Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules  
Administrative Rules Division (ARD)  
MOAHR-Rules@michigan.gov  
REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT  
and COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (RIS)  
Agency Information:  
Department name:  
Licensing and Regulatory Affairs  
Bureau name:  
Bureau of Construction Codes  
Name of person filling out RIS:  
Tony Williamson  
Phone number of person filling out RIS:  
517-241-9303  
E-mail of person filling out RIS:  
WilliamsonT5@michigan.gov  
Rule Set Information:  
ARD assigned rule set number:  
2022-58 LR  
Title of proposed rule set:  
Rehabilitation Code  
Comparison of Rule(s) to Federal/State/Association Standard  
1. Compare the proposed rules to parallel federal rules or standards set by a state or national licensing agency or  
accreditation association, if any exist.  
There are no federal rules or standards set by a state or national licensing agency or accreditation association.  
A. Are these rules required by state law or federal mandate?  
These rules are required by state law in MCL 125.1504(5) and there is no federal mandate.  
B. If these rules exceed a federal standard, please identify the federal standard or citation, describe why it is  
necessary that the proposed rules exceed the federal standard or law, and specify the costs and benefits arising out  
of the deviation.  
There are no federal rules or standards, and these rules are required by state law in MCL 125.1504(5).  
2. Compare the proposed rules to standards in similarly situated states, based on geographic location, topography,  
natural resources, commonalities, or economic similarities.  
The proposed rules incorporate by reference the 2021 edition of the International Existing Building Code (IEBC),  
published by the International Code Council (ICC), with Michigan amendments, additions, or deletions. The  
surrounding Great Lakes states (Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin) follow the International Existing Building  
Code. Michigan’s rules look to be more stringent and follow newer codes than similar states. Pennsylvania and  
Minnesota follow the 2018 IEBC and Wisconsin follow the 2015 IEBC. In addition, it is anticipated the surrounding  
states will adopt the latest version of the IEBC, protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public, while ensuring  
sustainable human welfare.  
A. If the rules exceed standards in those states, please explain why and specify the costs and benefits arising out of  
the deviation.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 2  
The International Existing Building Code is a nationally recognized model code used through the United States as a  
minimum standard. The Michigan rules do exceed the standards of any of the other Great Lake States, (Pennsylvania,  
Minnesota and Wisconsin), because the surrounding Great Lakes states Pennsylvania and Minnesota follow the 2018  
IEBC and Wisconsin the 2015 IEBC, but it is anticipated that the surrounding states will adopt the latest version of the  
IEBC. There are costs of deviation from other Great Lakes States because the State of Michigan is using the newest  
Existing Building Code, which accounts for new technologies in existing building use and conservation. Once the  
other Great Lakes States adopt the newest Existing Building Code or newer than what they currently use, those states  
will fall into line with what Michigan is currently adopting. The State of Michigan will be at the forefront of the most  
up to date Existing Building Code. Regardless of which Existing Building Code other states use, structure owners  
within the State of Michigan only use the Existing Building Code when rehabilitating or renovating an existing  
structure. The costs the structure owner will realize is predicated upon the size of the structure. Therefore, the smaller  
the size of the renovated structure, the less it will cost that owner.  
3. Identify any laws, rules, and other legal requirements that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed  
rules.  
There are no federal, state, or local laws, rules, or other legal requirements that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict  
with the proposed rules.  
A. Explain how the rules have been coordinated, to the extent practicable, with other federal, state, and local laws  
applicable to the same activity or subject matter. This section should include a discussion of the efforts undertaken  
by the agency to avoid or minimize duplication.  
There are no federal, state, or local laws, rules, or other legal requirements that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict  
with the proposed rules.  
4. If MCL 24.232(8) applies and the proposed rules are more stringent than the applicable federally mandated  
standard, provide a statement of specific facts that establish the clear and convincing need to adopt the more  
stringent rules.  
MCL 24.232(8) does not apply to this rule set and the proposed rules are not more stringent because there are no  
federal standards. The proposed rules update the Rehabilitation code, of the Construction Code as mandated by 1972  
PA 230.  
5. If MCL 24.232(9) applies and the proposed rules are more stringent than the applicable federal standard,  
provide either the Michigan statute that specifically authorizes the more stringent rules OR a statement of the  
specific facts that establish the clear and convincing need to adopt the more stringent rules.  
MCL 24.232(9) does not apply to this rule set and the proposed rules are not more stringent because there are no  
federal standards. The proposed rules update the Rehabilitation code, of the Construction Code as mandated by 1972  
PA 230.  
Purpose and Objectives of the Rule(s)  
6. Identify the behavior and frequency of behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter.  
The proposed rules adopt the 2021 IEBC with technical provisions designed to alter the outdated existing building  
efficiency standards and provide a more energy efficient environment. The frequency of behavior due to the proposed  
rules is whenever a structure is being altered or renovated. The requirements outlined in this ruleset establish a more  
economical and environmentally friendly energy usage standard.  
A. Estimate the change in the frequency of the targeted behavior expected from the proposed rules.  
The proposed rules adopt the 2021 edition of the IEBC and will continue to establish a more progressive energy  
efficient Michigan Rehabilitation Code, allowing more flexibility while keeping current with technological  
innovations. However, there are no changes in the frequency from the current ruleset to the proposed rules, as the  
rules will continue to apply to alterations or renovations, or both, of structures.  
