[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AT THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-46
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
53-431 WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
BOB FILNER, California, Chairman
CORRINE BROWN, Florida STEVE BUYER, Indiana, Ranking
VIC SNYDER, Arkansas CLIFF STEARNS, Florida
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JERRY MORAN, Kansas
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
Dakota Carolina
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona JEFF MILLER, Florida
JOHN J. HALL, New York JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBORAH L. HALVORSON, Illinois BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
THOMAS S.P. PERRIELLO, Virginia DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
JOE DONNELLY, Indiana DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee
JERRY McNERNEY, California
ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JOHN H. ADLER, New Jersey
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
GLENN C. NYE, Virginia
Malcom A. Shorter, Staff Director
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
__________
September 30, 2009
Page
Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs..... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chairman Bob Filner.............................................. 1
Prepared statement of Chairman Filner........................ 46
Hon. Steve Buyer, Ranking Republican Member...................... 2
Hon. John J. Hall, prepared statement of......................... 46
WITNESSES
U.S. General Services Administration, Kevin Kampschroer, Acting
Director, Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings... 23
Prepared statement of Mr. Kampschroer........................ 69
U.S. Department of Energy, Richard G. Kidd IV, Program Manager,
Federal Energy Management Program, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy........................................... 25
Prepared statement of Mr. Kidd............................... 72
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, James M. Sullivan, Director,
Office of Asset Enterprise Management.......................... 38
Prepared statement of Mr. Sullivan........................... 79
______
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, Austin, TX, Gail
Vittori, Co-Director........................................... 4
Prepared statement of Ms. Vittori............................ 47
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing, James L. Hoff,
DBA, Director of Research...................................... 10
Prepared statement of Dr. Hoff............................... 66
Green Building Initiative, Jane M. Rohde, AIA, FIIDA, ACHA,
AAHID, Principal and Founder, JRS Associates, Inc.............. 8
Prepared statement of Ms. Rohde.............................. 59
U.S. Green Building Council, Thomas W. Hicks, Executive Director,
Building Performance Initiative................................ 6
Prepared statement of Mr. Hicks.............................. 53
SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD
Mitchell, Hon. Harry E., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arizona............................................... 82
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Background Material:
Chart Showing July 2009 Management Scorecards--Summary......... 83
Post-Hearing Questions and Responses for the Record:
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
Gail Vittori, Co-Director, Center for Maximum Potential
Building Systems, letter dated October 2, 2009, and response
memorandum dated November 13, 2009........................... 83
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
Thomas W. Hicks, Executive Director, Building Performance
Initiative, U.S. Green Building Council, letter dated October
2, 2009, and response letter dated November 9, 2009.......... 85
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
Jane M. Rohde, Principal, JSR Associates, Inc., letter dated
October 2, 2009, and response letter dated October 28, 2009.. 87
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
James L. Hoff, DBA, Director of Research, Center for
Environmental Innovation in Roofing, letter dated October 2,
2009, and Mr. Hoff's responses............................... 90
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
Hon. Steven Chu, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy, letter
dated October 2, 2009, and response from Betty A. Nolan,
Senior Advisor, Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs,
U.S. Department of Energy, letter dated November 19, 2009.... 92
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
Hon. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs, letter dated October 2, 2009, and VA responses...... 93
Hon. Steve Buyer, Ranking Republican Member, Committee on
Veterans' Affairs to Gail Vittori, Chair, Executive
Committee, U.S. Green Building Council, and Co-Director,
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, letter dated
October 16, 2009, and response memorandum dated November 13,
2009......................................................... 95
Hon. Steve Buyer, Ranking Republican Member, Committee on
Veterans' Affairs to Thomas W. Hicks, Executive Director,
Building Performance Initiative, U.S. Green Building Council,
letter dated October 16, 2009, and response letter dated
November 9, 2009............................................. 98
Hon. Steve Buyer, Ranking Republican Member, Committee on
Veterans' Affairs to Ward Hubbell, President, The Green
Building Initiative, letter dated October 16, 2009, and
response letter from Jane M. Rohde, Principal, JSR
Associates, Inc., letter dated October 21, 2009.............. 99
Hon. Steve Buyer, Ranking Republican Member, Committee on
Veterans' Affairs to James L. Hoff, DBA, Research Director,
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing, letter dated
October 16, 2009, and response letter dated February 1, 2010. 103
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AT THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Bob Filner
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Filner, Michaud, Hall, Perriello,
Rodriguez, Donnelly, Adler, Buyer, Brown of South Carolina,
Bilbray, and Roe.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN FILNER
The Chairman. Good morning. If the first panel will be
seated, we will introduce you.
Mr. Buyer. Good morning.
The Chairman. Good morning.
Good morning. This meeting of the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
I want to thank everybody for being here today.
The fact is that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) is the third highest energy user among agencies in the
Federal Government and third highest in water consumption. So
its footprint is significant and efforts to be in the forefront
of conservation and reduction are necessary and important.
All Federal agencies have to make sure to set an example
for energy, water, and fuel conservation. If we are asking
other Members of our society, corporations and individuals, we
have to set the example.
I am pleased that the VA has reported to our Committee that
it is taking extraordinary efforts to not only meet the goals
of the President's Executive Order, but exceed them.
For as much as the VA is accomplishing, I am equally
curious to hear what our panel of industry experts have to say
about the VA's progress. The experts we will hear from today
will add great value to the dialog and make thoughtful
recommendations for the future.
The VA was allocated $405 million in the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to accelerate critical
programs to reduce the environmental footprint of the
Department and the VA has set some very aggressive goals in
this area.
I am eager to hear how the VA plans to execute and sustain
these goals of energy, water, and fuel usage reductions while
constructing and renovating sustainable buildings and utilizing
the $400 million to its maximum potential.
We will continue in this Committee to monitor VA's actions
as it works to increase energy efficiency and provide results
for our veterans and our taxpayers.
I am looking forward to this hearing. Mr. Buyer, you are
recognized for an opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Filner appears on p.
46.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE BUYER
Mr. Buyer. Thank you very much.
I would like to welcome everyone to today's hearing on
increasing energy efficiency and sustainability within the
Department of Veterans Affairs. I greatly appreciate the
opportunity for this discussion.
It is important on multiple levels. One, the need for
energy independence on a national level is becoming even more
critical given the political uncertainty in the world and given
the bad actors of whom we, the United States, do business with.
Also compelling is the need to reduce pollutants that harm
our environment. And from a more tightly focused Committee
perspective, conserving energy and financial resources allows
the VA to use each dollar saved directly for veterans' health
care.
Shortly after the 111th Congress convened, the Health
Subcommittee Chairman, Mike Michaud, and I introduced H.R. 292,
the ``Department of Veterans Affairs Energy Sustainability Act
of 2009,'' to require the development and implementation of VA
energy conservation plans. This legislation is a step forward
enabling the VA to become more energy efficient and sustainable
for the future by requiring the Secretary to develop and
implement a comprehensive program on energy sustainability.
The bill would also require the creation of a firm baseline
database on energy and water usage and expenditures throughout
the VA and the National Cemetery Administration (NCA) upon
which the VA can gauge its progress for energy sustainability
and efficiency.
The bill would also provide VA with necessary tools to
increase their energy conservation and sustainability programs
by permitting the installation of energy efficient and
renewable energy systems in the Department buildings, much of
which, Mr. Sullivan, you are doing right now and I applaud you
on your efforts. We will get a chance to discuss that soon.
Also, I am very interested in the development of the
building envelope systems as we design these new hospitals. And
that will also be important in our discussions here today.
Also using electrical submetering in the Department
buildings providing for Energy Star and other energy efficient
purchasing and allowing the Department to use the expertise of
the National Laboratories regarding energy and water efficient
technologies in order to meet the VA's sustainability goals.
It makes good business sense to reduce wasteful spending at
the VA on inefficient energy systems so that this funding can
be used, as I said, to better assist our veterans.
Chairman Michaud and I are pleased to have the support of
other Members of the Committee. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for
holding the hearing so we can further explore these very, very
important issues.
I had requested a legislative hearing on the bill. While
that has not been made to date, I believe that we are going to
be able to work together as a Committee on this very, very
important issue.
The Federal Government should be at the forefront, and the
VA ranks sixth highest in energy consumption among all Federal
agencies and it has an opportunity to make a significant
impact. With hundreds of facilities nationwide, including
hospitals, outpatient clinics, regional offices, the VA should
set the example for wise use of alternative energy resources
such as solar, wind, and geothermal.
And, Mr. Sullivan, you are moving out smartly to do just
that and I am quite certain the Chairman and other Members of
the Committee join me in congratulating you and the Secretary
for that.
New VA construction and major renovation projects must be
forward looking and incorporate the most cost-effective
building mechanical systems as outlined in the VA's newly
developed sustainability and energy reduction design guide.
With the new facilities coming online, whether it is New
Orleans, Las Vegas, Orlando, we also have Denver as well as the
National Cemetery plans for Bakersfield, California, and
Philadelphia, these types of designs will be very fruitful.
So I want to thank the witnesses today for bringing your
expertise to the table. We look forward to your testimony.
And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Buyer.
We welcome the first panel and we thank you for being here.
Gail Vittori is the Co-Director of the Center for Maximum
Potential Building Systems. Tom Hicks is the Executive
Director, Building Performance Initiative of the U.S. Green
Building Council (USGBC). Jane Rohde is the Principal and
Founder of JSR Associates, and she is here on behalf of the
Green Building Initiative (GBI). James Hoff is Director of
Research for the Center of Environmental Innovation in Roofing.
Again, we thank you for joining us. Your complete statement
will be made a part of the record and we ask for an oral
statement of about 5 minutes.
Ms. Vittori, we will start with your testimony. Thank you
again for being here.
STATEMENTS OF GAIL VITTORI, CO-DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR MAXIMUM
POTENTIAL BUILDING SYSTEMS, AUSTIN, TX; THOMAS W. HICKS,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUILDING PERFORMANCE INITIATIVE, U.S. GREEN
BUILDING COUNCIL; JANE M. ROHDE, AIA, FIIDA, ACHA, AAHID,
PRINCIPLE AND FOUNDER, JRS ASSOCIATES, INC., ON BEHALF OF GREEN
BUILDING INITIATIVE; AND JAMES L. HOFF, DBA, DIRECTOR OF
RESEARCH, CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION IN ROOFING
STATEMENT OF GAIL VITTORI
Ms. Vittori. Thank you, Chairman Filner and Ranking Member
Buyer.
I would like to take advantage of this opportunity to
testify about the role that the Department of Veterans Affairs
and the Federal Government can play in improving the energy
efficiency and sustainability of VA facilities and, in
particular, your health care facilities.
As was said, my name is Gail Vittori and I am the Co-
Director of the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems,
a nonprofit organization established in 1975 and based in
Austin, Texas. I also have the privilege of serving as the
Board Chair of the U.S. Green Building Council.
I want to emphasize today five key elements for 21st
Century, high-performance healing environments, recognizing
that each of these are consistent with patient care and safety
and wise stewardship of resources.
First, buildings do matter. There is ample evidence that
green hospitals accelerate patient healing and enhance medical
staff well-being and productivity.
Just a quick example. One study found that nurses with
access to a view in their break rooms had a 40-percent
reduction in medical error rate. If I were a patient, I would
want to be in a hospital that provided my nurses a window with
a view and wouldn't each of you?
Hospitals should fundamentally be healing environments that
create a workplace where medical professionals want to work and
where they do their work well and also that enhance patient
healing.
Similar studies have found the same correlation that
windows in a patient's room also will enhance and accelerate
healing. In fact, green hospitals correlate with positive staff
recruitment and retention, which is a significant bottom line
benefit.
Second, opportunities to dramatically reduce hospital
energy and water use are abundant, many with a rapid return on
investment. Hospitals, as you know, on average are more than
two times as energy intensive as commercial office buildings.
Lighting, just as one example, represents 42 percent of
U.S. hospitals' electrical use. A systematic relamping program,
just as one example, of existing hospitals and advanced
lighting design for new hospitals can reap significant energy
savings, reduce greenhouse gas and other environmental
pollutants, and lower operating costs while enhancing the
healing environment.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), each dollar invested in energy efficiency in the health
care sector is equivalent to generating new revenues of $20 for
hospitals and $10 for medical office buildings. Every dollar
saved through energy and water efficiency can be redirected to
patient care that is important in delivering the best care
possible to our Nation's veterans.
Third, I know for many of you the issue of first cost is
your first and last question. A study completed earlier this
year of 13 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED)-certified health care facilities found that green health
care facilities need not cost more than nongreen buildings with
a zero to 5 percent first cost premium and no correlation to
size or LEED certification level.
The study further established a trend toward lower first
cost premiums over time and the benefits of integrated design.
These findings bode well for hospitals being designed today.
Fourth, life cycle cost analysis for procurement decisions,
this is extremely important. Accounting for economic and
measurable performance indicators such as patient length of
stay, recruitment, retention, medical error, environmental
externalities, and dissolving the divide between first costs
and operations and maintenance costs is a common-sense
opportunity to advance best value, data-driven design
decisions, and especially true for owner-occupied, long-lived
buildings such as hospitals. In its absence, we often end up
making well-intentioned but short-sighted decisions and bear
long-term costs.
And, finally, collaborate with industry peers on research,
best practices, and lessons learned. This investment avoids
duplication of effort and reinventing the wheel and raises the
bar across the entire sector. Not only can the VA pursue these
strategies, they cannot afford not to.
Across the country, projects are demonstrating the real and
significant benefits of green and energy efficient health care
facilities and the VA is among the leaders in doing this.
To date, there are about 90 registered Green Guide for
Health Care projects representing an estimated 70 million
square feet of green health care facilities and 440 LEED-
registered and certified health care projects. Sixty-five of
these represent more than 6 million gross square feet.
In addition, 48 acute care and children's hospitals have
earned the EPA's Energy Star designation. Fifteen of these are
Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals.
The first LEED platinum certified hospital in the world,
Dell Children's Medical Center, has many stories to tell. It is
a great example of a truly high-performance healing environment
designed to reduce direct energy use by over 17 percent and
save 1.4 million gallons of water.
They also are telling a real life story every day of how
much difference a building can make in supporting patient
healing and staff well-being.
Just as one example, over their first year of operation,
nursing turnover was about 2.4 percent compared to 10 to 15
percent as a national average. The cost to replace just one
nurse at Dell is about $70,000.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is taking note of these
opportunities and currently has 18 health care facilities
registered in the LEED rating system.
Chairman Filner and Ranking Member Buyer, thank you very
much for your leadership in convening this critical hearing. I
look forward to working with the Committee, the Department of
Veterans Affairs, and other stakeholders to help improve energy
efficiency and sustainability of the Department of Veterans
Affairs so that patient healing can be enhanced, staff well-
being can be enhanced, and to make a very key contribution to
ensuring that we have healthy communities and healthy
ecosystems.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Vittori appears on p. 47.]
The Chairman. Thank you so much.
Mr. Hicks.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS W. HICKS
Mr. Hicks. Thank you, Chairman Filner and Ranking Member
Buyer and the Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to
appear before you today to discuss energy efficiency,
sustainability at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
My name is Tom Hicks and I lead the Building Performance
Initiative for the U.S. Green Building Council, which is a
nonprofit organization committed to a prosperous and
sustainable future through cost-effective and energy saving
green buildings.
With a membership of 78 local chapters, 20,000 member
companies and organizations, the U.S. Green Building Council is
the driving force working to advance more environmentally
responsible, healthy, and profitable buildings.
The impact of and opportunities within the building sector
are extraordinary. Buildings in the United States are
responsible for 40 percent of the CO2 emissions,
nearly 14 percent of the potable water use, and comprise
roughly 14 percent of the gross domestic product, making green
building a source of significant economic and environmental
opportunity to reduce the impact of these buildings while
saving money.
A recent study from McKinsey and Company reports that an
investment in energy efficiency, including building energy
efficiency, could generate more than $1.2 trillion in energy
savings, reduce energy consumption by 23 percent, and reduce
annual greenhouse gas emissions by 1.1 gigatons by 2020.
This would have the same environmental impact as taking the
entire fleet of U.S. passenger vehicles and light trucks off
the road.
With the short time I have today, I would like to focus my
comments on two broad themes. First, the Federal Government and
the Department of Veterans Affairs is and has been the leader
in energy efficiency and green building. Federal agencies have
a tremendous responsibility and power to continue to lead by
example and move the building sector to even higher levels of
achievement.
Second, the government sector, both existing buildings and
new construction, is an area of great opportunity to save
taxpayers money, create jobs, and save energy and water while
protecting the environment.
For over a decade now, during my time at USGBC and prior to
that with the EPA before that, I have been working to advance
green building and energy efficient buildings across the Nation
and around the globe. I have had the opportunity to work with
countless leaders and non-governmental organizations in
industry and in government who have worked tirelessly to
accelerate the uptake of green building in the marketplace and
to ensure that this green building revolution touches
everybody.
My experiences have shown me that leadership, whether it is
paving a path forward, overcoming obstacles, or pioneering new
best practices, has proven to be successful for shifting the
market toward sustainability.
As the owner, tenant, or manager of more than 3.3 billion
square feet of building space valued at more than $700 billion,
the Federal Government has the country's largest real estate
portfolio, including many of the Nation's most recognized and
cherished landmarks. With this vast portfolio comes the power
to forge a greener, more energy efficient, healthier, and
prosperous path for the Nation's buildings and communities.
By leveraging the unparalleled purchasing power of the
taxpayer dollars to support green building, the Federal
Government can not only reduce its significant environmental
footprint but also speed the adoption of green building
strategies by the private sector and save real dollars and
resources through reduced utility bills and operating costs.
Recognizing the impact of the Federal building sector, 13
Federal agencies and departments have made policy commitments
to use or encourage LEED certification. Some 24 million square
feet of federally-owned or leased building space is currently
certified under LEED and more than 400 million square feet of
space is registered with LEED.
These policies, coupled with various policies referencing
LEED in 34 States and more than 100 localities, are having a
marked impact on the larger green building landscape. To date,
more than 23,000 building projects are registered with LEED and
more than 3,600 have earned LEED certification. This includes
the LEED silver certified regional field office in Reno,
Nevada, for the VA and VA's 18 other registered projects.
With a diverse real estate portfolio, the VA is doing more
to make its portfolio energy efficient and sustainable. In
recent months, VA has pursued a number of far-reaching
sustainability projects through the use of funds provided by
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Significantly, the
agency is dedicating roughly $399 million of the $1 billion
provided for medical facilities operated by the Veterans Health
Administration (VHA) to energy efficiency and renewable energy
projects.
The USGBC applauds the Department's commitment to
sustainability and encourages it to leverage the recovery funds
to even greener ends.
As I mentioned in my written remarks, the opportunity to
leverage its funding for energy and financial savings in the
Federal sector is huge. Financing vehicles such as energy
performance contracts allow funds spent on efficiency to go
well beyond the impact of simply spending dollars on direct
costs.
In addition, once efficiency measures are in place, if the
Federal Government were to perform tune-ups or recommission its
entire building stock, it could achieve an estimated 15-percent
reduction in energy use in each building that is commissioned
and generate more than $650 million in annual savings and
eliminate roughly 2.7 million tons of carbon in 1 year.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the Veterans' Affairs
Committee for the opportunity to discuss the Department of
Veterans Affairs and its work in transforming our Nation's
buildings. USGBC looks forward to working with the Committee
and the Department to ensure that the energy savings and
environmental potential of our public buildings are realized.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hicks appears on p. 53.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Ms. Rohde.
STATEMENT OF JANE M. ROHDE
Ms. Rohde. Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, and
Members of the Committee----
The Chairman. Could you press the button for your
microphone?
Ms. Rohde. I apologize.
Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss my
experience evaluating the sustainability of VA hospitals using
the Green Building Initiative's Green Globes Rating System.
I am the Principal and Founder of JSR Associates,
Incorporated, a senior living and health care consulting firm.
As an architect with more than 20 years of experience, I
participate on many design Committees, including the Guidelines
for Design and Construction of Healthcare Facilities which is
code in at least 44 States and referenced as a guide by the VA.
Today I am speaking on behalf of the Green Building
Initiative, a nonprofit organization that brought the Green
Globes Building Rating System to the United States in the year
2005.
The Green Globe System is a Web-based tool being used by 21
VA hospitals to meet the Federal requirements outlined in the
guiding principles. Green Globes for Continual Improvement of
Existing Buildings, CIEB, was the module used.
During the process, VA energy managers were asked to
complete an electronic survey of their medical center and
report their findings. Important items requested during this
evaluation are monthly energy and water consumption from
utility bills, information on transportation practices that
minimize energy consumption, and other data that describe
policies related to containing emissions, promoting recycling,
and monitoring indoor environmental issues.
Additionally, the Green Globe System recognizes progress in
reducing energy consumption through the use of the Energy Star
rating system. By evaluating operational energy and source
energy through Energy Star and by using life cycle assessment
tools, the Green Globes Rating System can help building owners
identify a building's carbon footprint and cycles for
improvement.
Once the initial Green Globe survey is completed in-house,
the team is then provided with an automated report with an
initial score and opportunities for improvement. This
automatically generated report is based on the Green Globes
protocol, which assigns a number of points to each answer based
on desirable outcomes.
The report is for the internal team's use to evaluate the
recommendations for improvements to the medical facility and
its operations.
Following this evaluation, a third-party assessor visits
the building to audit the team's documented outcomes, interview
key staff, complete a walk-through, and determine if the
building qualifies for Green Globe certification.
As a third-party assessor, I have visited 15 out of the 21
hospitals that are working to complete the Green Globes
evaluation and certification process.
While we are still in the early stages of evaluating the VA
hospitals, I can tell you that these facilities are doing
extremely well in their efforts to comply with Federal
sustainability requirements.
It is clear to me that in addition to receiving valuable
feedback and recognition from this process, many of the VA's
best practices in sustainability will provide valuable case
studies to benefit the health care facilities in the private
sector.
I would like to provide you with some of the creative ideas
and programs that are currently proposed or being completed at
VA hospitals across the country.
Richmond, Virginia, has a proposed project to complete an
arboretum that would not only be a site enhancement, but will
reduce heat island effect, reduce water runoff, provide a
resource for the veterans and their families, and create an
opportunity for engaging the community at large.
And Portland, Oregon, has a boiler chiller plant supervisor
training program that is exemplary, including an educational
manual and on-site training tools. They are able to share their
expertise with not only trainees but other locations that need
assistance with additional improvement in energy and water
consumption.
Dallas, Texas, is in the process of completing an ethanol
fueling station for the VA and other governmental agencies for
their flexible fuel fleet vehicles.
Birmingham, Alabama, located in a tight urban block, is
evaluating using an existing underground spring for recovery
water for the cooling tower.
San Diego, California, has one of the strongest recycling
programs across the board. This site as well as Milwaukee,
Portland, and Seattle are excellent examples of systems that
are working to reduce use of natural resources.
Because continual improvement is just that, continual, it
is important to realize that ongoing efforts are what make a
hospital sustainable. Tools and certification programs like
Green Globes allow VA staff to conduct periodic assessments
that then empower them to be the drivers of initiatives for
improvement that can be qualified and quantified over time.
The next steps for VA, and I assume all Federal agencies,
will be to do the deeper dive on their portfolios. Continuing
such an assessment program will help to achieve the largest
potential energy and water savings across all of VA health care
facilities, not only hospitals, but the full range of VA
facilities, including CBOCs, which are community-based
outpatient clinics, CLCs, which are Community Living Centers
that are for long-term care residents, Hospice Palliative care,
and Polytrauma Centers.
To do this, they need multiple tools like Green Globes to
help make surveying, measurement, evaluation, and regular
benchmarking part of their ongoing process.
It is clear that the VA hospitals that have been assessed
are on a positive path for sustainability improvement. I am
fortunate to be part of this groundbreaking initiative,
assessing firsthand the creativity, the potential, and the
amazing outcomes that are sure to manifest as a result of this
ongoing evaluation and certification process.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rohde appears on p. 59.]
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Dr. Hoff.
STATEMENT OF JAMES L. HOFF, DBA
Dr. Hoff. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Filner, Ranking
Member Buyer, and Members of the Committee.
My name is Dr. James Hoff and I serve as Research Director
for the Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing in
Washington.
The mission of the Center is to serve as a unified voice of
the roofing industry in matters relating to the energy and
environmental benefits afforded by modern roofing systems.
Our membership includes roofing contractors, roofing
materials manufacturers, construction designers, and building
researchers, all interested in a common goal of raising public
awareness of the importance of our Nation's rooftops and their
strategic value in reducing energy consumption, mitigating
environmental impact, and enhancing the quality of the
buildings in which we all live and work.
My mission before the Committee this morning is to raise
awareness of roofing's contribution to energy efficiency and
the many different ways our Nation's rooftops can be used to
meet broader goals of reducing energy consumption.
In addition, I would like to express the Center's support
of important energy initiatives already undertaken by the
Department of Veterans Affairs. And, finally, I would like to
recommend some additional actions to help assure that the
important energy efficiency goals of the Department are fully
realized on the rooftops of all VA facilities.
Few locations offer as many opportunities to transform our
building environment as our Nation's rooftops. Occupying over
200 billion square feet of surface area, they serve as a major
resource for energy efficiency, a ready platform for the
production of clean energy, and a vital shield of health and
safety over our homes and businesses.
In terms of energy efficiency, we estimate that if just the
commercial and institutional roofs in the United States were
insulated at the levels envisioned by the Energy Policy Act of
2005, annual energy cost savings would exceed $2 billion.
In terms of clean energy production, we estimate a
conservative contribution from rooftop solar and wind power
would exceed the annual production of 12 Grand Coulee dams.
Given this combination of sizeable national roofing
inventory and the many new energy technologies available, the
roofing industry also offers an outstanding opportunity for
developing a new generation of highly skilled, high-paying
green jobs.
According to 2002 census data, over 225,000 Americans are
employed in the roofing industry. Roofing contractors already
generate $21 billion annually in completed roofing
installations. And with new energy saving and energy producing
technologies that can be added to these installations, this
overall economic contribution is certain to increase
significantly, especially in terms of new high-paying job
skills.
As stated previously, the Center would like to express its
support of the important energy initiatives already undertaken
by the Department of Veterans Affairs, especially as embodied
in the Department's Green Building Action Plan. This plan
establishes overall targets and broad operating principles
consistent with the energy targets of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
Since the enactment of this legislation, however, our
Nation's energy standards have been revised upward and even
higher levels of these consensus standards are anticipated
within the year. Because building energy standards continue to
evolve, the Center recommends the Department's Green Building
Action Plan be revised to reflect the most recent national
building energy standards as published by the American Society
of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers.
