises, or allow any other person or entity (except
Tenant’s authorized representatives) to occupy or use all or any part of the Premises,
without first obtaining Lessor’s written consent. Lessor has the right to require additional
financial and other information from the proposed assignee, purchaser, transferee or other
encumbering party (each, a “Transferee”), to make its decision, and Tenant agrees to
assist Lessor in receiving such information from any proposed Transferee. Any Transfer
without Lessor’s prior written consent is voidable and, at Lessor’s election, constitutes a
Default. Any consent to a Transfer does not constitute a further waiver of the provisions
of this Section.
If Tenant is a corporation or a limited liability company, any (i) dissolution, merger,
consolidation, or other reorganization of Tenant, or (ii) the sale or other transfer of a
controlling percentage of the capital stock or membership interests, as the case may be, of
Tenant, or (iii) the sale of 50% of the value of the assets of Tenant, shall be deemed a
voluntary assignment. The phrase “controlling percentage” means (a) in the case of a
corporation, the ownership of, and the right to vote, stock possessing more than 50% of
the total combined voting power of all classes of Tenant’s capital stock issued,
outstanding, and entitled to vote for the election of directors or (b) in the case of a limited
liability company, ownership of, and the right to vote membership interests possessing
more than 50% of the total combined voting interests of Tenant.
If Tenant is in default of monetary obligations to Lessor pursuant to this lease, Tenant
immediately and irrevocably assigns to Lessor, as security for Tenant’s monetary
obligations under this lease, all rent from any subletting of all or part of the Premises as
permitted by this lease, or a receiver for Tenant appointed on Lessor’s application, may
collect such rent and apply it toward Tenant’s obligations under this lease.
14
24. SURRENDER OF POSSESSION:
A. Improvements.
Upon expiration, cancellation or other earlier termination of this lease, except as
otherwise provided herein, title to all Improvements including all alterations or
additions (including Unauthorized Additions) thereto, will automatically vest in
Lessor and will remain on and will be surrendered with the Premises.
If Lessor does not desire title to any portion of the Improvements, Lessor shall
notify Tenant in writing as soon as practicable of the Improvements to be
removed by Tenant (the “Excluded Improvements”). Tenant shall remove the
Excluded Improvements, whether above or below ground, within 30 days
following the expiration, cancellation or earlier termination of this lease.
If Tenant fails to remove the Excluded Improvements, Lessor may remove them
at Tenant’s expense, and, upon written demand by Lessor, Tenant shall
immediately reimburse Lessor, in full, for all of the costs and expenses incurred
by Lessor in removing such Improvements.
Upon expiration, cancellation, or termination of this lease, Tenant shall surrender
to Lessor the Premises and all improvements, including alterations and additions,
in good condition (ordinary wear and tear and destruction to the Premises covered
by Section 27. Destruction, excepted), provided, however, if Tenant is required to
remove Excluded Improvements, Tenant shall surrender that portion of the
Premises where the Excluded Improvements are located within 30 days after the
expiration, cancellation, or termination of this lease in good condition (ordinary
wear and tear and destruction to such Premises covered by Section 27.
Destruction, excepted). If Tenant fails to surrender the Premises to Lessor on
expiration, cancellation, or termination of this lease, Tenant shall defend,
indemnify, and hold Lessor harmless from any and all claims, liability, costs, and
damages resulting from Tenant’s failure to surrender the Premises, including,
without limitation, claims made by a succeeding tenant or renter.
B. Personal Property.
Title to personal property belonging to Tenant, or Subtenant (for purposes of this
Section, each, an “Owner”) will remain in the Owner all times during the Term of
this lease, and the Owner has the right at any time to remove any or all of its
personal property from the Premises, provided that upon any such removal,
Owner shall repair, at Owner’s expense, any damage resulting therefrom and
leave the Premises in a clean and neat condition.
If Owner fails to remove any personal property from the Premises within 30 days
after the expiration, cancellation, or termination of this lease, such personal
property may be removed by Lessor at Tenant’s expense, by charging such
expense to the Security Deposit, as provided in Section 5. Additional Payment
15
Provisions. If Lessor’s cost to remove personal property from the Premises
exceeds the amount of the Security Deposit, then Tenant shall reimburse Lessor
the difference between Lessor’s cost and the amount of the Security Deposit,
immediately upon receipt of Lessor’s written demand therefor.
C. Effectiveness.
The provisions of this Section 24 will survive the expiration, cancellation or
earlier termination of this lease.
25. DEFAULT:
The occurrence of any of the following is a “Default” by Tenant:
A. Tenant’s failure to pay when due any rent required to be paid under this lease if
the failure continues for three days after written notice of the failure from Lessor
to Tenant.
B. Tenant’s failure to provide evidence of insurance as required under Section 20
(Insurance) if the failure continues for three days after written notice of the failure
from Lessor to Tenant.
C. Tenant’s failure to undertake such maintenance of the Premises as is determined
to be reasonable by the Director of Airports, in his sole discretion, if the failure
continues for 30 days after notice has been given to Tenant.
D. Tenant’s failure to cure a safety hazard immediately upon notice from Lessor to
do so. If, in the sole discretion of the Director of Airports, the required cure of the
noticed safety hazard cannot be completed within 24 hours, Tenant’s failure to
perform will constitute a default under the lease unless Tenant undertakes to cure
the failure within 24 hours and diligently and continuously proceeds to complete
the cure as soon as reasonably possible.
E. Tenant’s failure to provide any instrument or assurance or estopple certificate
required by this lease if the failure continues for five days after written notice of
the failure from Lessor to Tenant.
F. Tenant’s failure to perform any other obligation under this lease if the failure
continues for 30 days after written notice of the failure from Lessor to Tenant. If,
in the sole discretion of the Director of Airports, the required cure of the noticed
default cannot be completed within 30 days Tenant shall not be in Default of this
lease if Tenant commences to cure the Default within the 30-day period and
diligently and in good faith continues to cure the Default to completion.
G. The committing of waste on the Premises.
16
H. Tenant’s failure to comply with any of the provision of Section 29, Non-
Discrimination.
I. Tenant’s failure to occupy the Premises for 30 consecutive days, which will be
deemed abandonment.
J. To the extent permitted by law:
a. A general assignment by Tenant or any guarantor of the lease for the
benefit of creditors.
b. The filing by or against Tenant or any guarantor, of any proceeding under
an insolvency or bankruptcy law, unless (in the case of an involuntary
proceeding) the proceeding is dismissed within 60 days.
c. The appointment of a trustee or receiver to take possession of all or
substantially all of the assets of Tenant or any guarantor, unless possession
is unconditionally restored to Tenant or that guarantor within 30 days and
the trusteeship or receivership is dissolved.
d. Any execution or other judicially authorized seizure of all or substantially
all of the assets of Tenant located on the Premises, or of Tenant’s interest
in this lease, unless that seizure is discharged within 30 days.
When this lease requires service of notice, that notice shall replace rather than
supplement any equivalent or similar statutory notice, including any notices required by
Code of Civil Procedure section 1151 or any similar or successor statute. When a statute
requires service of a notice in a particular manner, service of that notice (or similar notice
required by this lease) in the manner required by Section 35, Notices, will replace and
satisfy the statuary service-of-notice procedures, including those required by Code of
Civil Procedure section 1162 or any similar or successor statute.
26. LESSOR’S REMEDIES:
Lessor has the following remedies upon the occurrence of a Default. These remedies are
not exclusive; they are cumulative and in addition to any remedies now or later allowed
by law.
A. Lessor may terminate this lease and Tenant’s right to possession of the Premises
at any time. No act by Lessor other than giving written notice to Tenant shall
terminate this lease. Lessor’s acts of maintenance, efforts to re-let the Premises,
or the appointment of a receiver on Lessor’s initiative to protect Lessor’s interest
under this lease do not constitute a termination of Tenant’s right to possession.
Upon termination of this lease, Lessor has the right to recover from Tenant:
17
(1) The worth, at the time of the award, of the unpaid rent and fees that had
been earned at the time of the termination of this lease;
(2) The worth, at the time of the award, of the amount by which the unpaid rent
and fees that would have been earned after the date of termination of this
lease until the time of award exceeds the amount of the loss of rent and fees
that Tenant proves could have been reasonably avoided;
(3) The worth, at the time of the award, of the amount by which the unpaid rent
for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of
the loss of rent and fees that Tenant proves could have been reasonably
avoided; and
(4) Any other amount, and court costs, necessary to compensate Lessor for all
detriment proximately caused by Tenant’s Default.
“The worth, at the time of the award,” as used in (1) and (2) of this Section, is to
be computed by allowing interest at the rate of 10% per annum or the maximum
rate permitted by law, whichever is less. “The worth, at the time of the award,”
as used in Paragraph 3 of this Section, is to be computed by discounting the
amount at the discount rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco at the
time of the award, plus 1%.
B. Lessor, at any time after the occurrence of a Default, can cure the Default at
Tenant’s cost, provided Lessor has given Tenant 30 days written notice and (i)
Tenant has failed to cure such Default within such 30 days or, (ii) if the Default is
of such a nature that it cannot be cured within such 30-day period, Tenant fails to
pursue such cure diligently to completion. If Lessor at any time, by reason of
Tenant’s Default, pays any sum to cure the Default or does any act that requires
the payment of any sum, the sum paid by Lessor shall be due from Tenant to
Lessor within 30 days from the time the sum is paid, upon written notice given by
Lessor to Tenant, and if paid by Tenant at a later date, shall bear interest at the
rate of 10% per annum or the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less,
from the date the sum is paid by Lessor until Lessor is completely reimbursed by
Tenant. Such sum, together with interest accrued thereon shall be paid by Tenant
as additional rent.
27. DESTRUCTION:
In the event of damage to or destruction of any Improvement, Tenant shall repair, replace
or rebuild the Improvements so they are in substantially the same condition as they were
in immediately before such damage or destruction. Tenant will have 90 days to
commence repair or restoration of the Improvement, and shall diligently pursue the
completion of the repair or restoration. The total destruction of the Improvement will
terminate this lease.
18
28. CONDEMNATION:
A. If the whole or any part of the Premises is taken for any public or quasi-public use
under any actions or by any statute or by right of eminent domain, or by a
conveyance in lieu thereof, then this lease will automatically terminate as to the
portion taken. If only a part of the Premises is so taken and, in the discretion of
the Lessor, the balance of the Premises is unusable or unsuitable for the intended
purpose of this lease, then Lessor, at its sole option and in its sole discretion, has
the right to terminate this lease in its entirety on 120 days’ notice to Tenant. If
only a part of the Premises is so taken and the Tenant, in the exercise of
reasonable discretion, determines that the balance of the Premises is unusable or
unsuitable for the Tenant’s purposes hereunder, then Tenant has the right to
terminate this lease in its entirety on 30 days’ notice to Lessor.
B. In the event of a taking of a portion of the Premises under the power of eminent
domain that does not result in a termination of this lease, Tenant shall continue to
pay rent hereunder without reduction and the lease will continue in full force and
effect as to the part not taken. In the event this lease is terminated in its entirety as
the result of condemnation, Tenant shall pay all rent provided for in this lease
through the date of termination. In no event will Tenant have a claim against
Lessor for the value of the unexpired Term of this lease or for any other loss or
damage arising or resulting from the termination or partial termination of this
lease.
In the event that all or any part of the Premises is taken by eminent domain or
conveyed in lieu thereof, both parties have the right to pursue a condemnation
award against the condemning agency. Tenant is entitled to any award for lost
business, moving expenses and the depreciated value of any fixtures or property
improvements installed, and not removed by Tenant. Lessor is entitled to all
other amounts awarded, including, but not limited to, all amounts awarded for
land value. No claim made by or payments to the Tenant will diminish or
otherwise adversely affect the Lessor’s award. Provided the Lessor is not the
condemning agency, Tenant shall not have and shall not claim against Lessor for
any loss, damage or other matter arising out of a condemnation.
29. NON-DISCRIMINATION:
A. Tenant assures that it will undertake an affirmative action program as such term is
defined and required by 14 CFR Part 152, Sub-part E (“Sub-part E”) to ensure
that no person is excluded from participating in any employment activities
covered by Sub-part E on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin, or sex.
Tenant assures that no person shall be excluded on these grounds from
participating in or receiving the services or benefits of any program or activity
covered by Sub-part E. Tenant assures that it will require that its covered
suborganizations provide assurances to Tenant that they similarly will undertake
19
affirmative action programs, and that they will require assurances from their
suborganizations, as required by Sub-part E, undertake to the same effort.
B. In the event of a breach of the above non-discrimination covenants, Lessor has the
right to terminate this lease and to re-enter and repossess the Premises and the
facilities thereon. This provision does not become effective until the procedures
of Title 49, CFR Part 21 are followed and completed, including the expiration of
any appeal rights.
C. Tenant shall furnish its accommodations and/or services on a fair, equal, and not
unjustly discriminatory basis to all users thereof and it shall charge fair,
reasonable, and not unjustly discriminatory prices for each unit or service,
provided that Tenant may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory
discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers.
D. Noncompliance with Subsection C. above constitutes a material breach thereof
and, in the event of such noncompliance, Lessor has the right to terminate this
lease without liability therefore or, at the election of Lessor or the United States,
either or both governments shall have the right to judicially enforce the provisions
of Subsection C.
E. Tenant agrees that it shall insert the above four paragraphs in any sublease
agreement by which Tenant grants a right or privilege to any person, firm, or
corporation to render accommodations and/or services to the public on the
Premises.
30. OPERATION OF AIRPORT BY LESSOR:
A. Aviation Hazards: Lessor shall take any action it considers necessary to protect
the aerial approaches of the Airport against obstructions, including preventing
Tenant from erecting, any building or other structure on the Premises which, in
the opinion of the Lessor or the Federal Aviation Administration, would limit the
usefulness of the Airport or constitute a hazard to aircraft.
B. Navigational Aids: Lessor reserves the right during the term of this lease or any
renewal and/or extension or holdover period thereof to install air navigational aids
including lighting, in, on, over, under, and across the Premises. In the exercise of
any of the rights hereof, Lessor agrees to give Tenant no less than 90 days written
notice of its intention to install such air navigational aids and to use its best efforts
to minimize interference with Tenant’s use of the Premises.
31. AIRPORT USE AND DEVELOPMENT:
A. This lease is subordinate to the provisions and requirements of any existing or
future agreement between Lessor and the United States, including but not limited
20
B. to the Federal Aviation Administration, relative to the development, operation,
and maintenance of the Airport.
B. There is hereby reserved to Lessor, its successors and assigns, for the use and
benefit of the public, a right of flight for the passage of aircraft in the airspace
above the surface of the Premises. This public right of flight includes the right to
cause in said airspace any noise inherent in the operation of any aircraft used for
navigation or flight through said airspace or landing at, taking off from, or
operation at the Airport.
32. DEVELOPMENT OF PREMISES:
A. Tenant shall comply with the notification and review requirements covered by 14
CFR Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in connection with any
construction, modification or alteration of any present or future building or
structure situated on the Premises.
B. Tenant shall not erect nor permit the erection of any structure or object, or permit
the growth of any tree on the Premises to exceed the established height contours.
In the event the aforesaid covenants are breached, Lessor reserves the right to
enter upon the Premises and to remove the offending structure or object and cut
the offending tree, all of which shall be at Tenant’s sole cost and expense.
C. Tenant shall not make use of or develop the Premises in any manner that might
interfere with the landing and taking off of aircraft from the Airport or otherwise
constitute a hazard. In the event the aforesaid covenant is breached, Lessor
reserves the right to enter upon the Premises and cause the abatement of such
interference at the sole cost and expense of Tenant.
D. Nothing herein shall be construed to grant or authorize the granting of an
exclusive right within the meaning of Section 308a of the Federal Aviation Act of
1958 (49 U.S.C. § 40103) or to consent to future construction, modification or
alteration.
E. This lease and all of its provisions are subject to whatever right the United States
Government now has or in the future may have or acquire, affecting the control,
operation, regulation, and taking over of the Airport by the United States during a time
of war or national emergency. In the event the United States Government acquires or
takes over the Airport during a time of war or national emergency, rent shall be abated
in proportion to that portion of the Premises unavailable for Tenant’s use for the
period of such acquisition or control by the United States Government.
21
33. INSTRUMENT OF TRANSFER:
This lease is subordinate and subject to the provisions and requirements of the Instrument
of Transfer by and between the United States and Lessor dated the 9th day of October,
1947, and recorded in Book 1137, at page 114 of the Official Records of the County of
Contra Costa, State of California.
34. CHOICE OF LAW:
This lease is governed by the laws of the State of California, with venue in the Superior
Court of Contra Costa County, California.
35. NOTICES:
Any and all notices to be given under this lease may be served by enclosing same in a
sealed envelope addressed to the party intended to receive the same, at its address set
forth herein, and deposited in the United States Post Office as certified mail with postage
prepaid. When so given, such notice will be effective from the date of its mailing.
Unless otherwise provided in writing by the parties hereto, the address of Lessor, and the
proper party to receive any such notices on its behalf, is:
Director of Airports
Contra Costa County Airports
181 John Glenn Drive, Suite 100
Concord, CA 94520-5550
and the address of Tenant is:
Buchanan Fields Golf Club, LLC
1091 Concord Avenue
Concord, CA 94520
Attn: Robett Hollis
36. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:
Time is of the essence for each provision of this lease.
37. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS:
The covenants and conditions herein contained, subject to the provisions as to
assignment, apply to and bind the heirs, successors, executors, administrators and assigns
of all of the parties hereto.
22
38. INVALID PROVISIONS; SEVERABILITY:
It is expressly understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that in the event
any covenant, condition or provision contained herein is held to be invalid by a court of
competent jurisdiction, such invalidity does not invalidate any other covenant, condition
or provision of this lease, provided, however, that the invalidity of any such covenant,
condition or provision does not materially prejudice either Lessor or Tenant in their
respective rights and obligations contained in the valid covenants, conditions and
provisions of this lease.
39. ENTIRE AGREEMENT:
This lease and all exhibits referred to in this lease constitute the entire agreement between
the parties relating to the rights herein granted and the obligations herein assumed and
supersedes all prior or contemporaneous understandings or agreements of the parties. No
alterations or variations of this lease are valid unless in writing and signed by Lessor and
Tenant.
40. CUMULATIVE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES:
The rights and remedies with respect to any of the terms and conditions of this lease are
cumulative and not exclusive and are in addition to all other rights and remedies at law or
in equity. Each right or remedy shall be construed to give it the fullest effect allowed in
law.
41. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES:
Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer on any person, other
than Lessor and Tenant, and their respective successors-in-interest, any rights or remedies
under or by reason of this lease.
42. NO CONTINUING WAIVER:
The waiver by Lessor of any breach of any of the terms or conditions of this lease does
not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or of
any other terms or conditions of this lease. The receipt by Lessor of any rent with
knowledge of the breach of any term or condition of this lease shall not be deemed to be a
waiver by Lessor, unless such waiver is specifically expressed in writing by the Director
of Airports. No payment by Tenant or receipt by Lessor of a lesser amount than specified
in this lease shall be deemed to be other than a payment on account of such rent and shall
not be deemed a waiver of notice of termination and of forfeiture of this lease.