B. Describe the difference between current behavior/practice and desired behavior/practice.  
To comply with the requirements of the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act, the proposed rules  
adopt the updated IEBC. These adjustments will improve energy efficiency in existing buildings when required to be  
applied to the alteration, or renovation, or both, of a structure.  
C. What is the desired outcome?  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 3  
The desired outcome is to bring the Michigan Rehabilitation Code rules in line with the 2021 IEBC and to eliminate  
unnecessary requirements in the code, improve clarity, and align codes with the Michigan rules. The rules are designed  
to provide consumer safety while allowing latitude for innovation and new technologies. Overall, this code is intended  
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public from potential dangers associated with the installation and  
operation of more energy efficient existing building designs while ensuring sustainable human welfare.  
7. Identify the harm resulting from the behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter and the likelihood  
that the harm will occur in the absence of the rule.  
Without implementation of the proposed rules, the businesses would not being able to take advantage of new methods,  
materials, or technologies leading to improved existing building efficiency. The rules are designed to provide  
consumer safety while allowing latitude for innovation and new technologies. Overall, this code is intended to protect  
the health, safety, and welfare of the public from potential dangers associated with the installation and operation of  
more energy efficient existing building designs while ensuring sustainable human welfare.  
A. What is the rationale for changing the rules instead of leaving them as currently written?  
MCL 125.1504(5): The Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act requires the agency to update the  
codes not less than once every 3 years to coincide with the national code change cycle.  
8. Describe how the proposed rules protect the health, safety, and welfare of Michigan citizens while promoting a  
regulatory environment in Michigan that is the least burdensome alternative for those required to comply.  
Aligning the Michigan Rehabilitation Code with the 2021 IEBC will protect the health, safety, and welfare of  
Michigan citizens while promoting a regulatory environment that is the least burdensome alternative for those required  
to comply. These rules ensure the ongoing assessment of safety in various energy efficient measures and training of  
staff to keep current with the most updated information. The rules are designed to provide consumer safety while  
allowing latitude for innovation and new technologies. Overall, this code is intended to protect the health, safety, and  
welfare of the public from potential dangers associated with the installation and operation, while ensuring sustainable  
human welfare.  
9. Describe any rules in the affected rule set that are obsolete or unnecessary and can be rescinded.  
The following rules are unnecessary because they are outdated and will be rescinded: R 408.30556, R 408.30559, R  
408.30562, R 408.30565, R 408.30565a, R 408.30566, R 408.30568, R 408.30570, R 408.30572, R 408.30573, R  
408.30574, R 408.30575, and R 408.30576.  
Fiscal Impact on the Agency  
Fiscal impact is an increase or decrease in expenditures from the current level of expenditures, i.e. hiring additional staff,  
higher contract costs, programming costs, changes in reimbursements rates, etc. over and above what is currently  
expended for that function. It does not include more intangible costs for benefits, such as opportunity costs, the value of  
time saved or lost, etc., unless those issues result in a measurable impact on expenditures.  
10. Please provide the fiscal impact on the agency (an estimate of the cost of rule imposition or potential savings  
for the agency promulgating the rule).  
The proposed rules have no fiscal impact on the agency beyond the current operational costs.  
11. Describe whether or not an agency appropriation has been made or a funding source provided for any  
expenditures associated with the proposed rules.  
The proposed rules will not result in additional fiscal impact on the agency. Thus, there is no need for an additional  
appropriation or funding source as a result of the changes in the rules.  
12. Describe how the proposed rules are necessary and suitable to accomplish their purpose, in relationship to the  
burden(s) the rules place on individuals. Burdens may include fiscal or administrative burdens, or duplicative  
acts.  
The application of the rules and adopted IEBC is required to set the minimum standards for existing building code  
compliance, fostering better solutions for the safety and care placed upon individuals and communities in compliance  
with the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act. Although there is no administrative burden on the  
individual, each person must review expenses for the project and decide if costs match budget. There will be an  
increase in upfront costs for materials for alterations or renovations, or both, of an existing structure.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 4  
A. Despite the identified burden(s), identify how the requirements in the rules are still needed and reasonable  
compared to the burdens.  
The amendments will clarify code requirements, which will make compliance less burdensome. The individual may  
realize a net savings in existing structure costs pursuant to these requirements.  
Impact on Other State or Local Governmental Units  
13. Estimate any increase or decrease in revenues to other state or local governmental units (i.e. cities, counties,  
school districts) as a result of the rule. Estimate the cost increases or reductions for other state or local  
governmental units (i.e. cities, counties, school districts) as a result of the rule. Include the cost of equipment,  
supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs in both the initial imposition of the rule and any ongoing  
monitoring.  
Local jurisdictions with administrative enforcement of the code may incur some cost in training of inspection staff  
and would not realize any cost reduction. However, when construction is up in general, there will be increased  
revenue from permits, (re)inspections, and plan reviews. The construction market is subject to numerous outside  
influences such as: material costs, labor costs, and interest rates.  
Local jurisdictions will be required to comply with the rules when engaging in construction projects on structures  
owned by the jurisdiction. The agency has no way of knowing what the additional specific expenses will be, as each  
individual structure will be unique to the needs of the governmental unit. Overall, a person must review expenses for  
the project and decide if costs match budget. There will be an increase in upfront costs for materials for alterations,  
renovations of an existing structure.  