In addition, because the re-roofing of existing Department
facilities generally falls outside the new building or major
renovation activities addressed by the Green Building Action
Plan of the Department, the Center recommends that specific
energy efficiency targets be established for all VA roofing
projects, again based on the most recent national building
energy standards.
Finally, because durability in roof system design is
critical, especially if the roof is also to serve as a platform
for renewable energy production, the center strongly recommends
that roof condition assessment be included as a mandatory
element in all renewable energy design contracts.
Additional information regarding these recommendations is
included in the larger written statement provided to the
Committee. And the Center would be happy to discuss or clarify
any of these recommendations with Committee staff.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak before the
Committee and thank you for your continuing interest in
applying sound energy policy to the management and operation of
the Department's building inventory.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hoff appears on p. 66.]
The Chairman. Thank you all very much. It was very
enlightening. We will now have some questions from the
Committee.
Mr. Hall, if you want to start off?
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for acknowledging me.
And I would like to identify myself with your remarks and those
of the Ranking Member, Mr. Buyer, before our panel spoke. And I
appreciate your indulgence because I have a double booking as
many of us do this morning.
And I have a statement I will enter into the record. I will
not go into all of it, but this is indirectly connected as was
mentioned by the Ranking Member.
[The prepared statement of Congressman Hall appears on p.
46.]
Mr. Hall. Our veterans right now are being created by
conflicts that we are involved in in parts of the world where
they happen to have large amounts of energy, oil in particular,
that we, if we pull the rug out from under the Jihad as some of
our friends in Israel have suggested, knowing firsthand where
the funding is going, we may actually find ourselves not
healing our veterans more quickly if their nurses do not make
as many medical errors but defunding those who we are fighting.
So it is very important.
My question, I guess, to all panelists is these ideas are
really exciting. I mean, the thoughts of flat roofs like those
at West Point, which I represent and I am on the Board of
Directors of, being converted to reflective surfaces or solar
surfaces so you do not have the heat island effect and you are
reflecting the sun's energy and/or turning it into electricity
or that you are collecting rainwater and using it for watering
lawns or washing cars or other things instead of using potable
water, so that conservation of energy and the conservation of
water can be done simultaneously.
My question to all of you because we have in my district,
as many of us do in our districts, we have older buildings. It
is easier, I think, when you are starting out with a new design
to achieve some of these things.
But when you are dealing with old VA buildings that are
perhaps under the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced
Services Commission's purview and they are trying to decide
what buildings to keep, which ones to upgrade and so on, have
you seen or do you have any ideas for the success,
achievability of success in converting older buildings to such
efficiency and energy generation or energy savings?
Ms. Vittori, perhaps you could start.
Ms. Vittori. Sure. I would be happy to begin. Great
questions.
In fact, we find that with existing buildings, which are
really the largest percentage of buildings as we look forward,
there are many opportunities, in particular for hospitals
because they are such intensive energy users, a comprehensive
audit of looking at what parts of the profile are representing
the largest energy users.
As I mentioned in my comments, lighting is 42 percent of
electrical use. So a comprehensive relamping program is going
to dramatically drop the operating energy use budget of the
hospital. That is significant. A 24/7 operating building's
lighting obviously is a big percentage, so that is not
surprising. And we know that there is significant advancement
in lighting technology that is giving reliable lighting. It is
going to last a long time, which is what you want, and also
high-quality lighting which also enhances the healing
environment.
A comprehensive retro-commissioning to ensure that the
mechanical equipment is actually operating as it is designed is
another one of those low-hanging fruit opportunities. Training
facility staff so that they understand proper operations and
maintenance protocols, investing in that will reap huge
returns.
And just as an example, I know that the VA has a number of
these initiatives underway. There is a system in the Midwest,
Gundersen Lutheran, which has taken a comprehensive view of
their existing buildings and new construction with the goal to
be carbon neutral by 2014, so just in 5 years, and they are
doing that through a stepped process, which I have in detail
laid out in my written testimony. So I encourage you to look at
that.
Thank you.
Mr. Hall. Thank you.
Mr. Hicks.
Mr. Hicks. I think to answer that question specifically and
to understand the opportunity, I think one of the things that
is key is being able to properly manage and to properly manage,
you need to properly measure.
And I think to the credit of the VA, a lot of what they
have done over the past several years is to do just that,
certainly on their energy use as it relates to using the EPA's
Energy Star tool to be able to benchmark their energy use to
understand where they are today.
And I think doing that and taking it out across their
portfolio of buildings and then looking at other opportunities
beyond energy use, so understanding how their water use is
relative to other industry norms.
I think once that is understood, those choices as to
whether a building is right for a whole building retrofit or
some other solution has to come into play will bear itself out.
But regardless, there are low-cost, no-cost opportunities
for these buildings to look at, whether it is commissioning and
retro-commissioning, whether it is tune-ups to other parts of
the building, and these are opportunities that exist throughout
and should be done prior to any assessment as to whether a
building is, you know, is one that should be kind of kept or
whether a new building should be built.
Mr. Hall. Mr. Chairman, my time has expired.
The Chairman. Ms. Rohde, would you like to add anything?
Ms. Rohde. I have a couple comments, if I may.
The Chairman. Please.
Ms. Rohde. And to your point, it was a great question for
me because I have been spending a lot of time inside your VA
hospitals.
From the 15 hospitals that I have seen, using thermal
imaging for all the hospitals to detect thermal leaks in the
envelope would be an excellent recommendation overall which
ties to the earlier testimony.
We have two hospitals so far that have done that for their
roofing and they have actually been able to see some savings
now that they have been repairing their roofs accordingly.
Create a task force to include IT departments and the
energy managers, which is an established position within the VA
hospital to review opportunities to reduce time that computers
are turned on in nonessential areas. That is one plug load area
that I think needs to be evaluated and could help a lot within
the VA hospitals specifically.
Create a task force to include food service management,
canteen management, and procurement and acquisitions, and to
potentially localize contracts to reduce inherent energy and
transportation costs of products that are made locally and are
available locally.
Recommend discussion between National Science Foundation
(NSF), Veterans Affairs Central Office (VACO), and the EPA to
evaluate kitchen equipment for energy and water conservation
compliance. We do not quite have as much information available
on the commercial side of the kitchen equipment to address some
of those issues that I think would be good.
Continue to monitor and benchmark water usage and energy
usage comparatively to uniques. Uniques are different patient
types. And what you will see is if you have an increase in
unique patient types and staff increases that your energy
consumption and water needs to be evaluated against that. So
you want to know really what your full picture is if you are
increasing staff and patient uniques and if energy consumption
is really going down and you are really demonstrating something
very powerful in terms of understanding your energy
consumption.
Work cooperatively with GBI and other similar green
building organizations to look at the Irrigation Association
industry to enhance opportunities for water efficiency and site
enhancement as this process is extended to other VA facilities,
including cemeteries.
Relamping programs were discussed. All the hospitals that I
visited thus far do have a relamping process either completed
or underway. Recommissioning has been funded by some of the
Veterans Integrated Services Networks (VISNs) but not all
VISNs. So depending on the VISN you are in, depends on if the
hospital is being recommissioned or not.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Dr. Hoff.
Dr. Hoff. Thank you.
As suggested by Ms. Rohde both now and in her testimony,
improvement tends to be incremental more than dramatic at times
and that is why practices of continuous improvement and
practices that take a look at changes that can be made to
specific building elements at specific points in time are very
important.
I think it would be important for the Committee to realize
that on average, the rooftops on VA facilities will be replaced
at a rate of about four to five times the building or
construction of new facilities.
In the United States every year, about a billion square
feet of roofs are installed on new buildings. About four
billion square feet are installed on existing buildings. So
that means that roofing offers that opportunity.
And, secondly, these low-slope roofs that you mentioned in
your district, very common both in your district and throughout
the United States. It is typically the model that we utilize
for our larger buildings.
And that is a model that allows easy access to the existing
roofing insulation, the easy ability to use thermal scanning
technology and surveys that Ms. Rohde mentioned, and the
opportunity to save existing materials and then add to those
materials in a very economic way at the time of re-roofing.
And so it is just that that is a probably very critical
point in any kind of building management exercise to be sure
that that opportunity that is four times the opportunity of new
construction is fully realized.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much. And I apologize for
being late.
Let me ask you because all these areas are extremely
important and I know that as we dialogue about it, the
importance as we move forward how much we are able to
accomplish and get done, on new construction, is anybody
looking at, for example, we have a polytrauma center that is
supposed to be built in San Antonio. Who is on top of that
making sure we try use the latest technology so that we will
not have to do something to it afterwards to make it more
energy efficient?
Not everybody at one time, please.
Mr. Hicks. Well, I am not sure if I can speak to that
facility.
Mr. Rodriguez. Okay. Can anybody?
The Chairman. Mr. Rodriguez, we will have a panel from the
VA----
Mr. Rodriguez. Okay.
The Chairman [continuing]. Joining us, so they could
probably answer that more directly.
Mr. Rodriguez. So none of you are handling new
construction? No?
Mr. Hicks. Just, again, specifically the facility----
Mr. Rodriguez. No. Just any new construction.
Mr. Hicks. Sure. And I think with the LEED rating system
that we have, it certainly addresses the, you know, the
holistic view of what a green building, sustainable building
is, looking at the best and the most advanced technologies to
put in those buildings that will deliver results. And so that
is what the LEED rating system is about.
And the VA has used that system in their buildings. I am
not sure about that specific facility, but that is something
that has been used and it is a way to kind of help you deliver
those results so that you are not leaving opportunities on the
table.
Mr. Rodriguez. Now, we was also mentioned, I think you
mentioned the fact that a lot of our facilities are pretty old,
in pretty bad shape in some cases in terms of cost
effectiveness.
But I think that given, in terms of the amount of, you
know, work that needs to be done, is there anything that we
ought to be doing in that area in order to try to move forward
because of the possible savings that are there in order to
revitalize some of those facilities as quickly as possible?
Ms. Rohde. I think I can speak to that. The 15 buildings
that I have been through, what I have learned is that if you
have been to one VA, you have been to one VA. They are
completely different in every aspect.
One thing that I see that would be helpful across the board
is people who have really strong boiler plant management, for
example, help those facilities who do not. And I think that if
they were to integrate that education process that they would
actually see an advancement across the board in efficiency.
Equipment efficiencies, each facility that I have talked
to, they each have their perspective on what they think is
their highest priority depending on what their goals are and
what they have already achieved. It also depends on how long
their manager has been in place, how long their Green
Environmental Management Systems (GEMS) coordinator has been in
place and a lot of other factors.
But they have different parts of the environmental
footprint that they are all working on in different ways. And I
think that cross-referencing and being able to learn from one
another, from the other hospitals would be very appropriate.
And there are some other things that we have in terms of
VACO listings, that we have kind of given a VA central listing,
recommendations like the thermal imaging, for example. That is
something that could benefit all the hospitals if it was
funded.
So there are those types of recommendations that are coming
out of the facilities as we go through them.
Mr. Rodriguez. So are you also saying then each unit or
each area has their own priorities? Is there a need for us to
do something to force, not force, but emphasize the importance
of efficiency issues when it comes to energy throughout the
system?
Is there anything that we could do, or any recommendations
that are out there, to help push the fact that in addition to
their immediate priorities, which could be leaks in the
plumbing or whatever the importance of looking at a little more
long term in terms of energy efficiency?
Ms. Rohde. One area that I would look at is other pilot
programs for different renewable energy sources. You have a PV,
photovoltaic, setup in Dallas that is being evaluated,
potential wind, ground source heat pumps, some other areas that
are being evaluated. I would continue those types of
evaluations and funding those kind of evaluations because I
think that that is going to help us see where things will lay.
The PVs, for example, did not demonstrate as much energy
consumption savings as was anticipated, but it does give you
the pilot to use it as a baseline.
And technologies, being very aware of different
technologies that are available and being able to test them out
at sample sites. I think that that would be very helpful as
well.
Mr. Rodriguez. Any major water reuse either from the roof
or other forms?
Ms. Rohde. There are a couple of plans, and that came out
of recommendations. Two or three of the facilities we were
looking at would benefit from keeping cisterns for rainwater
collection and the rainwater collection being used not only for
irrigation but for recovery water for the cooling towers.
So I think that there are some real-water savings, I would
say, and recycling and waste management are the two areas that
need continual work in some of the facilities that we visited.
Water conservation and consumption is a little bit harder, but
I think the more creative the thought processes are in terms of
developing cisterns and things, that that would be very
applicable.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much.
Ms. Vittori. Just if I could make two points. One is that
in addition to sharing data and information amongst the
facilities overseen by the Department of Veterans Affairs, I
think there is an extremely rich opportunity to also share with
industry peers other large health care systems in the United
States that are asking these same questions.
And so pooling research, pooling best practices, pooling
lessons learned, and so that everyone has an opportunity to
benefit from that shared knowledge together and raise the bar
for health care overall with the VA taking a very significant
lead on that.
Mr. Rodriguez. How quickly can we move on that? You know, I
guess that requires some dialog and collaborating among all of
them?
Ms. Vittori. I think those opportunities are very possible.
Large systems like Kaiser Permanente based in California, and
Partners in Massachusetts, there are systems throughout the
country that are representing large numbers of facilities as
well as many, you know, individual facilities owned by entities
both public and nonprofit.
The other point in terms of water, because it is not only a
natural resource issue but it has significant energy
implications, water being so energy intensive in terms of its
treatment and transportation.
And you are from Texas. I am from Texas. We had just an
unbelievably challenging summer with our drought. One of the
opportunities to capture water in cisterns and condensate off
of chillers and so on and redirect that for irrigation, but
there is a real concern in health care facilities about
infection, the potential that reclaimed water sources can
actually challenge infection control which is of paramount
importance.
And so I think a very key research area knowing that we
have instability with our water resources right now is how to
provide some real guidance on whether or not there is concern
about directing reclaimed water, whether it is used on
landscape, interior courtyards, other uses in the facilities so
that we can safely understand how to use it properly. I think
it is exactly where we want to go. We need research to back
that up.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Michaud.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking
Member, for having this hearing.
Just a couple of quick questions for the panelists.
In your work with the VA system, have you ever run into any
problems as it relates to procurement issues? For instance,
something might not be on the Federal buying list, but it might
be something that actually would be very beneficial that is my
first question.
And my second question, you talk about new technologies and
thinking outside the box, so to speak, what do you do to really
get out there and to find out what new technology is available?
A good example is actually just earlier this week before I
came back to DC, I met with a business that has this little
filter that you put on your furnace before it goes into the oil
burner. And what they were telling us was that if you have got
an oil tank that is just sitting there, it breaks down. But
when it goes through the filter, it actually requires it to
burn hotter. Therefore, you need a smaller nozzle. And what
they were telling us, if this actually works out, is you could
save as much as ten percent because the stack temperature is
hotter, therefore, you have got to use a smaller nozzle.
What type of technology are you really aggressively looking
at, number one? And the other issue is on procurement as it
relates to what is on the list for the VA or any Federal agency
to buy?
Ms. Rohde. I could speak to that, if I may.
The procurement issue that I have just seen as an
observation is mostly that things are bought on large contract.
So as a result, I will use food service as an example, so if
you are using a food service company that is overall,
overarching, that is providing things is probably trucking
things from a lot of different distances and there is a huge
distribution line.
From my conversations with the different GEMS coordinators
on site, they have mentioned that, well, I would love to use
local whatever the material might be. However, I am tied to the
contract through procurement and acquisitions.
So in a sense, it is almost, in my mind, would be a task
force recommendation of evaluating how to look at aspects of
green in terms of how it relates to the acquisition process and
the contracting process. So that is what I have seen in terms
of that.
Your second question about new technology and how do we
address that, I think one of your best resources are your own
people internally. There are some guys out there and women out
there that are doing amazing things.
In Portland, they actually use the elevators when it is
coming down, to actually use that energy and they have figured
out a way to harvest it.
One of the guys has this idea about the sewer area, which I
thought was a little scary, but that you put filters in and you
actually use, because they are way up on a hill, and use the
downstream to create energy.
I mean, those are the kind of really creative ideas that
are out there and I think they are site specific. And I think
if you did a poll or a competition or whatever, you would be
amazed to find out what they already know about new
technologies that other facilities do not know anything about.
So I think that that is what I have seen from my
conversations with the people, really amazing people who work
in your different VA facilities.
Ms. Vittori. Again, on the new technologies, I would
encourage you to share information, cast the net broadly with
the health care sector because why should one be reinventing
the wheel that the other one has already had great success with
or found a surprising outcome that maybe fell short of what the
expectation was. And so by building that knowledge base
collectively, the Department of Veterans Affairs with the
broader health care sector, I think you would get great return
on that investment.
In terms of procurement, while I do not know the specifics
about the VA practices, my general sense is that life cycle
cost assessment, while it is talked about, is not often put in
play because of barriers between first cost budget constraints
and operations and maintenance costs.
It really is an enormous opportunity to say, particularly
for an owner-occupied building, let us pull those together and
so we get best value over the life of the building for
something that might have an incremental first cost premium but
will reap enormous return on investment over the life of the
building, maybe even as quickly as within the year, but may be
ruled out because it is a little bit more expensive than what
is on contract.
So I would encourage you to really look at life cycle cost
assessment.
Mr. Hicks. And I would like to just speak to maybe the
second point on technology and how new technologies can be
identified and deployed.
And I think, you know, great ideas about engaging your
existing assets within the buildings, absolutely. I also think
taking those people and having them engage the movement. There
are, you know, hundreds of thousands of people involved in the
green building movement and being able to get those folks into
those various forums where those discussions are being had,
where the new ideas are being put out, where the new
technologies are being discussed and vetted, I think that would
be an outstanding place to do that.
We have our own conference that we do, it is coming up in 6
weeks, for 30,000 people and it is a great place for people to
engage in those conversations. There are other forums like that
around the U.S. and around the world that would be similar
great opportunities to really accelerate the best practice
about what is going on and the best technologies available.
Dr. Hoff. I would like to just make a brief comment about
technology, especially in terms of the building envelope, the
cover around the building.
After many decades of very little research in building
envelopes, there has been a resurgence and a real acceleration
of research in the building envelope. The only area I would
provide somewhat of a caution, though, is that many of the
elements that we are talking about today, sun and water, are
also the same elements that over time tend to deteriorate and
attack our buildings, especially at the envelope.
I would certainly suggest to you that it is critical,
although new technology can offer many new opportunities, it is
important that the technology be fully evaluated in terms of
durability.
Really it is just like the patients that the VA works with.
The first thing they do is try to stabilize the patient. A
building envelope is the same way. Unless you have a stable
building envelope that is preventing water from entering and
attacking a building, you can have problems in the long run.
And that means with many of these technologies, there are risks
there and those risks should be properly addressed.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Buyer.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
If you will pass these to the witnesses. This is a bill
summary of H.R. 292. I would ask each of you, this is just a
summary, so if you could gain access to the original text. As I
mentioned in the opening statement, Congressman Mike Michaud
and I had introduced this bill to assist the Department of
Veterans Affairs in becoming more energy efficient and
sustainable.
So I welcome you to examine the Bill that Mr. Michaud and I
have introduced and please comment on it or any recommendations
that you may have, please submit for the record, and I would
appreciate that.
[The panel of witnesses supplied comments in response to
Congress Buyer's request in the Post-Hearing Questions and
Responses for the Record, which appear on p. 95.]
Dr. Hoff, one of your recommendations is that the
Department establish an energy standard for roofs separate from
the overall standards of the Department's green buildings
action plan. Why is that important?
Dr. Hoff. Thank you, Representative Buyer.
We believe it is important for the fact that I had
mentioned earlier, that the Department will be replacing many
more roofs on existing buildings than installing roofs on new
buildings.
And because of this high replacement rate, we believe that
the overall general guidelines or the green building guidelines
of the VA, although very important, are much harder to manage
specifically for re-roofing projects.
And, secondly, many of those re-roofing projects are going
to fall outside the broad guidelines of new facilities or major
renovations. Typically roofing occurs separate from major
renovations. It occurs when the roof starts to leak and not
necessarily on a completely time basis.
We would just simply recommend that the same principles in
those guidelines could be better refined and specifically
addressed to roofing and that would then allow, provide some
assurance that as major renovations proceed in the future on
any building that the roofing system would be adequate to meet
the broad goals of that larger renovation.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
Mr. Hicks, there are a number of guides available for
certifying green facilities. These systems use similar
principles to evaluate sites, including the evaluation of
energy and water consumption, use of renewable energy, and
impact on the environment.
How does the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design,
LEED, rating system compare with other assessment tools?
Mr. Hicks. Thank you, Ranking Member Buyer.
I think when you look at a variety of rating systems, and I
have had the privilege of looking at rating systems around the
world and talking to folks in other countries about their
rating systems, the DNA of the rating systems, what they look
at, the topics and how they treat those are very similar. But I
think where the difference lies is in several areas.
And one of the key areas is in how they go about through
the certification process, whether it is a self-certification
process, whether it is done through a third party, and so on.
So I think that is a key difference that LEED brings to the
table in employing through an organization we helped start up,
the Green Building Certification Institute, by employing, you
know, eight of the ten largest certification bodies around the
world who are in the business of providing a certification to
allow them to do that. So that is one key difference.
I think another area is you see these systems, what their
genesis is, where they come from. And I think one of the
benefits of LEED is that it was designed and built by and for
the building industry. This was not USGBC working in an ivory
tower coming up with these ideas and then imposing those on
those who----
Mr. Buyer. Mr. Hicks, let me ask you this. Do you believe
that Green Globes is a more practical and affordable than other
facility assessment tools?
Mr. Hicks. I do not. I think LEED is, as we have heard
before from studies, that it is for, you know, zero to 5
percent cost, premium first cost with those benefits coming
back in the simple payback and the return on investment in the
first 6 to 2 years.
I think, you know, I would refer to the GSA's comprehensive
study on this where they found that LEED to be the preferred
and superior rating system.
Mr. Buyer. Ms. Rohde, do you have a comment on that? Would
you agree or disagree with his comments?
Ms. Rohde. Well, I would say that there are a variety of
rating systems that are out there and have different
applications for different building types.
However, I will say that the reason I worked with Green
Globes and the reason I think it is a value is that it can be
utilized directly by the people who are working in the
building. So, therefore, those who have the most knowledge of
the building, that have the most information in terms of day-
to-day operations are the ones that get to directly input into
the tool.
So because of the ease of use, because of the immediate
feedback that it gives you, its focus on energy, it is
updatable by internal resources, basically you can update it as
you go along. For the continual improvement module, I think it
makes for a more affordable good solution, better solution for
improvement and review of continual improvement for existing
buildings.
Mr. Buyer. Are these rating systems in competition with
each other, or are there cultural preferences here? Help me.
Ms. Rohde. I do not know so much in my background because I
work in both health care and senior living. One, I have had the
barrier of using LEED tools. We have used the format check list
information for different projects, but a lot of times it is
the cost of the tool itself that has limited our usage.
So as a result, we started looking at Green Globes and I
was able to pilot that with some of my senior living campus
projects who are similar to a hospital campus project.
So as a result, that is why I believe that the tool is
useful. There are pluses and minuses for all tools. I think
that green building tools are very appropriate and very much
needed, but that is my take on the Green Globes tool.
Mr. Buyer. Mr. Hicks, I know my time is over, but I will
give you the last bite here.
Mr. Hicks. Sure. You know, I would agree. I mean, as I said
in the opening response, you know, the rating systems or DNA is
very similar to one another. And it really gets down to the
cost effectiveness.
And I think, you know, there are many studies out there
that are looking at the cost effectiveness of LEED buildings
and what they are delivering in terms of environmental benefit,
in terms of their energy savings, in terms of their cost
savings.
I think, you know, again, LEED was developed by and for the
building industry. It was developed in the consensus process
and certifications being done by certification bodies that are
in the business of certification, not individuals who are
trained to perform that service.
And I think it is done by the U.S. industry and I think
that is important. This is not a tool that was imported from
another country, via another country into this country. This
was done by and for the U.S. industry here in the United
States.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Buyer.
I appreciate all of your insights.
What struck me is that our own employees, aside from the
macro policies that we are setting have a lot of creativity,
energy and expertise. I am not sure that we do, and maybe Mr.
Sullivan could address it later, but we should be mobilizing
our employees with some incentive awards or bonuses.
We seem to give bonuses to upper administration as our
backlog of disability claims increases, but we are not giving
bonuses to the people who had some of those ideas that you
mentioned.
It seems to me we could mobilize our 250,000-person
workforce with some real excitement and give them some of those
incentives and bonuses. I assume that works in big
organizations.
Do you want to say anything, Ms. Rohde?
Ms. Rohde. Yes, I would like to.
The one thing I noticed, too, is that there is a lot of
excitement going on. The Portland folks, for example, their
GEMS Committee is a very active Committee and they are doing
really strong outreach. So if we could take that outreach
program with the ``green'' package, with the, you know,
reusable bag and the whole deal, if you could take that type of
excitement and expand that to other areas that are having
issues, I think you would have a good motivator.
I know that we did talk about that in terms of how to
motivate and that is something that is a little tricky because
bonuses and time off and things like that are very much
regulated in terms of being a governmental process. So that is
something that I cannot address, but I could definitely suggest
because I think that there are good ideas out there that could
be honored as such.
The Chairman. We thank you all very much for your insight.
You have helped us all understand and guided us to look for new
solutions in energy efficiency. Thank you for your testimony
today.
We will move on to the second panel. Kevin Kampschroer is
the Acting Director of the Office of Federal High-Performance
Green Buildings at the U.S. General Services Administration
(GSA). Richard Kidd is the Program Manager of the Federal
Energy Management Program (FEMP) in the Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE).
Mr. Kidd, you win the award for the longest title for
today.
Again, your written statements will be made a part of the
record and we look forward to a 5-minute oral statement.
Mr. Kampschroer.
STATEMENTS OF KEVIN KAMPSCHROER, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
FEDERAL HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS, U.S. GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION; AND RICHARD G. KIDD IV, PROGRAM MANAGER,
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, OFFICE OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY
AND RENEWABLE ENERGY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
STATEMENT OF KEVIN KAMPSCHROER
Mr. Kampschroer. Thank you, Chairman Filner, Ranking Member
Buyer, and Members of this Committee.
My name is Kevin Kampschroer. I am the Acting Director of
the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings at the
General Services Administration.
Thank you for inviting me today to discuss the goals for
Federal agencies to become more energy efficient in a
sustainable manner and thank you for accepting my written
testimony for the record. Today I will highlight the importance
of greening our buildings.