43. COVENANT AGAINST LIENS:
Neither Tenant nor Lessor shall permit any mechanic’s, materialman’s, or other lien
against the Premises, or the property of which the Premises forms a part, in connection
23
with any labor, materials, or services furnished or claimed to have been furnished. If any
such lien is filed against the Premises, or property of which the Premises forms a part, the
party charged with causing the lien will cause the same to be discharged, provided
however, that either party may contest any such lien, so long as the enforcement thereof
is stayed.
44. HEADINGS AND CAPTIONS:
The section headings and captions of this lease are, and the arrangement of this
instrument is, for the sole convenience of the parties to this lease. The section headings,
captions, and arrangement of this instrument do not in any way affect, limit, amplify or
modify the terms and provisions of this lease. The lease is not to be construed as if it had
been prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties have prepared it. The
parties to this lease and their counsel have read and reviewed this lease and agree that any
rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting
party does not apply to the interpretation of this lease.
The parties are signing this lease as of the date stated in the introductory clause.
LESSOR TENANT
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, a political Buchanan Fields Golf Club LLC, a
Subdivision of the State of California California limited liability company
By By
Greg Baer Robett Hollis
Director of Airports Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Thomas L. Geiger,
County Counsel
By
Kathleen Andrus,
Deputy County Counsel
Signature Page to Lease dated as of October 1, 2024
N24°28'42"E 76.60
'S62°23'00"W 121.95'R=20.00'∆=102°51'23"L=35.90'N45° 34' 42"E (R)S54° 09'59"E (R)N62° 23' 00"ELEASE SITE PARCEL =11,097± S.F. (0.255 AC.)MERIDIAN P
A
R
K
B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
(ROAD NO. 4
1
7
7
E
)NON-EXCLUSIVE =3,833± S.F. (0.088 AC.)CONCORD AVENUE(ROAD NO. 3971C)"L2" LINE "CONCORD AVENUER/W RECORD MAP" (RW3971-64)CENTERLINE "MERIDIAN PARKBOULEVARD EXTENSION" (E4177E-72)S69°46'36"E 22.69'N40° 28' 23"
W ∆=8
0
°
1
5
'19
"
L
=
1
0
5.0
5'R=75
.0
0'
31.5'S62°23'00"W 122.47'∆=6 1 °10 '3 6 "L=44.31'R =41.50'S75° 36' 24"W (R)S40°28'23"E
6
6
.
1
0
'
(
T
)17.66'48.44'S27°37'00"E (R) 5.50'R=13.50'∆=35°05'49"L=8.27'R=23.50'∆=102°51'23"L=42.19'R/WN27
°
3
7
'
0
0
"
W
27.0
0
'S14° 25
'
48
"W
(R
)50'R/W"L2" STA 20+72.49 E.C.AT INTERSECTION OFDIAMOND BOULEVARDN27°37'00"W 70.00'52'2' R/W WIDENINGPER DWG. BF XI-151N62°23'00"E 553.69'Contra Costa CountyPublic Works Department255 Glacier DriveMartinez, CA 94553File Path K:\surveys\AIRPORT PROJECTS\Buchanan\Lease Site 2301 Meridian Park Boulevard\ACAD\BF XI-050A.dwg Plot Date:5/9/2024 4:26:07 PMInstrument Document No.RecordedBUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORTSCALE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE: BF XI-050A.dwgDRAWING NO.:PAGE:CAD FILE:DCFAM1" = 20'1 of 105/09/2024BF XI-050ALease AgreementUnincorporated Contra Costa County, CaliforniaCONCORD, CA 94520BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT2301 MERIDIAN PARK BOULEVARDFeet0 20 4080BASIS OF BEARINGSBEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE"L2" LINE AS SHOWN ON THE R/W RECORD MAPFOR CONCORD AVENUE (RW3971-64), WHICH ISBASED ON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEMOF 1927 (CCS27), ZONE III, US SURVEY FOOT.Exhibit A
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3208 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/4/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:DENY the claims filed by Kinder Morgan, Inc. (on behalf of its subsidiary, SFPP, L.P.) in the total
amount of $324,441.25, plus interest, in unitary property taxes and rights of way taxes paid for tax
year 2019/2020.
Attachments:1. Attachment A - Claim of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Unitary Property Taxes), 2. Attachment B - Claim of
Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Rights of Way Taxes)
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Robert Campbell, Auditor-Controller
Report Title:Deny claims filed for unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/20
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
DENY the claims filed by Kinder Morgan, Inc. (on behalf of its subsidiary, SFPP, L.P.) in the total amount of
$324,441.25, plus interest, in unitary property taxes and rights of way taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Kinder Morgan, Inc. (on behalf of its subsidiary, SFPP, L.P.) (“Claimant”) has filed two separate claims for
refund of unitary property taxes and rights of way taxes against the County.
In March 2024, Kinder Morgan, Inc. submitted a claim for refund of unitary property taxes to the County in the
amount of $313,948.91, alleging that the statutory formula used to calculate its property tax rate violates the
California Constitution. [This claim is provided in Attachment A.]
In March 2024, Claimant submitted a separate claim for refund of rights of way taxes to the County in the
amount of $10,492.34, alleging that it is not subject to the assessment jurisdiction of California State Board of
Equalization and is only subject to the local assessment jurisdiction of the County. Therefore, it should have
been subject to the local tax rate, which is lower than the unitary tax rate. [This claim is provided in Attachment
B.]
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3208,Version:1
Claimant requests interest on the requested refund amounts.
ANALYSIS:
Unitary Property Taxes
Under the California Constitution, certain property owned or used by utilities and telecommunication
companies, among others, is annually assessed by the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). (Cal. Const.,
article XIII, § 19.) The amount of such "unitary property" assessments attributed to the County by the BOE are
then taxed by the County in accordance with a statutory formula. (See Rev. & Tax. Code,§100.)
The Auditor-Controller uses the amount of unitary property assessments annually provided by the BOE to
calculate the amount of taxes to be levied on these properties in accordance with a formula mandated by state
law (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100). Based on this formula, the unitary tax rate for 2019/2020 is 1.6865%. The
Auditor-Controller has confirmed that the rate was correctly calculated pursuant to the state law, and the Office
of the State Controller has deemed it correct.
Claimants argue that they are entitled to a partial refund of taxes on the grounds that they were illegally levied
because the formula used to calculate the rate is unconstitutional. However, the County is given no discretion
on its calculation of the unitary tax rate; it is a mandated formula set by the State. A January 2023 decision
from the California Court of Appeals has affirmed the constitutionality of the rate. (County of Santa Clara v.
Sup. Ct. (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 347.) For these reasons, the claim for refund of unitary property taxes should
be denied.
Rights of Way Taxes
While the County assesses the intercounty pipeline rights-of-way, the County is required to use the unitary tax
rate established under Revenue and Taxation Code section 100(b) to calculate the rights of way tax. (Rev. &
Tax. Code, § 100.01.) The County is given no discretion on the calculation of this rate. Accordingly, the rights
of way tax rate for 2019/2020 is the same as the unitary tax rate, i.e., 1.6865%, which has been confirmed to be
calculated correctly. For these reasons, the claim for refund of rights of way taxes should be denied.
Untimely Claims
Claimant’s claims are denied as untimely per Revenue & Taxation Code section 5097(a)(2) because there is no
evidence that they were submitted within four years of the first installment payments of unitary property taxes
and rights of way taxes.
Standing
Claimant’s claims are denied as Kinder Morgan, Inc. does not have standing to request refunds on behalf of
SFPP, L.P.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to take the recommended action would result in interest continuing to accrue on a potential court-
ordered refund of property taxes.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3208,Version:1
cc:Rebecca Hooley, Assistant County Counsel; Jaskiran Samra, Deputy County Counsel; Laura Strobel,
County Administrator’s Office
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3209 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:DENY the claim filed by TransBay Cable, LLC in the total amount of $1,042,412, plus interest, in
unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020.
Attachments:1. Attachment A - Claim of TransBay Cable, LLC
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Robert Campbell, Auditor-Controller
Report Title:Deny claim filed for unitary property taxes paid for tax year 2019/20
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
DENY the claim filed by TransBay Cable, LLC in the total amount of $1,042,412, plus interest, in unitary
property taxes paid for tax year 2019/2020.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
In April 2024, TransBay Cable, LLC (“Claimant”) submitted a claim for refund of unitary property taxes
against the County, essentially alleging that the statutory formula used to calculate their property tax rate
violates the California Constitution and the US Constitution. Claimant requests interest on the requested refund
amount. [This claim is provided in Attachment A.]
In January 2023, Santa Clara County prevailed before the Court of Appeal on the basis that the statutory tax
rate imposed on property owned by such entities does not violate the California Constitution.
ANALYSIS:
Under the California Constitution, certain property owned or used by utilities and telecommunication
companies, among others, is annually assessed by the State Board of Equalization ("BOE"). (Cal. Const.,
article XIII, § 19.) The amount of such "unitary property" assessments attributed to the County by the BOE are
then taxed by the County in accordance with a statutory formula. (See Rev. & Tax. Code,§ 100.)
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3209,Version:1
The Auditor-Controller uses the amount of unitary property assessments annually provided by the BOE to
calculate the amount of taxes to be levied on these properties in accordance with a formula mandated by state
law (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 100). Based on this formula, the unitary tax rate for 2019/2020 is 1.6865%. The
Auditor-Controller has confirmed that the rate was correctly calculated pursuant to the State law, and the Office
of the State Controller has deemed it correct.
Claimants argue that they are entitled to a partial refund of taxes on the grounds that they were illegally levied
because the formula used to calculate the rate is unconstitutional. However, the County is given no discretion
on its calculation of the unitary tax rate; it is a mandated formula set by the State. A January 2023 decision
from the California Court of Appeals has affirmed the constitutionality of the rate. (County of Santa Clara v.
Sup. Ct. (2023) 87 Cal.App.5th 347.) For these reasons, the claim should be denied.
Additionally, Claimant’s claim is denied as untimely per Revenue & Taxation Code section 5097(a)(2) because
there is no evidence that it was submitted within four years of the first installment payment of property taxes.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Failure to take the recommended action would result in interest continuing to accrue on a potential court-
ordered refund of property taxes.
cc:Rebecca Hooley, Assistant County Counsel; Jaskiran Samra, Deputy County Counsel; Laura Strobel,
County Administrator’s Office
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3210 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ACCEPT the Annual Report on Revolving and Cash Difference Funds, Overage Fund, and Shortages
for fiscal year 2023-2024, as recommended by the Auditor-Controller.
Attachments:1. Annual Report_2024.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Robert Campbell, Auditor-Controller
Report Title:Annual Report on Revolving and Cash Difference Funds, Overage Fund, and Shortages for
fiscal year 2023-2024
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ACCEPT the Annual Report on Revolving and Cash Difference Funds, Overage Fund, and Shortages for fiscal
year 2023-2024 from the County Auditor-Controller.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
Provisions of Government Code Sections 29321.1 and 29370.1 and Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Resolution No.92/525 authorize the County Auditor-Controller to establish,increase,reduce,or discontinue
Revolving Funds and Cash Difference Funds.Provisions of Government Code Sections 29380.1 and 29390.1
and Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Resolution No.83/1062 authorize the County Auditor-
Controller to replenish the Cash Difference Funds and to transfer money in the Overage Fund to the General
Fund.With respect to those authorities and to conform with Government Code Sections 29321.1,29370.1,
29380.1,and 29390.1,the County Auditor-Controller submits this report showing the officers and details of the
balances of the Revolving and Cash Difference Funds, Overage Fund, and Shortages for fiscal year 2023-2024.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County Auditor-Controller would not comply with Government Code Sections 29321.1, 29370.1, 29380.1,
and 29390.1.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3210,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3211 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Director
of Child Support Services, a purchase order with MedBillIQ in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for
Worker's Compensation Lien notification and execution services for the period July 1, 2024, through
June 30, 2026. (66% Federal, 34% State)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Lori Cruz, Child Support Services Director
Report Title:Purchase Order with MedBillIQ
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Director of Child
Support Services, a purchase order with MedBillIQ in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for notification and
execution of Worker’s Compensation Liens for the period July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will be fully funded by allocations from the Federal Government at 66% and the State of California
at 34%.
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Child Support Services utilizes MedBillIQ to locate and file Worker’s Compensation Liens
for obligors with child support arrears. This system allows our Lien Clerk to file liens to collect past due child
support and in many cases those funds are sent to the other parent caring for the child.
The Master Services Agreement and Schedule I includes Limitation of Liability provision approved by County
Counsel.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3211,Version:1
If this action is not approved, the department will not be able to file and collect from worker’s compensation
awards.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3212 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Director
of Child Support Services, a purchase order with Caltronics Business Systems in an amount not to
exceed $1,941 for the renewal of Papercut software for the period October 1, 2024, through
September 30, 2025. (66% Federal, 34% State)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Lori Cruz, Child Support Services Director
Report Title:Purchase Order with Caltronics Papercut
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Director of Child
Support Services, a purchase order with Caltronics Business Systems in an amount not to exceed $1,941 for
Papercut software renewals for the period October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will be fully funded by allocations from the Federal Government at 66% and the State of California
at 34%.
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Child Support Services utilizes Caltronics Papercut as a secure method of printing
documents. The Papercut system enables DCSS workers to release printing jobs when they are physically at the
copy machine, eliminating the risk of customers and internal data being left unprotected.
The Maintenance and Support Agreement and the End User License Agreement of the purchase order include a
Limitation of Liability and Indemnification provision approved by County Counsel.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this action is not approved, the department will not have a secure method of keeping printed material
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3212,Version:1
protected at all times.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
340
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:8/28/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-340 declaring October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month, as
recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.
Attachments:1. Mission Possible Flyer 2024 Final.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director
Report Title:Proclaim October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT a resolution declaring October 2024 Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Contra Costa County, as
recommended by the Employment and Human Services Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact for this action.
BACKGROUND:
Domestic Violence Awareness Month is a national campaign dedicated to raising awareness about domestic
violence. In 1989, Congress declared the month of October to be Domestic Violence Awareness Month
(DVAM). Every October, organizations and individuals unite across the country for a national effort to uplift
the needs, voices, and experiences of survivors. In 1995, the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence
(NRCDV) convened several national domestic violence organizations to launch a new effort to support
domestic violence program’s awareness and education efforts for DVAM. This collaborative effort became the
Domestic Violence Awareness Project (DVAP), which comes up with an annual theme to inspire people to
action.
For 2024, the theme for DVAM is “Heal, Hold, & Center” to promote embracing the many cultural ways we
can heal from violence and oppression, commit to holding space for survivors, and center those most
marginalized in all our efforts to end domestic violence.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-340,Version:1
The County will not recognize Domestic Violence Awareness Month in 2024.
CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This resolution supports all five of Contra Costa County’s community outcomes of the Children’s Report Card:
(1) “Children Ready for and Succeeding in School”; (2) “Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for
Productive Adulthood”; (3) “Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient”; (4) “Families that are Safe, Stable
and Nurturing”; and (5) “Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and
Families.”
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California
IN THE MATTER OF Proclaiming October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Contra
Costa County:
WHEREAS,domestic violence refers to a pattern of abusive and coercive behaviors used to exert power and
control over an intimate partner or close familial individual affecting that person’s physical, emotional, mental,
sexual, and/or spiritual wellbeing and relationships; and
WHEREAS, in 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Criminal Justice Statistics Center reports that Contra
Costa law enforcement agencies received 3,218 domestic violence-related calls for service, of which 2,842
(about 88%) involved the use of a weapon and, per the Coroner’s Office and the Contra Costa District
Attorney’s Office, 13 domestic violence-related homicides occurred; and
WHEREAS,this year’s National Domestic Violence Awareness Month theme “Heal, Hold, & Center” builds
on the premise that there is no survivor justice without racial justice and calls for us to work together to
embrace the many cultural ways we can heal from violence and oppression,hold space for survivors, and center
those most marginalized in all our efforts to end domestic violence; and
WHEREAS,for the past 23 years, the Contra Costa Alliance to End Abuse has been pivotal in implementing
the Board of Supervisors' policy to end interpersonal violence in the County, including domestic violence, by
building cross-sector public-private partnerships that foster awareness, support innovative intervention and
prevention efforts, and address inequities so survivors can access services tailored to their needs; and
WHEREAS, STAND! for Families Free of Violence is a founding partner of the Contra Costa Alliance to End
Abuse and, for 47 years, has promoted safe and strong families by offering a comprehensive range of
prevention, intervention, and treatment programs to address domestic violence, sexual violence, and child abuse
in Contra Costa County. In 2023, STAND! for Families Free of Violence responded to over 12,000 crisis calls
through their 24/7 crisis support hotline (1-888-215-5555), provided emergency shelter and support to hundreds
of survivors while meeting their unique needs, delivered immediate emotional support, high-danger lethality
screening, and safety planning, and elevated youth voices while training over 1,000 youth on Teen Dating
Violence Prevention; and
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-340,Version:1
WHEREAS, through the Alliance to End Abuse’s Families Thrive Project, Community Strengths, in
consultation with partners, has developed free toolkits for organizations to support the healing process for
people who experience intimate partner violence, especially those from historically marginalized communities.
The Culturally Sustaining Approaches to Prevention Toolkit, reviewed and informed by RCF Connects’ Equity
for Black Women and Girls initiative and its Sister Circles, seeks to amplify the voices, needs, and hopes of
Black women and girls and engage and strengthen culturally sustaining practices. The Trauma Informed
Practices in Organizations Toolkit, shaped by work done with The Latina Center, helps organizations adopt
trauma-informed principles to break the trauma cycle and promote healing; and
WHEREAS, for the past 13 and a half years, the Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance (d.b.a. Family Justice
Center) has partnered with local and community-based organizations to assist interpersonal violence survivors
through its three Family Justice Centers in the County offering multiple healing spaces and survivor leadership
and empowerment programs. The fourth and new South County Family Justice Center in Danville will extend
this support to meet the critical needs of elder and immigrant survivors and their families; and
WHEREAS, everyone has a role in giving rise to safe and thriving communities for all and is invited to
register and partake in the Mission Possible Conference III: Creating Community and Opportunity to learn and
share how connection, healing, belonging, and economic opportunities, prevent violence.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors urges all
residents to actively participate in the efforts to end domestic violence in our homes, in our schools, and in our
communities, and does hereby proclaim October 2024 as “Domestic Violence Awareness Month.”
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-340,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
M I S S I O N P O S S I B L E I I I :
C r e a t i n g C o m m u n i t y a n d
O p p o r t u n i t y
T H U R S D A Y N O V E M B E R 7 , 2 0 2 4
8 :3 0 A M - 4 P M
P L E A S A N T H I L L C O M M U N I T Y C E N T E R
3 2 0 C I V I C D R I V E
P L E A S A N T H I L L , C A 9 4 5 2 3
An all-day, in-person conference focused on understanding violence
prevention from a public health lens.
Conference objectives will include:
1) Building shared understanding of violence prevention through
connection, healing and belonging, and
2) Exploring economic opportunities for community.
REGISTER HERE
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
341
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-341 proclaiming October 2024 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in
Contra Costa County, as recommended by the Chief Information Officer.