14. Discuss any program, service, duty, or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town, village, or school  
district by the rules.  
It is anticipated that a local government unit would incur added responsibility due to the proposed rules if a local unit  
of government has decided to administer and enforce the code under the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State  
Construction Code Act. They would be responsible for learning, understanding, and applying the new code  
accurately. However, no additional program, service, duty, or responsibility will be imposed on any city, county,  
town, village, or school district by the rule changes.  
A. Describe any actions that governmental units must take to be in compliance with the rules. This section should  
include items such as record keeping and reporting requirements or changing operational practices.  
The proposed rules would require additional or new responsibilities on behalf of governmental units to be in  
continued compliance with the rules. They would be responsible for learning, understanding, and applying the new  
code accurately, which would require training of all applicable staff.  
15. Describe whether or not an appropriation to state or local governmental units has been made or a funding  
source provided for any additional expenditures associated with the proposed rules.  
No additional appropriations for additional expenditures associated with the proposed rules have been made to state  
or local governmental units. However, $1.2T in federal grant programs through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law  
and/or the Inflation Reduction Act are available to states, local governments, and other organizations contingent upon  
the adoption of the 2021 IEBC.  
Rural Impact  
16. In general, what impact will the rules have on rural areas?  
The proposed rules affect the state of Michigan as a whole. There is no specific rural impact, rules are applicable to  
both urban and rural existing structures alike. Where allowed under the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State  
Construction Code Act, there continue to be limited agricultural exemptions under the applicable construction codes.  
Therefore, there is no specific rule impact as these rules are applicable to urban and rural existing structures alike.  
A. Describe the types of public or private interests in rural areas that will be affected by the rules.  
Pursuant to the Stille- DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act, there is an agricultural exemption to the  
applicability of the construction codes from permits and inspections for those reasons; however, any structures not  
falling under the agricultural exemption would still need to follow the code. It is unlikely that the proposed rules will  
have any impact on public or private interests in rural areas.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 5  
Environmental Impact  
17. Do the proposed rules have any impact on the environment? If yes, please explain.  
As cited in Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the ASHRAE standard  
90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan, it is expected with the adoption of the 2021 IEBC standard that there will be  
annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on average across the state and statewide CO2 emissions will be  
reduced by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative)  
The adoption of the 2021 IEBC includes expanded allowances for the use of mass timber construction. Wood is a  
natural, renewable, and sustainable material for existing structures. According to the Wood Products Council and  
American Wood Council, maximizing wood use in both residential and commercial construction across the United  
States could remove an estimated 21 million tons of C02 from the atmosphere annually—equal to taking 4.4 million  
cars off the road. Additionally, the use of wood products helps ensure healthy, resilient forests. According to an  
analysis by Dovetail Partners mass timber and other building innovations can reduce emissions by 68% based on a  
whole life analysis of a mass timber building over a 60-year life span.  
Small Business Impact Statement  
18. Describe whether and how the agency considered exempting small businesses from the proposed rules.  
Because the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act does not allow for exemption of small  
businesses from the Michigan Rehabilitation Code, the agency has no authority to exempt small businesses from the  
proposed rules.  
19. If small businesses are not exempt, describe (a) the manner in which the agency reduced the economic impact  
of the proposed rules on small businesses, including a detailed recitation of the efforts of the agency to comply  
with the mandate to reduce the disproportionate impact of the rules upon small businesses as described below (in  
accordance with MCL 24.240(1)(a-d)), or (b) the reasons such a reduction was not lawful or feasible.  
The agency was obligated to follow the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act, which is  
applicable to scenario “(b) the reason such a reduction was not lawful or feasible,” as the act did not provide for such  
an exemption.  
A. Identify and estimate the number of small businesses affected by the proposed rules and the probable effect on  
small businesses.  
According to the most current federal data available, Michigan has 765,487 small businesses. These businesses will  
be affected by this rule set only if existing structure construction or renovations occur needing permits and inspection  
approvals regarding the proposed rules. Small businesses may incur higher upfront costs, but these expenses will be  
offset by the long-term financial savings because of this ruleset.  
B. Describe how the agency established differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables for small  
businesses under the rules after projecting the required reporting, record-keeping, and other administrative costs.  
The agency did not establish differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables for small businesses as the  
agency was obligated to follow the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act, which applies to all  
structures, regardless of the size of the business owning the structure or contracting for improvements of the  
structure.  
C. Describe how the agency consolidated or simplified the compliance and reporting requirements for small  
businesses and identify the skills necessary to comply with the reporting requirements.  
The agency did not establish consolidated or simplified the compliance and reporting requirements for small  
businesses, as the agency was obligated to follow the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single State Construction Code Act,  
which applies to all structures, regardless of the size of the business owning the structure or contracting for  
improvements of the structure.  
D. Describe how the agency established performance standards to replace design or operation standards required  
by the proposed rules.  
R 408.30551 adopts by reference the 2021 IEBC, which is a nationally recognized model code. For that reason, the  
agency need not establish performance standards, as the design and operation standards are established through the  
2021 IEBC.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 6  
20. Identify any disproportionate impact the proposed rules may have on small businesses because of their size or  
geographic location.  