GSA collaborates with other Federal agencies in developing,
implementing, and evaluating Federal green building programs.
We advocate the use of interagency programs and cooperations
such as Energy Star, which is jointly run by the Department of
Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency and the use of
the resources of the National Laboratories, also run by the
Department of Energy.
We have worked with the Department of Veterans Affairs on
projects such as its Veterans Benefits Office in Reno, Nevada,
which was the VA's first building rated using a third-party
independent rating system.
We continue to work with the VA on every new opportunity to
support the VA's important mission to our country's veterans.
High-performing green buildings provide the best value for
the taxpayer and the public through both life cycle cost
benefits and the positive effects on human health and
performance.
A recent study of GSA's 12th earliest green Federal
building shows energy consumption is down 26 percent, occupant
satisfaction up 26 percent compared to commercial office
benchmark data.
More importantly, the top third of those studied buildings
deliver significantly better results with 45 percent less
energy consumption, 53 percent lower maintenance costs, and 35
percent less water use.
According to a 2008 McGraw-Hill Construction report,
operating costs for green buildings are on average 8 to 9
percent lower and values are 7.5 percent higher. They have a
3.5 percent greater occupancy ratio and provide a 6.6 percent
total return on investment.
The life cycle cost of green buildings is lower than the
life cycle cost of those that are not. Even the initial capital
costs are not necessarily higher and when they are, only
marginally so.
GSA's study of the initial capital cost showed that an
increase is only from zero to three percent and it is very
dependent on the design and the quality of the integration of
that design.
Sustainable design also offers economic, environmental, and
societal benefits. If a building decreases its energy
consumption, the cost of operation is less, the asset value
increases, and the production of greenhouse gases decreases.
For example, a planted roof can have significant economic
and environmental benefits such as lowering the roof
temperature, lowering costs for neighboring buildings, reducing
the city's heat island effect, and reducing storm water runoff.
In cities like Washington, DC, this reduces water pollution
both locally and downstream in the Chesapeake Bay.
Societal benefits include physically and aesthetically
pleasing effects for building occupants and neighbors, jobs for
workers to install and maintain planted roofs, and reduction in
greenhouse gases caused by the building.
Careful selection and use of materials can reduce energy
consumption during the manufacturing process and protect the
health of occupants in the use of those materials. Careful
construction techniques, the reuse of existing structures, and
careful siting can reduce waste, decrease resource consumption,
and improve occupants' quality of life.
The key is a holistic integrated planning that considers
all factors that influence a building, including the decision
whether to build at all.
However, design challenges for high-performance green
buildings may vary for different building types. Given the
intense use of some buildings such as hospitals, health care
facilities, data centers, performance measures must be
different and the benchmarks need to be adjusted to reflect the
use of the building. One can still address energy efficiency
hospitals. In so doing, the energy efficiency decisions will be
balanced differently against air quality standards and health
related factors than they would be in a normal office building.
We need to have as much emphasis on actual building
performance as on the design criteria. California is
contemplating a standard building performance labeling as
prerequisite for every real estate transaction. Beginning in
2010, GSA will require new building leases over 10,000 square
feet to have an Energy Star rating earned in the most recent
year of operation.
The value of Energy Star and other similar measures is that
they are ongoing performance measures, not one-time design
measures.
We in the building industry and in the Federal Government
also need to expand our measures. While today we typically
concentrate on energy use in buildings, we need to remember
that buildings are also tools for businesses and organizations.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 states
that high-performance green buildings must not only perform
well mechanically but must perform to improve the health and
enhance the performance of the occupants. This is particularly
important in health care facilities where the importance of the
work within the buildings cannot be overstated.
If we only look at the energy consumption in the building,
we miss the importance of how building performance can increase
the ability of people to care for the ill, reduce the
transmission of disease, or create conditions for healing.
A key broad measure of environmental impact is greenhouse
gas emissions. Once you measure the collective effects of
greenhouse gas production by an organization with buildings as
components, you can make more informed decisions and tradeoffs.
We need to look at the way we buy materials, travel to and
from the building, the way we use the building, and how it is
operating. In both office buildings and computer centers,
integrating the occupants' operations with facility operations
can increase energy savings by as much as 50 percent and also
lower the tenant's cost of operations.
Health care facilities present particular difficulties and
opportunities. We need to create conditions in which health
care professionals can perform at their best around the clock.
A health care facility is an amalgam of office, laboratory,
hotel, data center, and industrial facility. The key is to make
sure that the building operations integrate the hospital health
care operations.
The research that the National Institutes of Health has
been conducting on the way that buildings and their mechanical
systems can either increase or mitigate the transmission of
airborne pathogens is also beginning to change the way that
health care facilities are constructed and operated.
However, more research on the unintended consequences of
current building management practices is needed. There is an
extensive study from 2004 by Craig Zimmering and Roger Ulrich
that articulates some of the research needs that are ongoing.
The creation of jobs across the design, engineering,
manufacturing, and construction operations industries will
boast with a green economy and American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act is a key component of doing that. This is an
opportunity that is not only local but very local in the
creation of jobs with new skills.
Thank you again for this opportunity to testify today and
the opportunity that the Congress has provided GSA both through
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and our continuing
service to other Federal agencies. I am available to address
any questions you may have. We look forward to continuing to
support the VA in its mission and to help the VA reduce the
environmental impact while simultaneously improving conditions
for people working in its facilities and the veterans staying
in those facilities.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kampschroer appears on p.
69.]
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Kidd.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD G. KIDD IV
Mr. Kidd. Good morning, Chairman Filner, Ranking Member
Buyer, and other distinguished Members of the Committee. I
would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear
here today. My intent is to highlight for you the energy
management performance of VA within the context of the overall
Federal Government's efforts.
By way of background, the U.S. Federal Government is the
single largest user of energy in the United States, accounting
for roughly 1.6 percent of our Nation's total energy
consumption. The bill to the taxpayers for the energy consumed
by our government is $24.5 billion.
Government actions in these areas are guided by the
legislative and policy initiatives contained within the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), Executive Orders,
and the Energy Policy Acts of 1992 and 2005, which collectively
establish energy management goals for all Federal agencies, the
most salient of which requires the U.S. government to reduce
its energy intensity by 30 percent by the year 2015, to
increase the use of renewable electric energy equivalent to 7.5
percent by 2013 and thereafter, to reduce water consumption by
2 percent annually, and to reduce petroleum consumption by 2
percent in covered fleet vehicles.
In the most general terms, the total amount of facility
energy use by the Federal Government has decreased by almost 30
percent since 1985, but it has only been in recent years that
specific measures of performance have been in place.
Summarizing the data from fiscal year 2009, 6 Federal
agencies consume 80 percent of the energy used by the Federal
Government with Veterans Affairs being the third largest.
Energy intensity in fiscal year 2008 was 12.4 percent lower on
average than the fiscal year 2003 base year with VA having
reduced its energy intensity by 11.4 percent.
Overall, the government used renewable electric energy
equivalent to 3.4 percent of its electric use. This is
significantly less than the 4.9 percent reported in 2007, but
above the current 3 percent requirement. VA exceeded this
requirement generation goal with 4.1 percent of its electric
power coming from renewable sources.
Federal agencies on average reduced their water intensity
by 2.9 percent. The VA achieved a 3 percent reduction. And in
fiscal year 2008, the government invested almost $935 million
in building efficiency improvements, $469 million through
appropriations, with the remainder coming through energy
performance and utility energy savings contracts.
An amount equivalent of 12.9 percent of the government's
total energy bill was invested in energy efficiency
improvements. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
recommends 20 percent, an amount that only three agencies met.
The VA invested 7.8 percent.
The VA has received a green status on the rating score card
that FEMP prepares for OMB signifying overall successful energy
management programs. VA's successful performance is
particularly noteworthy given the unique set of challenges that
the agency faces.
Veterans Affairs operates 153 medical centers. While these
centers constitute 75 percent of the VA's square footage, they
represent over 99 percent of its energy consumption. The VA's
energy intensity is almost 66 percent above the Federal
average, but below the national average for health care
facilities.
Veterans Affairs is also the second largest user of water
in the government on a square footage basis.
Meeting these challenges and receiving a green rating would
not have occurred without the dedicated efforts led by James
Sullivan, the Director of the Office of Asset Enterprise
Management, and VA's entire energy management team.
The Departments of Energy and Veterans Affairs have a long
history of a cooperative and productive relationship in matters
of energy efficiency.
This year, FEMP restructured itself to create a customer
service organization where every individual in our office is a
direct liaison to a Federal agency. I placed our Deputy and
senior-most engineer, Scott Richland, as our customer service
representative to VA.
This May, FEMP asked all Federal agencies to submit
proposals for technical assistance under the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act. Three VA projects were selected. These
include a detailed renewable energy feasibility study for
national cemeteries, medical center retro-commissioning
specifications, and integrated site assessments and short-term
diagnostic testing to retro-commission selected buildings
located in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina.
Before I conclude, I would like to just add a personal
statement that as a veteran, a third-generation Army officer, I
have tremendous respect and admiration for the role Veterans
Affairs plays in keeping faith with all those who have served
in uniform.
As someone with extensive international experience in
conflict and post-conflict zones gained through my service with
the United Nations and our State Department, I have a keen
appreciation for the adverse security implications generated by
our country's dependence upon foreign oil. Increasing the
energy efficiency of the Federal Government and by extension
our country as a whole is a critical step in enhancing our
Nation's security. And I am pleased to assist Veterans Affairs
and all Federal agencies in this endeavor.
I would like to thank the Members of the Committee for
giving me the opportunity to speak with you and to submit
written testimony. I look forward to answering any additional
questions that you might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kidd appears on p. 72.]
The Chairman. We thank both of you or I should say 100
percent of you. That was a joke.
Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kidd, thank you very much, both of you, for being here
today and for your testimony and for your work.
From your perspective, what are some of the things that we
might be able to do that might help you in making your job
easier in assessing in terms of what is going on?
I think it is our goal in the long term is that we felt
that we could make 20 percent efficiencies issues just roughly
overall. What is the goal now for the VA overall and what are
some of the areas you think that we can make some improvements
and maybe highlighting some of the areas where you think that
they are moving on?
Would you like to comment on that, Mr. Kidd?
Mr. Kidd. Thank you very much.
As indicated, VA has some very unique challenges, unique as
compared to all the other Federal agencies, given the fact that
it runs health care centers. And the health care centers, as
Mr. Kampschroer pointed out, have extreme demands in terms of
water, air, energy, data management--all of this has to be done
in an environment which is conducive to healing.
So I would commend VA and their current team for all the
efforts that they have done and the good work that they have
put forward to date.
The goals for VA are the same as for all the Federal
agencies, a 30 percent energy intensity reduction by 2015 and a
2 percent per year annual water reduction to 16 percent by
2015.
In terms of assistance that can be provided, I do not think
it is for me to say what the requirements this Committee should
place on VA. But speaking for the whole Federal Government, the
issue of energy management is one of increased importance. And
the increased attention that you and other Members of Congress
give to this issue, I believe is appreciated by all of us.
Mr. Rodriguez. What are some of the gaps that you see where
there might be some additional improvements that could be made
with the VA?
Mr. Kidd. Well, I think Veterans Affairs like all Federal
agencies, is wrestling with the challenge of a range of
demands, some immediate, some long term, and how to effectively
allocate their resources to succeed in meeting all of these
demands.
So I do not think Veterans Affairs has challenges that are
unique to just that one agency beyond the requirements of
addressing the energy, water needs on the medical facilities.
Mr. Rodriguez. And so from your office, a year from now, 5
years from now as you go back, what are some of the things that
can help you in looking at to see if we will be able to get
where we need to go? Do we need to do some additional
assessments of best practices? When you come before us next
year or 5 years from now, how do we get to that level that we
want to get to?
Mr. Kidd. Right now in EISA, section 432, there is a
requirement for Federal agencies to audit 25 percent of their
goal covered buildings every year. So if I were to come back
next year or the year after or the year thereafter, I would
come back with data representing respectively 50, 75, and 100
percent of the Federal buildings, because of the additional
auditing performed on those Federal buildings.
That data will be tracked and reported through an online,
Web-based tracking system and that should be up this winter,
January or February timeframe. So if I came back a year from
now, you would have access to that data online FEMP could
analyze it, and we could have a discussion about the results of
the energy audits which have been performed on Federal
facilities.
That information will give us a much clearer picture as to
all the positive things that the Federal Government has done
and, likewise, it will highlight for us greater areas where
additional work needs to be taken. It will highlight our missed
opportunities, if you will.
Mr. Rodriguez. At the present time, what do you suggest we
do besides going out and looking at for them to expedite what
is occurring to get there as quickly as possible? Any
recommendations from the GAO from that perspective? How do we
get there as quickly as possible? I know I can see some of the
facilities moving. I can see others not moving maybe.
Mr. Kidd. Well, I would say that speed, while speed is
important, it is not the most important criteria. And I would
echo the comments that Mr. Kampschroer made about the
requirement to take an integrated, whole systems approach to
designing our new buildings and retrofitting our old buildings.
So speed is important, but quality is more important. And
we are going to have better buildings if we bring all the
stakeholders together at the same room at the same time,
architects, engineers, occupants, managers, patients.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Rodriguez, thank you.
Mr. Michaud.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Just a couple of quick questions.
We heard the first panel talk about issues such as food and
some of our contracting and procurement issues that are
currently out there, which could be problematic if you are
looking at new technology and green energy.
What have your agencies done to really look at some of the
problems or do you see any problems with the procurement
issues?
And I will use food, for instance. I know in Maine, I am
sure a lot of other VA facilities could potentially buy local
food from farmers who are probably veterans. You get fresh
food, therefore, when you look at the waste that goes there as
well. Any comments?
Mr. Kampschroer. Thank you.
The procurement process is being systematically revised
across the Federal Government to take more into account factors
such as transportation of goods and materials on the way to the
site, the quality of materials.
We started, for example, in the 1990s requiring not only
our own operators of buildings to use green cleaning materials
that were less toxic but also to require that again in the
contractors. It is an ongoing issue in procurement to make sure
that people who have contracts with the Federal Government are
actually performing according to those specifications.
We are also examining the possibility of providing direct
access to contract from, you know, contractor A to buy off of a
schedule to make sure that the right materials are actually
being procured so that if both are working for the government,
you can make sure, and, again, I use green cleaning as an
example, that the products that have already been tested and we
know are qualified then are used by subcontractors who are
doing cleaning of facilities. And this sort of ricochets
through all manner of procurement.
I think also, as I mentioned, as we begin to use more
comprehensive measures such as greenhouse gas accounting, we
will begin to see those factors take a larger role in
procurement that will again, I think, make an overall
improvement in our procurement decisions.
Mr. Buyer. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Michaud. Yes.
Mr. Buyer. Mr. Michaud asked you about food.
Mr. Kampschroer. Yes. And in the procurement of food as
well about which I know somewhat less than green cleaning, we
are also changing, I know in the area of procurement for GSA's
own cafeterias to emphasize just exactly the kind of examples
Mr. Michaud mentioned. And I would be happy to get a more
complete response on the subject of food to the Committee.
[The GSA subsequently provided the following information:]
The General Services Administration (GSA) is committed to
incorporating principles of sustainable design and energy
efficiency into all of its procurement practices, including its
building projects; we address food service in more detail
below. In addition, President Obama signed Executive Order (EO)
13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance on October 5th, setting sustainability
performance goals for all Federal agencies. The EO requires
Federal agencies to set 2020 greenhouse gas emission reduction
targets, increase energy efficiency, support sustainable
communities, and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote
environmentally responsible products and technologies.
Specifically, section 2(h) requires agencies to ensure that 95
percent of new contract actions including task and delivery
orders are energy efficient, water efficient, bio-based,
environmentally preferable, non-ozone depleting, contain
recycled content, or are non-toxic or less-toxic alternatives
where such products and services meet agency performance
requirements.
While GSA does not procure food directly, each item in
GSA's Federal Supply System is assigned to a specific Source of
Supply (SOS) for management. Food is in Federal Supply Class
(FSC) Group 89, which is acquired by the Department of Defense,
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Supply Center in Philadelphia,
PA, through the Defense Revitalization and Marketing Service
(DRMS). Information can be found at http://www.drms.dla.mil/
asset/fsclist.html. DLA has been designated as the integrated
materiel manager at the wholesale level for one or more
consumable items of supply in the FSC.
GSA uses the GSA Schedules Program to acquire food service,
hospitality, cleaning equipment and supplies, food service
equipment and supplies, kitchen management solutions, emergency
and non-emergency food service support, refrigeration, cooking,
dishwashing, food preparation, storage equipment, and other
miscellaneous food industry items.
GSA provides food service operations in hundreds of Federal
workplaces for more than one million employees, contractors and
visitors who are housed in our 354 million-square foot
inventory. GSA has the authority to provide concessions in GSA-
controlled buildings, with operations ranging from vending
machines, snack bars, to full-service cafeterias, cafes, and
food courts.
In response to President Obama's recent challenge to
improve the health and wellness of Federal employees, GSA is
initiating changes to its national food service template in FY
2010 to include language on wellness and sustainability. While
this template is specifically for GSA actions, it will be
available to all Federal agencies to use, and made available to
the public. New GSA contracts will have the flexibility to be
tailored to local market offerings and consumer demand,
ensuring adequate competition and successful vendor operations.
Food service vendors will be asked to incorporate healthy menu
options and expand menu variety, including green food and
sustainable services, organic, locally grown and locally
sustainable products. Furthermore, GSA will ask vendors to
incorporate such energy-saving practices as recycling,
composting, food donation programs, and cleaning services
adhering to Green Seal Environmental standards, and to align
their operations with the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building rating system.
Mr. Michaud. My next question is for the Department of
Energy as well as the GSA. My concern is, that everyone is
talking about green energy, that we have got to be energy
efficient. But when I look at what is happening in certain
agencies as far as some of the standards, I will use
transportation, for instance, because Maine is doing a lot of,
through the University of Maine, with a bridge and a backpack
which actually is stronger than steel. When you look at the
CO2 impact, it reduces the impact. The durability is
great. But I do not see any real initiatives coming out from
the Department of Energy. What I see the Department of Energy
doing is looking at the bigger chunks of money going to certain
areas versus trying to really focus on some of the technology.
A good example and it gets right back to wind rather than
import the steel from China for windmill blades they are also
doing work with wood composite. And the durability, the
strength is actually just as great as steel and the maintenance
is low because you do not have to worry about the rusting. And
the maintenance is extremely low.
And off the coast of Maine, you have got the equivalent of
40 nuclear power plants, but the Department of Energy is just
sitting down here doing whatever it is doing. I do not see them
being really proactive in getting back to thinking outside the
box in new technology, new ideas. The only ideas I see coming
are those from within the administration, which is really the
driving force.
I would ask the Department of Energy to comment on what you
are really doing proactively? And how are you being really
aggressive out there on energy that relates to the VA
facilities as well?
Mr. Kidd. Thank you.
Well, I would submit that the Department of Energy is
investing significant amounts of money across the entire
spectrum of technologies that are required to make energy
efficiency and renewable energy less costly and more available
to the American people.
Both in our standard budget and in the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act funds, you have seen tremendous increases
in investment on light weighting technologies, which you
mentioned because light weighting technologies are viable for
vehicles. Roughly 6 percent of the energy in your car, in your
gasoline powered car, goes to move the weight of the occupant.
The rest goes to move the weight of the vehicle or is lost in
friction or in engine inefficiencies. So light weighting is a
key component for windmills, for transportation across the
board. We are investing in that.
One of the key issues is energy storage, how do we get the
renewable power available for a longer period of time when the
wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. We are making
billions of dollars of investment in the issue of power
storage.
All right. In terms of the turbine efficiency, we are
investing in that. In terms of building envelope design,
mechanical practices, in building controls, all of these are
areas which are receiving tremendous investment across all the
National Laboratories.
In terms of the National Laboratories and your question,
what can we do to accelerate the deployment of this technology
to the Federal agencies, that is where I come in. I am very
interested in that topic.
In the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we had a
number of requests across the Federal agencies for assistance
from DOE. We were oversubscribed. In fact, we were 400 percent
oversubscribed from Federal agencies asking us for what we
could do in regards to the resources that we had.
And what we did is we looked out across the entire DOE lab
enterprise, which is really a national asset, the great
capacity that resides in our laboratories, and we said, look,
we are not just going to bring one lab to this problem. It is
not about building envelopes, all right, in the case of a
military installation. It is about building envelopes and
renewables and grid and power storage and all these issues. And
so let us bring them all together.
So in response to a requirement that originated in the
State of Hawaii and the Pacific Command, we are bringing six
National Laboratories to a problem that just a year ago, we
probably would have only brought one lab to.
So we are making some improvements. And I am committed to
trying to get that technology from the DOE labs to the Federal
agencies as soon as possible and make the Federal Government a
leader and a first adopter for the rest of the country.
Thank you.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Bilbray.
Mr. Bilbray. Yeah. Let me, just so I will reflect the
gentleman from Maine's comment, show you how much talk is
really very large out there and performance is very low.
In the mid 1970s, the Federal Government did the study to
prove composite technology using wood and saturation epoxies,
were much stronger, much less maintenance and much more
efficient than using traditional metal. But you have old habits
to break.
So this goes all the way back to like 1976, I think, when
the study breakthrough flat out said, in fact, actually, if I
remember right, it was a group called the Gudgeon Brothers who
actually had learned the technology building boats in Michigan
and applying it to wind generation. And we are still fighting
this battle.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask a couple questions. And
let me just sort of warn the panelists.
I served 6 years on the Air Resources Board for California,
some of the best scientists in the world on these issues, 10
years on an air district. And, frankly, I heard a lot of talk
and a lot of promises and I see very little performance.
I hate to say it. I guess when I got here, Mr. Chairman
will remember when I got here and was blown out that the
Capitol of the United States was being heated and cooled by
coal. In California, you go to prison for burning coal. And it
was stacked up outside and nobody even realized that here we
were leading through example. And that is the one thing I want
to get down to is this leading through example.
And I have just got to tell you it burns me every time I
see our SUVs out there with E85 on it as if that is some kind
of great environmental benefit to the world and taking credit
for this stuff when scientists are telling us, no, but politics
is saying it is much better, much more efficient to do that.
You were talking about renewables. My question to you is
move the conversation. What portion or is there any mandate
that your departments are buying zero emission electricity for
our facilities?
And do not get into the renewable issue because wood
burning is counted as renewable and it is one of the most
polluting particulate problems we have in air pollution. But
when it comes down to zero emission, do we have any mandate
that the Federal Government and your facilities have to buy
zero emission?
Mr. Kidd. Sir, the mandate for renewable power, is a 7.5
percent target by 2015. Power generated through biomass
processes is classified as renewable, and that is how we track
it. We could give you a breakdown of the current percentage.
With some time, I could get back to you by what the breakdown
is of the----
[The DOE subsequently provided the following information:]
Currently, FEMP does not break down renewable energy
generation at the agency level by source. Rather, FEMP
maintains its renewable energy generation statistics as a
function of the percentage of renewable energy generated
relative to the total agency energy generation.
Mr. Bilbray. Okay. So we are actually going to be buying
electricity and continuing to subsidize electricity that is
contributing to the greenhouse gases and polluting. We still
have not required that all our electricity is off the carbon
chain.
Let me ask you this. You have got about a third of your
projected energy intensity reduction by buying energy credits,
right?
Mr. Kidd. That is correct now, but the Department of Energy
is phasing out the value of renewable energy credits (RECs) for
calculating compliance with the energy intensity goal. So by
2012, RECs will no longer count as a contributing factor to the
energy intensity reduction goal. They will only count for the
renewable goal.
Mr. Bilbray. Okay. And I am really sorry, Mr. Kidd.
California started this whole concept of offset trading, but
the history of it, especially with the Federal Government, is
less than stellar.
I think you know the fiasco we had here of promising the
consumers that the Capitol was going to green, bought offsets,
and none of those offsets were ever--it was the biggest sham in
the world.
I just really would love to see the accounting on this
because I have seen nothing but bait and switch on these
offsets with no enforceability, nobody coming down hard on it,
nobody paying a price for setting up the shams. And I think
that is one of those issues that we--when you say this, I want
to see how you are going to enforce it, how you are going to
mandate it.
If anybody buys, basically pays for this, and it does not
happen, who is held accountable? If the farmers that you are
paying do not do the stuff they claim to do, like what happened
with our Capitol, our so-called green strategy, who is
accountable, whose head rolls, because there is a lot of
promises being made here and we are not seeing it?
The question I have on the other attitude is when we talk
about location, let us not talk about building, but when we
talk about resiting the facility, how much is location and the
availability of mass transit and existing infrastructure
determined in the siting? Is there a mandate that that priority
be given by your departments?
Mr. Kampschroer. There is a set of internal guidelines that
GSA uses to ensure that that happens. There is a mandate in
Executive Order that we apply to those. We factor that into our
leasing decisions as well. It is one of the components that we
evaluate in every lease that we award across the country.
Mr. Bilbray. Why are we depending on certificates, energy
certificates rather than going straight for clean technology,
Mr. Kidd, the purchase of these certificates? Why are we not
wheeling clean technology? With the grid the way it is now, we
can go out of State and wheel clean technology into our
facilities. Why are we not doing that? Why are we playing this
certificate game rather than going over and actually dealing
directly and working on wheeling clean energy into our
facilities?
Mr. Kidd. I think the Federal Government is making some
significant investments in renewable technology and energy
efficiency technologies. The way the goal setup is structured
is that for agencies to get credit, they have to bring new
sources online.
One of the things that we are looking for----
Mr. Bilbray. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa,
whoa. Wait. Excuse me. You said to get credit for what to bring
new sources online?
Mr. Kidd. The goal for renewable power generation of 7.5
percent, half of that requirement has to be met through new
energy sources, so new renewable power sources that are
created. You cannot buy your way to goal compliance.
Mr. Bilbray. And why? You cannot buy your way to buying
clean energy. You cannot pay more for existing clean energy and
wheeling that to you. You cannot do that. Is that what you are
saying, 50 percent of this?
Mr. Kidd. No. I am saying that for goal compliance, the
agencies get credit for renewable power, which is generated on
their site or on premise. Alternatively, agencies can also get
partial credit for renewable power which they purchase via
RECs.
Mr. Bilbray. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bilbray.
Mr. Buyer.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The GSA, do you support providing the VA the same authority
that the Department of Defense has to enter into long-term, 20-
year commodity procurement contracts?
Mr. Kampschroer. GSA supports, and has submitted a
legislative proposal to, extend the authority for utility
purchases for renewable power for up to 20 years. It was also a
component in the earlier drafts of the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007, but not in the final.