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Board of Supervisors
From:Marc Shorr, Information Technology Director
Report Title:Proclaim October 2024 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in Contra Costa County
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution proclaiming October 2024 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in Contra Costa County, as
recommended by the Chief Information Officer.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to the County.
BACKGROUND:
This proclamation encourages all Contra Costa County Agencies and Departments to recognize October as
National Cybersecurity Awareness Month, an international initiative that educates everyone about online safety
and empowers individuals and businesses to protect their data from cybercrime. Even amidst large-scale data
breaches and cyberattacks, Cybersecurity Awareness Month reminds everyone that there are simple, effective
ways to keep yourself safe online, protect your personal data, and ultimately help secure our world.
It also supports the Department’s strategic vision for educating, empowering and ensuring information security
is in the hands of every County employee.
The Department of Information Technology recommends that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
direct County staff to adhere to the new Administrative Bulletin 144, “Information Security Policy.”
Specifically, Section IV.D mandates that all County employees complete information security training.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-341,Version:1
County employees will be less aware of the importance of Cybersecurity initiatives.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
IN THE MATTER OF
Proclaiming October 2024 as Contra Costa County Cybersecurity Awareness Month.
WHEREAS, since 2004, the President of the United States and Congress have declared October to be
Cybersecurity Awareness Month, helping individuals protect themselves online as threats to technology and
confidential data become more commonplace; and
WHEREAS,Contra Costa County recognizes the role each employee plays in online safety and the importance
of taking proactive steps to enhance cybersecurity at home and in the workplace; and
WHEREAS, the importance of security awareness requires heightened attention at a time when
government agencies at home and abroad have fallen victim to coordinated malicious attacks and
suffered financial losses as a result;
NOW THEREFORE, the County of Contra Costa hereby proclaims the month of October 2024 as
Cybersecurity Awareness Month and directs all employees to complete information security awareness training
in accordance with Administrative Bulletin 144.
______________________________________________________
FEDERAL D. GLOVER, Chairperson JOHN GIOIA
Supervisor, Fifth District Supervisor, First District
___________________________
CANDACE ANDERSON
Supervisor, Second District
___________________________
DIANE BURGIS
Supervisor, Third District
____________________________
KEN CARLSON
Supervisor, Fourth District
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-341,Version:1
___________________________
MONICA NINO
County Administrator
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
342
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:8/15/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-342 recognizing October 2024 as Filipino American History month, as
recommended by Supervisor Andersen.
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor
Report Title:Resolution Recognizing October as Filipino American History Month
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ACCEPT presentation to recognizing October as Filipino American History Month
FISCAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact.
BACKGROUND:
This presentation recognizes the many achievements and contributions Filipino Americans have made in Contra
Costa County.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
No action to be taken.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-342,Version:1
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California
IN THE MATTER OF Recognizing October as Filipino American History Month in Contra Costa
County.
WHEREAS,as of 2024 US Census Data, 1,247,073 Filipino Americans make up the largest Asian American ethnic
group in the State of California and the third largest group in the United States today, with a robust population dating all
the way back to the first recorded settlement on October 18, 1587, when sailors of the Nuestra Señora de Esperanza
known as “Indios Luzones,” arrived in Morro Bay, California; and
WHEREAS,Filipino Americans have helped to stabilize and advance the United States healthcare sector, with 25% of
Filipino adults serving as frontline healthcare workers, a testament to deep-rooted cultural values of warmth, hospitality,
and service; and
WHEREAS,Filipino Americans have a long-standing history of defending and serving our country in combat, with
250,000 Filipinos fighting on behalf of America during World War II; and
WHEREAS,the Bataan Death March, one of the most notorious tragedies of World War II, serves as an unforgettable
reminder of the 16,500 Filipino and 650 American heroes who lost their lives in defense of our great nation. To this day,
the courageous and selfless men who lost their lives during the Bataan Death March symbolize the eternal bond shared
between Filipinos and Americans, who through this tragedy, forged strength in their unity; and
WHEREAS,in the 1920s, a wave of ambitious Filipino young men known as the “Manongs,” embraced the unknown
and immigrated to America in search of prosperity, educational opportunities, and a brighter future for their loved ones;
and
WHEREAS,the State of California has perennially served as an epicenter for Filipino activism and advocacy, dating all
the way back to the establishment of Larry Itliong’s Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC), which
orchestrated the Delano Grape Strike on September 8th, 1965, and
WHEREAS,the persistence and relentless determination of Larry Itliong, Phillip Vera Cruz, and other notable Filipino
labor leaders inspired the establishment of the United Farm Workers (UFW) union, which alongside Cesar Chávez and
Dolores Huerta, safeguarded the rights of farmworkers and championed for labor rights reforms; and
WHEREAS,Contra Costa County represents an inspiring and civically engaged Filipino American population, which
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-342,Version:1
has seen the emergence of several honorable politicians such as the City of El Cerrito’s Gabriel Quinto, the City of
Pinole’s Cameron Sasai, and the City of Hercules’ Alexander Walker-Griffin, who have each profoundly impacted their
respective communities through their leadership; and
WHEREAS,in 2017, California Governor Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown appointed Benjamin T. Reyes II as the first
Filipino American Superior Court Judge in Contra Costa County; and
WHEREAS,on March 19, 1855,the Filipino American Association of Pittsburg, with founder and President Rudy Wilas
at the helm, was officially founded, with the goal of preserving Filipino traditions, empowering local community youth,
and showcasing the warmth and beauty of Filipino culture; and
WHEREAS, LEAD Filipino, a San Jose based non-profit organization founded in 2015, has operated with the purpose of
amplifying the Filipino voice, fostering greater civic engagement amongst the Filipino community, and creating a space
for Filipino Americans to unlock their leadership potential through participation in education, cultural celebrations, and
statewide advocacy initiatives; and
WHEREAS, The Lumpia Company, a proud Oakland-based restaurant, owned by Alex Retodo, Earl Stevens, and
Richard Reyes, has revolutionized the food industry, introducing the vibrance of Filipino cuisine to the mainstream and
shattering barriers one lumpia at a time; and
WHEREAS, on April 23, 2021, Filipino American Rob Bonta was sworn in by Governor Gavin Newsom as the 34th
Attorney General of the State of California, serving as the first individual of Filipino descent and second Asian American
to occupy the position; and
WHEREAS,through his actions, humility, and profound impact, Rob Bonta continues to forge a brighter, more inclusive
California, with the advancement of AB 123 demonstrating Bonta's ongoing efforts to raise awareness about Filipino-
American history; and
WHEREAS, Rob Bonta's unwavering commitment to public service and the pursuit of social justice serves as a
testament to his parents, Warren and Cynthia Bonta, both of whom were dynamic community leaders that inspired him to
become an advocate for positive change; and
WHEREAS,in 1991, the Filipino American National Historical Society championed for Congress’ recognition of
October as Filipino American History Month; and
WHEREAS,in 2009, Congress first designated the month of October as Filipino American History Month; and
WHEREAS, it is paramount to educate Contra Costa County residents about the vital contributions of Filipino-
Americans in shaping and enriching American society, particularly in the military, hospitality, and healthcare sectors; and
WHEREAS,October has been designated Filipino American History Month to celebrate the cultural heritage,
achievements, and contributions Filipino Americans have made in Contra Costa County, the State of California, and
across the country at large.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:That the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors does hereby
recognize October, 2024 as Filipino American History Month.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:2RES 2024-
343
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/24/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-343 honoring Don Lau for his decades of service in Contra Costa
County, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 2 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Report Title:Proclamation Honoring Don Lau for Service to Contra Costa County Communities
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution honoring Don Lau for service to Contra Costa County Communities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
N/A
BACKGROUND:
Don Lau has been a leader in West Contra Costa County for decades.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
N/A
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-343,Version:2
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, California
IN THE MATTER OF Honoring Don Lau for his decades of service in Contra Costa County
WHEREAS,Don Lau was born and raised in Honolulu, Hawaii, and has dedicated his life to serving others, achieving
academic excellence with a Bachelor of Arts from Valparaiso University and a Master of Social Work from the University
of Michigan; and
WHEREAS, Don Lau began his impactful work in Contra Costa County in 1976 when he was hired as the West Area
Organizer for the Contra Costa Children’s Council, which served as the fiscal agent for the Therapeutic Nursery
School/Early Childhood Mental Health Program (TNS/ECMHP); and
WHEREAS, Don Lau has served on the Advisory Committee, Board of Directors, and Emeritus Board for ECMHP,
dedicating countless hours to the mental health and well-being of children in our community; and
WHEREAS, Don Lau’s commitment to education was demonstrated through his election to the Richmond (West Contra
Costa) Unified School District Board of Trustees in 1981, and his subsequent re-elections in 1985 and 1989, where he
worked tirelessly to improve educational opportunities for all students; and
WHEREAS, Don Lau joined the West Contra Costa YMCA in 1983, playing a pivotal role in the merger that created the
YMCA of the East Bay and growing the branch’s budget to $15 million, significantly expanding services in early
childhood education, afterschool enrichment, health and wellness, mental health, teen leadership, and family programs;
and
WHEREAS, Don Lau retired in 2017 as the President and CEO of the YMCA of the East Bay, leaving behind a legacy of
community service, leadership, and positive impact on thousands of lives; and
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-343,Version:2
WHEREAS, Don Lau has been a dedicated member of the Richmond Rotary Club since 1984, serving as a past president
and currently as Chair of Community Services, where he continues to give back to his community; and
WHEREAS, Don Lau has generously contributed his time and expertise to numerous nonprofit boards and public
commissions, further demonstrating his unwavering commitment to the well-being of his community; and
WHEREAS, Don Lau is a loving father to three adult children and a proud grandfather of five grandchildren, passing on
his values of service, leadership, and community spirit to future generations;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors honors and commends Don
Lau for his outstanding contributions to the children, families, and communities of Contra Costa County, recognizing his
lifelong commitment to public service and leadership.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3201 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPOINT Heidi Swillinger to the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (JPA) Board of Directors for
a term ending on January 1, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
Attachments:1. Swillinger, Heidi (WCCTA) 09-16-24
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Report Title:APPOINT Heidi Swillinger to the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (JPA) Board of
Directors for a term ending on January 2, 2025, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPOINT Heidi Swillinger to the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (JPA) Board of Directors for a term
ending on January 1, 2025
FISCAL IMPACT:
none
BACKGROUND:
The Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WestCAT) owns, operates and maintains a public transit system in
an effort to meet public transportation needs in Western Contra Costa County. WestCAT is governed by a seven
-member Board of Directors
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The appointment would not be made and the District would not have representation on the commission
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3201,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:224-3202 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/5/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPOINT Yvonne Wadleigh to the District 3 seat on the Family & Children’s Trust Committee to a
term expiring September 30, 2026, and DECLARE a vacancy in the At-Large 3 Seat, as
recommended by Supervisor Burgis.
Attachments:1. Vacancy Notice.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 2 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Diane Burgis, District III Supervisor
Report Title:APPOINTMENT TO & VACANCY ON THE FAMILY & CHILDREN'S TRUST
COMMITTEE
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPOINT Yvonne Wadleigh to the District 3 seat on the Family & Children’s Trust Committee to a term
expiring September 30, 2026, and DECLARE a vacancy in the At-Large 3 Seat, as recommended by Supervisor
Burgis.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
BACKGROUND:
Yvonne Wadleigh is currently an At Large member of the committee. Supervisor Burgis is appointing her to
the District 3 seat.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The District 3 seat would remain vacant.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3202,Version:2
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3203 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPOINT Pamela DeWitt to the District 1 Appointed seat 1 for the East Richmond Heights Municipal
Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026, as recommended by Supervisor Gioia.
Attachments:1. PamDeWitt_erhMACapplication
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Report Title:APPOINT Pamela DeWitt to the District 1 Appointed seat 1 for the East Richmond Heights
Municipal Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPOINT Pamela DeWitt to the District 1 Appointed seat 1 for the East Richmond Heights Municipal
Advisory Council for a term ending on December 31, 2026
FISCAL IMPACT:
none
BACKGROUND:
The East Richmond Heights Municipal Advisory Council was created to advise the Board of Supervisors or
other local government agencies on issues and concerns related the unincorporated community of East
Richmond Heights
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The appointment would not be made and the District would not have representation on the commission
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3203,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3204 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/23/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPOINT Maura Millison to the At-Large #2 Seat, with a term ending September 30, 2025, on the on
the Family and Children’s Trust Committee, as recommended by the Family and Human Services
Committee.
Attachments:1. Millison Maura Application_Redacted, 2. FACT ROSTER REDACTED 08.26.2024
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Family & Human Services Committee
Report Title:Appointment to the Family and Children’s Trust Committee
☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☒ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPOINT Maura Millison to the At-Large #2 Seat, with a term ending September 30, 2025, on the on the
Family and Children’s Trust Committee, as recommended by the Family and Human Services Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact for this action.
BACKGROUND:
The Family and Children’s Trust Committee (FACT), was established in 1982 by the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors to make funding recommendations on the allocation of a variety of funds for prevention
and intervention services to reduce child abuse and neglect, provide supportive services to families and
children, and promote a more coordinated, seamless system of services for families. Funding for FACT
supported projects derived from federal and state program legislation, and donations to the County’s Family
and Children’s Trust Fund.
Every two years, the members of the FACT establish a series of County priorities for the use of these funds
through review of existing data and reports and by holding Public Hearings in various areas of the county. The
Committee then develops a competitive bidding process to select non-profit, community-based agencies that
can best provide the services determined to be most important. Program recommendations are made to the
Board of Supervisors which makes the final funding decisions. The Committee continues to evaluate these
funded programs to ensure continued provision of quality service and achievement of stated goals. Programs
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3204,Version:1
currently being supported include countywide parenting classes, therapeutic day care for emotionally disturbed
children, treatment for families, young children and teens with both substance abuse and child abuse issues,
services for homeless families, and projects to support children whose mothers have been victims of domestic
violence and sexual assault.
On March 19, 2024 the Board of Supervisors approved a reduction of FACT Committee member seats from
fifteen (15) to eleven (11). This reduction has allowed the FACT Committee to achieve quorum and meet
regularly. Members are appointed by the Board and include citizens with expertise in children’s issues,
education, law, non-profit agency management, public health, and program research/evaluation. Terms for all
Commission seats are two years.
At Large and non-District appointed seat vacancies on the FACT have been assigned for Family and Human
Services Committee (FHS) review since 2003.
At the September 23, 2024 FHS Meeting, the Committee approved the appointment of Maura Millison to the At
-Large #2 Seat, with a term ending on September 30, 2025, on the on the Family and Children’s Trust
Committee.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If not approved, this seat would remain vacant which may impact the FACT’s ability to maintain quorum.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1. This application and any attachments you provide to it is a public document and is subject to
the California Public Records Act (CA Government Code §6250-6270).
2. All members of appointed bodies are required to take the advisory body training provided by
Contra Costa County.
3. Members of certain boards, commissions, and committees may be required to: (1) file a
Statement of Economic Interest Form also known as a Form 700, and (2) complete the State
Ethics Training Course as required by AB 1234.
4. Meetings may be held in various locations and some locations may not be accessible by
public transportation.
5. Meeting dates and times are subject to change and may occur up to two (2) days per month.
6. Some boards, committees, or commissions may assign members to subcommittees or work
groups which may require an additional commitment of time.
7. As indicated in Board Resolution 2021/234, a person will not be eligible for appointment if
he/she is related to a Board of Supervisors' member in any of the following relationships:
(1) Mother, father, son, and daughter;
(2) Brother, sister, grandmother, grandfather, grandson, and granddaughter;
(3) Husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, stepson, and
stepdaughter;
(4) Registered domestic partner, pursuant to California Family Code section 297;
(5) The relatives, as defined in 1 and 2 above, for a registered domestic partner;
(6) Any person with whom a Board Member shares a financial interest as defined in the
Political Reform Act (Gov't Code §87103, Financial Interest), such as a business partner or
business associate.
Maura Millison
productivity and awareness; included are a WBI handbook for account teams, and a supplier
diversity process for Roche
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3205 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ACCEPT the resignation of Geri Stern, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat 3 on the Mental
Health Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post
the vacancy
Attachments:1. Geri Stern_Resignation
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Report Title:ACCEPT the resignation of Geri Stern, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat 3 on the
Mental Health Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the
vacancy
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ACCEPT the resignation of Geri Stern, DECLARE a vacancy in the District I seat 3 on the Mental Health
Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2026 and DIRECT the Clerk of the Board to post the vacancy
FISCAL IMPACT:
none
BACKGROUND:
The Mental Health Commission’s role is to review and assess the community's mental health needs, services,
facilities, and special problems, in order to advise the Board of Supervisors concerning local mental health
services and programs
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The vacancy would not be made and the District would not have representation on the council
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3205,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/28/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3206 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Conservation and
Development Director, a purchase order with BMC Software, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $40,211
for the renewal of the license for the department's help desk, asset management, and hardware and
software patching management systems, for the period September 30, 2024 through September 29,
2029. (100% Land Development Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:John Kopchik, Director, Conservation and Development
Report Title:Purchase Order with BMC Software, Inc. for License Renewal
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the Conservation and
Development Director, a purchase order with BMC Software, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $40,211.07 for
the renewal of the license, including support and maintenance, of the department's help desk, asset management
and hardware/software patching management systems, for the period September 30, 2024 through September
29, 2029.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No impact to the County General Fund, costs will be fully paid for with the Land Development Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) has been using BMC Track-It and BMC Client
Management software for over ten years. BMC Track-It provides help desk and asset management of our
software and computer and server hardware. BMC Client Management allows us to manage and secure our
client devices (patching) to help DCD remain security compliant. Renewing our license and related support
and maintenance would allow us to be current with patching of our systems.
BMC’s End User License Agreement includes a limitation of liability provision which caps damages at the
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3206,Version:1
amount paid for the license.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
DCD will not be able to continue to use existing tools to provide help desk functionality, asset management of
our computer/server hardware and software or remain current with patching of our systems to be security
compliant.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3213 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/20/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract with
Parkworks Mechanical Systems, in an amount not to exceed $200,000, for additional control cabinets
for the parking system at 1026 Escobar Street, in Martinez, as recommended by the County
Administrator. (100% General Fund)
Attachments:1. 1026 Escobar System Separation Proposal.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Report Title:Purchase Order with Parkworks for additional control cabinets
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Administrator, or designee, to execute a contract with Parkworks
Mechanical Systems, in an amount not to exceed $200,000, for additional control cabinets for the parking
system at 1026 Escobar Street, in Martinez.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This funding for this purchase order is already part of the total project budget for 1026 Escobar Street, no
additional funding is needed.
BACKGROUND:
Parkworks is a qualified contractor from the list maintained by the County pursuant to Public Contract Code
section 22034, whose work and products related to the parking system at 1026 Escobar Street are proprietary.