The impact of these proposed rules will be directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a  
small business chooses to design. The larger the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the  
material costs and other associate expenses will incur. The proposed changes to the rules have a disproportionate  
impact on small businesses engaged in existing structure construction in the three different climate zones defined in  
the IEBC, with each climate zone having its own unique existing structure requirements (installation) effect cost  
because of their size or geographical location. Small businesses located in climate zone 5 (southern lower peninsula)  
will have lower compliance costs than small businesses located in climate zone 7 (upper peninsula) due to the  
environmental differences in the climate zones.  
21. Identify the nature of any report and the estimated cost of its preparation by small businesses required to  
comply with the proposed rules.  
There are no increased costs of preparing reports to small businesses, or requirements mandating completion of  
reports with the proposed rules.  
22. Analyze the costs of compliance for all small businesses affected by the proposed rules, including costs of  
equipment, supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs.  
The agency was able to determine variables to estimate compliance costs utilizing the PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan. In particular, the size of the existing structure, or  
its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the small business. Additionally, inflationary costs and specific  
material selections will factor into the expenses for the small business. The impact of these proposed rules will be  
directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a small business chooses to design. The larger  
the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the material costs and other associate expenses  
will incur. It is likely that any increase in cost will be passed along from the small business engaged in the existing  
structure construction project to the owner contracting for the project. Owners will incur upfront, higher costs, but  
these expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this ruleset. The following are impacts  
due to the proposed rules, but are not limited to the list below:  
Standard 90.1-2019 will provide an annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on average across the state.  
In 2023, the state issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As the state is the permitting  
authority for approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the statewide number of permits is  
approximately 67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. The estimated annual energy cost savings  
for these projects under the proposed rules equates to $6,887,034.  
It will reduce statewide CO2 emissions by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative), equivalent to the CO2 emissions of  
2,182,000 cars driven for one year.  
Updating the state rehabilitation code and energy code based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will also  
stimulate the creation of high-quality jobs across the state.  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 is expected to result in buildings that are energy efficient, more affordable  
to own and operate, and based on current industry standards for health, comfort, and resilience.  
Early investment in energy efficiency will pay dividends to residents of Michigan for years into the future.  
When an existing building is updated to a more stringent energy code, there is the long-term benefit of the ratepayer  
paying lower utility bills.  
Regulated small businesses may incur training costs for existing building code continuing education courses with  
fees ranging from free to $400.00 from ASHRAE. If the regulated small businesses desire use of the code book, a fee  
of $77.50 will be required for the rehabilitation code. The agency leaves it to the discretion of the regulated small  
businesses to choose how they obtain their training.  
23. Identify the nature and estimated cost of any legal, consulting, or accounting services that small businesses  
would incur in complying with the proposed rules.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 7  
There is no anticipated change to the nature and estimated cost of any legal, consulting, or accounting services that  
small businesses would incur in complying with the proposed changes to the rules.  
24. Estimate the ability of small businesses to absorb the costs without suffering economic harm and without  
adversely affecting competition in the marketplace.  
It is likely that any increase in cost will be passed along from the small business engaged in the existing structure  
construction project to the owner contracting for the project. Owners will incur upfront, higher costs, but these  
expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this rule set. It is assumed all builders who are  
small businesses pass the costs along to the building owner; therefore, competition would not be impacted.  
25. Estimate the cost, if any, to the agency of administering or enforcing a rule that exempts or sets lesser  
standards for compliance by small businesses.  
There are no rules that exempt or set lesser standards for compliance by small businesses. If the agency were to  
administer or enforce a rule that exempted or set lesser standards for compliance by small businesses the agency  
would incur some cost in training of inspection staff. Based on the current number of staff who would need to be  
trained, the estimated cost would be approximately $2,195.00 (average of $43.90 per hour times for 50 people).  
26. Identify the impact on the public interest of exempting or setting lesser standards of compliance for small  
businesses.  
There is no public interest at play as it relates to exempting standards of compliance for small businesses. To  
maintain the integrity, security, and fairness of businesses conducted in Michigan, all businesses must be held to the  
same compliance, and exempting small businesses or setting lesser standards of compliance is not an option for fair  
and equal businesses practices. The code is applied uniformly across the state to ensure all jurisdictions are providing  
for the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Setting lesser standards of compliance for small businesses would  
negatively impact the safety of structures rehabilitated by the small businesses and therefore the occupants of those  
structures.  
27. Describe whether and how the agency has involved small businesses in the development of the proposed rules.  
The agency involved small businesses through the Code/Rule Change Proposal Form, and rules review committee  
process.  
A. If small businesses were involved in the development of the rules, please identify the business(es).  
The agency received no code/rule change proposal form from any small business participation on the committee  
included plumbing, electrical, and mechanical contractors, building inspectors, residential builders, energy rating  
companies, professional engineers, small home, and residential builders.  
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Rules (independent of statutory impact)  
28. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the rule amendments on businesses or groups.  
The agency was able to determine variables to estimate compliance costs utilizing the PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan. In particular, the size of the existing structure, or  
its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the business or groups. Additionally, inflationary costs and  
specific material selections, will factor into the expenses for the businesses or groups. The impact of these proposed  
rules will be directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a business or group chooses to  
design. The larger the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the material costs and other  
associate expenses will incur. Any business or group already established in a preexisting structure or moves into a  
preexisting structure will derive no impact by these proposed rules. Businesses or groups will incur upfront, higher  
costs, but these expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this rule set. Overall, the agency  
has no way of knowing what the additional specific expenses will be, as each individual structure will be unique to  
the needs. The following are impacts due to the proposed rules, but are not limited to the list below:  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will provide an annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on  
average across the state. In 2023, the state issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As  
the state is the permitting authority for approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the  
statewide number of permits is approximately 67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. The  
estimated annual energy cost savings for these projects under the proposed rules equates to $6,887,034.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 8  
It will reduce statewide CO2 emissions by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative), equivalent to the CO2 emissions of  
2,182,000 cars driven for one year.  