And where that authority granted, it would be available to
every Federal agency either through delegation from GSA or by
GSA's use of the procurement authority for the agencies as we
do across the government.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
On average, can you tell me how long it takes for an
interested company to complete the application process for
inclusion on a GSA schedule?
Mr. Kampschroer. My understanding is that it is
approximately 4 months today, but I would be better served to
give you the information for the record after the fact.
Mr. Buyer. If we switch chairs and you were a Member of
Congress, you would get to hear the complaints about
individuals and their applications and how long it takes. And
it is much longer than that. Sort of the rule of thumb out
there in the street is that it could take up to a year. And I
just find that unacceptable.
I think it is probably some of the frustration that Mr.
Michaud has with trying to do the contracting. And we are going
to get into procurement issues later on, probably in October,
November, and we will invite GSA to come back.
Let me ask this. If you know, what is my answer to these
companies that complain about how long it takes to get on a GSA
schedule? Who do I refer them to or how do you advance the
process?
Mr. Kampschroer. We have created a new Web site partially
as a result of the intense interest in doing business with the
government by new firms that the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act has caused. I would refer them to that Web
site. We have a number of people, gsa.gov/recovery, and then it
is pretty clear. I would certainly provide the Committee
information on how best to go about it depending on the nature
of the product.
[The GSA subsequently provided the following information:]
Generally speaking, it takes between 3 to 4 months from the
time an offer is received until an award is made. However,
there are many factors which may impact the offer processing
timeframe, such as:
LQuality/completeness of the incoming offer as
incomplete information requires clarification requests until
the information is sufficient to support a ``fair and
reasonable'' price determination by a Contracting Officer;
LWorkload of the Contracting Officer;
LComplexity of the Offer; and
LPre-award audits, if applicable.
GSA is making efforts to improve the process. For example,
Pathways to Success is an online tutorial focused on educating
the potential contractor about the Schedules program and the
associated contract compliance responsibilities. The intent is
to enable the contractor to make an informed decision about
whether or not it is prepared to support and maintain a Federal
contract.
In addition, our Supplier Management organization (within
the FAS Office of Acquisition Management) conducts a New
Contractor Orientation, and also visits each new contractor to
assess systems capability for tracking and reporting contract
sales, understanding of contract scope, and other contract
compliance areas such as the Basis of Award and the Price
Reduction Clause.
Various other process improvement projects, most using the
Lean Six Sigma methodology, are underway to address both the
new offer and the contract modification processes in the
Schedules program. These process improvements should reduce the
cycle time for processing offers and modifications.
Mr. Kampschroer. I have worked personally with different
firms that have been referred to GSA by themselves, by other
people, and I know that 4 months is achievable and I understand
that it used to take longer. So I am hopeful that the
improvements that we are making in the process will not only
take place but have a positive effect on increasing the
competition for work with the Federal Government.
Mr. Buyer. The challenge here is, and we can get into this
a little bit later with the VA, as we move to the renewable
energy projects that are existing with the VA and then through
that procurement process, they look at the GSA schedule and
say, okay, with regard to photovoltaic, who are the existing
companies out there. So they look at solar. You know, you come
under the category of solar.
But a lot of what I have learned here is that there are a
lot of large companies that are roofers who are also in the
photovoltaic business, but guess what? They are not under solar
under GSA. So as this new wave of contracts just went out
through the VA, a lot of these very large companies here in the
United States that also do solar, they are roofers. They are
not electricians.
The roofers threw the electricians off the roof, rightfully
so. They put all the money up there to put all that ply up,
they do not like holes in it. Now, the first person you call is
not the electrician if you have got raindrops coming through,
right?
And so these very large companies are very upset. Number
one, they did not know that the wave of bids went out and they
did not get to participate in the process. And we are feeling
some wave of some complaints. I just want to let you know that.
And so I am going to get into that a little bit later here with
the VA.
But I will work with you if you are going to give us some
recommendations on this Web site and I can refer these
companies to it. If all these green jobs that we are talking
about, they are new and emerging companies who also want to do
business not only in the private sector but with government,
but as these monies roll out and projects roll out, they are
not able to bid. They are not able to bid because they are not
on the GSA schedule. And they are locked out.
And so when they get locked out and if the only game in
town, not the only game, but the most emergent game in town is
government because of the stimulus bill, we have to deal with
the wave of complaints. So I want to work with you on this.
Okay?
I am going to end with a compliment to GSA. My compliment
is in regard to the Public Law 106-50 and the Presidential
Executive Order 13360 to establish a goal for all Federal
agencies to award 3 percent of the contract dollars to service-
disabled, veteran-owned businesses. And according to the SBA
Web site, GSA, you are at 3.93 percent. So you have exceeded
the goal set by the President and by Congress. So I
congratulate you.
To the Department of Energy, you are at \1/2\ of 1 percent.
I call that failure. I call that an embarrassment. So the next
time you want to get out and you come to Congress and you want
to talk about green jobs and creating all those jobs, be
careful which Committee you come to. If you come to the
Veterans' Committee and you talk like that, I am going to do a
little research on you. And I think we can do better. So please
take the message back, please, that with regard to these green
jobs and these emergent jobs, go to the schedule and find out
who are the veterans and disabled veteran small-owned
businesses and as we seek to meet our goals, I think we can do
two things at once.
Do you agree with that, Mr. Kidd? Sound like a good plan?
Mr. Kidd. Ranking Member Buyer, that sounds like a great
plan. I took----
Mr. Buyer. When you take that back, tell them Mr. Buyer
asked for it.
Mr. Kidd. Buyer, yes, sir. I will do that.
Mr. Buyer. All right. Thanks.
Thank you.
Mr. Bilbray. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Thank you both for your testimony and your help as we move
forward.
And we will ask for the third panel to----
Mr. Bilbray. Mr. Chairman, before they leave, could I just
ask one quick followup?
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bilbray. The renewable energy credits and the
certificates, what portion of those credits are within the
political subdivision of the United States and what portion
could possibly be outside of the United States, the credits and
the offsets?
Mr. Kidd. Sir, I do not know the specific answer to that
question. On my written testimony, I have given you a breakdown
by agency of how much of their renewable energy comes from on-
site generation and how much comes from renewable energy credit
purchases. We will check and get back to you on how much is
within the United States and how much is external to the United
States.
[The DOE subsequently provided the following information:]
Zero percent. The U.S. Government has not purchased any
Renewable Energy Credits (``RECs'') that certify any renewable
energy generated outside of the territory of the United States.
All REC's are associated with a point of generation inside the
U.S., and fed into the U.S. grid. FEMP has confirmed with
agencies that buy RECs on behalf of the U.S. Government (e.g.,
Defense Energy Support Center, Power Marketing Agencies), that
all Federally purchased REC's are from generation inside the
U.S.
Mr. Kidd. I would just also like to highlight for the
Committee that FEMP has prepared a guide on how to sell green
products to the Federal Government. That is available on our
Web site. So when any of your constituents bring that to you,
that is another resource that you have available to you and
that covers all avenues of sales to the Federal Government
beyond just the GSA schedules.
Mr. Bilbray. I just want to warn you anything outside of
the United States is going to be very, very heavily hit based
on a whole lot of things that are coming down the pike. And the
auditing and the ability to account for any credits that are
outside our jurisdiction really is going to be raised into
question very quickly not only by the environmental community,
but a lot of the media is going to be seeing this coming down
the pike. Okay? Stay away from out of country offsets.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Bilbray.
We will ask the third panel to join us. From the Department
of Veterans Affairs, James Sullivan is the Director of the
Office of Asset Enterprise Management. He is accompanied by
Edward Bradley, Director of Investment and Enterprise
Development Service in the Office of Asset Enterprise
Management. John Stenger is the Director of Healthcare
Engineering at the VHA. John Beatty is the Director of Safety,
Health, Environmental and Emergency Management at the VHA.
Thank you for being here today. You have gotten a lot of
compliments, Mr. Sullivan, and we are anxious to hear if you
deserve them or not.
STATEMENT OF JAMES M. SULLIVAN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ASSET
ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS;
ACCOMPANIED BY EDWARD L. BRADLEY, III, DIRECTOR, INVESTMENT AND
ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT SERVICE, OFFICE OF ASSET ENTERPRISE
MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; JOHN D.
STENGER, EIT, BSME, DIRECTOR, HEALTHCARE ENGINEERING, OFFICE OF
THE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH FOR OPERATIONS AND
MANAGEMENT, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS; AND JOHN D. BEATTY, DIRECTOR OF SAFETY,
HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, VETERANS HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Mr. Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Buyer, and Members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to present the
Department of Veterans Affairs Green Management Program, our
commitment to energy efficiency and cleaner energy and to
building lasting change that reduces VA's impact on the
environment.
I am accompanied here today by Mr. Ed Bradley on my right,
Director of the Investment and Enterprise Development Service;
John Stenger sitting next to me, Director of Healthcare
Engineering; and John Beatty, Director of Safety, Health,
Environment and Emergency Management from the Department's
Veterans Health Administration.
From the outset, let me acknowledge and thank the witnesses
from the other panels today for their assistance in helping us
at VA reach our energy and sustainability goals. The Department
of Energy has gone over and above to assist us in performing
energy assessments--across the country, we have conducted
energy assessments on all VA-owned facilities as of this year--
and in supplying us educational and outreach materials and
capability.
The GSA has been working with us to help curtail our energy
consumption in numerous ways. The U.S. Green Building Council
and the Green Building Institute have been instrumental in
helping us with our certification of existing and newly
constructed facilities.
Before I go on about the Green Program, I need to emphasize
that our primary mission, which I am sure you would agree, is
to care for and provide services to veterans and their
families. Everything we do every day, that we undertake must
uphold and support the sacred responsibility and trust to care
for our Nation's veterans.
Our Green Program supports our core mission. It is simply,
we believe, a smarter and better approach to managing our
assets. We believe in acting as good stewards for the assets
that the American people have entrusted to the VA.
VA is making great strides in conserving resources at our
facilities across the country by proactively managing its
energy, environmental, fleet, and sustainable building efforts.
These four program areas are the cornerstone of our Green
Program.
We have, for example, reduced the rate at which VA uses
energy in its buildings by 11 percent since 2003 and we have
put energy management expertise in place at the local level
through the addition of dedicated energy managers to support
all VA facilities.
We have exceeded our alternative fuel vehicle acquisition
mandates and we are now installing pumps to dispense
alternative fuels at ten fueling stations across the country.
To date, 10 VA facilities, or about 7 million gross square
feet, have earned the certification as green buildings and we
are currently in the process of having an additional 11
buildings and campuses being certified as we sit here today.
To meet Federal mandates and ensure appropriate management
of our utility consumption, VA has recently awarded a contract
to install advanced electrical metering at all VA-owned
facilities. We are also dedicating over $400 million in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to make our
facilities more efficient and to add solar, wind, and other
renewable projects to our portfolio. To date, we have spent
approximately $60 million dedicated to energy efficiency
projects from this money.
VA has been a leader in implementing renewable
technologies. We recently awarded a wind turbine contract at
our Saint Cloud, Minnesota VA facility, 18 contracts for solar
photovoltaic projects, and additional contracts were awarded in
August for renewably fueled cogeneration projects at 38
different sites around the country.
At the Las Vegas VA Medical Center now under construction,
VA is installing solar panels that we believe will generate up
to 20 percent of the electrical needs of that facility.
At the Bronx VA Medical Center, a cogeneration plant is
planned and partially funded--with a projected payback in 3
years--as we install a new spinal cord injury unit in place
which Congress has funded.
We have conducted renewable energy feasibility studies at
other major projects that have been authorized and funded by
Congress such as Denver, New Orleans, and Orlando, and we will
be employing renewable energy activities at those sites based
upon those studies.
Next week, we will be launching what is known as the Green
Routine Initiative at VA to highlight October as energy
awareness month. This initiative takes the Department's
commitment to greening VA to the individual employee level
through a new Web site, videotape broadcasting, instructional
handbooks, and other materials designed to educate our
employees on simple tips and actions that can make a difference
at work to make green real and routine in every-day activities.
Going green to us means making the right investments and
putting green practices in place at every level of the
organization. Simply put, doing the right thing every day.
Mr. Chairman, you have my written statement. My colleagues
and I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sullivan appears on p. 79.]
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Sullivan.
Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much.
And you mentioned, you have a program in October that will
begin to reach out to the workers and----
Mr. Sullivan. Yes.
Mr. Rodriguez [continuing]. I think that would be a
tremendous idea because I think--and especially if you also
localize it to their own homes also because when we start
watching what is going on at home, we are also conscious of
what is happening at work. And I would hope that that is--and I
do not know if that is--part of the effort that you have.
Mr. Sullivan. Right. Our thrust is twofold. From the top
down, we are directing investments in the infrastructure that
need to be made and, secondly, and probably more importantly in
terms of the impact, is getting all of our employees on board
in their daily activities and integrating best practices,
whether it is turning off the light, whether it is looking at
how they recycle, making sure that they do briefings paperless,
whatever they may be, we have drafted it and we will have a
tool kit that will be distributed. And we will be happy to
provide a copy of it to the Committee next week for every
employee in VA so that will be ingrained in their culture.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
VA's Green Routine campaign was launched on Monday, October
5, 2009.
This campaign is designed to increase the awareness among
VA employees of their environmental impact as individuals and
as members of the Federal Government.
The newly established Web page at www.va.gov/greenroutine
contains a green resources guide for managers and employees
entitled Greening Action Guide & Toolkit. This guide provides
easy lifestyle changes for employees to perform daily in their
office environment to help reduce the agency's carbon
footprint, and promote awareness of their environmental impact.
The Web page also provides tips, facts, and governmental
resources that provide information about how to enact a daily
Green Routine. [The guide ``Veterans Affairs Central Office
Greening Action Guide and Toolkit,'' dated September 2009, and
the presentation by the Office of Asset Enterprise Management,
entitled ``VA Green Management Program: Energy, Environment,
Fleet and Sustainable Buildings,'' dated September 2009, are
being retained in the Committee files.]
Please let us know if you have any additional questions and
we would be happy to assist. Ed Bradley, Director of Investment
and Enterprise Development Service, can be contacted at (202)
461-7778.
Mr. Rodriguez. And I think that would great, especially
now. I think people are going back to also being a little more
frugal, not spending money, and the same thing applies to
energy and those sources.
The earlier questions regarding energy, I guess each
facility usually buys their energy from the closest facility
that is available in the community. And so that data is kind of
difficult to grab a hold of the type of electricity that you
are using. But you did say you did an assessment also of each
of the facilities.
So if I look at the facilities that, you know, like, for
example, the site in San Antonio, the site in El Paso, I would
see where the strengths are and the weaknesses; is that
correct?
Mr. Sullivan. That is correct. The Federal mandate is for
us to do energy assessments, 25 percent of our portfolio of
owned facilities every year. We actually exceeded that. We did
a third each year and we just completed the first full round of
those.
And there was an outside consultant that came in and looked
at the energy needs of the facility, what could be changed in
terms of operation and maintenance practices, what investments
needed to be made with the idea to bring someone else in, look
at it, and say what do we need to do.
We then take those energy assessments when we look at our
investments and target our investments to address those
priorities that are identified in those studies.
Mr. Rodriguez. Can I ask you to provide that to my office,
the site in El Paso and as well as the one in San Antonio----
Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely, sir.
Mr. Rodriguez [continuing]. You know, Audie Murphy and----
Mr. Sullivan. Sure.
Mr. Rodriguez [continuing]. I would appreciate that.
[The VA provided two reports to Congressman Rodriguez,
entitled: ``Phase II Energy Assessment, Department of Veterans
Affairs, VA Heart of Texas Health Care Network, VISN 17,''
dated March 10, 2008, and ``Phase II Report to Department of
Veterans Affairs, VISN 18 Energy Assessment,'' dated February
28, 2007. The reports will be retained in the Committee files.]
Mr. Rodriguez. Now, what kind of a response do you have in
terms of identifying the weaknesses later on in terms of
accomplishing some of those goals that you have for each of the
facilities?
Mr. Sullivan. As I think I mentioned earlier, the struggle
that we deal with every day is balancing the greenness with
providing the health care and providing the cemetery services.
For example, in the cemetery area, the folks are making
great strides in dryscape, looking at other alternatives to
reduce our water in cemeteries. But at some point, we do reach
a wall where if we take the action, it will adversely affect a
service to the veteran.
And so that is the constant struggle that we deal with and
the energy managers in the field deal with on a daily basis to
make sure we have that right balance. That is probably our
largest challenge.
Mr. Rodriguez. Okay. Now, in accomplishing that, I know in
some of the facilities that I have visited, they talk about the
fact that there is not enough staffing and some of it has been
contracted out.
Has that been looked at as to how best to make this happen?
I would hope that we would have sufficient resources now at
least to hire the staff that is needed?
Mr. Sullivan. From our perspective, I can assure you that
both last year and this year we have received significant
support from the Secretary in terms of funding our needs. We
have put in place 112 or 118 energy managers in the field
dedicated to doing this kind of work. We have also had
significant funding increases from ARRA and from others.
And what we are doing is developing an in-house capability
in a lot of cases and training our own people, obviously
supplementing it at times with expertise outside of our realm,
but primarily it is an in-house capability.
Mr. Rodriguez. And the initial question that I had on the
new facilities, are we on top of that in making sure that we
try to be as efficient as possible in the building of the new
facilities?
Mr. Sullivan. We are trying. All projects that were
submitted to Congress for funding from 2009 and on are fully
compliant with all of the new standards. The ones prior to
that, since the standard did not exist when we submitted the
funding request, we are going back and trying to retrofit or
make changes to any of those facilities.
You know, an example is Las Vegas. When we got the initial
funding on Las Vegas, we did not have a lot of these mandates
in place 3 and 4 years ago. So what we have done is we have
hired someone to come in and look at the Vegas example and say
what can we do, even though parts of that are fully designed
and partially under construction, what can we do there to
include renewables. And they have identified a significant
solar capability that was not originally in the contract that
we are going to put in where we believe that will take care of
about 20 percent of the electricity needs of that hospital.
So we are catching up on the ones that were in the pipeline
and all the new ones are fully compliant starting in fiscal
year 2009.
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Michaud.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Sullivan, for coming here as well.
You had mentioned that the VA has sited some windmills. Is
that on the VA's facilities and, if so, how has the permitting
process been going?
Mr. Sullivan. At this point, we have identified two sites
for wind turbines, one in Saint Cloud and one potentially in
Bourne, Massachusetts, at the cemetery. We have also 13 studies
underway to see where else we could site those. And in that
process, we do go through the environmental and historic
preservation processes where we bring out to the community what
we are doing.
We have also had some smaller wind projects in Michigan
that were not really windmills but ones that go across the top
of the building, so it is less visible to the public.
Mr. Michaud. Okay. So there are no actual windmills that
you have really sited on the VA campuses?
Mr. Sullivan. Well, the one in Saint Cloud is sited on the
campus. We identified the parcel. The contract was awarded. The
one in Bourne, I believe, is projecting an award sometime in
January.
Mr. Michaud. Okay. Has it been built though?
Mr. Sullivan. No.
Mr. Michaud. Okay. My next question, as you heard from the
other two panels, the issue about procurement, and when you
look at energy whether it is food or transportation costs for
energy, have you run into any problems dealing with some of the
procurement issues getting what you need as far as green?
Mr. Sullivan. I think in terms the way we have addressed
this is prior to 2 years ago, we had decentralized the
procurement capability. It was fairly decentralized for energy
anyway out to individual medical centers. About 3 years ago, we
pulled that all together and created the National Energy
Business Contracting Center. All of these contracts are done by
a dedicated group of folks that just do energy contracts.
So we think that that has helped significantly. But in any
contracting issue, it is always a challenge to keep moving
forward and balancing how fast we move with the quality of what
we are doing.
And I know a lot of folks, not so much in this forum here
but other forums, have pushed so hard about why are we not
doing more quicker. Part of it is to make sure we are doing it
right and we are trying to do it right.
Mr. Michaud. Now, you had mentioned the VA meeting the
standards that are out there. But my question is, do you think
the standards are adequate? That is, I met with a businessowner
who is working with insulation and cellulose, which is what
they do. It is flame retardant. It is better than regular
fiberglass insulation. And you do not have to deal with the
health problems with fiberglass insulation. It is made out of
trees so it is definitely green.
So can you comment on that as far as, yes, you might be
meeting the standards, but are the standards up to date or can
we do better improving some of the standards that are currently
out there that you are meeting?
Mr. Sullivan. We have updated all of our standards in 2007
and 2008 for energy-related requirements for the facilities we
build and the facilities we lease.
In terms of that particular technology, I am not familiar
with it. Primarily we rely on GSA and DOE to give us guidance
in terms of what are the breaks between research and actual
useable technology. That is not to say that we do not look. If
opportunities come like this, we would be happy to take a look
at it and see if there is an application at VA for that.
Mr. Michaud. Okay. And my last question: when you talk
about trying to be more energy efficient in the facilities that
you own, how do you deal with facilities that you lease? Do you
work directly with GSA or is that----
Mr. Sullivan. Most of our leasing, we have delegated
leasing authority from GSA. So VA enters into all medical
leases itself.
About, and I can get you the exact date, about--I want to
say--a year ago, we included in all of our RFPs for leases the
same requirements and standards we do in our buildings for
energy improvements. So as all those new leases are put in
place, they will have to adhere to those as well.
And I know, for example, I just happened to look at a CBOC
the other day to check to make sure that the requirements were
in the RFPs and were in the awarded contract and they were.
I can get you a date of when we started to do that. It was
a little bit later than the buildings because we went after our
own first.
[The VA subsequently provided the following information:]
The GSA SFO template has incorporated Energy Star language
since September 2000. GSA began to include LEED language into
their SFOs in December 2007. The GSA SFO template is used for
all VA existing space procurements, which is most of what is
done in the field.
In FY 09, VA began implementation of energy requirements as
LEED Silver Certifiable and enhanced requirements to meet the
five guiding principles and other requirements as set forth in
EO 13423 (2007). Effective in FY10, leases now require LEED
Silver Certification.
Mr. Michaud. Great. Thank you very much.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Michaud.
Mr. Buyer.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
I would like to ask the same question that I asked to the
GSA. Do you support providing the VA the same authority that
the Department of Defense has entering into long-term, 20-year
commodity procurement contracts?
Mr. Sullivan. Yes, I believe that would be helpful.
Mr. Buyer. Thank you.
I am contemplating this, so I am going to ask whether or
not you think this is a good idea.
Mr. Sullivan. Okay.
Mr. Buyer. All right. My contemplation is the gentleman
that just testified on the second panel is to have him
representing the GSA and you, put the two of you together and
have a meeting with me. What I would like to do is figure out
how we can do the next wave of contracting a little better than
what was done with the first wave.
My sensing here, and please correct me if you believe that
this assessment is incorrect, that I think you moved into a new
space, you were under a lot of pressure. My review of the front
pages, the first six, seven pages that I had gotten of the
requests for procurement (RFPs) that you did a very good job in
putting these together, but you were also under a lot of
pressure to get these out and done with this year's moneys.
Whoever looked at with regard to the--you are completely within
the scope of your authority and following the statute, but you
looked under the solar. You found out of those companies, you
know, a lot of these companies, I hate to call it like this,
but some are front companies for others of whom bid off of the
schedule, and you sought to find who would be responsive in a
lot of these PV projects, and you have got some awards that are
about to come out, right?
Mr. Sullivan. That is correct. Eighteen.
Mr. Buyer. And now, as I told the second panel, we dealt
with a lot of complaints. These are a lot of large companies
out there of whom are on the GSA schedule, of whom are roofers
who also do the PV, and that is who is doing a lot of the big
PV contracts around the country, did not even know, did not
even know about the bids going out. And so we are dealt with
some wave of complaints.
From the taxpayer perspective and i.e. government
perspective, wow, it is better to be inclusive than exclusive.
And so what I am hopeful is a meeting with GSA and you as we go
into the second wave. I am not going to upset the apple cart. I
have not asked the Chairman to do anything. I think you did the
very best you could under the time requirements that you had.
The question is, do you think we can do better? I think we
can. And I would like to ask if you believe it would be
fruitful to put together a meeting with you and the GSA for us
to see how we can improve the process?
Mr. Sullivan. Absolutely. We are always looking to do
better and improve what we are doing. And we are aware there
were some businesses that were not on the schedules and for
whatever reason did not have the opportunity.
And as we move to the second wave which is larger than the
first, we had already contemplated taking a portion of those
and doing full and open and not doing those on schedule.
But we would be happy to meet with you and GSA and make
sure we have a strategy that the Committee is acceptable to
move forward within the statutory responsibilities. Absolutely.
Mr. Buyer. Okay. All right. I think it would be helpful to
do that. And I would be more than happy to invite the Chairman
or any other interested Members to that meeting.
Thank you. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Buyer.
Again, thank you for your expertise and your commitment. We
have come a long way, but we have a long way to go.
Just one question, Mr. Sullivan. I think you heard me
earlier talk about some incentives for employees. Are we doing
any of that? I know you started off by saying you are giving
out the suggestions, but that is not the same as an incentive
program or----
Mr. Sullivan. Right now our incentive program really is
focused on rewarding people who put projects together and the
projects themselves, we participate in the DOE's FEMP Award
Program and we have several winners over the last few years.
And, actually, two or three winners, we bring them into town
and they go to a reception and an award ceremony. But that is
one area we have identified in our action plan that we need to
have more employee incentives. We know the local field managers
and medical centers do some of it. But one of the areas we need
to do better is to have a corporate incentive program and that
is something we are working on and we will do that.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Again, we thank all the panelists. You have enlightened us
all as we continue on our path toward energy efficiency and
independence. Thank you.
The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Filner,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Good morning. I would like to thank everyone for attending the
hearing today. The VA is the 6th highest agency user in energy
consumption intensity and the 3rd highest agency in water consumption
making its footprint significant and its efforts to be in the forefront
on conservation and reduction commendable.
As Federal agencies, I firmly believe that responsibility to the
public is a must, and that we--as lawmakers and executors of the
Federal Government-- must set the example in energy, water and fuel
conservation, with the hopes of having corporate and mainstream America
follow.
I am pleased that the VA has reported to our Committee that it is
taking extraordinary efforts to not only meet the goals of the
Executive Order, but exceed them.
For as much as the VA is accomplishing, I am equally curious to
hear what our panel of industry experts have to say about the VA's
progress. I believe the experts we will hear from today will add great
value to this dialog and make thoughtful recommendations on the way
ahead.
The VA was allocated $405 million in American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to accelerate critical programs to reduce
the environmental footprint of the department. The VA set some very
aggressive goals in this arena.