Parkworks installed the existing parking stacker as part of the 1026 Escobar Street project to increase the
amount of off-street, covered parking at the location. The system, as installed, uses control cabinets that are
handing 20 parking spots each. In practice this has led to increased time for parking operations, especially
during peak parking or departure times. The addition of three control cabinets will allow each cabinet to
control 10 parking spaces. This will decrease the waiting time if individuals show up at the same time and
increase user satisfaction with the parking system.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3213,Version:1
Not approving the additional cabinets will maintain the increased parking times during peak operation and
decrease the use of the system putting additional strain on other parking resources.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
8/16/2024
1026 Escobar
ATTN:Cora Young
RE:System Separation Proposal for 1026 Escobar
This proposal is a lump sum proposal for the sale,manufacturing and installation necessary for the
separation of the (3)20 platform systems at 1026 Escobar into (6)10 platform systems.
It is important to note that the separation will not affect the two year warranty period or the warranty start
date of 5/16/2024 as established by Webcor.
Parkworks proposes the supply and installation of the following:
●3 additional control cabinets
●6 additional hydraulic pumps and associated piping
●3 additional touchscreens
●Updated software
Assumptions:
●Final and frozen backgrounds for all Architecture and Engineering
●Fully designed,engineered and constructed building by others
●Concrete tolerances will be as follows
o ¼”in 10ft straight edge for the parking and gate areas
●All entitlements,approvals and permits by others
●All labor will be non-union and prevailing wage (unless add alternate for union labor is selected)
●Coordination and day to day management by others
●Adjacent to property there will be a location to unload 40’open-top containers and a minimum 12’
wide pathway from unloading zone to lift-and-slide installation area
●County will provide site map including delivery locations and clear path to bring lift and slide
components into building
●County is responsible for providing a safe and secure job site to avoid a loss of PW tools and
equipment
●County will provide to PW clean,debris free,swept,dry slabs
o If any painting or debris producing work is carried out in the environs of the parking system,
tarping and/or cleaning will be by others.
●County will ensure that the lift-and-slide components and all surrounding areas stay entirely dry
during the duration of installation
●County will coordinate delivery and load-in schedules
●County will provide temporary 110V and 220V power during installation and 480V permanent
power no less than 3 months prior to TCO
●County will provide area lighting
●County will provide high-speed internet access during construction period
●County will provide debris box for PW use during installation
●Post-construction,building management will provide a locked area or room on site for the storage
of spare parts and specialized tools
Scope Delineation:
For Electrical Wiring Scope -please refer to Appendix A
Following please find a list of inclusions and exclusions to this Supply and Installation Proposal:
Inclusions
●Freight,duty,and logistics,including labor,for devanning and load-in
●All site unloading,laydown and lifting by PW using our own equipment
●5k Warehouse Forklift during Installation Period
●Structural Engineering of lift-and-slide system,including lateral design and analysis,and
anchorage to structure
●Parkworks coordination with SE to ensure that required tolerances are met
●Lift-and-slide and MEPF coordination
●Embed design,manufacture,and supply to jobsite (placement by others)
●QC preceding every lift-and-slide associated concrete pour to verify embed placement and
concrete tolerances
●Interface with AHJ and FD as needed
●Measurement of existing conditions,system sizing and layout of systems
●Power units
●Hydraulic oil,concrete anchors,and installation supplies necessary to complete the lift-and-slide
system
●Prevailing wage labor
●Touch up of any paint damage
●Electric Gates and Gate Support Structure
●Field Labeling
●Special inspections for concrete anchors and welding
●Teleservice hardware
●Receivers and remotes (1 remote per platform)
Exclusions
●Permit fees of any kind including fees associated with permits for unloading
●Installation of any and all electrical conduit or EMT
●Any and all design and engineering services related to the building (including MEP,Fire Life Safety,
Architecture,Landscape,Acoustics,etc.)
●Clash Detection (PW will work with team to clear clashes,but not be tasked with their discovery)
●Building construction
●Exterior Doors and Exterior Door Controls
o Including RFID and/or Intercom
●Marine delay insurance
●Any extraordinary tariffs
●Lighting design,supply and installation –both interior and exterior
●Signage and Way-finding design and installation –both interior and exterior
●Traffic analysis and EIR studies
●Internet and Wifi
●Temp and Permanent Power
●All Fireproofing and Firestopping,including all floor and wall sleeves and blockouts for conduits
●Ventilation and humidity control of any kind
●Bollards of any kind
●Electrical engineering to size supply circuits,conduits,and wiring
●Design and install of all fixed electrical conduits and raceways
●Cameras,associated wiring,and recording equipment
●Union labor (unless specified)
●OCIP credit,project is bid net of OCIP/CCIP
●Demobilization and remobilization in the event of delay
●Warehouse costs,including transloading and trucking,as the result of project delay that results in
our equipment arriving in United States and requiring storage prior to job site load-in
●Cleaning construction dust and debris from lift-and-slide components that collects after installation
●Service Contract for first year of operation
●Service Contract/Extended Warranty -past initial 2 year included Warranty
●Anything not specifically included in deliverables or inclusions
●Monthly reporting including schedule analysis
●User and Service/Maintenance Manuals
The quoted price,stated below,includes system installation,parts and labor.System is under warranty for
24 months assuming that Factory Service is followed.This price is valid for 30 days.
Total Proposed Cost:
Description Amount in USD ($)
Separation and conversion of (3)20 platform systems to 10 platform systems $174,941.50
Add Alternate:
Description Amount in USD ($)
Supply and Install of Fences $18,200
Standard Terms and Conditions
Compensation and Payment Terms.Subject to the fee adjustments described below and to the lump sum
limitations (if applicable),compensation shall be at Parkworks’standard hourly rates.If compensation is stated as
a lump sum,the lump sum will be applicable only to the Scope of Services included herewith.Compensation for
any optional or additional services will be at Parkworks’standard hourly rates plus reimbursable expenses,or a
lump sum fee agreed to in writing in advance of performing the work.Client shall pay Parkworks for all services
and reimbursable expenses within 30 days of the invoice date,without claim of setoff or deductions.Unless
otherwise agreed,Parkworks will invoice every month based either on time expended or,where compensation is
stated as a lump sum,based on the percentage of work completed.
Retainer.The retainer amount,as required,shall be paid by Client to Parkworks upon execution of the
Agreement.
Late Charges.Interest and administrative charges of 1-1/2%per month will accrue 30 calendar days after the
invoice date.Interest and administrative charges shall be in addition to the fees for professional services and
reimbursable expenses.
Invoice Approval.Client must notify Parkworks within 14 calendar days of the invoice date if Client objects to any
portion of the invoice.
Suspension of Work.Parkworks shall have the right,upon three (3)days prior written notice to Client,and without
waiving any claim,to suspend work on the Project until all payments are current.Parkworks does not waive its
right to suspend work at any time even if Parkworks previously elected to continue work.
Taxes.If fees or other charges are subject to sales,gross receipt or similar taxes,Client shall be responsible for
paying all such taxes.
Mediation/Dispute Resolution.All claims and disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be
resolved by good faith negotiations between the Client and Parkworks.If a good faith negotiation fails to resolve
the matter,the Client and Parkworks shall seek a satisfactory resolution using a mutually agreeable independent
third-party mediator.The Client and Parkworks agree that all disputes between them arising out of or relating to
this Agreement shall be resolved through nonbinding mediation settled in and governed by the State of California
unless the parties mutually agree otherwise.
Miscellaneous.This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior
writings,discussions and communications relating to the subject matter hereof.This Agreement can only be
modified by a written agreement or amendment signed by both parties.Parkworks shall render its services
hereunder in the capacity of an independent contractor and not as an employee.If any provision hereof shall be
invalid or unenforceable to any extent,then the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect
and the invalid or unenforceable provision shall be modified and interpreted in a manner so as to be enforceable
to the greatest extent permitted by law.This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with
the laws of The State of California.
Access-to-Site.Parking must be provided for Parkworks service vehicles during and after installation.The
owners are responsible for keeping the equipment free of dust and debris,oil and grease,they must be cleaned 2
times per year minimum.
Mutual Exclusion of Special,Incidental,Indirect and Consequential Damages.To the fullest extent permitted by
law,neither party shall be liable to the other party or anyone claiming by,through or under the other party,for any
special,incidental,indirect or consequential damages whatsoever arising out of,resulting from,or in any way
related to the Project or to this Agreement.
Termination of Services.This agreement may be terminated by the Client or Parkworks should the other fail to
perform its obligations hereunder.In the event of termination,the Client shall pay Parkworks for all services
rendered to the date of termination,demobilization time,all reimbursable expenses,and reimbursable termination
expenses.
Ownership of Documents.All documents produced by the Parkworks Team under this agreement shall remain
the property of Parkworks and may not be used by the Client for any other endeavor without the written consent
of Parkworks.
Limitation of Liability.In recognition of the relative risks,rewards and benefits of the project to both the Client and
Parkworks,the risks have been allocated such that the Client agrees that,to the fullest extent permitted by law,
and not withstanding any other provision of this Agreement,Parkworks’total liability,in the aggregate of the
Consultant and the Consultant’s officers,directors,partners,employees and subconsultants,and any of them,to
the Client and anyone claiming by or through the Client,for any and all claims,losses,costs and damages,
including attorney’s fees and costs and expert witness fees and costs of any nature whatsoever or claims
expenses resulting from or in any way related to the Project or Agreement from any cause or causes shall not
exceed the total compensation received by the Consultant under this Agreement.It is intended that this limitation
apply to any and all liability or cause of action however alleged or arising,unless otherwise prohibited by law.
Indemnification.The Client shall,to the fullest extent permitted by law,indemnify and hold harmless Parkworks,
his or her officers,directors,employees,agents and sub-consultants from and against all damage,liability and
cost,including reasonable attorney's fees and defense costs,arising out of or in any way connected with the
performance by any of the parties named of the services under this agreement,excepting only those damages,
liabilities or costs attributable to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of Parkworks.
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3214 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/24/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute a purchase order with
Stryker Sales, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $65,335 for the purchase of emergency evacuation
chairs and LifePAK automated external defibrillators for County Administration Buildings A and B
located at 1025 and 1026 Escobar Street, Martinez, as recommended by the County Administrator
based on findings of the Risk Management department. (100% General Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Report Title:Stryker Sales, LLC - Purchase Order for Emergency Safety Equipment for County
Administration Buildings
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute a purchase order with Stryker
Sales, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $65,335 for the purchase of eleven emergency evacuation chairs and
eight LifePAK automated external defibrillators (AED) for County Administration Buildings A and B located at
1025 and 1026 Escobar Street, Martinez.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$65,335, 100% General Fund. The acquisition costs of the emergency safety equipment will be allocated to the
tenant departments located within 1025 and 1026 Escobar Street. It is anticipated that 100% of these costs will
be General Fund based on the budget composition of the departments at these locations.
BACKGROUND:
On April 6, 2022, Risk Management’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Public Access Coordinator
provided the County Administrator’s Office with an ADA Public Access Report for the main County
Administration Building at 1025 Escobar Street, Martinez. The ADA Public Access Report evaluated the
accessibility of the emergency evacuation routes of 1025 Escobar Street for person with a range of disabilities
and resulted in Risk Management recommending the purchase and installation of seven (7) Stryker evacuation
chairs and four (4) AEDs. After further discussion, it was determined that the number of AEDs purchased
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3214,Version:1
should be increased to five (5); one for each floor of the building and one to be installed adjacent to the Board
of Supervisors’ chambers.
On August 16, 2024, Risk Management Safety and Loss Control recommended the purchase and installation of
four (4) Styker evacuation chairs and three (3) AEDs for County Administration Building B at 1026 Escobar
Street, Martinez as a result of a building walkthrough for ADA assessment completed on May 3, 2024.
The quotes provided by Stryker Sales, LLC include the installation hardware with anti-theft devices and a $250
credit for one (1) older LifePAK AED that is no longer supported and was previously installed at 651 Pine
Street, Martinez.
Today’s action by the Board is due to the vendor terms and conditions for the purchase including a limitation of
liability clause different from the standard form contract language of the County along with a clause making the
agreement subject to the laws of the State of Michigan (the state in which the firm is headquartered).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without the purchase of the equipment related to this action, the County will be unable to satisfy the findings of
the Risk Management department’s Safety and Loss Control unit as described above.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3215 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/26/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE the payment of $50,000 as an escrow deposit for the potential purchase of 2305 and 2313
Windy Springs Lane in Brentwood, CA (100% Measure X funds)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Report Title:Escrow Deposit for Potential Purchase of Land in Brentwood
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE the payment of $50,000 as an escrow deposit for the potential purchase of 2305 and 2313 Windy
Springs Lane in Brentwood, CA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Five million dollars in Measure X funding for the acquisition and construction of a youth center in District 3
was previously approved by the Board of Supervisors. The escrow deposit will come from those funds.
BACKGROUND:
Measure X funds were allocated by the Board of Supervisors to help purchase, lease and/or construct youth
centers in Districts 3, 4 and 5. The County is investigating purchasing land at 2305 and 2313 Windy Springs
Lane in Brentwood for the potential siting of a youth center for District 3. In order to continue the process of
investigating the potential purchase of the land the County needs to open escrow with the potential seller and
needs to provide a deposit of $50,000 to open escrow. If final purchase price and terms are agreed between the
County and the seller, staff will return to the Board of Supervisors for authorization to make the purchase.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If we do not open escrow we will not be able to proceed with potentially purchasing the properties.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3215,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3196 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a contract with Marinus
Analytics LLC in an amount not to exceed $5,758 for a software application subscription with Traffic
Jam, to assist in the investigation of suspected human trafficking cases for the period October 1, 2024
through September 30, 2025. (100% Federal)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Diana Becton, District Attorney
Report Title:Marinus Analytics Subscription Agreement
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the District Attorney, or designee, to execute a Subscription Agreement with
Marinus Analytics LLC in an amount not to exceed $5,758 for a Traffic Jam subscription to assist in the
investigation of suspected cases of human trafficking for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30,
2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this action will result in expenditures of up to $5,758 to be funded 100% by a federal grant which
is included in the FY2024-2025 Departmental Budget.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic Jam is a subscription software application used by law enforcement agencies to investigate suspected
cases of human trafficking. Using proprietary algorithms, Traffic Jam scrapes open-source intelligence (data)
from hundreds of websites advertising illicit sexual services, compiles that data, and provides a variety of
advanced data analytics tools to search the compiled data by indicia of human trafficking and other criteria
(phone numbers, image searches, locations, social media usernames, etc.).
The application provides a highly efficient means of identifying victims of human trafficking and their
traffickers and developing reliable evidence to prove human trafficking cases and to hold traffickers
accountable. The value of the software is that it efficiently compiles data and provides highly effective tools to
parse that data. If law enforcement had to conduct this research on a site-by-site basis, there would not be
enough time in the day to identify and review even a small proportion of this data.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3196,Version:1
The Marinus Analytics Subscription Agreement includes limitation of liability and indemnification for the
County to hold Marinus Analytics LLC harmless from any claims arising out of the performance under this
agreement.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without executing the Marinus Analytics Subscription Agreement, the District Attorney’s Office cannot access
traffic jam subscription to efficiently investigate suspected cases of human trafficking.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3197 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:8/29/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order and related agreement with Allied
Network Solutions, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $72,946 to purchase Cisco Intersight, used to
manage County virtual servers network devises and storage infrastructure, for the period June 14,
2024 through June 13, 2026. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director
Report Title:20-569-0 (Admin) Allied Network Solutions Inc. for Cisco Intersight
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and
Human Services Director, a purchase order and related agreement with Allied Network Solutions, Inc., to
purchase Cisco Intersight, used to manage County virtual servers network devises and storage infrastructure, in
an amount not to exceed $72,946 for the period June 14, 2024 through June 13, 2026. (59% Federal, 35% State,
6% County)
FISCAL IMPACT:
$72,946: 59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County General Fund, of which $36,473 is budgeted in FY24/25 and
$36,473 will be budgeted in FY25/26.
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) seeks to renew its maintenance agreement with
Cisco to use their Intersight product. This purchase enables EHSD and DoIT to have a single location to
manage our virtual servers network devices and storage infrastructure. EHSD has approximately 200 Virtual
servers to support services to our customers, 400 Network switches and routers, and a Large (120TB) network
storge appliance. Cisco’s General Terms include a limitation of liability capping liability at the greater of fees
paid in the past 12 months or $100,000. This vendor was selected per procurement requirements outlined in
Administrative Bulletin 600.3.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3197,Version:1
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The County will be limited in its ability to effectively manage their network environment for their customers.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This agreement supports all five of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: (1)
"Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive
Adulthood"; (3)"Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and
Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families,”
by supporting staff working directly with families and children.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3198 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute
an agreement with JUMP Technology Services, L.L.C., in an amount not to exceed $102,974 to
provide software services for taking reports and managing Adult Protective Services cases for the
period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2026. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director
Report Title:Contract #40-375-4 (AAS) JUMP Technology Services, L.L.C.- Software Services
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute an
agreement with JUMP Technology Services, L.L.C., in an amount not to exceed $102,974 to provide
software services for taking reports and managing Adult Protective Services cases for the period October 1,
2024 through September 30, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$102,974: 59% Federal, 35% State, and 6% County funds; $55,634 of which is budgeted in FY 24-25 and
$47,340 of which will be budgeted in FY 25-26.
BACKGROUND:
On October 23, 2018, the Board approved item (C.44) authorizing a contract amendment with JUMP
Technology Services L.L.C. to increase the payment limit by $80,000 to a new payment limit of $141,881 for a
term of September 30, 2018 to September 30, 2020. This staff report is to execute a new agreement with mutual
indemnification and limitation of liability for the period of October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2026, to
provide software subscriptions, training, and technical assistance support of JUMP Technology Software,
LEAPS.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Should the proposed action not be approved by the Board of Supervisors, the County will not be in compliance
with the California Department of Social Services (CDSS), as Adult Protective Services (APS) is a mandated
program, and counties are required to provide reporting to CDSS. LEAPS is the standard database for APS in
the State.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3198,Version:1
CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This contract supports 4 and 5 of Contra Costa County’s community outcomes of the Children’s Report Card”,
(4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High
Quality of Life for Children and Families.”
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3199 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute
a non-financial Agreement with the Trustees of the California State University on behalf of California
State University Long Beach to provide student internship placement(s) for practical social work field
experience to eligible and enrolled Employment and Human Services Department Staff for the period
October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2028. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director
Report Title:CFS - Contract # 20-346-1 California State University Long Beach
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Employment and Human Services Director, or designee, to execute a non-
financial Agreement with the Trustees of the California State University on behalf of California State
University Long Beach to provide student internship placement(s) for practical social work field experience to
eligible and enrolled Employment and Human Services Department Staff for the period October 1, 2024
through September 30, 2028.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a non-financial Agreement.
BACKGROUND:
California State University Long Beach (CSULB) College of Health and Human Services provides nursing,
health services, paraprofessional training, and degree programs in the field of Social Work and desires its
students to obtain practical experience at agency facilities to facilitate acquiring professional field experience.
Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD) desires to renew the Agreement with CSULB to
participate in CSULB’s student internship placement program in the field of Social Work whereby offering
eligible and enrolled EHSD Staff the opportunity to gain practical field experience credits towards their
CSULB Social Work degree.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3199,Version:1
On November 20, 2020 the Board of Supervisors approved an Agreement with CSULB to provide student
internship placements for social work field experience for the period October 1, 2020 through September 30,
2024 (C.23). This Agreement will renew the prior approved Agreement for a term October 1, 2024 through
September 30, 2028.