Updating the state energy code based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will also stimulate the creation of  
high-quality jobs across the state.  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 is expected to result in buildings that are energy efficient, more affordable  
to own and operate, and based on current industry standards for health, comfort, and resilience.  
Early investment in energy efficiency will pay dividends to residents of Michigan for years into the future.  
When an existing structure is updated to a more stringent energy code, there is the long-term benefit of the ratepayer  
paying lower utility bills.  
For owners, the size of the existing structure, or its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the individual.  
The PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan indicates cost of  
the material is based on the project size and scope, only if the cause for alterations or renovations, or both, of an  
existing structure is required. Additionally, inflationary costs and specific material selections will factor into the  
expenses for the individual. According to the PNNL analysis, these costs would be offset through life-cycle cost  
savings as indicated in the chart below.  
Cost estimates were developed for the differences between ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 and Standard  
90.1-2019 as implemented in the six prototype models. Costs for the initial construction include material, labor,  
commissioning, construction equipment, overhead and profit. Costs were also estimated for replacing equipment or  
components at the end of the useful life. The costs were developed at the national level for the national cost-  
effectiveness analysis and then adjusted for local conditions using a state construction cost index (Hart et al. 2019,  
Means 2020a,b).  
Table 5 shows incremental initial cost for individual building types in state-specific climate zones and weighted  
average costs by climate zone and building type for moving to ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1- 2019 from  
Standard 90.1-2016.  
The added construction cost can be negative for some building types, which represents a reduction in first costs and a  
savings that is included in the net Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) savings. This is typically due to the interaction between  
measures and situations such as the following:  
Fewer light fixtures are required when the allowed lighting power is reduced. Also, changes from fluorescent to LED  
technology result in reduced lighting costs in many cases and longer lamp lives, requiring fewer lamp replacements.  
Smaller heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment sizes can result from the lowering of heating  
and cooling loads due to other efficiency measures, such as better building envelopes. For example,  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 has more stringent fenestration U-factors for some climate zones. This  
results in smaller equipment and distribution systems, resulting in a negative first cost.  
Table 5. Incremental Construction Cost for Michigan ($/ft2)  
Climate Zone Small Office Large Office Stand-Alone Retail Primary School Small Hotel Mid-Rise  
Apartment All Building Types  
5A  
6A  
7
($1.748)($2.029)  
($1.728)($2.008)  
($1.667)($1.992)  
($1.363)  
($1.305)  
($1.299)  
($2.042)  
($2.053)  
($2.055)  
($1.305) ($2.053)  
$0.666  
$0.675  
$0.714  
$0.680  
($0.381) ($1.013)  
($0.444)($1.196)  
($0.612)($1.227)  
($0.452)($1.198)  
State Average ($1.722)($2.008)  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 9  
In 2023, the state issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As the state is the permitting  
authority for approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the statewide number of permits is  
approximately 67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. Using the above data from PNNL the  
statewide incremental construction cost equates to a life-cycle net savings of approximately $130,962,964 across  
building types and climate zones.  
A. Identify the businesses or groups who will be directly affected by, bear the cost of, or directly benefit from the  
proposed rules.  
The businesses and groups who will be directly affected by the proposed rules are those entities who renovate an  
existing structure to work in or renovate an existing structure. Also, contractors will be affected by these proposed  
rules because they will be hired to construct pursuant to the existing structure requirements. The businesses or groups  
who will directly benefit from the proposed rules will be the individuals producing the energy products, building  
contractors, and timber supply and processing businesses because they will be able to profit through the hired work  
to be performed based upon the rehabilitation code requirements. Additionally, structure owners will realize an  
energy costs savings long-term, as these standards are implemented through existing structure renovations. The  
individuals who will renovate an existing structure will bear the cost of the new standards.  
B. What additional costs will be imposed on businesses and other groups as a result of these proposed rules (i.e.  
new equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping)? Please identify the types and number of businesses  
and groups. Be sure to quantify how each entity will be affected.  
The impact of these proposed rules will be directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a  
small business chooses to design. The larger the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the  
material costs and other associate expenses. Any small business already established in a preexisting structure or that  
moves into a preexisting structure will derive no impact by these proposed rules. Businesses will incur higher upfront  
costs, but these expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this rule set. In particular, the  
size of the existing structure, or its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the business deriving from  
inflationary costs and specific material selections factoring into the expenses for the business. There are over 61,000  
skilled trade licensees who will be impacted. As cited in PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard  
90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan. The following are impacts due to the proposed rules, but impacts are not limited  
to the list below:  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will provide an annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on  
average across the state.  
It will reduce statewide CO2 emissions by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative), equivalent to the CO2 emissions of  
2,182,000 cars driven for one year.  
Updating the state rehabilitation code based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will also stimulate the  
creation of high-quality jobs across the state.  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 is expected to result in buildings that are energy efficient, more affordable  
to own and operate, and based on current industry standards for health, comfort, and resilience.  