I am eager to hear how it plans to execute and sustain these goals
of reduction in energy, water and fuel usage while building and
renovating sustainable buildings and utilizing this $405 million to its
maximum potential.
The Committee will continue to monitor VA actions as it works to
increase energy efficiency and provide results for our veterans and
taxpayers.
While I applaud the VA's efforts to go green, I think it's
imperative that we not forget the most important mission of the VA and
that is caring for veterans. We need to ensure that the very specific
needs of our veterans are being met at hospitals, clinics, and nursing
homes, and make certain their care is not degraded or impacted by the
efforts in becoming more energy efficient.
Now is not the time to lose focus on the larger goal of providing
world class health care for veterans, but the time to balance the many
initiatives necessary to transform the VA into a 21st Century
organization.
Prepared Statement of Hon. John J. Hall
Thank you Mr. Chairman, thank you to the witnesses, and good
morning. I am very pleased that the Committee is addressing such an
important issue.
Energy efficient buildings will be a critical part of this
country's strategy for the future. Here are just a few statistics to
show how important green building will be:
According to the Department of Energy, buildings currently use 39
percent of the total energy produced in the U.S., and 74 percent of all
electricity generated.
Buildings currently emit 30 percent of America's CO2,
making them top culprits contributing to global warming and climate
change.
These facts are illuminating for a few reasons.
First, they show just how consuming and wasteful our current
building practices are.
Second, these facts help demonstrate that there are many ways in
which we can become more energy efficient as a country; simply
reforming one industry won't fix the problem.
Finally, they make us realize that green building will be necessary
for the future success of our country.
I am very pleased that the VA has been on the forefront of energy
efficiency initiatives.
Achieving wider LEED and Green Globe recognition, utilizing a
variety of renewable energies and committing to cut emissions 30
percent over the next 10 years are all reasonable and important goals.
Understandably, the VA consumes a high amount of energy due to its
network of around-the-clock hospitals and medical facilities. I hope
the VA will continue to explore ways of reducing its carbon footprint
while continuing to provide the world-class care it is known for.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing. I look forward to
the testimony of the witnesses. I remain committed to helping the VA
achieve its energy efficiency goals, and I submit my statement for the
record.
Prepared Statement of Gail Vittori, Co-Director,
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, Austin, TX
On behalf of the Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems, a
non-profit organization established in 1975 and based in Austin, Texas,
I would like to thank Chairman Bob Filner and Ranking Member Steve
Buyer for the opportunity to testify about energy efficiency
opportunities at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. My name is
Gail Vittori, and I am Co-Director of the Center for Maximum Potential
Building Systems (CMPBS).
As a non-profit organization active in green building and life
cycle design since its founding in 1975, CMPBS has been a catalyst for
resource efficient, regionally appropriate building methods and
materials and associated public policy, research, education and
demonstration initiatives in both the public and private sectors. Over
the past 10 years, CMPBS has pioneered the integration of green
building practices in the health care sector, in collaboration with
other non-profit organizations, professional societies, and health care
systems.
In 2001, I participated in the American Society for Health Care
Engineering's first Green Building Task Force. The Task Force's work
was released in 2002 as the ASHE Green Healthcare Construction Guidance
Statement, establishing a seminal framework for shaping health care's
green building opportunities, and setting the stage to connect these
strategies with human health, environmental, economic and community
benefits. It strategically positioned these initiatives around three
scales of influence: Protect the immediate health of the building
occupants; protect the health of the surrounding community; and protect
the health of the global community and natural resources.\1\ Later in
2002, CMPBS convened the Green Guide for Health Care, now a project of
CMPBS and Health Care Without Harm; in 2004, I was appointed Founding
Chair of the LEED for Healthcare core committee, and served in that
capacity through 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ American Society of Health Care Engineering. www.ashe.org.
Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bolstered by these initiatives and others I'll mention through this
testimony, in less than a decade resource conserving and healthy
building strategies have shifted from the domain of a few early adopter
health care organizations to recognized mainstreamed best practices,
with measurable human health, environmental and bottom line economic
benefits. The Department of Veterans Affairs has had a visible presence
in supporting many of these efforts and investing in their own research
to advance sustainable practices in their portfolio, including the
recently released Innovative 21st Century Building Environments for VA
Healthcare Delivery. This leadership is welcome at a time when the
health care sector has much to learn from and collaborate with industry
peers--and recognizes that sharing best practices and lessons learned,
along with using and improving tools to measure, manage and
continuously improve design decisions, operations and maintenance, is
instrumental to advance the very best practices across the bottom line,
embracing patient outcome, staff well-being and productivity, economic
performance and community benefit. These are essential elements to
shape 21st Century health care facilities, and, together, have the
makings for a win-win-win agenda.
Reflecting on recent studies, measurable benefits associated with
green health care facilities are compelling:
As documented in other market sectors, LEED'
certified health care facilities do not necessarily have higher first
costs than ``non-green'' buildings; first costs are independent of
building size and LEED certification level; \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Guenther, Houghton, Vittori. Demystifying Green Building
Premiums in Healthcare, Summer2009. Health Environments Research &
Design Journal. Vol. 3, No. 3, Vendome Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve patient healing thereby reducing length of stay;
\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Alan Bell, Pioneering the Platinum Path for Health Care.
Practice Greenhealth/GGHC Webinar, April 24, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduce operating costs, curbing energy and water expenses
by employing resource efficient practices and installing conserving
equipment and fixtures; dollars budgeted for utilities can be
redirected to patient care;
Enhance competitiveness in the marketplace--they are the
hospitals where patients want to go;
Ease recruitment and retention challenges--they are the
workplaces where medical professionals want to work.
As a mission-driven sector focused on health, the maxim first do no
harm is emerging as a defining lens reflecting patient care and,
increasingly, how health care plans, designs, builds and operates its
facilities. Operating one of the Nation's largest health care systems
with more than 1,400 sites of care, the Department of Veterans Affairs
is uniquely positioned to put the lessons of green building into
practice--and to be a leader in the transformation of our healing
environments.
The U.S. Health Care Sector
The U.S. health care sector is the largest service sector in the
U.S. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade
Administration (2008), the health care sector represents 17 percent of
the Gross Domestic Product and is projected to grow to 19.5 percent by
2017. There are 33 million employees in the U.S. health care
sector.4,5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/
us_chs_Greening_Sustainability_HealthCare _1208.pdf, Accessed September
2009.
\5\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Health care construction represents a similarly significant share
of the U.S. economy. The U.S. Census Bureau indicates a $47.4 billion
investment in health care construction between April 2007 and March
2008, with the FMI Corp. projecting annual health care construction
expenditures to reach more than $60 billion by 2010. \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Environmental Construction and Management. 2007. ``Health Care
Construction Prognosis: Industry Appears to be in Top Form,'' June
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sector's sizable impact is not, however, without an
environmental cost. Health care facilities in the U.S. are the second
most energy intensive building sector, just below food service and
sales,\7\ and release more than 30 pounds of CO2 per square
foot per year.\8\ In-patient facilities average 239,200 Btu/sq. ft.,
while overall health care facility energy intensity is calculated at
187.7 Btu/sq. ft.\9\ On average, health care facilities are more than
two times as energy intensive as commercial office buildings, and
currently spend more than $8.5 billion on energy each year.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Energy Information Administration, CBECS 2003, adjusted for
inflation to 2009 by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.energystar.gov/
index.cfm?c=health care.bus_
health care, Accessed September 2009.
\8\ http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energysmarthospitals/
about_esh.html. Accessed September 2009.
\9\ Energy Information Administration, CBECS 2003, adjusted for
inflation to 2009 by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.energystar.gov/
index.cfm?c=health care.bus
_health care, Accessed September 2009.
\10\ Energy Information Administration, CBECS 2003, adjusted for
inflation to 2009 by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.energystar.gov/
index.cfm?c=health care.bus
_health care, Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We know, based on groundbreaking examples in the U.S. and abroad,
this doesn't need to be the case. In contrast, U.S. hospital energy
intensity is about three times the intensity for thermal energy as in
Australia, and more than two times the electrical energy intensity in
the U.K.\11\ These more energy efficient health care facilities operate
without compromising patient care or safety, or staff well-being or
productivity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ CADDET, Learning from experiences with Energy Savings in
Hospitals. CADDET Centre for the Analysis and Dissemination of
Demonstrated Energy Technologies Energy Efficiency Analysis Report
Brochure 05, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hospitals are also prodigious water users. An estimated 31.4
million gallons of water are used per year for process use, and another
13 million gallons per year for fixtures such as faucets, toilets and
showerheads.\12\ This is equivalent to more than 120,000 gallons of
water per day per hospital. Through a comprehensive water conservation
strategy, Kaiser Permanente has reduced water consumption to an average
of 107,143 gallons of water per bed per year, compared to 135,222
gallons on average for California hospitals, and 182,699 gallons per
bed per year nationally.\13\ According to a 2008 study issued by the
Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, health care facilities report
between 25 and 40 percent return on investment resulting from water
conserving measures.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Bob Loranger. . .
\13\ GHSI, The Eco-Health Footprint Guide, May 2009, pg. 8.
\14\ Practice Greenhealth. Water Conservation Programs. http://
cms.h2e-online.org/ee/facilities/waterconserve/. Accessed September
2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At present, because of understandable infection control concerns,
most if not all the water used inside hospitals is treated, potable
water. As a result, health care's water demand represents not only an
enormous draw on our Nation's potable water resources, but also imparts
a substantial energy cost. Nationally, water supply and treatment
represents about 4 percent of electricity use.\15\ For many
municipalities, water treatment and transport represents their number
one energy demand. Establishing hospital-specific protocols to reduce
potable water use, while not compromising patient care, and putting
these into practice is instrumental to ease demand on the Nation's
water and energy supplies, and mitigate emissions associated with
energy generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Electric Power Research Institute. Water and Sustainability
(Vol. 4): U.S. Electricity Consumption for Water Supply and Treatment-
The Next Half Century. Product ID No. 1006787. 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another key area of health care's environmental footprint is waste.
Hospitals have a unique waste profile including municipal solid waste,
regulated medical waste, hazardous waste, pharmaceutical waste,
electronic waste, and construction, demolition and land clearing waste
associated with facility construction and renovations. In 1998, the
U.S. EPA and the American Hospital Association set a goal to reduce
hospital total waste volume by 50 percent by 2010.\16\ As one example
of opportunity, a study of 9 Los Angeles hospitals found that non-
contaminated paper represents more than 53 percent of a hospital's non-
regulated waste.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ http://www.h2e-online.org/pubs/Memorandum.pdf. Accessed
September 2009.
\17\ California Integrated Waste Management Board. http://
www.ciwmb.ca.gov/bizWaste/
FactSheets/Hospital.htm. Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmaceutical waste is a unique consequence of health care
operations. According to the U.S. EPA, pharmaceuticals and personal
care products are ``being discovered in our Nation's waterways in very
low concentrations.'' \18\ Recognizing the potential consequences on
human health and ecosystems resulting from unintentional exposure to
these chemical byproducts, the EPA is proposing to add hazardous
pharmaceutical wastes to the Universal Waste Rule, providing a disposal
system for these wastes that protects public health and the
environment.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/ppcp/, accessed 9/25/09.
\19\ http://www.epa.gov/waste/hazard/wastetypes/universal/
pharm.htm. Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Shift in Healing Environments
Understanding why health care facilities are energy intensive and
how they use energy provides a roadmap for reducing environmental
impact, while generating significant financial savings and improving
the working and healing environments of millions of Americans.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, each dollar
invested in energy efficiency in the health care sector is equivalent
to generating new revenues of $20 for hospitals, and $10 for medical
office buildings. Every dollar saved through energy and water
efficiency can be redirected to patient care.
And, for the 33 million Americans working in health care
facilities, they deserve nothing less than a building that promotes
their health and well-being so they can deliver critical health care
services benefited by an optimal work environment. Just as one example,
a 1996 study found that nurses with access to a breakroom with windows
made 40 percent fewer medical errors and had a 25-percent reduction in
stress levels than nurses with windowless breakrooms. \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Ovitt, University of Illinois. 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hospitals are large, technically complex buildings, operating 24
hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. They require the lights to
be on all the time. Thus, it is not surprising that hospitals are
governed by unique regulatory requirements addressing a range of
mechanical and ventilation requirements that bear significant energy
demands. Diagnostic medical equipment is largely unregulated; much of
it is continuously operating. This results in substantial energy use
and waste heat, contributing to the building's cooling loads.
Recognizing the health care sector's unique needs and demands, a
spectrum of tools and resources provide a solid foundation to deliver
high performing healing environments. Two tools have emerged as
principal guideposts: the health-based Green Guide for Health Care and
the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED; LEED for Healthcare is in
development. These metric tools focus on site, water, energy,
materials, environmental quality and innovative and integrative design
strategies. They reinforce that high performance and healing
environments are consistent with a mission-based sector such as health
care, with healing and stewardship central tenets. Indeed, many health
care systems view their buildings and operations as visible, tangible
manifestation of their core mission of healing and stewardship.
Initially released in 2004, the Green Guide for Health Care is the
health care sector's first quantifiable sustainable design toolkit,
integrating enhanced environmental and health principles and practices
into the planning, design, construction, operations and maintenance of
health care facilities. It is a voluntary, self-certifying metric
toolkit. The Green Guide builds on the ASHE Green Healthcare
Construction Guidance Statement; its structure is adopted from the
market-proven LEED framework and was created at a time when there was a
void of green building rating tools and guidance customized for the
health care sector. The Green Guide introduced an array of health care
specific credits, such as Connection to the Natural World/Places of
Respite, Process Water Use Reduction, Medical Equipment Efficiency,
Design for Flexibility, Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic Chemical
Reduction, Construction Practices, Acoustical Control, Daylight and
Views. These reflect a methodical, strategic look at how best to guide
an industry with a unique operational profile, while honoring the
opportunity to connect efficiency and performance within a context of
healing. Health care systems such as Kaiser Permanente, based in
California and the Nation's largest non-profit health care system, and
Partners in Massachusetts have adopted the Green Guide to support the
design, construction and operations of their new construction,
renovations and additions.
The Green Guide also developed a series of peer-reviewed Technical
Briefs, released in 2007, to provide technical guidance to the
industry. It also developed a peer-reviewed Prescriptive Path for
Hospitals to achieve 14 percent Energy Reduction, applicable to all
climate zones.
LEED for Healthcare development began in 2004, using the Green
Guide for Health Care as a foundational reference document. As with the
Green Guide, LEED for Health Care will address issues unique to the
health care industry including reducing chemicals and pollutants,
providing access to nature and the outdoors, and encouraging
transportation alternatives that reduce dependence on single occupant
vehicles and a customized approach for views and daylight.
As a result of these initiatives, today there are about 90
registered Green Guide for Health Care projects representing an
estimated 70 million square feet of green health care facilities, and
440 LEED-registered and certified health care buildings, with 65
certified under LEED rating systems released prior to LEED 2009,
launched in April 2009.\21\ LEED certified health care projects
represent more than 6 million gross square feet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Personal communication with Melissa Gallagher-Rogers, USGBC.
September 24, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These customized market transformation tools have been an essential
underpinning of integrating green building into the health care sector.
Through their use in practice, we are learning with increasing
certainty the costs and benefits of energy and water efficiency and
other green building strategies. Indeed, we find with recent data that
a comprehensive green building approach can enhance patient safety, and
improve the health and well-being of patients and staff.
Further evidence of the market value of these tools is the
Massachusetts Department of Public Health's approval, in September
2008, of new guidelines that include the Green Guide for Health Care
and LEED for Healthcare into the Determination of Need process. These
guidelines, in effect as of January 1, 2009 for hospitals and clinics,
and July 1, 2009 for nursing homes, require that the Determination of
Need must establish that the project will take ``all feasible measures
. . . to avoid or minimize damage to the environment'', and the
projects must ``demonstrate their consideration of and commitment to
LEED for Health Care and the Green Guide for Health Care standards, and
be certifiable at a ``silver'' level based on the LEED point
structure.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ www.thefreelibrary.com/
Massachusetts+Determination+Of+Need+Process+Expanded+To+Include+New...-
a0187008995 accessed 9/24/09, 105 CMR 100.533(B)(8) (``Factor 8'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Energy Star for
Healthcare offers two tools to benchmark facility performance for both
new construction and existing buildings, available for acute care and
children's hospitals and medical office buildings, in addition to other
market sector building types. EPA's Target Finder provides a platform
for architects and building owners to establish energy targets during
the design process, and be eligible to achieve an EPA rating.\23\
Performance is compared to an ``average'' building, using up to three
energy sources to estimate annual energy use. Projects achieving a
rating of 75 or higher are eligible for Designed to Earn the ENERGY
STAR designation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ http://www.energystar.gov/
index.cfm?c=new_bldg_design.bus_target_finder. Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's Portfolio Manager offers an online tool to enable existing
facilities to measure and manage energy and water consumption, estimate
carbon footprint, and rate energy performance compared to facilities in
their region and nationally. Portfolio Manager helps to guide strategic
opportunities to reduce consumption. To date, 48 acute care and
children's hospitals, representing 39,147,806 square feet, have earned
the ENERGY STAR designation--15 of these are Department of Veterans
Affairs hospitals.
DOE's EnergySmart Hospitals, launched in 2008, provides hospitals
with tools and resources addressing energy-efficiency and renewable
energy technologies, spanning design, construction, retrofit, and
operations and maintenance. EnergySmart Hospitals' goals include
achieving 20 percent improved efficiency in existing hospitals, and 30
percent improved efficiency in new hospitals relative to current
standards. \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energysmarthospitals/
about_esh.html. Accessed September 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Healthcare Energy Impact Calculator, developed by Healthcare
Without Harm and Practice Greenhealth, is a Web-based tool that
calculates health impacts associated with power plant emissions
associated with a health care facility's electrical generation.
Identifying carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury
emissions, the EIC estimates the number of related health incidents,
such as asthma, premature death, and bronchitis, emergency room visits,
medical treatment costs, and external societal costs based on U.S. EPA
data.
Critically, green health care facilities need not cost more than
conventional facilities. Recent research published in 2009 reflecting
an assessment of 13 LEED-certified and-registered health care projects
suggests that first costs associated with green health care facilities
are lower than commonly thought. Consistent with findings from other
building sectors, data reveal that achieving low- or no first cost
premium in health care facilities is independent of project size and
LEED certification level. The study found that first cost green
building premiums range from 0 to 5 percent before accounting for
financial incentives--such as grants, philanthropic gifts, and public
or utility incentives--and 0 to 3.8 percent when including financial
incentives. The study also found that first cost green building
premiums were higher for projects that achieved LEED certification
early in this decade vs. projects that were certified later. As with
other sectors, first cost green building premiums for health care
facilities are trending down. \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ HERD Journal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXAMPLES
Dell Children's Medical Center of Central Texas, a 473,000 square
foot, 169-bed acute care hospital serving 46 Central Texas counties,
opened in April 2007. As the first LEED-Platinum certified hospital in
the world, Dell Children's provides an inside view of the costs and
benefits of green health care facilities. From its inception, the Dell
Children's team--both from the hospital administration and the design
team--prioritized health and wellness. They made a commitment to
quality in their pursuit of LEED Platinum certification. The project
benefited from a rigorous energy model considering the relationships
between building orientation, exterior envelope performance, window
placement, daylight, access to views, and mechanical equipment. By
partnering with the local utility, the project also reaped benefits
from an on-site Combined Cooling, Heating and Power Plant (CCHP). The
CCHP's 4.5 MW natural gas-fired turbine supplies 100 percent of the
hospital's electrical demand, along with steam, and is 75 percent more
efficient than coal-fired power plants. Combined heat and power systems
reduce carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions, so contribute to
healthier environments. As a healing environment, Dell Children's
provides every patient room with daylight and views, with high
efficiency lighting and occupancy sensors to reduce electrical loads.
The project is designed to achieve a 17.2-percent reduction in direct
energy use--and is an example of how an energy efficient hospital can
also provide abundant daylight and views, often seen as being at cross-
purposes. Additionally, Dell Children's installed low-flow plumbing
fixtures saving 1.4 million gallons of water a year, and tied in to the
City of Austin's reclaimed purple pipe water system to offset reliance
on potable water for their native plant landscape and outdoor healing
gardens. They diverted 32,000 tons of construction debris from
landfills, achieving a 91 percent overall recycling rate. Now in
operation for more than 2 years, the Dell experience amplifies some of
the measurable benefits from a high performing green hospital: \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Pioneering the Platinum Path for Health Care. Practice
Greenhealth/GGHC Webinar, April 24, 2009.
2.4 percent nursing turnover rate in the first year,
compared to 10-15 percent national average. The cost to replace one
nurse at Dell Children's is more than $70,000.
With energy costs of $2-$4 per square foot per year,
productivity gains could exceed annual energy cost of operating the
building.
LEED has positively influenced recruitment, media
attention, and patient surveys provide positive comments about building
design.
A second example is Gundersen Lutheran, a not-for-profit health
care system operating in Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota. Gundersen
Lutheran's focused efforts on energy performance have enabled them to
achieve its goal of 20 percent reduced energy costs by the end of 2009,
and to be 100 percent carbon neutral by 2014. In the May/June 2009
article ``Lowering Health Care Costs Through Energy Efficiency'',
Gundersen Lutheran's goal was defined as, ``. . . produce as much clean
energy as it consumes by 2014, using techniques that have quick
paybacks so that savings from reduced energy use can be used to support
the institution's health care mission.'' \27\ They will achieve this by
reducing energy demand in existing buildings by 30 percent, and in new
facilities by 50 percent. A key driver of Gundersen's aggressive goal
setting was their projection that if recent energy price trends
continued, their energy bills would increase $500,000 each year.\28\
Their analysis of 10 years of utility bills calculated energy use of
250 to 235 kBtu per square foot per year. They are designing their new
hospital, due to open in 2012, to operate at 125 to 115 kBtu per square
foot per year. Their early investment in a comprehensive facilities'
audit identified lighting retrofit as a key energy savings opportunity.
Retrofitting with more efficient lamps yielded ``better light for half
the cost or less'' according to Gundersen's Corey Zarecki, and saved
$250,000 per year in reduced energy bills.\29\ Gundersen Lutheran's
Jeff Rich, Executive Director of Major Projects and Efficiency
Improvements, also views this effort as mission driven: ``Not only do
we feel it is the right thing to do from an environmental standpoint,
we think it will improve health. By dropping carbon emissions, we
actually can improve the air quality and the health of the community,
and we believe that it is a hedge against inflationary pressures we are
seeing from energy prices. And we believe we can drop the cost of
health care with this program.'' \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Sarah Klein, ``Case Study: Lowering Health Care Costs Through
Energy Efficiency''. The Commonwealth Fund. May/June 2009. http://
www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Newsletters/Quality-Matters/2009/May-
June-2009/Case-Study.aspx. Accessed September 2009.
\28\ Sarah Klein, ``Case Study: Lowering Health Care Costs Through
Energy Efficiency''. The Commonwealth Fund. May/June 2009. http://
www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Newsletters/Quality-Matters/2009/May-
June-2009/Case-Study.aspx. Accessed September 2009.
\29\ Ibid.
\30\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Department of Veterans Affairs can further advance their
energy-efficiency and green building initiatives through a
comprehensive suite of data driven environmental goals, consistent with
improved patient care and enhanced workplace, such as follow:
1. Perform a comprehensive audit of existing facilities and
procurement to highlight the low-hanging fruit yielding quick return on
investment that will reap financial benefits for many years. Consider
these investment expenses, such as retrofitting lamps and water
fixtures.
2. Ensure a regular maintenance regime, continuous commissioning
and consideration of adding controls to mechanical equipment to
optimize mechanical operations.
3. Implement green housekeeping, integrated pest management and
use of healthy materials to measurably improve air quality.
4. Collaborate with industry peers on research initiatives such as
displacement and natural ventilation that hold promise for significant
energy reductions, and appropriate use of reclaimed water sources
consistent with infection control considerations; share best practices.
5. For new construction, use an integrative design process and
flexible design strategies; establish aggressive energy and water goals
and assess renewable energy strategies. Design for solar readiness to
enable installation of renewables when they have favorable life cycle
costs.
6. Locate new projects near transit and provide safe routes for
pedestrians and cyclists; for existing facilities, collaborate with
transit authorities to provide service.
7. Connect facilities to locally grown, healthy food options.
8. Take advantage of existing tools to measure, manage and
continuously improve performance.
9. Expand bottom line evaluation to provide for life cycle cost
assessment, factoring in patient length of stay, employee recruitment
and retention, energy and water savings, long-service mechanical
performance, healing environment and environmental quality as measures
of economic performance.
Together, these strategies have the promise to position the
Department of Veterans Affairs as a leader in green health care
facilities. As a comprehensive initiative, these commonsense solutions
will lower the VA's carbon footprint, shield against rising energy and
water costs, provide a healthy environment to support patient healing
and staff well-being and productivity, and contribute to healthy
communities and ecosystems.
Prepared Statement of Thomas W. Hicks, Executive Director,
Building Performance Initiative, U.S. Green Building Council
On behalf of the U.S. Green Building Council's (USGBC) nearly
20,000 organizational members and 78 local chapters, thank you Chairman
Filner and Ranking Member Buyer for the opportunity to testify about
opportunities to improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of
buildings owned and operated by the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs. My name is Tom Hicks, and I direct the Building Performance
Initiative at the U.S. Green Building Council.
Introduction
The U.S. Green Building Council is a national nonprofit
organization working to advance more environmentally responsible,
healthy, and profitable buildings.
The VA, with a diverse real estate portfolio including more than
1,400 sites of care and serving millions of veterans each year,\1\ can
and should do more to lead by example in the transformation of our
buildings and communities. The agency has taken significant steps in
this direction in recent years through its formal embrace of green
building standards and initial deployment of a number of renewable
energy systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Organizational Briefing
Book (June 2009) p. 7, available at http://www.va.gov/ofcadmin/docs/
vaorgbb.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Impact of Constructing and Operating Buildings
Buildings annually account for 39 percent of U.S. primary energy
use and for 38 percent of U.S. CO2 emissions; \2\ 13.6
percent of all potable water use or 15 trillion gallons per year; \3\
and they consume 40 percent of raw materials globally (3 billion tons
annually).\4\ The EPA estimates that 136 million tons of building-
related construction and demolition debris are generated in the U.S. in
a single year.\5\ (By way of comparison, the U.S. creates 209.7 million
tons of municipal solid waste per year.\6\) It is clear that the VA
should accelerate its efforts to reduce the impact of its construction
and building operations activities on the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Energy Information Administration (2008). Assumptions to the
Annual Energy Outlook; Energy Information Administration (2008). EIA
Annual Energy Outlook.