This Agreement contains non-standard legal responsibility indemnification and insurance language, which has
been reviewed and approved by County’s County Counsel and Risk Management Departments.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This contract supports all five of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: 1)
"Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; 2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive
Adulthood"; 3) "Families that are Economically Self Sufficient"; 4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and
Nurturing"; and 5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families"
by providing higher education learning opportunities to eligible and enrolled EHSD Staff to support these
outcomes.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
EHSD would not be able to provide field experience to EHSD Social Worker Staff to support professional
development in obtaining higher education and potential career advancement opportunities within EHSD and
the County.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3200 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/3/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the
Employment and Human Services Director, a purchase order and related agreement with CDW
Government LLC in an amount not to exceed $20,693 for the purchase of Optiv, Forcepoint Web
Security, subject to the terms of CDW Government’s network security products license agreement, for
the period February 23, 2024 through February 22, 2027. (59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Marla Stuart, Employment and Human Services Director
Report Title:20-545-0 (Admin) CDW-G Optiv Security, Inc. Purchase Order
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Employment and
Human Services Director, a purchase order and related agreement with CDW Government LLC for the
purchase of Optiv, Forcepoint Web Security, subject to the terms of CDW Government’s network security
products license agreement, in an amount not to exceed $20,693 for the period February 23, 2024 through
February 22, 2027.
FISCAL IMPACT:
$20,693: 59% Federal, 35% State, 6% County General Fund, all of which is budgeted in FY 24/25.
BACKGROUND:
The Employment and Human Services Department (EHSD), seeks to renew the software package for web
filtering and security for personal computers used by the public at multiple sites. This purchase enables EHSD
IT to filter, block, and real-time content scanning for internet traffic on our PCs used by the public. This
product allows authentication and enforcement settings that secure our public network. This will keep offensive
and inappropriate content from being displayed in public areas. This purchase order includes a service
agreement that includes a limitation of liability. This vendor was selected per procurement requirements
outlined in Administrative Bulletin 600.3. This action is late due to staffing shortages in EHSD’s contracts unit.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3200,Version:1
The County will be restricted in its ability to keep offensive and inappropriate content from being displayed on
computers accessed by the public.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
This agreement supports all five of the community outcomes established in the Children's Report Card: (1)
"Children Ready for and Succeeding in School"; (2) "Children and Youth Healthy and Preparing for Productive
Adulthood";(3)"Families that are Economically Self-Sufficient"; (4) "Families that are Safe, Stable and
Nurturing"; and (5) "Communities that are Safe and Provide a High Quality of Life for Children and Families,”
by supporting staff working directly with families and children.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:224-3195 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:Acting as the governing Board of the Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District, APPROVE and
AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding in an amount up to
$170,000 from the Crockett Community Foundation, a nonprofit corporation, procure a new boiler and
air conditioning system, and execute an agreement for installation. (10% CCFPD match)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 2 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Report Title:Crockett-Carquinez Grant Opportunity and HVAC Equipment Acquisition
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Acting as the governing Board of the Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District (District), APPROVE and
AUTHORIZE the Fire Chief, or designee, to apply for and accept grant funding in an amount up to $170,000
from the Crockett Community Foundation, a nonprofit corporation, procure a replacement boiler and air
conditioning system, and execute an agreement for installation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this request will allow the Fire Chief to apply for, and if awarded, receive grant funding of up to
$170,000, which would provide monies necessary to procure a replacement boiler and new air conditioning
system and installation. Award of funding would require the District to provide a match of 10% of the total
grant amount awarded.
BACKGROUND:
The Crockett-Carquinez Fire Protection District has the opportunity to apply for grant funding from the
Crockett-Carquinez Community Foundation and would benefit from replacing their current boiler system and
purchasing air conditioning equipment. If awarded, the grant would provide up to 90% of the cost for a
replacement boiler, a new air conditioning system, and installation. The remaining 10% of the costs would be
covered by District revenues.
Receipt of grant funding will allow the District to retire the current boiler system located at Station 78, which
does not provide air conditioning and maintenance repairs are no longer cost effective. If awarded sufficient
funding, the District could also purchase new air conditioning equipment.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3195,Version:2
The District is also requesting approval to expend grant funding received for the purchase and installation of a
new boiler and air conditioning system.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The District will not be able to receive grant funding and use it towards much needed facility HVAC upgrades.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3183 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to purchase, on behalf of the Health
Services Director, 876 Albertsons gift cards for a total amount not to exceed $24,966 to be used as
incentives for consumer participation in Mental/Behavioral Health Services Act-Prop 63 planning
processes. (100% Mental/Behavioral Health Services Act)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Gift Cards for Consumer Participation of Mental Health Services Act -Prop 63
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to purchase, on behalf of the Health Services
Director, 876 Albertsons gift cards each with a $30 value with a five percent discount totaling $24,966 to be
used as an incentive for consumer participation in Mental/Behavioral Health Services Act-Prop 63 (MHSA)
planning processes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This $24,966 expenditure will be funded by MHSA-Prop 63 funding. There is no impact to County General
Fund.
BACKGROUND:
Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act, was passed by voters on November 2, 2004. This proposition
imposes an additional 1% tax on taxable personal income above $1 million to provide dedicated funding for
expansion of mental health services and programs. Gift Cards are provided to mental health consumers and
family members as an incentive for ongoing and meaningful participation and involvement as full partners in
the MHSA planning processes, from the inception of the planning through implementation and evaluation of
identified activities.
State Department of Mental Health Letter Number 05-01 requires the participation of mental health consumers
and family members in this process. Additionally, counties must continue to be engaged in ongoing community
planning processes for MHSA annual plan updates and for any new MHSA plan. As such, to obtain broader
stakeholder input, gift cards allow the county to provide a way to reward those mental health consumers and
their family members who so willingly volunteer many hours to participate in the myriad of MHSA planning
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3183,Version:1
processes.
Gift cards help offset potential costs and financial burden associated with meeting participation including, but
not limited to transportation and meals. The gift cards will be administered in accordance with the requirements
outlined in Administrative Bulletin #615.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If there are no incentives available, consumer and family member participation and involvement may decrease
during the Community Program Planning Process, which is a required component for the Mental Health
Services Act (MHSA) Three-Year Program and Expenditure Plan.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3184 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health
Services Director, a purchase order with AT&T Mobility Wireless Operations Holdings Inc. in an
amount not to exceed $330,000 for the purchase of mobility equipment, accessories, and wireless
services for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Purchase Order with AT&T Mobility Wireless Operations Holdings Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute on behalf of the Health Services
Director, a purchase order with AT&T Mobility Wireless Operations Holdings Inc. dba AT&T in an amount not
to exceed $330,000 for the purchase of mobility equipment, accessories, and wireless services for the period of
July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this purchase will result in expenditures of up to $330,000 over a three-year period and will be
funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues.
BACKGROUND:
Contra Costa Health (CCH) Information Technology (IT) handles purchasing of AT&T mobility equipment and
accessories for CCH. All mobility devices purchased from AT&T are equipped with AT&T FirstNet. FirstNet is
a national public safety broadband network specifically developed and operated by AT&T, providing
comprehensive tower-to-core encryption to enhance security for healthcare workers.
This purchase will be governed by cooperative agreements between the State of California and AT&T
(Participating Addendum PA-2022-WDV-AT&T) and the State of Utah and AT&T (NASPO ValuePoint Master
Agreement MA149). The State of California cooperative agreement limits the liability of AT&T to the amounts
paid by County to AT&T, excluding claims for infringement and bodily injury/death.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Opting not to use AT&T FirstNet for purchasing mobility equipment, accessories and wireless services may
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3184,Version:1
result in reduced communication effectiveness, decreased reliability and security, potential coverage gaps, and
higher costs. For public health and emergency response agencies, these factors are critical, as effective
communication is essential for saving lives and maintaining public health during emergencies and disasters.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3185 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:7/25/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Surescripts, LLC, to increase the payment limit to $140,000 and extend the term
through June 30, 2027 and for successive one year terms thereafter for secure, electronic prescription
data messaging services for Contra Costa Health. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Amendment/Extension #23-714-1 with Surescripts, LLC
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County an
amendment to Contract #23-714 with Surescripts,LLC,a Delaware limited liability company,to increase the
contract payment limit to $140,000 and to extend the termination date to June 30,2027,and for successive (1)
year renewal terms thereafter until termination,for secure,electronic prescription data messaging services for
Contra Costa Health (CCH).
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Amendment will result in additional expenditures of up to $140,000 and will be funded as
budgeted by the department in FY’s 2024-27, by 100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I (Rate increase).
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the needs of CCH by providing information system products or services,some of which
allow for a secure e-prescription messaging platform shared amongst health care providers.Under purchase
order,on February 9,2012,CCH entered into a Prescriber Connectivity Agreement (PCA)with Surescripts
LLC.,to participate in the Surescripts clinical network to access,among other services,Surescripts clinical
network services,including prescription routing services,prescription history,and benefits services.On
November 1,2016,Amendment No.1 was executed to amend the PCA to enable CCH to participate in
Surescripts National Record Locator Service.On August 15,2017,the parties executed Amendment No.2 to
the PCA to add Clinical Direct Messaging (CDM)Service.On October 31,2019,the parties executed
Amendment No.3 to the PCA to allow CCH to use the Surescripts Real-Time Prescription Benefit service.On
September 30,2020,the parties executed Amendment No.5 to the PCA to enable CCH to use Surescripts
Electronic Prior Authorization service through the Surescripts network,permitting end-users to engage in an
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3185,Version:1
electronic prior authorization transaction with a pharmacy benefit manager.
On May 11,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #23-714 (a zero-dollar contract)with
Surescripts,containing mutual indemnification to hold harmless both parties for any claims arising out of
breach,for the provision of its secure messaging platform services for the period April 1,2021,through March
31, 2024.
CCH has been contracting with this vendor since February 2012 for its services concerning patient medication
history,with the record locator and exchange feature affording the ability to identify where patients have
received care and locates medical records shared through CareQuality.This national census-based
interoperability framework facilitates information exchange amongst health data networks.
This Contractor was approved as a sole source contractor by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing
Division on May 14,2024.CCH will monitor measurable service contract deliverables with outcomes required
of the Contractor.CCH’s access to subscribed services (such)as acute service for accessing patient medication
history and national record locator services for obtaining provider information,will be monitored by the
department in compliance with Section III(B)(7)of the Purchasing Policy.Current service offerings include
Medication History Acute,National Record Locator,Clinical Direct Messaging,Real-time Prescription Benefit
Service,and Electronic Prior Management Services.This Contract was approved by CCH Personnel to ensure
no conflict with labor relations.
On May 11,2021,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract 23-714 (Amendment #6 to the PCA)with
Surescripts,which states that as of May 1,2021,the County shall pay Surescripts for access to its CDM clinical
network services from April 1,2021,through March 31,2024.After executing Amendment #6,CCH received
invoice credits from SureScripts due to spikes in messaging sent during the COVID-19 pandemic.CCH has
been utilizing the credit(s) to offset monthly fees.
Under this Amendment #23-714-1,the parties will append the County’s HIPAA Business Associate Addendum
(to the PDA),increase the Contract payment limit from $0 to $140,000,and allow the Contractor to provide its
CDM clinical network services through June 30,2027 (and for successive (1)year renewal terms thereafter
until termination).The division is requesting a retroactive date for this Amendment due to delays caused by the
negotiations between the parties.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Amendment is not approved,CCH will not have access to the Contractor’s secure messaging platform
used by CCH for secure,electronic prescription clinical messaging,including the medication history acute
service offering allowing for accurate medication history to flow directly into the ambulatory care workflow,
potentially jeopardizing patient care.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3185,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3186 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Contra Costa Community College District for the County to provide HIV and Sexually Transmitted
Infections testing and education at Diablo Valley College, Los Medanos College and Contra Costa
Community College for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2026. (Non-financial
agreement)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title: Agreement #72-240 with Contra Costa Community College District
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Agreement #72-240 with Contra Costa Community College District, for the County to provide HIV and
Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) testing and education at the three community colleges (Diablo Valley
College, Los Medanos College and Contra Costa Community College), for the period from October 1, 2024
through September 30, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None, this is a non-financial agreement.
BACKGROUND:
This agreement is being established to formalize a partnership between the County’s Health Services
Department (CCH) and Contractor to implement a no-cost HIV and STI testing and education program on-site
at each of the three (3) community colleges. The mission of CCH HIV/STI Program is to prevent the spread of
HIV and other STI and reduce the impact of these infections by coordinating countywide education, prevention,
testing and care services. Services may include rapid testing for HIV, hepatitis C and syphilis; laboratory-based
testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia, risk reduction and education, HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PreEP)
outreach and education, free condoms and lubricants, and resources and direct linkage to access services with
CCH.
Approval of this Agreement will allow the County to provide HIV and STI testing and education services at the
three community colleges, through September 30, 2026. The Agreement includes both parties to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless the other party and their officers, agents and employees against all claims, demands,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3186,Version:1
actions, costs (including attorney’s fees) and liabilities arising from or related to, and in proportion to, the
negligence, willful misconduct or omissions of said party, its officers, agents or employees.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, County will not receive the necessary funding to support the reduction in HIV
and STI infection in the community.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3187 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Planned Parenthood: Shasta-Diablo, Inc. (dba Planned Parenthood Northern California), in an amount
not to exceed $5,000,000 to provide obstetrics and gynecology, family planning and behavioral health
treatment services for Contra Costa Health Plan members for the period October 1, 2024 through
September 30, 2025. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Contract #27-168-20 with Planned Parenthood: Shasta-Diablo, Inc. (dba Planned Parenthood
Northern California)
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Contract #27-168-20 with Planned Parenthood: Shasta-Diablo, Inc. (dba Planned Parenthood Northern
California), a non-profit corporation, in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000, to provide obstetrics and
gynecology (OB/GYN), family planning and behavioral health treatment services for Contra Costa Health Plan
(CCHP) members, for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This Contract will result in annual contractual service expenditures of up to $5,000,000 and will be funded
100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues.
BACKGROUND:
CCHP has an obligation to provide certain medical specialist health care services, including OB/GYN, family
planning and behavioral health services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health
Plan membership contracts with the county. This Contractor has been a member in the CCHP Provider Network
providing the OB/GYN, family planning and behavioral health treatment services and fostering a deep
understanding of CCHP organizations mission, values and long term objections since November of 2007.
This Contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code
§§ 26227 and 31000; Health and Safety Code § 1451. Health Services Personnel approved this Contract to
ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. Contractor shall cooperate with and participate in CCHP’s
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3187,Version:1
Quality Improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and Member experience.
Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and participation in the
organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement programs. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3
CCHP physician services are exempt from solicitation requirements.
On August 1, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #27-168-19 with Planned Parenthood: Shasta-
Diablo, Inc. (dba Planned Parenthood Northern California), in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 to provide
obstetrics and gynecology, family planning and behavioral health treatment services for Contra Costa Health
Plan members for the period October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2024.
Approval of Contract #27-168-20 will allow Contractor to continue to provide OB/GYN, family planning and
behavioral health treatment services for CCHP members through September 30, 2025.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Contract is not approved, certain specialized health care services including OB/GYN, family planning
and behavioral health treatment services will not be provided to CCHP members by this Contractor and may
limit access to these services to members.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3188 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Attentive Cognitive and Mental Health Services Psychology Inc., in an amount not to exceed
$400,000 to provide behavioral health therapy and neuropsychological testing services for Contra
Costa Health Plan members and County recipients for the period November 1, 2024 through October
31, 2026. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Contract #77-714 with Attentive Cognitive and Mental Health Services Psychology Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County
Contract #77-714 with Attentive Cognitive and Mental Health Services Psychology Inc.,a corporation,in an
amount not to exceed $400,000,to provide behavioral health services -therapy and neuropsychological testing
services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP)members and County recipients,for the period November 1,
2024 through October 31, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $400,000 over a two-year
period and will be funded 100% by CCHP Enterprise Fund II revenues.
BACKGROUND:
CCHP has an obligation to provide certain behavioral health services -therapy and neuropsychological testing
services for its members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with
the County.The Department of Health Care Services (DHCS)has added behavioral health therapy services to
the list of medically necessary outpatient mental health services.Neuropsychological testing services are
mandated by State and Federal regulations.This Contractor will join the CCHP Provider Network to provide
these services and foster a deep understanding of the CCJHP organizations mission,values,and long-term
objectives starting November 1,2024.This Contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal
authorities:California Government Code §§26227 and 31000;Health and Safety Code §1451.Health Services
Personnel approved this contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations.
The nature of the behavioral health services -therapy and neuropsychological testing services needed is
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3188,Version:1
The nature of the behavioral health services -therapy and neuropsychological testing services needed is
complex and requires seamless coordination,integration and collaboration with existing programs and systems.
This Contract will maintain comprehensive area coverage for the entire CCHP membership and meet the Knox-
Keene Act,time and distance mandate required by the State of California Department of Managed Health Care
(DMHC)services.Contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s Quality Management
Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care and services and
member experience.Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance measurement data and
participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement Programs.These
contracted services were determined to be exempt from Administrative Bulletin 600.3 solicitation requirements
by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division.
Under new Contract #77-714 will allow the Contractor to provide behavioral health services -therapy and
neuropsychological testing services for CCHP members and County recipients through October 31, 2026.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Contract is not approved,certain behavioral health services -therapy and neuropsychological testing
services for CCHP members under the terms of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts
with the County will not be provided and may cause a delay in services to CCHP members.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3189 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Perseus Corporation, to increase the payment limit by $120,312 to an amount not to
exceed $301,280, and extend the term through June 30, 2025 for additional consultation and
technical assistance regarding third-party cost reports. (100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Amendment/Extension #23-419-19 with Perseus Corporation
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Contract Amendment/Extension #23-419-19 with Perseus Corporation, a corporation, effective October 31,
2024, to increase the payment limit by $120,312, from $180,968, to a new payment limit of $301,280 and to
extend the termination date from October 31, 2024 to June 30, 2025 for additional consultation and technical
assistance regarding third-party cost reports.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Amendment will result in additional annual expenditures of up to $120,312 and will be funded
as budgeted by the department in FY 2024-25, by 100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I revenues.
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the social needs of County by providing consultation and technical assistance regarding
third party cost reports and acting as the primary liaison between the Health Services Department and the State
and Federal government with regard to all interactions, audits, review of cost reports and/or claims filed.
This Contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code
§§ 26227 and 31000; and all legal authorities cited in the HIPAA Business Associate Addendum, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Personnel approved this Contractor ensure no conflicts
with labor relations. Theses contracted service were determined to be exempt from Administrative Bulletin
600.3 solicitation requirements by Public Works Department’s Purchasing Division.
In September 2023, the County Administrator approved, and the Purchasing Service Manager executed contract
#23-419-18 with Perseus Corporation in the amount $180,968, for the provision of consultation and technical
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3189,Version:1
assistance regarding third-party cost reports for the period November 1, 2023 through October 31, 2024.