Early investment in energy efficiency will pay dividends to residents of Michigan for years into the future.  
Table 3. Annual Energy Cost Savings for Michigan ($/ft2)  
Climate Zone Small Office Large Office Stand-Alone RetailPrimary SchoolSmall HotelMid-Rise ApartmentAll  
Building Types  
5A  
$0.048  
$0.058  
$0.096  
$0.072  
$0.082  
$0.019  
$0.073  
6A  
$0.048  
$0.057  
$0.082  
$0.073  
$0.079  
$0.021  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 10  
$0.062  
$0.067  
State Average $0.048  
$0.063  
7
$0.052  
$0.057  
$0.057  
$0.074  
$0.081  
$0.072  
$0.073  
$0.066  
$0.077  
$0.030  
$0.021  
Jobs Creation through Energy Efficiency  
Energy-efficient building codes impact job creation through two primary value streams:  
Dollars returned to the economy through reduction in utility bills and resulting increase in disposable income, and;  
An increase in construction-related activities associated with the incremental cost of construction that is required to  
produce a more energy efficient building.  
Residential builders and skilled trades licensees may incur training costs for rehabilitation code continuing education  
courses, which typically cost $400.00 from qualified training organizations. If the residential builder or skilled trade  
licensee desired the use of the code book, a fee of $77.50 will be required for the rehabilitation code. The agency  
leaves it to the discretion of the residential builders and skilled trades licensees to choose how they obtain their  
training. There are over 54,000 licensed residential builders and over 61,000 skilled trades licensees in this state who  
will be impacted.  
29. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the proposed rules on individuals (regulated individuals or  
the public). Include the costs of education, training, application fees, examination fees, license fees, new  
equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping.  
Regulated individuals may incur training costs for existing building code continuing education courses with fees  
ranging from free to $400.00 from qualified training organizations. The 2021 IEBC essentials course offered by ICC  
online costs $198.00 for non-members. If the regulated individual desires use of the code book, a fee of $77.50 will  
be required for the rehabilitation code. The agency leaves it to the discretion of the regulated individual to choose  
how they obtain their training. Estimated statewide compliance costs, assuming all regulated individuals take a  
course and purchase a code book is $28,750,000. The qualitative effect will be to improve licensee knowledge of the  
code, as well as new technologies and techniques derived when completing training. In addition, in 2023, the state  
issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As the state is the permitting authority for  
approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the statewide number of permits is approximately  
67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. The estimated annual existing building cost savings for  
these projects under the proposed rules equates to $6,887,034.  
A. How many and what category of individuals will be affected by the rules?  
It is anticipated that approximately 54,000 licensed residential builders and 61,000 skilled trades licensees and other  
regulated individuals (including architects and engineers) will be affected by these proposed rules, but only when  
existing structures renovations are contracted for. An estimated 15,546 homeowners engaged in renovation projects  
will be impacted through the requirement for the projects to be completed in compliance with the rules and the  
adopted code.  
B. What qualitative and quantitative impact do the proposed changes in rules have on these individuals?  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 11  
Regulated individuals may incur training costs for existing building code continuing education courses with fees  
ranging from free to $400.00 from qualified training organizations. The 2021 IEBC essentials course offered by ICC  
online costs $198.00 for non-members. If the regulated individual desires use of the code book, a fee of $77.50 will  
be required for the rehabilitation code.? The agency leaves it to the discretion of the regulated individual to choose  
how they obtain their training. Estimated statewide compliance costs, assuming all regulated individuals take a  
course and purchase a code book is $28,750,000. The qualitative effect will be to improve licensee knowledge of the  
code, as well as new technologies and techniques derived when completing training. In addition, in 2023, the state  
issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As the state is the permitting authority for  
approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the statewide number of permits is approximately  
67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. The estimated annual building cost savings for these  
projects under the proposed rules equates to $6,887,034.  
According to PNNL, energy-efficient building codes impact job creation through two primary value streams:  
1. Dollars returned to the economy through reduction in utility bills and resulting increase in disposable income, and;  
2. An increase in construction-related activities associated with the incremental cost of construction that is required to  
produce a more energy efficient building.  
30. Quantify any cost reductions to businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or governmental units as a result  
of the proposed rules.  
If the aforementioned groups stay within their existing building, and never make changes, they will neither incur  
costs nor realize savings based on this new set of rules. The cost reductions will depend upon if the individual,  
business, group of individuals renovate an existing structure where they are located. As cited in PNNL Cost-  
Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan. The following are results of cost  
reductions due the proposed rules, but are not limited to following listed below:  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will provide an annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on  
average across the state.  
It will reduce statewide CO2 emissions by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative), equivalent to the CO2 emissions of  
2,182,000 cars driven for one year.  
Updating the state rehabilitation code based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will also stimulate the  
creation of high-quality jobs across the state.  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 is expected to result in buildings that are energy efficient, more affordable  
to own and operate, and based on current industry standards for health, comfort, and resilience.  
Early investment in energy efficiency will pay dividends to residents of Michigan for years into the future.  
When an existing building is updated to a more stringent energy code, there is the long-term benefit of the ratepayer  
paying lower utility bills.  
31. Estimate the primary and direct benefits and any secondary or indirect benefits of the proposed rules. Please  
provide both quantitative and qualitative information, as well as your assumptions.  