\3\ U.S. Geological Survey (2000). 2000 data.
\4\ Lenssen and Roodman, 1995, ``Worldwatch Paper 124: A Building
Revolution: How Ecology and Health Concerns are Transforming
Construction,'' Worldwatch Institute.
\5\ U.S. EPA Characterization of Construction and Demolition Debris
in the United States, 1997 Update.
\6\ U.S. EPA Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the
United States, 1997 Update. Report No. EPA530-R-98-007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policymakers and building owners alike are now embracing green
building to meet current economic, energy, and environmental
challenges. They are focusing on the whole building, from construction
materials to energy systems, and even cleaning supplies and waste
management.
More specifically, green building reduces emissions and
environmental impacts throughout the supply chain and the complete
building lifecycle by targeting:
reduced energy consumption through the use of energy-
efficient heating and cooling systems, renewable power, and building
commissioning (system ``tune ups'');
reduced potable water consumption through the use of low-
flow fixtures and appliances, and the on-site treatment of storm water;
reduced health impacts and improved environmental
performance through the use of nontoxic, salvaged, recycled, and local
materials, and the development of plans for managing waste, and
reduced emissions, and reduced health and environmental
impacts by siting buildings away from fragile ecosystems and near
public transportation, and by promoting the use of hybrid or electric
cars, and the use of alternative means of transportation, such as
bicycles and walking.
Measurement of Economic, Health, and Environmental Benefits: The Size
of the Opportunity
Importantly, the technology to make substantial reductions in
energy use and CO2 emissions in buildings is already
available. Investments in energy-saving and other climate-friendly
technologies can deliver buildings and communities that are
significantly less carbon intensive, and are also more profitable and
healthy places to live and work. The potential returns of a nationwide
commitment to energy efficiency are tremendous: McKinsey & Co. reports
that an up front investment of $520 billion in energy efficiency could
generate more than $1.2 trillion in energy savings, reduce energy
consumption by 23 percent, and reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions
by 1.1 gigatons by 2020.\7\ According to McKinsey, this would have the
same environmental impact as taking the entire fleet of U.S. passenger
vehicles and light trucks off the road.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ McKinsey & Co., Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the US Economy
(July 2009), pp. iii & 12, available at http://mckinsey.com/
clientservice/electricpowernaturalgas/downloads/US_energy_
efficiency_full_report.pdf.
\8\ See McKinsey & Co., available at http://mckinsey.com/
clientservice/electricpowernaturalgas/US_energy_efficiency/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The greening of day-to-day operations and maintenance of our
building stock represents a powerful strategy for realizing this
potential in a cost-effective and fully verifiable way. For example,
green ``tune-ups'' to our building systems and equipment, known as
``commissioning,'' produce measurable operational and environmental
savings. Commissioning of existing buildings can improve energy
efficiency by roughly 15 percent at a median cost of only 27 cents per
square foot--offering an attractive payback period of roughly 6
months.\9\ To give you a sense of the size of this opportunity, if all
of the Nation's existing commercial buildings were to take advantage of
these tune ups, this would yield $18 billion or more in energy savings
annually.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Mills, E., Friedman, H., Powell, T., et al., The Cost-
Effectiveness of Commercial-Buildings Commissioning: A Meta-Analysis of
Energy and Non-Energy Impacts in Existing Buildings and New
Construction in the United States (December 2004), p. 1, available at
http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/emills/pubs/pdf/cx-costs-benefits.pdf.
\10\ Id. at 57.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing this potential, USGBC has worked for more than a decade
to provide building owners, operators, and users with the tools and
resources they need to achieve lasting environmental improvements in
the places they live, work, and learn.
Validating Green Building: Use of Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED)
Chief among USGBC's suite of resources for advancing market
transformation is the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design) rating system--a voluntary, third-party certification system
for green buildings. It was developed by USGBC to provide the building
community with a measurable consensus definition of leadership in
energy and environmental design.
LEED promotes performance in six key areas: sustainable site
development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials and resources,
indoor environmental quality, and green building innovation. Each
category includes certain minimum requirements that all projects must
meet, followed by additional credits that are earned by incorporating
green design and construction techniques. Four progressive levels of
LEED certification--Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum--are earned
based on the number of credits achieved. The Green Building
Certification Institute (GBCI) provides independent, third-party
verification to ensure a building meets LEED's high performance
standards.
Originally launched in 2001 for new commercial construction
projects, LEED is continuously improved to ensure its responsiveness to
technical innovation and market demand. USGBC released rating systems
for operations and maintenance and commercial interiors markets in
2006, and for the schools and residential sectors in 2007. USGBC is
also nearing completion of rating systems for neighborhood
developments, health care facilities, and retail spaces. (A more
complete discussion of LEED for Healthcare follows on page 8.)
The most recent version of LEED, known as LEED 2009, was released
in April 2009. This version involves several key advancements,
including the weighting of LEED credits based on the extent of their
ability to impact different environmental and human health concerns;
and the regionalization of credits to acknowledge specific
environmental issues and priorities that arise in different locations.
Additional improvements to the online platform for LEED and an expanded
certification structure through the Green Building Certification
Institute accompanied the launch of LEED 2009.
Verifying Building Performance
USGBC's work is guided by an understanding that improving building
performance is a process, not an isolated act. Optimal building
performance hinges on a sustained commitment from building owners,
managers, and users alike, who must work together to ensure
conscientious installation, use, and management of building equipment
and systems.
The importance of operations and maintenance to maximizing the
energy-saving potential of sustainable design cannot be overstated.
Where there is a gap between the design aspirations of a building and
its actual performance, the problem is almost always operations and
maintenance issues. For example, although one high-performance building
was designed to achieve energy savings of 50 percent when compared to
the national average, it in actuality achieved energy savings of just
over 10 percent--a significant achievement gap.\11\ It turned out the
building was not being operated with the same commitment to energy
efficiency as was evidenced by its design and engineering. Closing this
design-performance gap is essential to meeting the mounting climate and
energy challenges that are now commanding international attention, and
to realizing the $1.2 trillion in potential energy savings that are
possible through energy efficiency improvements by 2020.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See id. at p. 8, Fig. 1.
\12\ See McKinsey & Co., Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the U.S.
Economy (July 2009), available at http://mckinsey.com/clientservice/
electricpowernaturalgas/downloads/US_energy_effi-
ciency_full_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motivated by its desire to close potential achievement gaps between
design and performance, in August 2009, USGBC launched a new Building
Performance Initiative. The Initiative seeks to put in place a
comprehensive data collection effort for all buildings that have
achieved LEED certification; implement an appropriate methodology for
analyzing this data; and provide building owners with better
information with which to address any performance gaps that stem from
predicted versus actual building performance.
The Initiative builds on announcements made by USGBC earlier this
year in tandem with its release of LEED 2009. LEED 2009 requires that
the owners of all certified projects permit USGBC to access actual
energy and water use data in the future to support research on best
practices and building performance. Mindful that diligent operations
and maintenance practices are an imperative for all buildings, USGBC
also encourages new construction projects certified under LEED to
embrace the operational and maintenance practices set forth in our
separate certification protocol--LEED for Existing Buildings:
Operations & Maintenance.
LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance provides
building owners and managers with a set of performance targets and best
practices for improving their facilities and their building management
practices to yield substantial savings in energy, water, and solid
waste. Developed by industry experts from the facility and property
management and engineering fields, the LEED for Existing Buildings:
Operations & Maintenance rating system provides a set of best green
practices in building operations, highlighting opportunities to use
less energy, water and natural resources; improve the indoor
environment; and uncover hidden opportunities for savings. A key
requirement is that the facility manager develop a comprehensive plan
for reporting, inspecting, and reviewing building operations and
maintenance practices to ensure optimal performance throughout the
building's life. Projects are required to submit actual performance
data through LEED's online portal as part of the certification process
to demonstrate that they are achieving the indicated performance
measures.
Greening Federal Buildings
As the owner, tenant, or manager of more than 3.3 billion square
feet of building space valued at more than $772 billion, the Federal
Government has the country's largest real estate portfolio,\13\
including many of the Nation's most recognized and cherished landmarks.
With this vast portfolio comes the power to forge a greener, more
energy efficient, healthier, and prosperous path for the Nation's
buildings and communities. By leveraging the unparalleled purchasing
power of taxpayer dollars to support green building, the Federal
Government can not only reduce its significant environmental footprint,
but also speed the adoption of green building strategies by the private
sector, and save real dollars and resources through reduced utility
bills and operating costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Federal Real Property Council, FY 2007 Federal Real Property
Profile (May 2008), http://gsa.gov/graphics/ogp/FRPP_FY07.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The potential environmental and economic savings are extraordinary.
If the Federal Government were to re-commission its entire building
stock and achieve the estimated 15-percent reductions in energy
use,\14\ it could generate more than $650 million in annual energy
savings and eliminate roughly 2.7 million tons of carbon in 1 year.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Mills, E., Friedman, H., Powell, T., et al., The Cost-
Effectiveness of Commercial-Buildings Commissioning: A Meta-Analysis of
Energy and Non-Energy Impacts in Existing Buildings and New
Construction in the United States (December 2004), available at http://
eetd.lbl.gov/emills/PUBS/Cx-Costs-Benefits.html.
\15\ Extrapolations from Federal building consumption data in the
U.S. Department of Energy's Buildings Data Energy Book, available at
http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/Chapter View.aspx?chap=4#1. Total
Federal primary energy consumption in buildings and facilities for FY
2005 was.65 quadtrillion Btu. The Federal Government spent
$4,390,100,000 in FY 2005 on energy for buildings. The above
extrapolations assume that all of the energy comes from coal-fired
electricity production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing the impact of the Federal building sector, 13 Federal
agencies or departments have made policy commitments to use or
encourage LEED certification. Some 24 million square feet of federally
owned or leased building space is currently certified under LEED, and
more than 400 million square feet of space is registered with LEED.
These policies, coupled with various policies referencing LEED in 34
States and more than 190 localities, are having a marked impact on the
larger green building landscape. To date, more than 23,700 building
projects are registered with LEED, and more than 3,600 projects have
earned LEED certification.
Sustainability and the Department of Veterans Affairs
Boasting a construction budget of more than $1.8 billion and a
diverse building portfolio of more than 1,700 facilities, including
1,400 sites of care, \16\ the VA is an essential player in the effort
to reduce our Nation's environmental footprint. The department's
significant presence in the health care sector presents unique
opportunities for Federal leadership, given the large energy use of
hospitals and medical centers and the critical role these facilities
play in advancing the Nation's wellness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Department of Veterans Affairs Organizational Briefing
Book (June 2009) p. 5, available at http://www.va.gov/ofcadmin/docs/
vaorgbb.pdf (noting that VA maintains 153 hospitals, 995 outpatient
clinics, 135 community living centers, 49 domiciliary residential
rehabilitation treatment programs, 232 veterans centers, 57 veterans
benefits offices, and 128 national cemeteries).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA has long worked to improve the energy performance of its
facilities, adopting EPA's Energy Star tool early on to benchmark its
portfolio. In the past several years, the VA has worked consistently to
comply with Federal environmental requirement and goals,\17\ including
through its ``Green Buildings Action Plan.'' The Action Plan details
the agency's commitment to the use of integrated design, commissioning,
energy efficiency, and measurement and verification to enable optimal
performance of agency facilities.\18\ The VA's Sustainable Design and
Energy Reduction Manual provides additional guidance in pursuit of
these goals, with information about how the LEED rating system (and
specific credits and topics within it) can be used by VA facilities to
meet Federal mandates.\19\ Indeed, LEED is prescribed as the
methodology for achieving Federal mandates related to sustainability
and energy reduction, and projects are encouraged to achieve LEED
Silver equivalency for construction projects. Third-party certification
under LEED is recommended, but not required.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58;
Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and
Transportation Management; Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007, Public Law 110-140.
\18\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Green Buildings
Action Plan, available at http://www.cfm.va.gov/TIL/sustain/
GreenBuildAction.pdf.
\19\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Sustainable Design
and Energy Reduction Manual, available at http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/VA/
VAENERGY/sderm.pdf.
\20\ See id. at 2-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following LEED case study highlights green building principles
in practice in one VA facility:
VA Regional Office, Reno, NV: VA's first LEED certified
facility, which earned LEED Silver under LEED for New Construction
version 2.2, features a range of energy and environmental measures. The
36,000 square-foot building has occupancy sensors and daylighting
controls, low-flow plumbing fixtures, a ``cool'' roof to reduce heat
effect, high-efficiency glazed windows, and paints, carpets, and other
products selected for their low-Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)
content. The project also makes use of locally and regionally sourced
materials, with some 30 percent of materials manufactured by local
companies, roughly 70 percent harvested or extracted within 50 miles,
and more than 10 percent derived from recycled materials.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VAnguard (May/June 2008),
``A Sustainable Approach to Building Design,'' at p. 14-15, available
at http://www1.va.gov/opa/feature/vanguard/08mayjuneVG.pdf.
Eighteen other VA facilities are now registered with LEED.
Opportunities for Enhanced Performance
Leveraging Economic Recovery Funds
In recent months, VA has pursued a number of far-reaching
sustainability projects through the use of funds provided by the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Significantly, the
agency is dedicating roughly $399 million of the $1 billion provided
for medical facilities operated by the Veterans Health Administration
to energy efficiency and renewable energy projects.\22\ The remaining
funds will be used for diverse nonrecurring maintenance projects, among
them the installation of advanced utility metering systems and lighting
controls, and upgrades to HVAC systems.\23\ Additional energy
conservation projects are planned for monuments and memorials as part
of the $50 million in repair funds provided to the National Cemetery
Administration.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Implementing the
Recovery Act, available at http://www.va.gov/recovery/
Implementing_the_Recovery_Act.asp.
\23\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Planned Obligations
for ARRA Non-Recurring Maintenance Projects through August 30, 2009,
available at http://www.va.gov/recovery/Agency_Plans_and_Reports.asp.
\24\ See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Implementing the
Recovery Act, available at http://www.va.gov/recovery/
Implementing_the_Recovery_Act.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USGBC applauds the Department's commitment to sustainability and
encourages it to leverage ARRA funds to even greener ends through the
use of energy saving performance contracts. Under this model, the
agency enters a contract with an energy service company (ESCO), which
finances the upfront cost of the desired improvements, including needed
equipment. The balance is then repaid by the agency throughout the
contract period using the energy and other savings that are generated
by the project. By providing upfront financing that can be combined
with other measures undertaken by the agency, performance contracting
offers VA a means of broadening both the scope and depth of its
facility-related projects.
Most commonly used to finance water and energy improvements,
performance contracting is gaining popularity as a means of supporting
green improvements. Unlike traditional performance contracting, which
frequently targets isolated opportunities, ``green performance
contracting'' draws upon an integrated approach encompassing energy-
and water-saving measures as well as features designed to improve
indoor health and environmental quality. Green performance contracting
may even be used to cover the cost of green roof retrofits, and the
installation of systems to manage stormwater or other external
environmental pollutants.
By accounting for the interaction between building systems,
materials, and operational measures, green performance contracting can
deliver maximum building performance. Combining this model with third-
party verification, such as that provided by LEED for Existing
Buildings: Operations and Maintenance, can ensure that buildings
optimize sustainability as well as cost reductions.
Green Health Care Facilities
Located throughout the country and varying in type from hospitals
to outpatient clinics and community living centers, VA health
facilities play an essential role in the wellness of both our Nation's
people and our environment. Indeed, in 2008, more than 5 million
veterans sought care in VA health facilities.\25\ The use of green
building strategies targeted at the health care sector can optimize
performance of these facilities, in turn improving patient care,
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and generating significant financial
savings that can be reallocated to other priorities in service of our
Nation's veterans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Organizational Briefing
Book (June 2009) p. 7, available at http://www.va.gov/ofcadmin/docs/
vaorgbb.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developed in conjunction with the Green Guide for Health Care, LEED
for Healthcare addresses sustainability through the unique lens of
treatment environments. The rating system, which is nearing its second
public comment period, builds on core LEED credits to also encompass
issues such as increased sensitivity to chemicals and pollutants,
traveling distances from parking facilities, and access to natural
spaces.
Several VA health care facilities are now registered with LEED,
most under the LEED for New Construction rating system. USGBC
encourages the use of integrated design in all VA health care
facilities in light of their unique impact on health, the environment,
and the economy.
Advanced Metering
Advanced meters enable building owners and operators to view in
``real time'' a building's energy and water consumption and also allow
for peak demand reductions, reducing capacity shortages in strained
utility service territories. In addition to enabling dramatic
operational savings, advanced metering performs a critical educational
role--helping to raise awareness among building occupants and operators
about both the need and opportunities for reducing energy and water
consumption. Several VA facilities are now installing advanced metering
using ARRA funds. USGBC urges other facilities to follow their lead.
Renewable Energy and Green Power Purchasing
Turbulent energy prices, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy
security demand that buildings and communities seek out new and
renewable sources of energy, among them solar, wind, and biomass power.
The VA is a leader in the purchase of ``green'' power, ranking 4th
among Federal agencies participating in the EPA's Green Power
Partnership, which assists organizations in procuring power from
renewable resources.\26\ The agency currently derives 4 percent of its
electricity from green power.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Power Partnership,
Top 10 Federal Government (as of July 9, 2009), available at http://
www.epa.gov/grnpower/toplists/top10federal.htm.
\27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Importantly, VA facilities need not rely on power purchasing alone
to diversify their energy supplies, but rather can themselves serve as
significant renewable energy producers. In 2007, as part of its energy
management plan, the VA launched an initiative to expand the use of the
alternative energy in VA facilities. The agency selected 39 pilot
projects for potential use in hosting photovoltaic, solar water
heating, wind, or geothermal systems. These projects are enabling
dramatic results. For example, through more than 1,600 solar panels on
its 2,000-square foot roof, the Jerry L. Pettis Memorial VA Medical
Center in California is expected to save an estimated $60,000 in
electricity costs.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VAnguard (November/
December 2008), available at http://www1.va.gov/opa/feature/vanguard/
08novdecVG.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other VA health care facilities possess similarly tremendous square
footage, and as such, opportunities for deploying renewable energy
systems. Building commissioning--by ensuring proper calibration of
building equipment and by addressing leaks in the building envelope--
can assist in eliminating unnecessary energy use and in putting
renewable energy to its most efficient use.
Conclusion
With a vast building portfolio and a mission of service to our
Nation's veterans, VA is a natural leader in the movement toward more
sustainable, healthy, and cost-effective buildings. The agency's recent
efforts to both track and seek improvements in the energy and
environmental performance of VA facilities through metering and
commissioning are critical, and should be extended to all VA
facilities. Additional focus on the use of integrated and sustainable
design strategies--particularly in VA's health care facilities--can
amplify these efforts, enabling impressive environmental and health
benefits, while also generating financial savings that can be
reallocated to other priorities in support of our Nation's veterans.
About U.S. Green Building Council
The Washington, D.C.-based U.S. Green Building Council is committed
to a prosperous and sustainable future for our Nation through cost-
efficient and energy saving green buildings.
With a membership comprising 78 local chapters, nearly 20,000
Member companies and organizations, and more than 100,000 LEED
Accredited Professionals, the U.S. Green Building Council is the
driving force of an industry that is projected to soar to $60 billion
by 2010. The U.S. Green Building Council leads an unlikely constituency
of builders and environmentalists, corporations and nonprofit
organizations, elected officials and concerned citizens, and teachers
and students.
Prepared Statement of Jane M. Rohde, AIA, FIIDA, ACHA, AAHID, Principle
and Founder, JRS Associates, Inc.,
on behalf of Green Building Initiative
Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer and Members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity to discuss my experience evaluating the
sustainability of VA Hospitals using the Green Building Initiative's
Green Globes' rating system.
I am the principal and founder of JSR Associates, Inc., a senior
living and health care consulting firm. As an architect with more than
20 years of health care experience, I've participated on many design
Committees, including the Guide lines for Design and Construction of
Healthcare Facilities, which is code in at least 44 States and
referenced by the VA.
Today I am speaking on behalf of the Green Building Initiative, a
non-profit organization that brought the Green Globes'
building rating system to the United States in 2005.
About Green Globes'
The Green Globes system is a Web-based tool being used by 21 VA
hospitals to meet the Federal requirements outlined in the Guiding
Principles. Green Globes for Continual Improvement of Existing
Buildings (CIEB) was the module used. During this process, VA Energy
Managers were asked to complete an electronic survey of their medical
center and report their findings. Important items requested during this
evaluation are monthly energy and water consumption from utility bills,
information on transportation practices that minimize energy
consumption, and other data that describe policies related to
containing emissions, promoting recycling, and monitoring indoor
environmental issues.
Additionally, the Green Globes system recognizes progress in
reducing energy consumption through use of the Energy Star rating
system. By evaluating operational energy and source energy through
Energy Star, and by using life cycle assessment tools, the Green Globes
rating system can help building owners identify a building's carbon
footprint and set goals for improvements.
Once the initial Green Globes survey is completed in-house, the
team is then provided with an automated report with an initial score
and opportunities for improvement. This automatically generated report
is based on the Green Globes protocol which assigns a certain number of
points to each answer based on desirable outcomes. The report is for
the internal team's use to evaluate the recommendations for
improvements to the medical facility and its operations.
Following this evaluation, a third-party assessor visits the
building to audit the team's documented outcomes, interview key staff,
complete a walkthrough and determine if the building qualifies for
Green Globes certification.
Lessons Learned on VA Buildings
As a third-party assessor, I have visited 15 out of the 21
hospitals that are working to complete the Green Globes evaluation and
certification process.
While we are still in the early stages of evaluating the VA
hospitals, I can tell you that these facilities are doing extremely
well in their efforts to comply with Federal sustainability
requirements. It is clear to me that, in addition to receiving valuable
feedback and recognition from this process, many of the VA's best
practices in sustainability will provide valuable case studies to
benefit the health care facilities in the private sector.
I would like to provide you with some of the creative ideas and
programs that are currently proposed or being completed at VA hospitals
across the country:
Richmond, Virginia, has a proposed project to complete an
arboretum that would not only be a site enhancement, but will reduce
heat island effect, reduce water runoff, provide a resource for the
Veterans and their families, and create an opportunity for engaging the
community at-large.
Portland, Oregon, has a boiler/chiller plant supervisor
training program that is exemplary, including an education manual and
on-site training tools. They are able to share their expertise with not
only trainees but other locations that need assistance with additional
improvement in energy and water consumption.
Dallas, Texas, is in the process of completing an Ethanol
fueling station for the VA and other governmental agencies for their
Flexible Fuel fleet vehicles.
Birmingham, Alabama, located in a tight urban block, is
evaluating using an existing underground spring for recovery of water
for the cooling tower.
San Diego, California, has one of the strongest recycling
programs across the board. This site, as well as Milwaukee, Portland,
and Seattle, are excellent examples of systems that are working to
reduce use of natural resources.
Because continual improvement is just that--continual--it is
important to realize that ongoing efforts are what make a hospital
sustainable. Tools and certification programs like Green Globes allow
the VA staff to conduct periodic assessments that then empower them to
be the drivers of initiatives for improvement that can be quantified
over time.
The next steps for VA and I assume all Federal agencies will be to
do the deeper dive on their portfolios. Continuing with such an
assessment program will help to achieve the largest potential energy
and water savings across all of VA Health Care Facilities--not only
hospitals, but the range of VA facilities, including CBOTs, CLCs,
Hospice/Palliative Care, and Polytrauma Centers. To do this, they need
multiple tools--like Green Globes--to help make surveying, measurement,
evaluation, and regular benchmarking part of their ongoing process.
It is clear that the VA hospitals that have been assessed are on a
positive path for sustainable improvement. I am fortunate to be part of
this groundbreaking initiative, assessing firsthand the creativity, the
potential, and the amazing outcomes that are sure to manifest as a
result of this ongoing evaluation and certification process.
JSR Associates, Inc. Background and Relevant Information
JSR Associates, Inc. represents over 20 years of experience in
programming, architecture, interior design, and operational consulting
for Senior Living and Healthcare Projects. Jane Rohde founded the firm
in 1996 and her practice focuses predominantly on senior living and
health care consulting. She is an independent contractor serving the
Green Building Initiative as a third party assessor for the Continual
Improvement of Existing Buildings module of Green Globes'.
Rohde holds a Bachelor of Architecture Degree from Virginia Tech and is
certified by the American College of Health Care Architects (ACHA) and
the American Academy of Health Care Interior Designers (AAHID). Rohde
is also NCIDQ and NCARB certified, as well as being a LEED Accredited
Professional. Additionally, Rohde is a professional member of the AIA
and honored as a Fellow for her volunteer and leadership work in health
care design by the International Interior Design Association (FIIDA).
Highlights from Third-Party Assessment of VA Hospitals Using Green
Globes-CIEB Rating System
To date, the initial VA hospitals evaluated are on track to achieve
Green Globes certification. This approach to evaluation provides a
holistic review of facility operations addressing not only energy
issues, but also water, indoor environment, site enhancement,
emissions, and environmental management practices. With both the Energy
Manager and GEMS Coordinator (Green Environmental Management System)
positions already in place within most VA Medical Centers, an ideal
team is created to work in tandem on completing the on-line Green
Globes survey. VA was able to evaluate whether to hire outside vendor
support to complete the sustainability evaluations or to use their in-
house staff. In most cases, Green Globes is written in such a way that
in-house teams will often choose to complete the work on their own,
knowing that a highly qualified third-party assessor will be following
through with a detailed audit. Furthermore, the Green Globes process
provides instant feedback and recommendations for the teams to consider
as they drive further improvements in the performance of the VA
portfolio.
Opportunities for VA Hospitals to Conduct Ongoing Assessment and
Continual Improvement
The following recommendations are some of those that will be made
for consideration to the in-house teams to further this dynamic
process:
Use thermal imaging for all hospitals to detect thermal
leaks in the envelope of the buildings. This includes evaluation of
loss of thermal control through the roof, walls and windows.
Create a task force to include IT departments and Energy
Managers to review opportunities to reduce the time that computers are
turned on in non-essential areas to conserve energy.
Create a task force to include Food Service management,
Canteen management, and Procurement/Acquisitions to discuss the
potential of localizing contracts to reduce inherent energy and
transportation costs of products that could be provided locally.
Recommend discussion between NSF, VACO, and EPA to
evaluate Kitchen Equipment for energy and water conservation compliance
(Energy Star, FEMP, Waterwise, etc.).