Approval of Contract Amendment Agreement #23-419-19 will allow the Contractor to continue to consultation
and technical assistance regarding third-party cost reports and acting as the primary liaison between the Health
Services Department and the State and Federal government with regard to all interactions, audits, review of cost
reports and/or claims filed through June 30, 2025.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the Contractor will not provide oversight and review of third-party cost reports
that the Department is required to file with federal and state agencies.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3190 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Thomas J. McDonald, MD Inc., in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to provide ophthalmology
services to Contra Costa Health Plan members and County recipients for the period November 1,
2024 through October 31, 2027. (100% Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Agreement #77-382-3 with Thomas J. McDonald, MD Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Contract #77-382-3 with Thomas J. McDonald, MD Inc., a professional corporation, in an amount not to
exceed $600,000, to provide ophthalmology services for Contra Costa Health Plan (CCHP) for the period from
November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2027.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this this Contract will result in contractual service expenditures of up to $600,000 over a three-year
period and will be funded as budgeted by the department 100% by Contra Costa Health Plan Enterprise Fund II
revenues.
BACKGROUND:
CCHP has an obligation to provide certain specialized health care services for its members under the terms of
their Individual and Group Health Plan membership contracts with the county. This Contractor has been a
member in the CCHP Provider Network providing ophthalmology services and fostering a deep understanding
of the CCHP organizations mission, values, and long-term objectives since August 1, 2021.
This Contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code
§§ 26227 and 31000; and Health and Safety Code § 1451. Health Services Personnel approved this contract to
ensure there is no conflict with labor relations. Contractor currently cooperates with and participates in CCHP’s
Quality Management Program which consists of quality improvement activities to improve the quality of care
and services and member experience. Cooperation includes collection and evaluation of performance
measurement data and participation in the organization’s clinical and service measure Quality Improvement
Programs. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 CCHP Physician services are exempt from solicitation
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3190,Version:1
requirements.
In October 2022, the County Administrator approved and the Purchasing Services Manager executed Contract
#77-382-2 with Thomas J. McDonald, MD Inc., in an amount not to exceed $200,000, for the provision of
ophthalmology services for CCHP members and County recipients for the period November 1, 2022 through
October 31, 2024.
Approval of Contract #77-382-3 will allow the Contractor to continue to provide ophthalmology services to
CCHP members and County recipients through October 31, 2027.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Contract is not approved certain specialized ophthalmology services for CCHP member under the terms
of their Individual and Group Health Plan membership with the County will not be provided and services may
be delayed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3191 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Psynergy Programs, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $873,462 to provide residential care services for
the period July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. (88% Mental Health Realignment; 12%
Mental/Behavioral Health Services Act)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Contract #74-571-10 with Psynergy Programs, Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director,or designee,to execute on behalf of the County
Contract #74-571-10 with Psynergy Programs,Inc.,a corporation,in an amount not to exceed $873,462,to
provide residential care services to adults diagnosed with Serious Mental Illness (SMI)and Serious Persistent
Mental Illness (SPMI), for the period July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Contract will result in annual budgeted expenditures of up to $873,462 for and will be funded
by 88% Mental Health Realignment and 12% Behavioral Health Services Act revenues.
BACKGROUND:
This Contract meets the social needs of County’s population by providing community-based residential care
services focusing on adults diagnosed with SMI and SPMI who are stepping down from the Institutes for
Mental Diseases (IMD)levels of care and transitioning back into the community.The Contractor has been
providing these services since September 2018.The Contractor has been providing these services since
September 2018.
This Contract is entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities:California Government Code
§§26227;California Code of Regulations,Title 9,Section 523 et seq.;California Welfare and Institutions Code
Section (5600 et.seq.,known as The Bronzan-McCorquodale Act).The Behavioral Health’s Quality
Management,Utilization Management and Contract Monitor staff meet on a regular basis to ensure monitoring
and performance measures in the Contract are upheld.This Contract was approved by Health Services
Personnel to ensure there is no conflict with labor relations.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3191,Version:1
This provider was selected in collaboration with community stakeholder advisory bodies and was approved as
part of the comprehensive Behavioral Health Services Act Three-Year Plan as required by State regulation.
Providers interested in providing specialized services were invited proactively to participate in program
development and offered the opportunity to submit interest at dozens of publicly noticed meetings.The
services and vendors were identified in the formal Three-Year plan was approved on the following schedule
that was noticed to the public and approved by the Board on August 1,2023.The Three-Year plan was posed
for public comment from June 5,2023 through July 5,2023,there was a Public Hearing at the Mental Health
Commission meeting on July 5, 2023, and it was approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 1, 2023.
On October 17,2023,the Board of Supervisors approved Novation Contract #74-571-8 with Psynergy
Programs,Inc.,in an amount not to exceed $450,267,for the provision of residential and mental health services
to adults diagnosed with SMI and SPMI, for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024.
On April 22,2024,the Board of Supervisors approved Contract Amendment Agreement #74-571-9 with
Psynergy Programs,Inc.,effective March 1,2024,to increase the payment limit by $205,000 to a new payment
limit of $655,267 for additional services, with no change in the term ending June 30, 2024.
Approval of Contract #74-571-10 will allow the Contractor to continue providing residential care services
through June 30,2025.The delay in the processing of this Contract was due to on-going negotiations between
the Department and Contractor.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Contract is not approved,there will be fewer residential care services available for adults diagnosed with
SMI or SPMI as the County solicits and engages an alternative Contractor.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3192 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Schilling and Associates, Inc., for amended consultation and technical assistance
services regarding operation and function of quality, safety and performance improvement for Contra
Costa Health with no change in the payment limit of $1,188,000 or term ending October 31, 2026.
(100% Hospital Enterprise Fund I)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Amendment #76-802-3 with Schilling and Associates, Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Contract Amendment #76-802-3 with Schilling and Associates, Inc., a corporation, effective October 1, 2024,
for additional consultation and technical assistance regarding operation and function of quality, safety and
performance improvement for Contra Costa Health (CCH), with no change in the payment limit of $1,188,000
or the term of November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Amendment will not change the original payment limit of $1,188,000 over a 3-year period and
will be funded 100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
The Department went through an extensive recruitment process multiple times over a long period of time with
no qualified candidate found prior to considering contracted candidates for the role. This role is an exempt is
not impacted by labor considerations. It is critical to engage a high-quality professional to ensure all state and
federal requirements are met annually including meeting CDPH and Joint Commission standards, on which our
continued ability to provide healthcare to all our patients depends. Given the need for regulatory compliance
and Ms. Schilling’s historical performance and success we are requesting continuity of her service. This
contract was approved by the Public Works Department’s Purchasing Manager on August 22, 2023.
Approval of this contract will allow contractor to plan and manage quality department and staff for CCH,
including quality, patient safety, clinical risk management, performance improvement, patient experience, care
management, regulatory, complaints and grievances, population health, peer review, and quality analytics.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3192,Version:1
On October 24, 2023, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #76-802-1 with Margaret E. Schilling, in an
amount not to exceed $1,188,000, to provide Chief Quality Officer services at CCRMC and Health Centers, for
the period November 1, 2022 through October 31, 2023. In November 2023, the County Administrator
approved Assignment #76-802-2 which assigned the agreement to Schilling and Associates, Inc.
Approval of this Amendment Agreement #76-802-3 will allow the contractor to provide an additional level of
services to CCH including operation and function of quality, safety and performance improvement, through
October 31, 2026.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not approved, the Department will not have the necessary management and oversight of the
quality and safety and performance improvement programs for CCH.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3193 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Locumtenens.com, to increase the payment limit by $750,000 to an amount not to
exceed $2,750,000 to provide additional temporary physician services at Contra Costa Regional
Medical and Health Centers with no change in the term ending December 31, 2024. (100% Hospital
Enterprise Fund I)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Amendment #26-395-34 with Locumtenens.com, LLC
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Health Services Director, or designee, to execute on behalf of the County
Contract Amendment Agreement #26-395-34, with Locumtenens.com, LLC, a limited liability company,
effective October 1, 2024, to amend Contract #26-395-33, to increase the payment limit by $750,000, from
$2,000,000 to a new payment limit of $2,750,000 to provide additional temporary locum tenens physician
services at Contra Costa Regional Medical Center (CCRMC) and Contra Costa Health Centers with no change
in the term of January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this Amendment will result in additional service expenditures of up to $750,000 and will be funded
100% by Hospital Enterprise Fund I. (No rate increase)
BACKGROUND:
CCRMC and Contra Costa Health Centers have an obligation to provide physician services to patients.
Therefore, County contracts with temporary help firms to ensure patient care is provided during peak loads,
temporary absences, vacations or emergency situations when full staffing is required. This Contractor was
chosen for its locum tenens staffing services and began providing services on August 1, 2001, and has been
providing temporary services on a continual basis, to the County as needed, for over 20 years. This Contract is
entered into under and subject to the following legal authorities: California Government Code §§ 26227 and
31000. Health Services Personnel approved this Contract to ensure no conflicts with labor relations. CCRMC’s
Quality Management, Utilization Management and Contract Monitor Staff meet on a regular basis to ensure
monitoring and performance measures in the Contract are upheld. Per Administrative Bulletin 600.3 CCRMC
Physician services are exempt from Solicitation requirements.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3193,Version:1
On February 27, 2024, the Board of Supervisors approved Contract #26-395-33 with Locumtenens.com, LLC,
in the amount of $2,000,000 to provide temporary locum tenens physician services at CCRMC and Contra
Costa Health Centers during peak loads, temporary absences, vacations or emergency situations, for the period
January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024.
Approval of Amendment Agreement #26-395-34 will allow the Contractor to provide additional temporary
locum tenens physician services through December 31, 2024. This Amendment includes services provided by
represented classifications and the County has met its obligations with the respective labor partner(s).
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Amendment is not approved, County will not receive additional hours of services from this Contractor
and physician staffing requirements may not be met.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3194 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE the new medical staff, allied health, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments,
additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and resignations as recommended by the Medical
Staff Executive Committee, at their September 16, 2024 meeting, and by the Health Services Director.
(No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Anna Roth, Health Services Director
Report Title:Medical Staff Appointments and Reappointments - September 16, 2024
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE the new medical staff, allied health, and tele-radiologist appointments and reappointments,
additional privileges, medical staff advancement, and resignations as recommended by the Medical Staff
Executive Committee, at their September 16, 2024 meeting, and by the Health Services Director.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact for this action.
BACKGROUND:
The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has requested that evidence of Board of
Supervisors approval for each Medical Staff member be placed in his or her Credentials File. The above
recommendations for appointment/reappointment were reviewed by the Credentials Committee and
recommended by the Medical Executive Committee.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this action is not approved, the Contra Costa Regional Medical and Contra Costa Health Centers' medical
staff would not be appropriately credentialed and not be in compliance with The Joint Commission on
Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-2667 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/4/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:9/11/2024 10/1/2024
Title:Acting as the governing board of the Contra Costa Housing Authority; APPROVE and AWARD a
contract in the amount of $112,000 plus up to $11,200 for contingencies as authorized by the Housing
Authority Executive Director to A&R Construction for the repair of four fire-damaged units located in
the Elder Winds public housing development in the City of Antioch, and TAKE related actions. (100%
U.S. Housing and Urban Development funds)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Contra Costa County Housing Authority Board of Commissioners
From:Joseph Villarreal, Executive Director
Report Title:AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE REPAIR OF 4 FIRE-DAMAGED
UNITS LOCATED IN THE ELDER WINDS DEVELOPMENT IN ANTIOCH
☐Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
(1)APPROVE plans, specifications, and design to rehabilitate four (4) fire-damaged units, Units A109,
A110, A209, and A210, located in the Elder Winds Public Housing Development at 2100 Buchanan Road, in
Antioch, CA.
(2)AWARD the construction contract for the above project to A&R Construction (A&R) in the amount of
$112,000.01 and DIRECT that A&R shall present two good and sufficient surety bonds contractor shall
present two good and sufficient surety bonds (performance and payment) in the amount of $112,000.01 each
and that the Executive Director, or designee, shall prepare the contract.
(3)AUTHORIZE the Executive Director, or designee, to approve construction change orders, as needed,
up to a maximum total of 10% ($11,200), which is in addition to the contract award amount.
(4)ORDER that, after the contractor has signed the contract and returned it, together with the bonds as
noted above, certificates of insurance, and any other required documents, and the Executive Director has
reviewed and found them to be sufficient, the Executive Director, or designee, is authorized to sign the contract
for this Board.
(5)ORDER that the Executive Director, or designee, is authorized to sign any escrow agreements prepared
for this project to permit the direct payment of retentions into escrow or the substitution of securities for
moneys withheld by HACCC to ensure performance under the contract, pursuant to Public Contract Code
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-2667,Version:1
Section 22300.
(6)DELEGATE, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 4114, to the Executive Director, or designee,
the Board’s functions under Public Contract Code Sections 4107 and 4110.
(7)DELEGATE, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6705, to the Executive Director, or to any registered
civil or structural engineer employed by HACCC, the authority to accept detailed plans showing the design of
shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection during trench excavation
covered by that section.
BACKGROUND:
On November 3, 2023, four units were damaged by fire and subsequent water damage rendering them
uninhabitable. HACCC solicited bids for the repairs and selected the most responsible and cost-effective firm to
rehabilitate the units and return them to service.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The construction contract will be funded 100% by HUD.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Should the Board not award the construction contract, as recommended, the four units will continue to remain
vacant and in need of rehabilitation.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3226 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/15/2023 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26193 to reclassify one Network Administrator II
(represented) position and its incumbent to Information Systems Manager I (represented) and place
the incumbent at Step 7 of the salary range of the new classification in the Library Department.
(100% Library Fund)
Attachments:1. P300 26193 Reclass NA II to ISM I in Library.pdf, 2. Signed P300 26193.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Reclassify one Network Administrator II position and incumbent to Information Systems Manager
I
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Position Adjustment Resolution No. 26193 to reclassify one (1) full-time Network Administrator II (LNSB)
(represented) position # 17842 at salary plan and grade ZA5 1787 ($8,764-$10,653) and its incumbent to Information
Systems Manager I (LTNA) (represented) at salary plan and grade ZA5 1884 ($9,648-$12,929) and place the incumbent
at Step 7 of the salary range of the new classification in the Library Department.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Upon approval, this action will result in an annual cost to the Library Fund of approximately $39,536. No fiscal impact
to the County general fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library recommends reclassifying one Network Administrator II position and its incumbent to Information Systems
Manager I.
Shortly before the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic hit, the Library was attacked with a ransomware attack. As a result
of this, the Library implemented multiple new security procedures to protect the Library network from outside attacks.
The Library’s Automation unit, which handles internet security and the installation of hardware and software for the
Library’s multi-user environment, has had increased work and responsibility as a result of implementing these procedures.
In particular, the incumbent of the Library’s Network Administrator II position has had increased workload and
responsibilities to maintain both network security and ensure that the Library’s public and staff terminals work. As a
result of the Library’s increased network presence, the Network Administrator II has taken on additional duties. It is
unlikely these duties can be properly removed and still ensure the smooth operation of the Library. These additional
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3226,Version:1
duties are more appropriate for an Information Systems Manager I classification.
The Automation unit was previously supervised by an Information Systems Project Manager. However, due to the attack
in January 2020, that manager position was moved to the Department of Information Technology out of necessity. Since
then, the unit’s day to day tasks have been supervised by a Deputy County Librarian, which is organizationally
inappropriate.
After a thorough review by the Human Resources Department of the duties the position is responsible for, they concluded
that the position should be properly classified as an Information Systems Manager I.
Typically a reclassification results in an increase in salary of 5% which is the standard per the Contra Costa County,
Salary Regulations 4.1 Salary-On Promotion reads in part: Any employee who is appointed to a position of a class
allocated to a higher salary range than the class he previously occupied, shall receive the salary in the new salary range,
which is next higher than the rate he was receiving before promotion. This regulation would place the current incumbent
at step 5 of the salary range for the new classification, however after review of the position duties and the extended length
of time the incumbent has performed these duties, the recommendation for this reclassification is placement at Step 7 of
the salary range.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this position change is not approved, the incumbent will be improperly classified and will not be properly compensated
for the work being performed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
POSITION ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
NO. 26193
DATE 12/27/2022
Department No./
Department Library Budget Unit No. 0620 Org No. 3714 Agency No. 85
Action Requested: Reclassify Network Administrator II (LNSB) position #17842 to Information Systems Manager I (LTNA)
Proposed Effective Date: 10/1/2024
Classification Questionnaire attached: Yes No / Cost is within Department’s budget: Yes No
Total One-Time Costs (non-salary) associated with request: $0.00
Estimated total cost adjustment (salary / benefits / one time):
Total annual cost $40,653.00 Net County Cost $0.00
Total this FY $30,490.00 N.C.C. this FY $0.00
SOURCE OF FUNDING TO OFFSET ADJUSTMENT Library Fund
Department must initiate necessary adjustment and submit to CAO.
Use additional sheet for further explanations or comments.
Alison McKee
______________________________________
(for) Department Head
REVIEWED BY CAO AND RELEASED TO HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
/s/ Julie Enea 9/25/2024
___________________________________ ________________
Deputy County Administrator Date
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS DATE 9/25/2024
Reclassify one (1) full-time Network Administrator II (LNSB) (represented) position # 17842 at salary plan and grade ZA5
1787 ($9,203.13-$11,186.47) and its incumbent to Information Systems Manager I (LTNA) (represented) at salary plan and
grade ZA5 1884 ($10,130.87-$13,576.33) and place the incumbent at Step 7 of the salary range of the new classification in
the Library Department.
Amend Resolution 71/17 establishing positions and resolutions allocating classes to the Basic / Exempt salary schedule.
Effective: Day following Board Action.
10/1/2024(Date) Nicole Bilich 9/25/2024
___________________________________ ________________
(for) Director of Human Resources Date
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: DATE 9/27/2024
Approve Recommendation of Director of Human Resources
Disapprove Recommendation of Director of Human Resources /s/ Julie Enea
Other: ____________________________________________ ___________________________________
(for) County Administrator
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION: Monica Nino, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Adjustment is APPROVED DISAPPROVED and County Administrator
DATE BY
APPROVAL OF THIS ADJUSTMENT CONSTITUTES A PERSONNEL / SALARY RESOLUTION AMENDMENT
POSITION ADJUSTMENT ACTION TO BE COMPLETED BY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOLLOWING BOARD ACTION
Adjust class(es) / position(s) as follows:
P300 (M347) Rev 3/15/01
REQUEST FOR PROJECT POSITIONS
Department Date No.
1. Project Positions Requested:
2. Explain Specific Duties of Position(s)
3. Name / Purpose of Project and Funding Source (do not use acronyms i.e. SB40 Project or SDSS Funds)
4. Duration of the Project: Start Date End Date
Is funding for a specified period of time (i.e. 2 years) or on a year-to-year basis? Please explain.
5. Project Annual Cost
a. Salary & Benefits Costs: b. Support Costs: (services, supplies, equipment, etc.)
c. Less revenue or expenditure: d. Net cost to General or other fund:
6. Briefly explain the consequences of not filling the project position(s) in terms of:
a. potential future costs d. political implications
b. legal implications e. organizational implications
c. financial implications
7. Briefly describe the alternative approaches to delivering the services which you have considered. Indicate why these
alternatives were not chosen.