The agency was able to determine variables to estimate compliance costs utilizing the PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan. In particular, the size of the existing structure, or  
its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the business or groups. Additionally, inflationary costs and  
specific material selections will factor into the expenses for the businesses or groups. The impact of these proposed  
rules will be directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a business or group chooses to  
design. The larger the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the material costs and other  
associate expenses. Any business or group already established in a preexisting structure or moves into a preexisting  
structure will derive no impact by these proposed rules. Businesses or groups will incur upfront, higher costs, but  
these expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this ruleset. While each individual  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 12  
structure will be unique based on the needs of the occupant, the following are impacts due to the proposed rules, but  
are not limited to the list below:  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will provide an annual energy cost savings of $0.063 per square foot on  
average across the state. In 2023, the state issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As  
the state is the permitting authority for approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the  
statewide number of permits is approximately 67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. The  
estimated annual energy cost savings for these projects under the proposed rules equates to $6,887,034.  
It will reduce statewide CO2 emissions by 10.0 MMT (30 years cumulative), equivalent to the CO2 emissions of  
2,182,000 cars driven for one year.  
Updating the state energy code based on ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 will also stimulate the creation of  
high-quality jobs across the state.  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 is expected to result in buildings that are energy efficient, more affordable  
to own and operate, and based on current industry standards for health, comfort, and resilience.  
Early investment in energy efficiency will pay dividends to residents of Michigan for years into the future.  
When an existing building is updated to a more stringent energy code, there is the long-term benefit of the ratepayer  
paying lower utility bills.  
Regulated individuals may incur training costs for rehabilitation code continuing education courses with fees ranging  
from free to $400.00 from qualified training organizations. The 2021 IEBC essentials course offered by ICC online  
costs $198.00 for non-members. If the regulated individual desires use of the code book, a fee of $77.50 will be  
required for the rehabilitation code. The agency leaves it to the discretion of the regulated individual to choose how  
they obtain their training. Estimated statewide compliance costs, assuming all regulated individuals take a course and  
purchase a code book is $28,750,00. The qualitative effect will be to improve licensee knowledge of the code, as  
well as new technologies and techniques derived when completing training. This data is based on the assumption that  
all licensees pursue training on the updated code and purchase a code book.  
The businesses and groups who will be directly affected by the proposed rules are those entities who renovate an  
existing structure. Also, contractors will be affected by these proposed rules because they will be hired to construct  
pursuant to the existing building requirements. The businesses or groups who will directly benefit from the proposed  
rules will be the individuals producing the energy products, building contractors, and timber supply and processing  
businesses because they will be able to profit through the hired work to be performed based upon the existing  
building code requirements. Additionally, structure owners will realize an energy costs savings long-term, as these  
standards are implemented through existing structure renovations. The individuals who will renovate an existing  
structure will bear the cost of the new standards.  
It is anticipated that approximately 54,000 licensed residential builders and 61,000 skilled trades licensees and other  
regulated individuals (including architects and engineers) will be affected by these proposed rules, but only when  
existing structures renovations are contracted for. An estimated 15,546 homeowners engaged in renovation projects  
will be impacted through the requirement for the projects to be completed in compliance with the rules and the  
adopted code.  
For owners, the size of the existing structure, or its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the individual.  
The PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan indicates cost of  
the material is based on the project size and scope. Additionally, inflationary costs and specific material selections  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 13  
will factor into the expenses for the project. According to the PNNL analysis, these costs would be offset through life  
-cycle cost savings as indicated in the chart below.  
Cost estimates were developed for the differences between ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 and Standard  
90.1-2019 as implemented in the six prototype models. Costs for the initial construction include material, labor,  
commissioning, construction equipment, overhead, and profit. Costs were also estimated for replacing equipment or  
components at the end of the useful life. The costs were developed at the national level for the national cost-  
effectiveness analysis and then adjusted for local conditions using a state construction cost index (Hart et al. 2019,  
Means 2020a,b).  
Table 5 shows incremental initial cost for individual building types in state-specific climate zones and weighted  
average costs by climate zone and building type for moving to ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1- 2019 from  
Standard 90.1-2016.  
The added construction cost can be negative for some building types, which represents a reduction in first costs and a  
savings that is included in the net Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) savings. This is typically due to the interaction between  
measures and situations such as the following:  
Fewer light fixtures are required when the allowed lighting power is reduced. Also, changes from fluorescent to LED  
technology result in reduced lighting costs in many cases and longer lamp lives, requiring fewer lamp replacements.  
Smaller heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment sizes can result from the lowering of heating  
and cooling loads due to other efficiency measures, such as better building envelopes. For example,  
ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 has more stringent fenestration U-factors for some climate zones. This  
results in smaller equipment and distribution systems, resulting in a negative first cost.  
Table 5. Incremental Construction Cost for Michigan ($/ft2)  
Climate Zone Small Office Large Office Stand-Alone Retail Primary School Small Hotel Mid-Rise  
Apartment All Building Types  
5A  
6A  
7
($1.748)($2.029)  
($1.728)($2.008)  
($1.667)($1.992)  
($1.363)  
($1.305)  
($1.299)  
($2.042)  
($2.053)  
($2.055)  
($1.305) ($2.053)  
$0.666  
$0.675  
$0.714  
$0.680  
($0.381) ($1.013)  
($0.444)($1.196)  
($0.612)($1.227)  
($0.452)($1.198)  
State Average ($1.722)($2.008)  
In 2023, the state issued 2,021 permits applying to approximately 3,279,540 square feet. As the state is the permitting  
authority for approximately 3% of the municipalities in the state, it is assumed the statewide number of permits is  
approximately 67,367 applying to approximately 109,318,000 square feet. Using the above data from PNNL the  
statewide incremental construction cost equates to a life-cycle net savings of approximately $130,962,964 across  
building types and climate zones.  