Continue to monitor and benchmark water usage and energy
usage comparatively to uniques (patient types) and resulting staff
changes for clearer evaluation of consumption in relationship to the
water and energy reductions required by 2015.
Work cooperatively with GBI and other similar green
building organizations, the Irrigation Association and industry to
enhance opportunities for water efficiency and site enhancement as this
process is extended to other VA facilities, including cemeteries.
Third-party certification is also an important part of
sustainability. It is important to validate the work that VA is doing--
and--if it's similar to the process the VA has used through the GBI, it
will provide them with valuable feedback and recommendations for
continual improvement from highly qualified assessors.
Green Globes for Continual Improvement of Existing Buildings
Considering that the United States is home to more than 100 million
buildings, the need to improve the performance of existing structures
is a necessary prerequisite for widespread energy efficiency;
particularly for health care buildings, as their water and energy
consumption are much larger than other building types. The missing
element--until GBI introduced Green Globes-CIEB--was a practical and
affordable way to measure and monitor sustainability and operational
performance on an ongoing basis.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.001
Green Globes-CIEB allows users to create a baseline of their
building's performance, evaluate interventions, plan for improvements,
and monitor success--all within a holistic framework that also
addresses physical and human elements such as material use and indoor
environment.
As in Green Globes for New Construction, energy is the most
significant area of assessment within Green Globes-CIEB. A combined
focus on energy use, building features, and management practices helps
to pinpoint where performance is lacking and what corrective action is
required. The system uses ENERGY STAR to determine a consumption target
for each building type and, where appropriate, buildings must meet a
minimum performance target of 75 percent based on the comparable ENERGY
STAR rating system.
Green Globes Automated Reports
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.004
The best way to achieve facility-wide environmental goals is to put
easy to understand information in the hands of those that make decision
and maintain the facilities. Green Globes-CIEB reports are generated
following completion by the in-house staff of an approximately 150-
question building survey. The survey helps staff to identify their
operations' strengths and weaknesses and provides them with
opportunities for improvement. The report is a tool for the in-house
staff and decisionmakers.
The report is also informative for the third-party assessor prior
to evaluation of the building against Green Globes protocols. Each
entry in the survey must be verified by the GBI-authorized third-party
assessor before a building can qualify for a Green Globes rating of
one, two, three, or four Green Globes. Once an on-site assessment is
completed by a GBI-assigned third-party assessor--which includes
evaluation of documentation and interviews with key facility
personnel--a certified rating is assigned to the building.
Achieving Green Globes Certification
Projects that achieve a score of 35 percent or more out of
applicable points become eligible for a Green Globes rating of one,
two, three or four globes, as follows:
One Globe: 35-54 percent
Two Globes: 55-69 percent
Three Globes: 70-84 percent
Four Globes: 85-100 percent
However, buildings cannot be promoted as having achieved a Green
Globes rating until the information submitted has been assessed and
certified by a qualified third party.
The Green Globes third-party assessment features a rigorous
evaluation process. The evaluation includes a thorough review of
documentation, an on-site walk through, and interviews of key facility
personnel.
The GBI currently oversees a network of Green Globes-trained
assessors comprised primarily of licensed architects and engineers with
significant experience in building sciences and sustainability issues.
To accommodate increasing demand and further strengthen our third-party
assessment program, GBI has launched a personnel certification and
training program. The most highly qualified architects, engineers, and
building sustainability experts will be eligible to become certified as
Green Globes Assessors (GGAs) whereas other practitioners with
experience in applying sustainability principles to buildings can earn
a Green Globes Professional (GGP) certification. Both programs are
accompanied by comprehensive training.
U.S. Market Acceptance of Green Globes
To date, 76 buildings have successfully achieved Green Globes
third-party certifications across the United States. More than 400
additional buildings are also registered to complete a Green Globes
assessment in the future.
Green Globes has also been formally recognized by the public and
private sectors including the following:
To date, 35 Federal Government buildings are registered
with Green Globes and are at some stage in the assessment process. This
includes 14 buildings from the U.S. government Services Administration
(GSA) Region 9 (San Francisco) and GSA Region 5 (Chicago), 21 Green
Globes-CIEB assessments from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
and 1 Green Globes assessment from the U.S. Department of State.
Nineteen States have included Green Globes in green
building legislation, regulation or executive order, including:
Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and
Wisconsin.
Green Globes is included in insurance packages offered
for green buildings by Aon Corp., Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., Liberty
Mutual, and Travelers.
Since the launch of Green Globes-CIEB, some of the
largest corporations and real estate companies in the country have
chosen to use it for their existing building portfolios, including the
USAA Real Estate Co., Tishman Speyer-Chicago, Capital One, and
Rubbermaid.
Green Building Initiative Background and Relevant Information
GBI Mission & Structure
The GBI is committed to accelerating the adoption of green building
practices by offering credible and practical tools that make green
design, management and assessment more accessible to a wider population
of builders and designers.
The Green Building Initiative (GBI) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit
education organization based in Portland, Oregon. It was established to
accelerate the adoption of sustainable design and construction
practices by promoting credible and practical approaches to green
building for both residential and commercial construction.
Ward Hubbell, who has previously testified before Congress, serves
as President of GBI at the discretion of an independent, multi-
stakeholder board of directors comprised of construction professionals,
product manufacturers, non-profit organizations, university officials,
and other interested third parties. Each board member is allocated one
vote to guide the GBI, ensuring an equal balance of influence. For a
list of board members, please visit the board page of the GBI Web site.
Having long recognized the power of collaboration, GBI has sought
to foster relationships with a variety of organizations related to the
built environment with the goal of helping to accelerate the acceptance
of sustainable design and construction in the marketplace. To this end,
GBI has a formal partnership with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's ENERGY STAR' program, as well as Memorandums of
Understanding with the following organizations:
American Institute of Architects (AIA)
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Associated General Contractors of America (AGC)
Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA)
National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
GBI has also established collaborative relationships with, among
others:
Alliance to Save Energy (ASE)
Architecture 2030
Sustainable Buildings Industry Council (SBIC)
Accomplishments, Innovation and Competition
When GBI was established in late 2004, there were no green building
rating systems with the specific objective of supporting mainstream
design and building professionals. This is at the core of the Green
Globes system and is fundamental to encouraging energy efficiency and
other green building practices on the broad scale that is clearly
necessary. That is why GBI obtained the exclusive rights to develop and
promote Green Globes in the United States.
Having more than one rating system in the U.S. market supports the
diversity of buildings, design and building professionals, and budgets.
It also creates an atmosphere of healthy competition, which does for
green building what it has done in countless other areas--drives
improvements, lowers costs and benefits the ultimate consumer, which in
this case is our shared environment.
In the last 4 years, for example, GBI:
Became the first green building organization to be
accredited as a Standards Developing Organization (SDO) by the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI),
Embarked on a process to establish Green Globes as the
first ANSI standard for commercial green building, which will be
completed this year,
Introduced Green Globes-CIEB to strengthen the link
between sustainable design objectives and actual building performance,
Developed the first tool for integrating life cycle
assessment (LCA)--widely considered to be the most effective way to
compare the environmental impacts of building materials and
assemblies--into a green rating system, and
Chose to advance the green movement as a whole by
supporting the development of a generic version of its LCA tool--the
ATHENA' EcoCalculator for Assemblies--which is available
free of charge from the ATHENA Institute (www.athenasmi.ca).
As evidenced by these highlights, GBI's offerings have evolved as
new opportunities have arisen to help mainstream practitioners
accelerate their adoption of green building practices. Our goal is for
green building to become the norm and, while GBI has arguably become a
leading voice in the movement, we are committed to remaining nimble and
continuing our role as an agent of positive change.
Conclusion
It is the GBI's view that improving the efficiency of buildings one
of the most important things Congress can do to reduce energy
consumption and address its related impacts. Green building rating
systems can accelerate this process by defining goals that go beyond
code, providing the means to measure progress, and rewarding those who
excel. It is the GBI's hope that this Committee will recognize the
valuable and complementary role of green building rating systems and
create policy that encourages rating system developers and others to
create additional market-based incentives that help motivate
significant energy and greenhouse gas reductions.
Thank you for inviting the Green Building Initiative to participate
in this important hearing. We look forward to the opportunity to work
with all of the Members of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs to
help increase the sustainability of VA facilities and operations.
Prepared Statement of James L. Hoff, DBA, Director of Research,
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing
Good morning and thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee, for the invitation to speak to you at this hearing on energy
efficiency. My name is
Dr. James Hoff, and I serve as Research Director for the Center for
Environmental Innovation in Roofing in Washington, DC. The mission of
the Center is to serve as the unified voice of the roofing industry in
matters relating to the energy and environmental benefits afforded by
modern roofing materials and systems. Our membership includes roofing
contractors, roofing materials manufacturers, construction designers
and building researchers, all interested in a common goal of raising
public awareness of the importance of our Nation's rooftops and their
strategic value in reducing energy consumption, mitigating
environmental impact, and enhancing the quality of the buildings in
which we all live and work.
My mission before the Committee this morning is to raise awareness
of the magnitude of roofing's contribution to energy efficiency and the
many different ways our Nation's rooftops can be used to meet broader
goals of reducing energy consumption and create a cleaner environment.
In addition, I would like to express the Center's support of the
important energy initiatives already undertaken by the Department of
Veterans Affairs, especially as embodied in the Department's Green
Buildings Action Plan. And finally, I would like to recommend some
additional actions than should be taken to help assure that the
important energy efficiency goals of the Department of Veterans Affairs
are fully realized on the rooftops of all VA facilities.
Energy Goals and Our Nation's Rooftops
Building Heat Loss and Roof Insulation.
Of all the opportunities for saving energy through improved roof
system design, the opportunity to reduce building heating costs is by
far the most important. Direct heat loss through the roofs of our
Nation's commercial and institutional buildings accounts for 25 percent
of total building heating loads, or over $12.5 billion in annual energy
costs (Huang & Franconi, 1999). Given the magnitude of energy costs
related to heat loss directly through our roofs, the application of
adequate levels of roof insulation is a critical aspect of efficient
roof system design. Unfortunately, the great majority of the
commercial/industrial roofs in the United States are not adequately
insulated as measured by current energy efficiency standards. The
Center estimates that the average level of insulation in our Nation's
roofing inventory is at least 30 percent lower than current building
code requirements, which in turn is 30 percent lower than the level
needed to support the energy reduction goals of the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007.
However, because thermal insulation has been designed to be an
integral part of modern commercial roofing systems, increased amounts
of insulation may be added easily and economically during the
installation of a roof on both new and existing buildings. The Center
estimates that if the 50 million square foot inventory of commercial/
institutional roofs in the United States were insulated at the levels
needed to meet the energy efficiency targets of the Energy Independence
and Security Act of 2007, annual energy costs savings would exceed $2.0
billion (Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing, 2009).
Solar Loads and Cool Roofs.
Roofs also contribute substantially to building cooling loads
through the absorption of solar energy into the roofing material. In
addition to increasing building air conditioning requirements, solar
heat absorption by roofs and other man-made surfaces tends to increase
the average temperature of our cities, contributing to what is known as
the Urban Heat Island Effect. Because solar heat loads generally peak
during the late afternoon, demand for electricity also tends to spike
at the same time. In fact, research suggests that up to 10 percent of
overall electricity demand in urban areas is used to compensate for
this heat island effect (Akbari, 2005).
Reducing this solar heat load can be accomplished through the
application of a number of ``Cool Roofing'' techniques suitable for
both new as well as retrofit applications. In new applications, the
cost of installing a roof with a highly reflective cool surface may be
no greater than the cost of installing a non-reflective roof. And in
retrofit applications, reflective roof coatings may offer an economical
alternative to complete roof membrane replacement, which in turn
mitigates environmental impact generated by additional construction
waste. ``Green Roofs'', or roofs covered with a layer of vegetation
offer an alternative cool roofing technology that reduces cooling loads
through the thermal mass and the evaporation of transpired moisture
from the vegetation. In a similar manner, roof surfaces covered with
stone ballast or concrete pavers can reduce cooling loads by absorbing
the sun's heat during the day and releasing it at night, similar to the
dynamics of traditional adobe construction in desert regions of the
United States.
Although cool roof surfaces may not offer the same magnitude of
overall energy savings as increased roof insulation, the energy savings
opportunity is still very significant. According to the Heat Island
Group of Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories, the installation of cool
reflective roofing surfaces--either as new roofing materials or
reflective coatings over existing roofing materials--could generate
annual cooling energy savings as high as $175 million (Akbari, 2005).
Clean Energy and the Rooftop Platform.
In addition to the opportunities to significantly reduce building
energy consumption, the rooftops of our country also offer an
attractive platform to increase the supply of energy from renewable
resources. This rooftop ``platform for the future'' is especially
attractive for the deployment of photovoltaic (PV) systems which
generate electricity through the direct conversion of sunlight into
usable electrical power. In addition to rooftop PV systems, the
installation of roof-mounted solar thermal systems offer an economical
clean energy alternative, especially for Department of Veterans Affairs
facilities requiring large quantities of hot water for laundry and
cleaning operations.
The benefits offered by rooftops for the economical and sustainable
deployment of renewable solar energy are numerous. Because existing
rooftops already serve a functional purpose by keeping water out of
buildings and helping generate economic value in the form of occupancy
or rent, their use as a platform to generate solar energy is generally
much less expensive than the acquisition of undeveloped real estate.
Further, the users of the energy generated by rooftop clean power are
located directly beneath the rooftop, reducing transmission and
operating costs. Finally, because rooftop clean power is generally
located directly within the current developed electric grid, no new
transmissionlines or controls are necessary.
Long-Term Energy Savings and Roof Service Life.
No matter how much energy efficiency can be designed into a
building, the benefits of that efficiency can only be realized if the
building provides a long and problem-free service life. And of all the
major components of a modern building, the roof system undoubtedly
exercises the most influence on service life. Roof leaks and other
roof-related failures can rapidly accumulate excessive moisture within
a building, accelerating the deterioration of building materials and
components. In addition, excessive moisture can lead to mold growth
that may adversely the health and safety of building occupants.
Finally, excessive moisture can compromise the thermal resistance of
building insulation, leading to a slow but steady reduction in overall
energy efficiency.
The issue of durability in roofing system design becomes even more
important as the rooftop takes on a new and expanded role as a platform
for renewable energy. For any building owner investing in a rooftop
solar system that may require 20 or more years of continuous service to
assure adequate financial return, it is imperative that the underlying
roofing system is designed and installed to provide the needed
uninterrupted service life.
Roofing and Clean Energy Jobs.
According to the 2002 Economic Census, over 225,000 Americans are
employed in the roofing industry. Given the overall market potential
for energy-efficient roofs combined with the additional opportunities
for rooftop solar energy production, the roofing industry offers an
outstanding opportunity for the development of a new generation of
highly skilled energy technicians and high-paying green jobs.
Roofing contractors already contribute a high added value through
their work--of the $21 billion expended annually on roofing
installations in the U.S., over $13 billion of economic value is added
by roofing contractors above and beyond the required roofing materials.
With the advent of new energy-saving and energy-producing technologies
now being added to roofing installations, the overall economic
contribution of the roofing industry is certain to increase
significantly, both in terms of added materials as well as new value-
added job skills.
Recommendations for the Committee
Incorporate Recent Energy Standard Updates in Department Action Plans.
The Center would like to express its support of the important
energy initiatives already undertaken by the Department of Veterans
Affairs, especially as embodied in the Department's Green Buildings
Action Plan. This plan establishes overall targets and broad operating
principles consistent with the energy targets of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. These
targets called for a 30-percent improvement over the then-current
national energy consensus standard for buildings, ASHRAE 90.1-2004.
Since the enactment of this legislation, however, the ASHRAE standard
has been revised upward (ASHRAE 90.1-2007), and an even higher level of
the standard is anticipated within the year. Because building energy
use standards, driven by technology improvements and current economics,
continue to evolve, the Center recommends that the Department's Green
Building Action Plan also be revised to reflect the current building
energy standard of ASHRAE 90.1-2007.
Establish Specific Insulation Targets for All New and Replacement
Roofs.
As mentioned previously, the Department's Green Buildings Action
Plan establishes overall targets for energy efficiency, especially in
regard to how they should be applied to new buildings and major
renovations. However, many roofing projects, especially the re-roofing
of existing Department facilities, fall outside new building or major
renovation activities. As a result, there may be some confusion as to
how the 30 percent energy improvement target should be applied to a
roofing-only project. To avoid this potential confusion, the Center
recommends that a specific target be established for roof insulation by
applying the 30 percent overall savings target to the current minimum
roof thermal conductance requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007 (for roofs
with above deck insulation). The calculation for this recommendation
for the applicable ASHRAE climate zones is illustrated in the following
table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Min. Adjusted For 30% Equivalent Min. Roof
ASHRAE Climate Zone Roof U-Value 1 Energy Improvement R-Value 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1 0.067 0.047 21.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 2-8 0.050 0.035 28.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U-value is a measure of thermal conductance.
\2\ R-value is a measure of thermal resistance and the reciprocal of U-value.
It should be noted that ASHRAE 90.1-2004 and ASHRAE 90.1-2007 also
includes a design provision for cool roofs, which allows a 10-percent
reduction in roof insulation value in certain climate zones if the roof
system is a cool roof. Although the Center does not dispute the logic
of this tradeoff, we recommend this tradeoff only be used if the
Department's Green Buildings Action plan is upgraded to the most recent
2007 version.
Include Roof Condition Assessment in all Roof-Mounted Renewable Energy
Projects
As mentioned previously, durability in roofing system design
becomes especially important if the role also serves a platform for
renewable energy production. Because the Department will certainly
expect 20 or more years of continuous service from any investment as
sizeable as rooftop solar or other renewable energy systems, the Center
strongly recommends that the condition and design of the roof be
evaluated to assure that both the renewable energy system and the roof
system will have compatible service lives.
References:
Akbari, H. (2005). Energy Saving Potentials and Air Quality
Benefits of Urban Heat Island Mitigation (PDF) (19 pp, 251K). Berkeley,
CA, Building Technologies Department, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing (2009). Economic
Growth, Energy Independence & America's Rooftops. Washington, DC.
Huang, J. and Franconi, E. (1999). Commercial Heating and Cooling
Loads Component Analysis. Berkeley, CA, Building Technologies
Department, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: LBNL-37208.
U.S. Census Bureau (2004). Roofing Contractors: 2002. 2002 Economic
Census, Construction Industry Series.
Prepared Statement of Kevin Kampschroer, Acting Director,
Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings,
U.S. General Services Administration
Good afternoon, Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer and Members
of this Committee. My name is Kevin Kampschroer and I am the Acting
Director of the Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings at
the United States General Services Administration (GSA). Thank you for
inviting me today to discuss the goals for Federal Agencies to become
more energy efficient in a sustainable manner.
GSA, through the Public Buildings Service (PBS), is one of the
largest and most diversified public real estate organizations in the
world. Our real estate inventory consists of more than 8,600 owned and
leased assets representing nearly 354 million square feet of rentable
space across all 50 States, 6 territories and the District of Columbia.
Our portfolio is composed primarily of office buildings, courthouses,
land ports of entry, and warehouses. GSA's goal is to manage these
assets efficiently, while delivering and maintaining superior
workplaces at best value to our client agencies and the American
taxpayer.
We also collaborate with other Federal agencies as partners in
developing, implementing and evaluating Federal green building programs
through programs such as ENERGY STAR, which is jointly run by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Energy. We have
worked with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on the
Veterans Benefits Office in Reno, NV, which was the VA's first building
rated using a third-party, independent rating system: Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). We continue to work with the VA
on every new project in support of the VA's important mission to our
country's veterans.
Cost and Value
High-performing green buildings provide the best value for the
taxpayer and for the public through both life cycle cost benefits and
positive effects on human health and performance. A recent study \1\ of
GSA's 12 earliest green Federal buildings shows energy consumption is
down 26 percent and occupant satisfaction up 27 percent, compared to
commercial office benchmark data in those regions. More importantly,
the top third of studied buildings, which use an integrated design
approach, deliver significantly better results with 45 percent less
energy consumption, 53 percent lower maintenance costs, and 39 percent
less water use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Assessing Green Building Performance'', K.M. Fowler et al.,
U.S. General Services Administration 2008, based on: KM Fowler and EM
Rauch: Assessing Green Building Performance: A post-occupancy
evaluation of 12 GSA Buildings, PNNL-17393, Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory, Richland, WA, 2008. The full report and white paper summary
can be found at www.gsa.gov/appliedresearch under Research
Publications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A recent report by CoStar, a major real estate transaction
information collection company, shows that green buildings, in general,
also have lower vacancy rates. According to the 2008 McGraw-Hill
Construction SmartMarket Report: Key Trends in the European and U.S.
Construction Marketplace, operating costs for green buildings are on
average 8 to 9 percent lower, building values are 7.5 percent higher,
buildings have a 3.5 percent greater occupancy ratio, and green
buildings provide a 6.6 percent total return on investment.
With the above mentioned long-term operating cost benefits, the
life cycle cost of green buildings is lower than the life cycle costs
of those that are not. Even the initial capital costs are not
necessarily higher, and when they are, only marginally so. GSA's study
of the initial capital cost shows that the increase on average is about
3 percent, ranging from zero to 10 percent, depending on the design.
Similarly, a private sector study by Davis Langdon \2\ in 2007 shows
that green building aspects tend to have a lesser impact on costs than
other building decisions, such as which kind of finishes and amenities
the building might provide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Lisa Fay Mathiesson, Peter Morris, ``The Cost of Green
Revisited'' Davis Langdon, July 2007, http://www.davislangdon.com/
upload/images/publications/USA/The%20Cost%20of%20Green%20 Revisited.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Benefits
Good sustainable design offers economic, environmental and societal
benefits. If a building decreases its energy consumption, the cost of
operation is less, the asset value increases, and the production of
greenhouse gasses also decreases. Although there is a large focus on
reducing energy consumption today, there are other benefits of
sustainable buildings. For example, a planted or ``green'' roof can
have significant economic benefits by lowering the roof temperature and
thus cooling, lowering costs for neighboring buildings, reducing the
the city's heat island effect, and reducing storm water runoff. In
cities like Washington DC, with a combined storm water and sewer
system, this reduces water pollution both locally and downstream in the
Chesapeake Bay. Finally, societal benefits include physically and
aesthetically pleasing effects for building occupants and neighbors,
jobs for workers to install and maintain planted roofs, and reduction
in greenhouse gasses caused by the building.
The careful selection and use of materials can reduce energy
consumption during the manufacturing process and protect the health of
occupants. Careful construction techniques can reduce the amount of
construction waste that reaches landfills by 95 percent or more. Re-use
of existing structures can reduce resource consumption while preserving
our country's heritage. Careful siting can make buildings perform
better from both environmental and human perspectives: proximity to
public transportation reduces pollution, saves energy, reduces employee
petroleum use, and improves occupants' quality of life. The key is
holistic, integrated planning that considers all factors that influence
a building, including the decision of whether to build at all. In
addition, every one of the choices is also a choice to reduce the
production of greenhouse gasses.
Design challenges for high performance green buildings may vary for
different building types (e.g. hospitals). Given the intensive use of
the buildings, as with data centers and laboratories, the measures will
be different, and the benchmarks need similarly to be adjusted to
reflect the use of the building. One can still address energy
efficiency in hospitals, and in doing so, the energy efficiency
decisions will be balanced differently against air quality standards
and other health-related factors.
We need to have at least as much emphasis on actual building
performance as on design. The State of California is contemplating
standard building performance labeling as a prerequisite for every real
estate transaction, and beginning in 2010 GSA will require new building
leases over 10,000 square feet \3\ to have an Energy Star rating earned
in the most recent year of operation. The value of the Energy Star
rating is that it is an on-going performance measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Except in cases where the tenant stays in the same building, or
where the market does not provide a building that meets the agency's
functional needs, or if the lease is in a historic building. These
exceptions are more explicitly defined in the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007, sec. 435.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We in the building industry and in the Federal Government also need
to expand our measures. While today we typically concentrate on energy
use in the building, we need to remember that buildings are also tools
for businesses and organizations. The Energy Independence and Security
Act of 2007 states that a high-performance green building must not just
perform well mechanically, but must perform to improve the health and
enhance the performance of the occupants.\4\ This is particularly
important in health care facilities, where the importance of the work
within the buildings cannot be overstated. If we only look at the
energy consumption of the building, we miss the importance of how
building performance can increase the ability of people to care for the
ill, to reduce the transmission of disease, or to create the conditions
of healing. Similarly, modernizing office buildings into high
performance facilities can increase the productivity of the workers
inside. Carnegie Mellon University has documented over 100 solid,
scientifically valid studies that demonstrate the link between high-
performance features and some aspect of productivity. Johns Hopkins
University has measured reduction in airborne illness by adding
ultraviolet light in mechanical systems. The Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory has measured an increase in productivity through better
lighting. Hewlett Packard has also measured increases in employee
engagement linked to their facility greening activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ EISA Sec. 401(13).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A key broad measure of environmental impact is greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. Once you measure the collective effects of greenhouse gas
production by an organization--with buildings as components--you can
make more informed decisions and tradeoffs. We need to look at the way
we buy materials for the building, travel to and from the building, the
way we use the building, and how the building is operating. In both
office buildings and computer centers, integrating the occupants'
operations with the facility operations can increase energy savings by
as much as 50 percent, and also lower the tenants' cost of operations.
Health care facilities present particular difficulties and
opportunities. We care for the sick, and try to prevent the
transmission of disease in these facilities. We need to create
conditions in which health care professionals can perform at their
best. They operate around the clock. A health care facility is an
amalgam of office, laboratory, hotel, data center and industrial
facilities--all in one complex building. The daunting complexity may
obscure opportunities for improvement. The key will be to make sure
that the facility operations integrate hospital health care operations.
As part of the training held at GovEnergy just last month, several case
studies presented examples of dramatic energy and water reduction with
no reduction in health care effectiveness.
The research that the National Institutes of Health has been
conducting on the way that buildings and their mechanical systems can
either increase or mitigate the transmission of airborne pathogens is
also beginning to change the way that health care facilities are
constructed and operated. More research on the unintended consequences
of current building management practices is need.
Creation of Green Jobs
The jobs created across the design, engineering, manufacturing,
construction and operations industries will bolster the ``green
economy.'' These jobs will provide practical experience in high-
performance technologies, green construction and building operations.
GSA has identified over 50 different trades and professions that
will participate in the accomplishment of GSA building projects. While
it may seem that some aspects of construction are unaffected by new
technologies, we find that virtually all are changed in some way by the
application of the principles of sustainable buildings and delivery.