8. Departments requesting new project positions must submit an updated cost benefit analysis of each project position at the
halfway point of the project duration. This report is to be submitted to the Human Resource s Department, which will
forward the report to the Board of Supervisors. Indicate the date that your cost / benefit analysis will be submitted
9. How will the project position(s) be filled?
a. Competitive examination(s)
b. Existing employment list(s) Which one(s)?
c. Direct appointment of:
1. Merit System employee who will be placed on leave from current job
2. Non-County employee
Provide a justification if filling position(s) by C1 or C2
USE ADDITIONAL PAPER IF NECESSARY
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3220 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to close the Prewett Library in Antioch
on Friday, November 29; Thursday, December 26; Friday, December 27; and Saturday, December 28,
2024 to coincide with the holiday closure of the Antioch Community Center for annual maintenance
projects. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Close Prewett Library in Antioch on 4 Days in November & December to Coincide with
Antioch Community Center Holiday Closure for Annual Maintenance.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the County Librarian, or designee, to close the Prewett Library in Antioch on
Friday, November 29; Thursday, December 26; Friday, December 27; and Saturday, December 28, 2024 to
coincide with the holiday closure of the Antioch Community Center for annual maintenance projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The Antioch Community Center, where the Prewett Library is located, will be closed Friday November 29th,
Thursday December 26th, Friday December 27th, and Saturday December 28th so the City of Antioch can
perform a number of annual maintenance projects. The County Librarian is requesting approval to close the
Prewett Library on these days. Permanent staff will be given the option to work elsewhere in the Library system
or to use paid leave accruals during the closure.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The presence of library personnel will impede the ability of workers to perform their annual maintenance tasks.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3221 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a
purchase order with EasyVista, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $40,254 for the renewal of EasyVista
Reach subscriptions to enable remote support for staff and patron computers, for the period
September 18, 2024 through September 18, 2027. (100% Library Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Click or tap here to enter text.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase
order with EasyVista, Inc., subject to EasyVista’s Terms and Conditions, in an amount not to exceed $40,254
for the renewal of EasyVista EV Reach subscriptions, for the period September 18, 2024, through September
18, 2027.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Library Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library utilizes EasyVista EV Reach remote access software. This product provides the Library IT
department the tools needed to remotely support and manage the Library’s staff and patron use computers.
EasyVista, Inc.’s Terms and Conditions include an indemnification from the County to EasyVista, as well as a
limitation of liability capping liability at the amount paid by the County to EasyVista in the 12 months prior to
the claim arising.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library will not be able to provide support to
maintain, troubleshoot, and update the Library’s staff and patron use computers in a timely and efficient
manner.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3221,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3222 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a
purchase order with EBSCO Information Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $77,435 for
renewal of the Flipster subscription to provide digital access to popular magazines, for the period
November 1, 2024 through October 31, 2025. (100% Library Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Purchase Order with EBSCO Information Services, Inc. for Flipster Subscriptions through
October 31, 2025
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase
order with EBSCO Information Services, Inc., subject to the EBSCO License Agreement, in an amount not to
exceed $77,435 for the renewal of the Flipster subscription, for the period November 1, 2024, through October
31, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Library Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library offers patrons the Flipster service. This product is the only resource offering current and back
issues of some of the most widely used and popular magazine titles for public libraries, such as Consumer
Reports, Time, and People. Flipster provides instant access to digital magazines through an app or a browser on
a computer or device to patrons within and outside of the library. Flipster offers highly visual and engaging
digital content across many niche and diverse topics, all in an appealing browsable format. The software is also
compatible for visually impaired patrons.
EBSCO’s License Agreement includes a limitation of liability at the amount of fees paid.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library will not be able to provide patrons with
the unique content or interface within the Flipster digital magazine service.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3222,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3223 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a
purchase order with Zoho Corporation in an amount not to exceed $7,649 for renewal of
ManageEngine ADAudit Plus subscriptions to support security monitoring and auditing of library user
accounts, for the period August 4, 2024 through August 3, 2027. (100% Library Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Purchase Order with Zoho Corporation for ManageEngine ADAudit Plus Subscriptions
through August 3, 2027
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase
order with Zoho Corporation in an amount not to exceed $7,649 for the renewal of ManageEngine ADAudit
Plus subscriptions, subject to the terms of Zoho Corporation’s Software License Agreement for the period
August 4, 2024, through August 3, 2027.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Library Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library uses ManageEngine ADaudit for monitoring and auditing Active Directory, file server and
Windows servers. This product sends out daily reports and notifies the Library Automation Department about
changes to user accounts, Active Directory changes, sensitive file changes, server access and failed login
attempts. All this helps monitor for cybersecurity and malware attacks.
Zoho Corporation’s Software License Agreement includes a limitation of liability capping liability at the
amount of fees paid in the prior 12 months, approved by County Counsel.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library’s IT operations will not be able to
function as they have been. Minimal preventive monitoring of Active Directory for Cybersecurity or Malware
would take place if ADaduit if not renewed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3223,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3224 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/18/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a
purchase order with Global Online Learning Services, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $6,000 for the
renewal of Off2Class subscriptions, for the period August 1, 2024 through July 31, 2025. (100%
Library Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Purchase Order with Global Online Learning Services Inc., for Off2Class Subscriptions
through July 31, 2025
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase
order with Global Online Learning Services Inc, subject to the terms of their Website Terms and Conditions of
Use, in an amount not to exceed $6,000 for the renewal of Off2Class subscriptions, for the period August 1,
2024, through July 31, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Library Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library offers patrons Off2Class services. This product offers online English lessons for use by tutors and
learners in the Library’s Project Second Chance adult literacy program.
Global Online Learning Services Inc.’s Website Terms and Conditions of Use include limitation of liability
provisions and indemnification language, approved by County Counsel.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library will not be able to provide tutors and
learners in the Project Second Chance adult literacy program with online English lessons.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3224,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3225 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a
purchase order with EBSCO Information Services, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $11,379 for the
renewal of LearningExpress Library Complete subscription, for the period October 1, 2024 through
June 30, 2025. (100% Library Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Alison McKee, County Librarian
Report Title:Purchase Order with EBSCO Information Services, LLC for LearningExpress Library
Complete Subscriptions through June 30, 2025
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Purchasing Agent to execute, on behalf of the County Librarian, a purchase
order with EBSCO Information Services, LLC, subject to the terms of EBSCO’s License Agreement, in an
amount not to exceed $11,379 for the renewal of LearningExpress Library Complete subscription, which
provides resources for learning and skills building to patrons, for the period October 1, 2024, through June 30,
2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Library Fund.
BACKGROUND:
The Library offers patrons the use of LearningExpress Library Complete. This product contains the highest
quality resources for learning, skills-building, and test preparation, all in one easy-to-use online platform. The
product’s extensive array of resources includes eBooks, online practice tests, interactive tutorials, microlessons,
articles, and flashcards. Organized into targeted learning centers, LearningExpress supports those looking to
improve core academic skills, pass a high school equivalency test, prepare for college, explore careers, join the
military, study for occupational certification tests, become a U.S. citizen, and much more.
EBSCO’s License Agreement includes an indemnification from the County to EBSCO, as well as a limitation
of liability at the amount of fees paid.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3225,Version:1
If the Purchase Order is not approved, the Contra Costa County Library will not be able to provide patrons with
online access to a comprehensive, interactive online learning platform of practice tests, tutorial course series,
and online job search tools.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3174 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE Budget Amendment No. BDA-24-00510 authorizing new revenue in the amount of $70,000
from the Public Defender's Office and appropriating it to the Public Works - ISF Fleet Services Fund
for the purchase of two vehicles for the Client Services Program (100% General Fund)
Attachments:1. BDA-24-00510.pdf
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Ellen McDonnell, Public Defender
Report Title:Purchase of two vehicles for the Public Defender’s Client Services Program
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Public Defender’s Office (0243)/Public Works - ISF Fleet Services (0064): APPROVE Budget Amendment No.
BDA-24-00510 authorizing new revenue in the amount of $70,000 from the Public Defender (0243) and
appropriating it to Public Works - ISF Fleet Services (0064) for the purchase of two vehicles for the Client
Services Program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This action increases revenue in Public Works - ISF Fleet Services (0064) and reduces appropriations by
$70,000 out of the Public Defender’s general funds (2909/4953).
BACKGROUND:
The Public Defender’s Client Services Program provides and enhances integrated programs and services for
successful reentry of the Department’s adult and youth clients. The social workers under this program are in
need of vehicles to effectively meet with clients, their families and support systems, and resource agencies in
order to link our clients with the necessary community-based services and resources.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this purchase is not approved, the Public Defender’s social workers will be required to find alternate ways to
meet with clients and community-based agencies, which may jeopardize the Department’s ability to support our
clients.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3174,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
View Budget Amendment: Budget
Amendment: FY 2024-25 - Operating Budget
on 09/11/2024 : BDA-24-00510
09:11 AM
09/24/2024
Page 1 of 2
Company Contra Costa County
Budget Template Operating Budget : FY 2024-25 Operating Budget
Budget FY 2024-25 Operating Budget
Organizing Dimension Type
Amendment ID BDA-24-00510
Amendment Date 09/11/2024
Description Transfer of funds to ISF for purchase of 2 vehicles
Amendment Type Appropriation / Estimated Revenue Adjustment
Balanced Amendment Yes
Entry Type Mid-Year Adjustments
Status In Progress
Budget Amendment Entries
Period *Ledger Account/Summary Home Organization *Cost Center *Fund Debit Amount Credit Amount Memo Exceptions
FY 2024-25 Year
(FY 2024-25
Operating Budget)
5011:REIMBURSEMENTS-GOV/GOV 2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL (Home
Org)
2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL
100300
GENERAL
$70,000.00 $0.00 Transfer of
funds to ISF
for purchase
of 2 vehicles
Warning : - Home
Org on Budget
Line Not Equal
Initiator's Home
Org
FY 2024-25 Year
(FY 2024-25
Operating Budget)
9951:REIMBURSEMENTS - GOV/GOV 2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL (Home
Org)
4284 VEHICLE
REPLACEMENT
150100
FLEET ISF
$0.00 $70,000.00 Transfer of
funds to ISF
for purchase
of 2 vehicles
Warning : - Home
Org on Budget
Line Not Equal
Initiator's Home
Org
FY 2024-25 Year
(FY 2024-25
Operating Budget)
4953:AUTOS & TRUCKS 2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL (Home
Org)
4284 VEHICLE
REPLACEMENT
150100
FLEET ISF
$70,000.00 $0.00 Transfer of
funds to ISF
for purchase
of 2 vehicles
Warning : - Home
Org on Budget
Line Not Equal
Initiator's Home
Org
FY 2024-25 Year
(FY 2024-25
Operating Budget)
4953:AUTOS & TRUCKS 2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL (Home
Org)
2909 PUB
DEFEND ADULT
CRIMINAL
100300
GENERAL
$0.00 $70,000.00 Transfer of
funds to ISF
for purchase
of 2 vehicles
Warning : - Home
Org on Budget
Line Not Equal
Initiator's Home
Org
FY24-25 Vehicle and Equipment Request 1.pdf
File Name FY24-25 Vehicle and Equipment Request 1.pdf
Content Type application/pdf
Updated By Susan Woodhouse
Upload Date 09/11/2024 04:17:25 PM
Comment
FY24-25 Vehicle and Equipment Request 2.pdf
File Name FY24-25 Vehicle and Equipment Request 2.pdf
View Budget Amendment: Budget
Amendment: FY 2024-25 - Operating Budget
on 09/11/2024 : BDA-24-00510
09:11 AM
09/24/2024
Page 2 of 2
Content Type application/pdf
Updated By Susan Woodhouse
Upload Date 09/11/2024 04:17:25 PM
Comment
Process History
Process Step Status Completed On Due Date Person (Up to 5)All Persons Comment
Budget Amendment Event Budget Amendment
Event
Step Completed 09/11/2024 04:17:26
PM
09/12/2024 Susan Woodhouse 1
Budget Amendment Event Review Budget
Amendment
Not Required 09/12/2024 0
Budget Amendment Event Approval by
Department Approver
– Budget Amendment
Sent Back 09/13/2024 06:16:08
PM
Ellen McDonnell
(Department Approver –
Budget Amendment)
1 Send Back Reason
from Ellen McDonnell:
At your request
Budget Amendment Event Budget Amendment
Event
Submitted 09/16/2024 08:53:01
AM
09/12/2024 Susan Woodhouse 1
Budget Amendment Event Review Budget
Amendment
Not Required 09/12/2024 0
Budget Amendment Event Approval by
Department Approver
– Budget Amendment
Approved 09/19/2024 02:47:17
PM
Ellen McDonnell
(Department Approver –
Budget Amendment)
1
Budget Amendment Event Approval by Budget
Specialist (Auditor
Office)
Awaiting Action Analiza Pinlac (Budget
Specialist (Auditor
Office))
3
Xia Zhang (Budget
Specialist (Auditor
Office))
Yesenia Campos
(Budget Specialist
(Auditor Office))
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
339
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-339 declaring October 2024 as Creek and Channel Safety Awareness
Month, ACCEPT the status report from the Public Works Department and the Flood Control and Water
Conservation District on the Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program, and DIRECT the Public
Works Department and the Flood Control and Water Conservation District to continue with
implementation and the annual campaign of a Countywide sustainable Creek and Channel Safety
Awareness Program, as recommended by the Chief Engineer, Flood Control and Water Conservation
District, Countywide. (100% Flood Control Zone 3B Funds)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month and its Associated Program, Countywide. Project
No. 7520-6B8311
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution declaring October 2024 as Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month; and
ACCEPT the following status report from the Public Works Department and the Contra Costa County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District (FC District)on the Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program
(CCSAP); and
DIRECT the Public Works Department and the FC District to continue with implementation and the annual
campaign of a Countywide sustainable Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program,including a follow-up
report to this Board in one year.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Annual notices,outreach,and maintenance of safety features for this year is estimated to cost $45,000 and will
be funded by Flood Control Zone 3B.
BACKGROUND:
On March 1,2011,the Board of Supervisors directed the FC District to develop a sustainable and impactful
outreach program to promote creek and channel safety throughout the County,after the drowning of two high
school students in the Walnut Creek channel.In response,the FC District formed a CCSAP team that developed
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-339,Version:1
a strategy to achieve this goal.
On October 4,2011,the Board declared October 2011 as the first Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month,
accepted the status report from the FC District on the CCSAP,approved the implementation plan,and directed
the FC District to continue with implementation and initiation of an annual campaign of a sustainable CCSAP,
including a follow-up report to the Board in one year.
Every year since then,the Board of Supervisors has received and approved a status report on the Annual
CCSAP and declared October as Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month.
The FC District refreshes warning stencils and signs in our facilities,and ensures gates and fences are secured
as needed throughout the year.In November 2023,the FC District continued its annual outreach to schools,
working directly with Walnut Creek Intermediate (WCI)on in-person events.The FC District equipped
leadership students with “Stay Out,Stay Alive!”bracelets,art supplies,a demonstration from the Fire District,
which provides for fun team building activities to emphasize the importance and danger of the channel.FC
District staff gave a presentation to the Leadership students at WCI,including an overview of the Walnut Creek
watershed,which includes photos and videos of contrasting channel conditions.Students participating in 7th and
8th grade art classes created colorful posters with the overall message to “Stay Out,Stay Alive!”As in the past,
several student posters were selected by the FC District and presented to the entire student body during the
lunch hour.At this school-wide event the FC District and Fire District spoke to students about the purpose of
the channel and presented equipment needed for life saving rescues.Copies of selected posters are then
displayed along FC District channel fencing in Walnut Creek to remind people to “Stay Out, Stay Alive!”.
The Chief Engineer,FC District,recommends that the Board declare October 2024 as Creek and Channel
Safety Awareness Month,accept the above report,and direct the Public Works Department and FC District to
continue with implementation and the annual campaign of a Countywide sustainable CCSAP,including a
follow-up report to this Board in one year.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this Resolution is not adopted,members of the public may not receive important information about creek and
channel safety.
CHILDREN’S IMPACT STATEMENT:
The FC District will continue to work with the schools and youth-based groups within the County to educate
children about safety regarding creeks and flood control channels.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-339,Version:1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
IN THE MATTER OF DECLARING OCTOBER 2024 AS CREEK AND CHANNEL SAFETY AWARENESS
MONTH, COUNTYWIDE.
WHEREAS,various regional flood control channels were constructed in Contra Costa County to efficiently
drain stormwater and runoff from within the cities and towns; and
WHEREAS, in April 2010, a family lost a husband and son in the rain-swollen Walnut Creek Channel; and
WHEREAS, in February 2011, two young men drowned in the same channel; and
WHEREAS,on March 1,2011,the Board of Supervisors directed the County Public Works Department and
Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to pursue a sustainable outreach program
to educate the public on the benefits and dangers of creeks and channels; and
WHEREAS,continued education of the public about creeks and channels has been determined as the best way
to keep citizens safe and avoid future tragedies; and
WHEREAS,the Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Program (CCSAP)is now being implemented
Countywide with an annual declaration of October as Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month to remind
the public of the CCSAP.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors hereby declares
October 2024 as Creek and Channel Safety Awareness Month encouraging the public to be informed about the
benefits and dangers of creeks and channels throughout Contra Costa County.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
335
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-335 approving the Parcel Map and Subdivision Agreement for minor
subdivision MS18-00014, for a project being developed by Shelley Molineaux, as recommended by
the Public Works Director, Walnut Creek area. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:1. Parcel Map, 2. Subdivision Agreement, 3. Improvement Security Bond for Subdivision Agreement
(1), 4. Tax Letter
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Approve the Parcel Map and Subdivision Agreement for minor subdivision MS18-00014
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution approving the Parcel Map and Subdivision Agreement for minor subdivision MS18-00014,
for a project being developed by Shelley Molineaux, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Walnut
Creek area. (District IV)
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department has reviewed the conditions of approval for minor subdivision MS18-00014 and
has determined that all conditions for Parcel Map approval have been satisfied.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
The Parcel Map and Subdivision Agreement will not be approved and recorded.
c: Larry Gossett-Engineering Services, Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Theresa Shepherd-Design/Construction, Renee Hutchins-Records,
Chris Halford-Mapping, Current Planning-DCD, Shelley Molineaux, SureTec Insurance Company, Stacey Gella, Placer Title Company
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-335,Version:1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
IN THE MATTER OF: Approving the Parcel Map and Subdivision Agreement for minor subdivision MS18-
00014, for a project being developed by Shelley Molineaux, as recommended by the Public Works Director,
Walnut Creek area. (District IV)
WHEREAS, the following documents were present for board approval this date:
I.Map
The Parcel Map of minor subdivision MS18-00014, property located in the Walnut Creek area,
Supervisorial District IV, said map having been certified by the proper officials.