The impact of these proposed rules will be directly correlated to the size of the existing structure, or renovation, a  
property owner chooses to design. The larger the square footage of the existing structure or renovation, the higher the  
material costs and other associate expenses. Any business already established in a preexisting structure or that moves  
into a preexisting structure will derive no impact by these proposed rules. Businesses will incur higher upfront costs,  
but these expenses will be offset by the long-term financial savings because of this rule set. In particular, the size of  
the existing structure, or its renovation, will dictate the ultimate expenses to the business deriving from inflationary  
costs and specific material selections factoring into the expenses for the business.  
Table 3. Annual Energy Cost Savings for Michigan ($/ft2)  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 14  
Climate Zone Small Office Large Office Stand-Alone RetailPrimary SchoolSmall HotelMid-Rise ApartmentAll  
Building Types  
5A  
6A  
7
$0.048  
$0.058  
$0.096  
$0.072  
$0.082  
$0.019  
$0.073  
$0.062  
$0.067  
$0.048  
$0.057  
$0.082  
$0.073  
$0.079  
$0.021  
$0.052  
$0.057  
$0.057  
$0.074  
$0.081  
$0.072  
$0.073  
$0.066  
$0.077  
$0.030  
$0.021  
State Average $0.048  
$0.063  
32. Explain how the proposed rules will impact business growth and job creation (or elimination) in Michigan.  
The proposed rules will benefit the skilled trades profession as well as the residential related industry due to the new  
requirements, which are established in this rule set. Michigan can ensure more energy efficient and resilient  
businesses by adopting the latest existing building codes, which lower utility bills, improve construction quality,  
create local jobs, and support workforce training for Michiganders.  
33. Identify any individuals or businesses who will be disproportionately affected by the rules as a result of their  
industrial sector, segment of the public, business size, or geographic location.  
Overall, the proposed changes to the rules have a disproportionate impact on small businesses in the three different  
climate zones, with each climate zone having its own unique existing structure requirements effect cost because of  
their size or geographical location. The code is applied uniformly across the state to ensure all jurisdictions are  
providing for the health, safety, and welfare of the public.  
34. Identify the sources the agency relied upon in compiling the regulatory impact statement, including the  
methodology utilized in determining the existence and extent of the impact of the proposed rules and a cost-  
benefit analysis of the proposed rules.  
Data for this Regulatory Impact Statement came from the PNNL study on the national cost-effectiveness of the  
ASHRAE standard 90.1-2019 and information and data provided by stakeholders, the Construction Code  
Commission, the State Plumbing Board, the Electrical Administrative Board, and the Board of Mechanical Rules.  
The Residential Builders Maintenance and Alteration Contractors Board was consulted but no substantial changes or  
suggestions were received. The agency also reviewed comments from the code/rule proposal forms and obtained  
research on other Great Lake States (Pennsylvania, Minnesota,- and Wisconsin).  
Through the means identified above, the following stakeholders contributed to this regulatory impact statement:  
The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)  
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory  
A. How were estimates made, and what were your assumptions? Include internal and external sources, published  
reports, information provided by associations or organizations, etc., that demonstrate a need for the proposed  
rules.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 15  
The agency relied on the following when determining the existence and extent of the impact of the proposed rules:  
Commission and Stakeholders.  
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) cost-effectiveness methodology.  
The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).  
2018 ENERGY STAR Cost & Savings Estimates.  
PNNL Cost-Effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2019 for the State of Michigan.  
Wood Products Council and American Wood Council at thinkwood.com.  
Dovertail Partners – Mass Timber Report.  
Alternative to Regulation  
35. Identify any reasonable alternatives to the proposed rules that would achieve the same or similar goals.  
No reasonable alternatives would achieve the same goals. The agency is required by statute to adopt the updated  
IEBC.  
A. Please include any statutory amendments that may be necessary to achieve such alternatives.  
Although the agency does not believe any statutory amendments are necessary to the Stille-DeRossett-Hale Single  
State Construction Code Act, individuals who believe the rehabilitation code updates cause additional expenses to be  
incurred may wish to lobby the legislature to extend the existing building code adoption to greater than every three  
years.  
36. Discuss the feasibility of establishing a regulatory program similar to that proposed in the rules that would  
operate through private market-based mechanisms. Please include a discussion of private market-based systems  
utilized by other states.  
The agency is unaware of similar programs or private market-based systems in other states.  
37. Discuss all significant alternatives the agency considered during rule development and why they were not  
incorporated into the rules. This section should include ideas considered both during internal discussions and  
discussions with stakeholders, affected parties, or advisory groups.  
There were no significant alternatives presented for the agency and rules review committee to consider.  
Additional Information  
38. As required by MCL 24.245b(1)(c), please describe any instructions regarding the method of complying with  
the rules, if applicable.  
Upon promulgation of the Michigan rules, the agency will publish instructions on obtaining the updated code books.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
;