II.Subdivision Agreement
A subdivision agreement with Shelley A. Molineaux, principal, whereby said principal agrees to
complete all improvements as required in said subdivision agreement within 2 years from the date of
said agreement. Accompanying said subdivision agreement is security guaranteeing completion of said
improvements as follows:
A.Cash Bond
Performance amount: $1,550
Auditor’s Deposit Permit No. 898903 Date: September 10, 2024
Submitted by: Shelley Molineaux
B.Surety Bond
Bond Company: SureTec Insurance Company
Bond Number: 4463547 Date: September 4, 2024
Performance Amount: $153,450
Labor & Materials Amount: $77,500
Principal: Shelley A. Molineaux
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-335,Version:1
III.Tax Letter
Letter from the County Tax Collector stating that there are no unpaid County taxes heretofore levied on
the property included in said map and that the 2023-2024 tax lien has been paid in full, and the 2024-
2025 tax lien, which became a lien on the first day of January 2024, is estimated to be $26,520, with
security guaranteeing payment of said tax lien as follows:
·Tax Bond
Auditor’s Deposit Permit Number: 896448 Date: August 2, 2024
Amount: $26,520
Submitted by: Shelley Molineaux
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
1.That said subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
DETERMINED to be consistent with the County’s general and specific plans.
2.That said Parcel Map is APPROVED and this Board does hereby accept subject to installation
and acceptance of improvements on behalf of the public any of the streets, paths, or easements
shown thereon as dedicated to public use.
3.That said subdivision agreement is also APPROVED.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
336
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-336 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee,
to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on
December 1, 2024, from 4:00 p.m. through 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a holiday fair, Kensington
area. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Approve and Authorize to fully close a portion of Oak View Avenue on December 1, 2024, from
4:00 p.m. through 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a holiday fair, Kensington area.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion
of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on December 1, 2024, from 4:00 p.m.
through 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a holiday fair, Kensington area. (District I)
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Applicant indicates this holiday mini-fair provides a great opportunity for people to gather and helps foster a
sense of community. Applicant shall follow guidelines set forth by the Public Works Department.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Applicant will be unable to close the road for planned activities.
c: Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry-Engineering Services, Marke Smith-Engineering Services, Devon Patel-Engineering
Services, Chris Lau-Maintenance, Kensington Police Department, Zip Code East Bay
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-336,Version:1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
OF IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a
portion of Oak View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, on December 1, 2024, from 4:00
p.m. through 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a holiday fair, Kensington area. (District I)
RC24-46
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Zip Code East Bay to fully close Oak
View Avenue between Colusa Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue, except for emergency traffic, local residents, US
Postal Service and garbage trucks, on December 1, 2024, from 4:00 p.m. through 7:30 p.m., subject to the
following conditions:
1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works
Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the event area and essential services will be allowed
access as required.
2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
3.Zip Code East Bay shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra Costa County.
4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive
General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance.
5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and the Kensington Fire
Protection District.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
337
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-337 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee,
to fully close a portion of Edgecroft Road, between 49 Edgecroft Road and 59 Edgecroft Road, on
October 15, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility pole,
Kensington area. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Approve and Authorize to fully close a portion of Edgecroft Road on October 15, 2024, from
7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Kensington area.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion
of Edgecroft Road, between 49 Edgecroft Road and 59 Edgecroft Road, on October 15, 2024, from 7:00 a.m.
through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I)
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Due to the narrow road width of Edgecroft Road at the work site, Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) has
requested the road closure to replace the existing utility pole. There is insufficient road width to set up and
operate boom trucks and safely maintain through traffic. Applicant shall follow guidelines set forth by the
Public Works Department.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Applicant will be unable to close the road to complete planned utility pole replacement.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-337,Version:1
c: Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Marke Smith-Engineering Services, Devon Patel-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry-Engineering
Services, Chris Lau-Maintenance, Kensington Police Department
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a
portion of Edgecroft Road, between 49 Edgecroft Road and 59 Edgecroft Road, on October 15, 2024, from
7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility pole, Kensington area. (District I)
RC24-53
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas & Electric Company to
fully close Edgecroft Road, between 49 Edgecroft Road and 59 Edgecroft Road, except for emergency traffic,
local residents, US Postal Service and garbage trucks, on October 15, 2024, from 7:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.,
subject to the following conditions:
1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works
Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be
allowed access as required.
2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
3.Pacific Gas & Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra
Costa County.
4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive
General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance.
5.Obtain approval for the closure from the Kensington Police Department, and the Kensington Fire
Protection District.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 3
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-337,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 3 of 3
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:1RES 2024-
338
Name:
Status:Type:Consent Resolution Passed
File created:In control:9/17/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:ADOPT Resolution No. 2024-338 approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee,
to fully close a portion of McBryde Avenue, between 6072 McBryde Avenue and 6110 McBryde
Avenue, on October 16, 2024, from 7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility
pole, Richmond area. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
adoptedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To: Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Approve and Authorize to fully close a portion of McBryde Avenue on October 16, 2024, from
7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of a utility pole replacement, Richmond area.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
ADOPT Resolution approving and authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a portion
of McBryde Avenue, between 6072 McBryde Avenue and 6110 McBryde Avenue, on October 16, 2024, from
7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility pole, Richmond area. (District I)
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
Due to the narrow road width of McBryde Avenue at the work site, Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E)
has requested the road closure to replace the existing utility pole. There is insufficient road width to set up and
operate boom trucks and safely maintain through traffic. Applicant shall follow guidelines set forth by the
Public Works Department.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Applicant will be unable to close the road to complete planned utility pole replacement.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:RES 2024-338,Version:1
c: Kellen O’Connor-Engineering Services, Marke Smith-Engineering Services, Devon Patel-Engineering Services, Bob Hendry-Engineering
Services, Chris Lau-Maintenance, CHP, Sheriff-Patrol Div. Commander
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
and for Special Districts, Agencies and Authorities Governed by the Board
IN THE MATTER OF: Approving and Authorizing the Public Works Director, or designee, to fully close a
portion of McBryde Avenue, between 6072 McBryde Avenue and 6110 McBryde Avenue, on October 16, 2024,
from 7:30 a.m. through 5:30 p.m., for the purpose of replacing a utility pole, Richmond area. (District I)
RC24-54
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that permission is granted to Pacific Gas & Electric Company to
fully close McBryde Avenue, between 6072 McBryde Avenue and 6110 McBryde Avenue, except for
emergency traffic, local residents, US Postal Service and garbage trucks, on October 16, 2024, from 7:30 a.m.
through 5:30 p.m., subject to the following conditions:
1.Traffic will be detoured via roads identified in a traffic control plan, reviewed by the Public Works
Department. Emergency vehicles, residents within the construction area and essential services will be
allowed access as required.
2.All signing to be in accordance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
3.Pacific Gas & Electric Company shall comply with the requirements of the Ordinance Code of Contra
Costa County.
4.Provide the County with a Certificate of Insurance in the amount of $1,000,000.00 for Comprehensive
General Public Liability which names the County as an additional insured prior to permit issuance.
5.Obtain approval for the closure from the CHP, Sheriff’s Office, and the Contra Costa Fire Protection
District.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3176 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/12/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract with
Advanced Chemical Transport, Inc. (d/b/a ACTenviro), in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to
provide hazardous waste collection and disposal services for the period of October 1, 2024, through
September 30, 2027, Countywide. (100% Local Road and Flood Control District Funds)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:On-call contract with Advanced Chemical Transport, Inc. d/b/a ACTenviro, for hazardous waste
collection and disposal services.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a contract with Advanced
Chemical Transport,Inc.d/b/a ACTenviro,in an amount not to exceed $500,000 to provide hazardous waste
collection and disposal services for the period of October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2027, Countywide.
FISCAL IMPACT:
100% Local Road and Flood Control District Funds.
BACKGROUND:
Contra Costa County Public Works Maintenance Division maintains over 660 miles of roads,79 miles of creeks
and channels,and 29 detention basins and dams throughout Contra Costa County.This maintenance work
consists of,but is not limited to,pavement repairs and surface treatments (e.g.,crack seals,pavement patches,
thin mill and overlays,and chip seals),pavement striping and painting,as well as vegetation management using
herbicides.Hazardous waste is generated as part of this work,and existing state and federal laws require that
the generated hazardous waste be transported to permitted recycling,treatment,storage,or disposal facilities
(“TSDF”) by registered hazardous waste transporters.
On January 3,2024,the County issued a Request for Proposal (RFP)(Solicitation #2311-713)for hazardous
waste collection and disposal services.Advanced Chemical Transport,Inc.d/b/a ACTenviro was selected to
provide the services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If this contract is not executed,the hazardous waste that is generated by the Public Works Maintenance
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3176,Version:1
If this contract is not executed,the hazardous waste that is generated by the Public Works Maintenance
Division will not be collected and disposed of, which will result in non-compliance with state and federal laws.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3177 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with HCI Systems, Inc., effective November 1, 2024, to increase the payment limit by
$2,000,000 to a new payment limit of $3,000,000 and extend the term through July 31, 2026, for on-
call fire sprinkler services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (100% General Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Amendment No. 3 with HCI Systems, Inc., a California Corporation, Countywide.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a contract amendment with
HCI Systems,Inc.,effective November 1,2024,to increase the payment limit by $2,000,000 to a new payment
limit of $3,000,000 and extend the term through July 31,2026,for on-call fire sprinkler services at various
County sites and facilities, Countywide.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Facilities Maintenance Budget. (100% General Fund)
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department,Facilities Services is responsible for inspecting,maintaining,repairing,and
certifying fire sprinkler systems at various County facilities to ensure County systems are in compliance.HCI
Systems,Inc.,provides fire sprinkler repairs and certification services,including but not limited to inspections,
fire sprinkler systems,fire alarm detection and repairs,24-hour emergency service,UL Certifications,fire
extinguishers and system monitoring.
Government Code Section 31000 authorizes the County to contract for special services for building security
matters.
The Request for Proposal was originally bid on BidSync #2012-456.The Public Works Department conducted
a thorough evaluation and HCI Systems,Inc.,was one of three vendors awarded for this contract.On July 13,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3177,Version:1
a thorough evaluation and HCI Systems,Inc.,was one of three vendors awarded for this contract.On July 13,
2021,the Board approved a contract with HCI Systems,Inc.for the term August 1,2021 through July 31,2024
in the amount of $800,000.
Amendment No.1,effective March 1,2022,added fire alarm system inspection services to the service plan.
Amendment No.2,effective January 9,2024,increased the payment limit to $1,000,000 and extended the term
through July 31, 2025.
Facilities Services is requesting Amendment No.3 with HCI Systems,Inc.to be approved,increasing the
payment limit by $2,000,000 from $1,000,000 to a new payment limit of $3,000,000 and extending the term
from July 31, 2025 to July 31, 2026 for on-call fire sprinkler services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without the approval of this Contract Amendment No.3,fire sprinkler services with HCI Systems,Inc.will
discontinue due to lack of sufficient funding, and future fire protection upgrades will not be completed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3178 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/13/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Sharjo, LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services), effective August 31, 2024, to
extend the term through August 31, 2025, with no change to the payment limit, for on-call restoration
services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide. (No fiscal impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Amendment No.1 with Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services),a California
Limited Liability Company, Countywide.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a contract amendment with
Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services),effective August 31,2024,to extend the term through
August 31,2025,with no change to the payment limit,for on-call restoration services at various County sites
and facilities, Countywide.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Facilities Maintenance Budget. (No fiscal impact)
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department,Facilities Services is responsible for the maintenance of all County sites and
facilities.On-call restoration contracts are used for emergency restoration services at County buildings which
include but are not limited to water damage,fire damage,smoke damage,mold,and asbestos remediation.
Government Code Section 25358 authorizes the County to contract for maintenance and upkeep of County
facilities.
The Public Works Department conducted a formal solicitation for on-call restoration services.The Request for
Proposal was originally bid on BidSync #2101-451.The Public Works Department conducted a thorough
evaluation and Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services)was one of three vendors awarded for
this contract.The Board approved a contract with Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services)for the
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3178,Version:1
this contract.The Board approved a contract with Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services)for the
term September 1, 2021, through August 31, 2024, in the amount of $3,000,000.
Facilities Services is requesting Amendment No.1 with Sharjo,LLC (dba ServiceMaster Restoration Services)
to be approved, extending the term from August 31, 2024, to August 31, 2025, for on-call restoration services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without the approval of this Contract Amendment No.1,restoration services with Sharjo,LLC (dba
ServiceMaster Restoration Services) will discontinue, and future projects will not be completed.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3179 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute a contract
amendment with Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec), effective July 31, 2024, to increase the payment
limit by $400,000 to a new payment limit of $1,800,000, increase the rates, and extend the term
through July 31, 2026, for structural integrated pest management services at various County sites and
facilities, Countywide. (100% General Fund)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Amendment No. 2 with Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec), a California Corporation, Countywide.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Public Works Director,or designee,to execute a contract amendment with
Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec),effective July 31,2024,to increase the payment limit by $400,000 to a new
payment limit of $1,800,000,increase the rates,and extend the term through July 31,2026,for structural
integrated pest management services at various County sites and facilities, Countywide.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Facilities Maintenance Budget. (100% General Fund)
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department,Facilities Services is responsible for managing the contract with the County’s
structural integrated pest management contractor.This program monitors the County’s efforts to control pests
while not endangering the environment.Government Code Section 31000 authorizes the County to contract for
special services.The Request for Proposal was originally bid on Bidsync #2101-447.The Public Works
Department conducted a thorough evaluation and Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec),was awarded for this
contract.
The Public Works Department awarded a three (3)year contract with the term August 1,2021 through July 31,
2024.The total contract amount awarded was $1,400,000.Amendment No.1 was approved,effective March 8,
2023, and increased rates according to the terms specified in the contract.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3179,Version:1
Facilities Services is requesting Amendment No.2 with Agurto Corporation (dba Pestec)to be approved,
adding additional funds to the payment limit,increasing the rates,and extending the term from July 31,2024,to
July 31, 2026, for structural integrated pest management services.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without the approval of this Contract Amendment No.2,the current contract with Agurto Corporation (dba
Pestec) will discontinue, and future pest management services will not be available.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3180 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/16/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE updates to Engineering Manuals used by the Public Works Department and Flood Control
and Water Conservation District, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Countywide. (No
Fiscal Impact)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Warren Lai, Public Works Director/Chief Engineer
Report Title:Engineering Manuals used by the Public Works Department and Flood Control District
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE the Public Works Department and Flood Control and Water Conservation District to use the current
versions of the appropriate engineering manuals and specifications in the course of their work,as those manuals
and specifications are superseded by County ordinance.
APPROVE that further exceptions in the application of the provision within manuals will be made from time to
time by the Public Works Director or the Director’s designee.Where a choice of standards exists,the Director,
or designee, will determine the applicable standard under the circumstances.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal Impact
BACKGROUND:
The manuals and specifications listed herein are generally accepted in California as standards in the field of
civil engineering.By recognizing their use,the Board will reduce public misunderstanding and further the
achievement of consistency in improvements plan and construction submittal.
Recognized Manuals:
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide
California Department of Water Resources, Division of Dams, Statutes and Regulations
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3180,Version:1
California Streets and Highways Code
California Vehicle Code
CalTrans Bridge Design Aids
CalTrans Bridge Design Details
CalTrans Bridge Design Specifications
CalTrans CADD User’s Manual
CalTrans Construction Manual
CalTrans Highway Design Manual
CalTrans Local Assistance Procedure Manual
CalTrans Plans Preparation Manual
CalTrans Site Best Management Practices Manual
CalTrans Standard Plans
CalTrans Standard Specifications
CalTrans Surveys Manual
CalTrans Traffic Manual
County Landscape Design, Construction, and Maintenance Standards and Guidelines
County Ordinance Code
County Standard Plans
County Standard Specifications
FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Stormwater C.3 Guidebook
Subdivision Map Act
U.S. Access Board ADA Standards
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Manuals
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Not recognizing the standards currently used by the Public Works Department and Flood Control and Water
Conservation District may lead to inconsistent staff interpretations and confusion on the part of the professional
and general public.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3181 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:9/19/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:DENY claims filed by J.J.P.H.A. (a minor); Andrea Catucci; Jorge Enrique Hortua Cuintaco; M.
Hernandez, L. Rodriguez, F. Rodriguez, and E. Hernandez; Dhondup Lhamo & Thupten Dharab;
Edgar Rene Yoc Pirir; and Jorge Zamora. DENY late claim filed by Richard Duncan.
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Monica Nino, County Administrator
Report Title:Claims
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
DENY claims filed by J.J.P.H.A. (a minor); Andrea Catucci; Jorge Enrique Hortua Cuintaco; M. Hernandez, L.
Rodriguez, F. Rodriguez, and E. Hernandez; Dhondup Lhamo & Thupten Dharab; Edgar Rene Yoc Pirir; and
Jorge Zamora. DENY late claim filed by Richard Duncan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
BACKGROUND:
DENY claims filed by J.J.P.H.A. (a minor); Andrea Catucci; Jorge Enrique Hortua Cuintaco; M. Hernandez, L.
Rodriguez, F. Rodriguez, and E. Hernandez; Dhondup Lhamo & Thupten Dharab; Edgar Rene Yoc Pirir; and
Jorge Zamora. DENY late claim filed by Richard Duncan.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Not acting on the claims could extend the claimants’ time limits to file actions against the County.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3181,Version:1
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™
1025 ESCOBAR STREET
MARTINEZ, CA 94553CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
Legislation Details (With Text)
File #: Version:124-3182 Name:
Status:Type:Consent Item Passed
File created:In control:8/30/2024 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
On agenda:Final action:10/1/2024 10/1/2024
Title:APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Mobile-Med
Work Health Solutions, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $377,429 to provide mobile occupational
health services to the Office of the Sheriff for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
(100% State)
Attachments:
Action ByDate Action ResultVer.Tally
approvedBOARD OF SUPERVISORS10/1/2024 1 Pass
To:Board of Supervisors
From:David O. Livingston, Sheriff-Coroner
Report Title:Mobile-Med Work Health Solutions, Inc.
☒Recommendation of the County Administrator ☐ Recommendation of Board Committee
RECOMMENDATIONS:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Sheriff-Coroner, or designee, to execute a contract with Mobile-Med Work
Health Solutions, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $377,429 to provide mobile occupational health services to
the Office of the Sheriff, for the period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approval of this request will result in up to $377,429 in contractual service expenditures and will be funded
100% by the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant.
BACKGROUND:
The Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff seeks to implement a mobile medical screening initiative to
assess and improve officer wellness. Mobile-Med Work Health Solutions (WHS) understands the unique
challenges public service professionals face, particularly in maintaining law enforcement personnel's health and
operational readiness. With a team of over 100 highly skilled medical professionals and a proven track record in
managing large-scale health operations, WHS combines expertise with innovative service delivery. Their
mobile team will provide personalized assessments and directly offer recommendations to officers for
behavioral and training modifications.
Mobile-Med Work Health Solutions can offer the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff a comprehensive,
adaptable solution that addresses law enforcement health needs. Their proposal leverages extensive experience,
innovative approaches and a client-focused methodology to enhance employee health, which fosters a more
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:24-3182,Version:1
effective law enforcement environment.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
If the Board does not approve, the Office of the Sheriff will lose the ability to participate in the Officer
Wellness and Mental Health Grant funded by the BSCC. This grant was funded to address physical, emotional
and/or mental health of sworn officers.
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Printed on 10/29/2024Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™