For example, in demolition work, GSA takes particular care to ensure
that materials are reused, and recycled, and we have avoided 95 percent
of the traditional construction waste on several of our projects.
Installation of PV requires special skills that are a part of the
green economy. Lighting systems and controls have improved dramatically
over the past 10 years. Implementing emerging technologies leads to the
creation of green jobs in building operations. GSA has discovered that
most building operators in the government and private sector state that
they are unable to find enough well-trained people to run high-
performance buildings and keep them running in a high-performance mode.
Buildings that are tuned up, commissioned and operating well can easily
slip into poorer performance without proper maintenance. The aggregate
result is a significant degradation of performance and an unnecessary
increase in energy consumption. GSA is already in conversations with
the Building Owners and Managers Association, the International
Facility Managers Association and others about the apparent shortage of
sufficiently trained building operators. GSA will work with the
Department of Labor to encourage connections between GSA-sponsored
building projects and the public workforce system to provide
individuals access to training and employment opportunities in green
jobs created with Recovery Act funding. We believe that GSA's Recovery
Act projects can potentially provide jobs along this emerging career
pathway.
Conclusion
The funds Congress provided Federal agencies through the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act are a sound investment in several
respects. First, the timely obligation of these recovery funds will
stimulate job growth in the green construction and real estate sectors.
Second, the money will help reduce energy consumption and improve the
environmental performance of our inventory. Third, the funds, in large
part, will be invested in the existing infrastructure, which will help
reduce our backlog of repair and alteration needs, thus increasing the
assets' value, prolonging their useful life, and ultimately further
conserving our country's resources. Finally, these funds will be
invested in government-owned assets for the long-term requirements of
our Federal customers.
Thank you again for this opportunity. All of us at GSA are excited
by the contribution Congress has allowed us to make, both with the
Recovery Act and in our continuing service to other Federal agencies. I
am available to address any questions you may have. We look forward to
continuing to support the VA in its mission and to help the VA reduce
its environmental impact while simultaneously improving the conditions
for people working in its facilities and the veterans staying in those
facilities.
Prepared Statement of Richard G. Kidd IV, Program Manager,
Federal Energy Management Program, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy
INTRODUCTION--Overview of the Federal Sector
Good morning Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer, and other
distinguished Members of the Committee. I am Richard Kidd, the Program
Manager for the Department of Energy's Federal Energy Management
Program (FEMP). FEMP operates within DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, which manages 10 research and development and
deployment programs. FEMP's mission is to:
Facilitate the Federal Government's implementation of sound,
cost-effective, energy management and investment practices to
enhance the Nation's Energy security and environmental
stewardship.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to address this Committee and
to talk about the Federal Government's efforts to reduce its energy
intensity and challenges we face as we attempt to achieve national
goals, highlighting our work with the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA). I believe that VA's efforts in reducing their energy consumption
help tell the story of how Federal agencies can lead the way in ``going
green.''
For perspective, the U.S. Federal Government is the single largest
user of energy in the Nation. Key statistics illustrate the impact the
Federal Government has on national security, U.S. energy consumption,
the Federal budget, and the environment include:
Nationwide, buildings account for nearly 40 percent of
U.S. primary energy consumption;
The Federal Government currently owns, operates, and
leases over 500,000 buildings at 8,000 sites throughout the U.S.; and
The Federal building inventory includes commercial,
industrial, residential, research, institutional, agricultural,
transportation, and cultural facilities operated by 26 cabinet-level
departments and independent agencies with a highly diverse set of
complex missions.
In FY 2008, total site-delivered energy consumption was 1.1
quadrillion Btu (``quads''), roughly 1.6 percent of U.S. total
consumption. Also in FY 2008, the Federal Government's site-delivered
energy, also known as point of use energy, bill was $24.5 billion. This
represented approximately 0.8 percent of total Federal expenditures
($2.983 trillion) that year. Of the $24.5 billion, over $7 billion was
spent on energy to operate Federal buildings.
ENABLING AUTHORITIES FOR FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT
I would like to highlight the Federal authorities that guide energy
policy at the Federal level. Following the 1973-1974 oil embargo,
Congress first recognized the national security dimensions of our
dependence on oil and the adverse impacts of this dependence. These
concerns have only heightened over time and a series of legislative
initiatives have been passed that guide the reduction of Federal energy
use, the procurement of renewable electric power, and the reduction in
petroleum use. The key guiding documents for Federal energy policy
include:
National Energy Conservation Policy Act, as amended by
the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, and the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005);
Energy Conservation and Production Act, as amended by
EISA and EPAct 2005;
Energy Policy Act 1992 (EPAct 1992);
Executive Order 13423; and
EISA
These authorities establish a range of Federal energy management
goals that apply to all Federal agencies that operate buildings and
facilities. The most salient goals are:
Reducing energy intensity (Btu/ft2) by 15
percent by the end of FY 2010, compared to a FY 2003 baseline and by 30
percent by the end of FY 2015;
Using renewable electric energy equivalent to a least 5
percent of total electricity use in FYs 2010-2012 and at least 7.5
percent in FY 2013 and beyond; at least half must come from sources
developed after January 1, 1999; and
Reducing water consumption intensity (g/gsf) by 2 percent
annually relative to the FY 2007 baseline to achieve 16 percent by the
end of FY 2015.
FEDERAL ENERGY FOOTPRINT--Goal Performance
All Federal agencies submit energy use data to FEMP for analysis.
The Federal agency energy use figures provided are based upon the
submissions for FY 2008. This data is analyzed by FEMP and submitted to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its use in assessing
agencies progress and status on the OMB Energy Scorecard. The Federal
Government has made significant progress in reducing its energy use
during the past decade. However, FY 2008 findings indicate that while
the Federal Government as a whole is currently meeting all of its major
goals in the areas of energy efficiency, deployment of renewables and
petroleum reduction, the rate of progress decreased in FY 2008.
Some of the other key highlights of our analysis are presented
below.
Six Federal agencies consume 80 percent of the energy used by the
Federal Government. The Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) is the
third largest energy consumer in the Federal Government:
Total Government and Top Six Agency Facility Energy Users
*Preliminary 2008 Data
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Facility Gross Square Total Facility Energy Use Total Facility Energy Costs
Footage ---------------------------------------------------------
Agency -----------------------------
Million SF Percent Billion Btu Percent Million $ Percent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DoD 1,983.7 62% 217,868 56% $3,949.1 55%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USPS 325.6 10% 30,732 8% $645.8 9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA 146.8 5% 28,290 7% $512.0 7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE 109.9 3% 26,595 7% $414.8 6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSA 210.7 7% 18,366 5% $434.6 6%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOJ 71.3 2% 15,975 4% $208.0 3%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other 375.5 12% 48,576 13% $1,059.1 15%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 3,223.0 100% 386,402 100% $7,223.4 100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Intensity
Based on preliminary FY 2008 data, the Federal Government's energy
intensity in its goal-subject buildings was 110,854 Btu/ft2
or 12.4 percent lower than the FY 2003 base year energy intensity of
126,583 Btu/ft2. VA reduced its energy intensity by 11.4
percent as indicated on the chart below.
Federal Facility: Agency Progress Towards Energy Reduction Goal
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.005
Water Reduction
In FY 2008, the Federal Government used a total 162,169.9 million
gallons of water, or 51.2 gallons per gross square foot (g/gsf).
Compared to FY2007, the Federal Government reduced its water intensity
by 2.9 percent, surpassing the reduction goal. VA reduced its water
intensity by 3 percent in FY 2008 as indicted on the chart below.
Federal Facilities: Agency Progress Toward Water Reduction Goal
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.006
Renewable Energy
The statutory goal for Federal electricity use from renewable
sources is 3 percent of total electricity use in fiscal years 2007-
2009, 5 percent in fiscal years 2010-2012, and 7.5 percent in FY 2013,
and thereafter. Under E.O. 13423, at least half of this reduction must
be from sources developed after January 1, 1999. Currently, electricity
from renewable sources counts toward energy efficiency and therefore is
credited toward overall energy reductions. However, the energy
efficiency credit earned by renewable energy sources is being phased
out by FY 2012.
Sixteen Federal agencies achieved the FY 2008 goal for renewable
energy purchases; six did not. While 13 agencies showed progress from
last year, seven agencies witnessed the percentage of their electricity
from renewable sources decline, two remained unchanged. VA exceeded the
renewable energy reduction goal achieving a reduction of 4.1 percent as
indicated on the chart below.
Overall, the Federal Government used renewable electric energy
equivalent to 3.4 percent of its electricity use in FY 2008, which is
significantly less than the 4.9 percent for FY 2007. Renewable electric
energy use in the Federal Government declined by 32 percent from FY
2007, from 2.8 terawatt-hours to 1.9 terawatt-hours; total facility
electricity use declined only slightly (-0.9 percent). A preliminary
assessment of the data suggests two reasons for this decline:
Increases in the price of renewable energy certificates
(RECs) \1\; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ RECs represent the environmental attributes of the power
produced from renewable energy projects and are sold separate from
commodity electricity. Federal agencies may purchase RECs to count
toward energy intensity reduction goals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduced motivation to purchase RECs since their
contribution toward meeting the energy reduction goal is declining. FY
2008 was the first year of the credit phase out--RECs could only
contribute up to 60 percent of an agency's reduction (5.4 percent of
the 9.0 percent target reduction in energy intensity).
Federal Facilities: Progress Toward Renewable Energy Goal
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.007
Funding
Improvements in energy efficiency come at a cost. Agencies may use
appropriated funds, or if conditions merit, Energy Savings Performance
Contracts (ESPCs) or Utility Energy Savings Contracts (UESCs), that are
budget neutral contracts paid over time from future energy savings, to
fund energy and water efficient projects. Authority for the ESPC and
UESC programs were provided to the agencies in EPACT 1992 and
permanently authorized in EISA 2007. In FY 2008, the Federal Government
invested $934,700,167 in energy-efficiency projects. Funding was
derived from the following sources:
$468,659,178 from direct appropriations;
$365,409,689 by ESPCs; and
$109,631,300 by Utility Energy Savings Contracts (UESCs).
In an FY 2007 Memorandum, the Chairman of the Council on
Environmental Quality recommended that Federal agencies spend
approximately 20 percent of their annual energy costs on energy
efficiency measures. Only three agencies--DOE, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Postal Service--met this
recommendation. VA invested 7.8 percent of its energy budget, all from
direct appropriations in the amount of $39.8 million. Overall, an
amount equivalent to 12.9 percent of the Federal Government's total
energy budget was spent on energy efficiency and renewable energy
projects, split evenly between ESPC/UESC projects and direct
obligations. The chart below shows historic data for funding energy
efficiency and renewable energy projects and a projection for FY 2009.
DOE's Estimate of Annual Investment Required
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.008
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS--PERFORMANCE
The Department of Veterans Affairs operates 153 hospitals with at
least one in each State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico plus
over 100 national cemeteries and a variety of other veterans care-
related and benefits administration facilities in 39 States. FEMP data
analysis shows that 99 percent of VA's energy consumption occurs in its
medical facilities. In addition to the VA's annual appropriations,
which address both major and minor construction projects, the Recovery
Act provides VA with $1 billion for non-recurring maintenance,
including energy projects for the Veterans Health Administration's
medical facilities and $50 million for monument and memorial repairs,
including energy projects for the Veterans' Cemetery Administration.
Both Recovery Act appropriations will remain available until September
30, 2010.
VA faces challenges in meeting its energy and water consumption
goal since medical facilities operate 24-hours per day, 7 days a week.
They require heating and cooling, steam and hot water, and energy-
intensive medical equipment, along with a very high-volume of outside
air. These facilities also have high standards for air quality which
require operating energy-intensive equipment to circulate fresh air and
in most cases all incoming air must be conditioned. Health care
facilities also have requirements shared by industrial including
``process'' energy load requirements. That means that for health care
facilities, energy requirements are dependent on the number and types
of patients served and no ENERGYSTAR' or FEMP-designated
product categories exist for the medical equipment widely used
throughout VA facilities nationwide. The ever increasing number of
veterans being served, and a shift to digital medical records, has also
led to a sharp increase in the VA's IT requirements, which may further
add to its energy use requirements.
Despite these challenges, VA exceeded the current Federal energy
reduction goals as reflected in the charts above for energy intensity,
water reduction, and renewable electric power procurement. The chart
below highlights the profile of VA's energy use and energy intensity.
While VA's energy intensity is almost 66 percent above the Federal
average, it is below the national average for health care facilities.
Also, 25 VA medical centers have earned EPA ENERGYSTAR'
building labels, which means they are in the top 25 percent of
facilities in their category; in this case, the category is acute care
hospitals.
Federal Government and VA Building Characteristics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VA % of
Building Characterics Federal VA Federal
Government Sector
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Buildings > 500,000 3,766 0.75%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Buildings over 1 million ft2 38 1 2.63%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Buildings greater than 500,000 ft2 1271 128 10.07%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site-delivered energy consumption in Federal goal-subject 340,247.3 26,960.9 7.92%
buildings (Billion Btu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thousand gross square feet (GSF) of Facility 43,069,329.5 146,812.5 4.78%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Intensity (BTU/GSF) 110,854 183,642 NA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide 42,658,568 3,003,584 7.04%
from goal building energy use (MTCO2E)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally:
VA ranks fourth among Federal agencies in terms of
overall on-site facility energy consumption behind DoD, USPS, and DOE;
VA ranks third in terms of Federal facility energy
expenditures;
VA ranks fourth in terms of Federal facility square
footage; and
Approximately 75 percent of VA's total building square
footage is in the hospital category.
FEMP uses the OMB Energy Management Scorecards to rate each Federal
agency's progress in meeting mandated energy reduction goals. VA
received a green status score for its FY 2008 Federal energy management
efforts. VA performance, as measured by the scorecard, reveals that it
met or exceeded the following criteria:
Reduction in energy intensity in goal-subject facilities
compared with FY 2003;
Use of renewable energy as a percent of total facility
electricity use;
On track to meter electricity in 100 percent of
appropriate facilities by FY 2012;
Reduction in water intensity compared with FY 2007; and
Percent of new building designs begun since October 1,
2006, that are 30 percent more energy efficient than relevant code.
In addition to its goal performance outlined above, VA has
demonstrated significant achievement in a variety of other energy
efficiency and renewable power activities which includes:
Developing a public-private energy savings partnership
project at the VA West Haven Campus of the Connecticut Health Care
System involving multiple utilities and private partners;
Producing a department-wide plan, the Energy Management
Action Plan;
Making significant investments in human capital to
include hiring 12 regional-level energy managers and 87 energy
engineers at the facility level;
Implementing a ``build green'' approach for all major
projects by incorporating sustainable design concepts into solicitation
requirements for architecture and engineering firms; and
Launching a major renewable energy initiative in FY 2009
featuring feasibility studies and project implementation for solar,
wind, geothermal and renewably fueled cogeneration.
DOE/FEMP-VA PARTNERSHIP ACTIVITIES
In May 2009, FEMP issued a call to all Federal agencies to submit
proposals for DOE technical assistance (TA) to provide agencies with TA
to plan and implement projects funded by Recovery Act or base FY 2009
appropriations. Three VA project proposals were selected for a total
value of $210,000. These projects consist of:
VA National Cemeteries, including TA for detailed
renewable energy feasibility studies at four cemetery sites;
VA Medical Centers, including TA in the development of
retro-commissioning specifications to increase the energy efficiency of
VA's Medical Centers; and
Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISN 7), including
integrated site-assessments and short-term diagnostic testing to retro-
commission selected sites is being performed in the regional network of
203 VA buildings located in Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina.
These TA projects strengthen an already well-established DOE/FEMP-
VA partnership. The partnership's key features include:
DOE/FEMP, VA, Department of Defense, Department of
Homeland Security, General Services Administration, and EPA joint
sponsorship of the annual GovEnergy Workshop and Tradeshow, which is
the Federal Government's premier event to train Federal employees (over
3,000 participants) on a wide range of technical, project financing,
and policy-related issues;
Active participation of VA personnel in FEMP-sponsored
project financing workshops for Federal procurement and facility energy
management;
Active VA participation in FEMP-coordinated interagency
task force and working groups; and
Recognition of VA sites and personnel for their
leadership and accomplishments through the annual Federal Energy and
Water Management award and energy champion programs.
VA has made great strides in ``greening'' their operations, and
FEMP looks forward to continuing to work with VA to ensure that
critical national energy and water efficiency goals are met. Working
together, we can improve the quality of VA facilities for employees and
patients, cut operating costs, and meet critical national goals in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing Federal energy and
water use.
Chairman Filner, Ranking Member Buyer and Members of the Committee,
thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak with you today and I
look forward to answering any additional questions you might have.
Prepared Statement of James M. Sullivan, Director, Office of Asset
Enterprise Management, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to discuss with you the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Green Management Program and our commitment to energy efficiencies and
cleaner energy--and to building lasting change that reduces VA's impact
on the environment.
I am accompanied here today by Ed Bradley, Director of Investment
and Enterprise Development Service, Office of Asset Enterprise
Management; and John Stenger, Director of Health Care Engineering; and
John Beatty, Director of Safety, Health, Environmental and Emergency
Management; both from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).
As the lead for VA's ``Green Team,'' I will present our Green
Management Program and identify the four major program areas; scope of
responsibilities; recent accomplishments; investments in energy
efficiency and renewable energy; energy savings; and VA's path toward
reducing its carbon footprint as an agency while enabling and
supporting VA's primary mission--to provide the highest quality care
and services to our Veterans and their families.
Green Management Program_Overview
VA is making great strides in conserving resources at its
facilities across the country by proactively managing its energy,
environmental, fleet and sustainable building efforts. These four
program areas are the cornerstone of our integrated Green Management
Program. Working collaboratively with VA's administrations--VHA,
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and National Cemetery
Administration (NCA) and staff offices--we have, for example, reduced
the rate at which VA uses energy in buildings by 11 percent since 2003.
We have created facility energy engineer positions to serve all
facilities. We have exceeded alternative fuel vehicle acquisition
mandates and installed pumps to dispense alternative fuels at 10
fueling stations, with many more planned and on the way. Six VA
facilities have earned certification as green buildings, and others are
in the evaluation process right now.
We are dedicating over $400 million in Recovery Act funds to make
facilities more energy efficient and to add solar, wind and other
renewable energy capacity. Activities such as these that help ``green''
our world are the right thing to do. They improve our well-being and
ensure a healthy planet for the generations to come. Reducing our
energy and environmental footprint is not only the right thing for VA
to do, it is the smart thing. Each action we take to reduce, reuse and
recycle energy, water and other resources has the potential to generate
cost savings that VA can redirect to its core mission of caring for our
Nation's Veterans and their families.
Our agency has established a tangible goal for each and every
employee to integrate energy and environmental considerations into
their day-to-day activities and into all VA operations and long-term
planning processes.
Energy and Water Management
Since 2003, VA has been successful in setting goals that exceed
mandates; benchmarking energy consumption at its facilities; improving
energy efficiency; and investing in renewable energy generation to
reduce its fossil fuel consumption.
Energy Project Investment Process
VA instituted a rigorous centralized energy project identification,
evaluation and investment process in 2003. The process begins with
regionally coordinated facility energy assessments to identify and
evaluate potential energy and water conservation measures. Once
measures are identified, facility and regional decision-makers select
measures to implement and decide on funding methods, which include
appropriations and alternative financing such as energy savings
performance contracts. VA's National Energy Business Center,
established in 2005, provides the Department with all energy-related
contracting services, from energy assessments to performance
contracting.
Technologies & Projects
The VA's Green Management Program has focused especially on
identifying facilities with high potential for renewable energy
projects and pursuing implementation of those projects. VA is making
use of the funds provided through the Recovery Act to fund design-build
contracts and feasibility studies at existing medical centers and
national cemeteries across the country. Additionally, VA is conducting
renewable energy feasibility studies for all new construction projects.
Solar photovoltaic (PV) panels are one technology that VA is
deploying. In 2008, we installed solar PV systems at 2 medical centers
and we expect to award design-build contracts for 19 additional
projects this year. With the design-build process, contractors evaluate
VA needs and propose the technologies and systems best suited to
filling those needs, including both thin film and crystalline
technologies. VA is actively pursuing wind and geothermal systems as
well, with contracts for two wind and four geothermal systems to be
awarded this year.
Cogeneration (also known as combined heat and power) is an energy
efficient system especially suited to meeting medical center energy
needs. Such systems simultaneously produce electricity and steam, hot
water or chilled water. The cogeneration plant at the Mountain Home VA
Medical Center (VAMC) in Johnson City, Tennessee, uses waste methane
gas that is produced from and processed at a local municipal landfill.
The cogeneration system at the San Diego VAMC won a Department of
Energy (DOE) award in 2006 and features a natural gas turbine with very
low emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOx). VA awarded 12
contracts this past August for feasibility studies of renewably fueled
cogeneration at 38 sites in 15 States and Puerto Rico.
VA is aggressively implementing advanced metering systems to
measure consumption at the building level to help identify problems and
opportunities to improve energy performance. We are currently
completing installation of electric and non-electric meters in Veterans
Integrated Service Networks (VISNs) 10 and 22, awarding a contract this
fiscal year to install electric meters in all other VA facilities, and
funding non-electric metering for all VA facilities through the
Recovery Act.
Water Management
VA's medical facilities must use water relatively intensely to meet
stringent patient care requirements. At VA's national cemeteries, water
is essential for maintaining appropriate national shrine environments.
VA was able to reduce its water consumption intensity by 3 percent
between FY 2007 and FY 2008 while also meeting these mission-related
requirements, exceeding the mandated reduction by 50 percent. The new
VBA Regional Office in Reno, Nevada, is certified Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver and uses water-wise landscaping
and other water management techniques such as waterless urinals to
reduced water consumption by more than 30 percent. NCA has been taking
steps to reduce water consumption while maintaining respect for our
Veterans' resting places. For example, at Fort Bliss National Cemetery
(El Paso, Texas), NCA used water-wise landscaping with drought-
resistant plants and installed drip-emitters for irrigation. Several VA
facilities have won DOE awards for water management, and VA is actively
pursuing additional opportunities.
Sustainable Building
As a Federal agency, VA is required to ensure that 15 percent of
its building inventory incorporates sustainable practices by 2015 in
accordance with the mandates of Executive Order 13423, Strengthening
Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management (2007).
The Green Building Initiative, Inc. (GBI) recently awarded Green Globes
sustainable building certifications to three VAMCs. Additionally, one
VHA and two VBA facilities have (LEED) certifications. The new VBA
Regional Office in Boise, Idaho, which will be activated in October
2009 uses geothermal energy and is in process for LEED Gold
certification. Moreover, all new construction and major renovation
projects are being designed to meet sustainable building principles.
There are 19 additional VA facilities that expect to obtain third-
party green building certification by the end of 2009. Once
certifications are obtained, VA's sustainable building square footage
will reach 12 percent of total applicable square footage in inventory.
We recognize the importance of building our new facilities to be as
sustainable as possible, and also maintaining that status through the
use of the Energy Star building rating system. VA has been an active
participant in the Energy Star buildings program since 2003. Twenty-
five VAMCs have received an Energy Star label, representing nearly 30
percent of all Energy Star labeled medical centers in the United
States. These labels signify that the facility is among the top 25
percent of comparable facilities in the Nation in terms of energy
performance. We have also established Energy Star ratings for all of
our medical centers and for two VBA regional offices.
Environmental
The Nation's environmental statutes impact the way VA facilities
are maintained and operated. Protecting the environment is critical to
ensuring the health of Veterans, employees and the public, as well as
the communities that VA serves. VA is committed to continually
improving its environmental programs to meet Federal, State and local
environmental requirements and reduce risks that VA facility operations
may pose to the environment. VHA is responsible for providing quality
health care to our Nation's Veterans at more than 150 VAMCs, 875
community-based outpatient clinics and other health care facilities.
Environmental Management Systems
The Green Environmental Management System (GEMS) is the foundation
for environmental management in VA's medical centers, focused on
environmental performance through a process of continuous improvement.
By 2008, GEMS were in place at all VAMCs with dedicated GEMS
coordinators serving at 99 percent of medical facilities. In 2009, VHA
began presenting detailed GEMS training courses to improve
understanding of statutes and regulations. NCA is expanding the number
of cemeteries covered by environmental management systems significantly
using Recovery Act funding, and will soon be adding coordinators as
well.
Green Purchasing
Buying green products is consistent with VA's mission to provide
our Nation's Veterans with a healthy environment. VA is proud of Fort
Custer National Cemetery's (Augusta, Michigan) prestigious 2007 White
House Closing the Circle Award for testing and using biobased products
in cemetery grounds maintenance equipment. Between September 2007 and
June 2009, 100 percent of the desktop computers that VA leased were
Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool gold or silver
products, signifying relatively low environmental impact.
Electronic Stewardship
VA is preparing to implement computer power management nationwide.
This project is challenging not only because of VA's size and widely
dispersed facilities, but because of its impact on other information
technology requirements, all of which need to be fully integrated. As
implementation proceeds, VA will be developing a strategy for
activating power management in nonmission-critical equipment.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction
Last year VA participated in developing protocol for the public
sector to inventory GHG emissions and has joined a new Federal
interagency initiative to ``road test'' the protocol. VA is working
with the Federal Energy Management Program office at DOE in their GHG
reduction leadership role. We have established an advisory group within
VA to shape VA's strategy for establishing a baseline inventory and
achieving VA's initial target of 30-percent reduction by FY 2020 from a
FY 2008 baseline.
Fleet Management
VA is taking steps to curb petroleum use and increase the use of
alternative fuels. We are on track to exceed our fleet management goals
of reducing petroleum consumption 2 percent annually and increasing our
alternative fuel consumption 10 percent annually. To support our
growing alternative fuel vehicle fleet, 25 facilities plan to add
alternative fueling capacity, and we are completing a study to identify
optimal locations for constructing up to 35 additional stations with
the $7 million in minor construction program funding we received for
this purpose. Also, VA is placing electric vehicles on VAMC campuses
and national cemeteries.
Education & Outreach
VA has recently embarked on a new initiative called the ``Green
Routine.'' This initiative is an outreach and awareness campaign
created with the support of Secretary Shinseki. The outreach will
provide the necessary information and resources to educate all
employees on how they can take advantage of the daily opportunities
within their grasp to contribute personally to creating a healthier
environment. Deliverables include an informational video; a Web page;
an instructional guide to going green in the workplace; and a
facilities action plan. Our agency is a leader among other Federal
agencies in reducing its energy consumption and environmental impact,
but now we are educating and reaching out to our 288,000 employees
nationwide to help us continue on the right path - the green path.
Conclusion
Over the past several years, VA has laid a solid foundation of
leadership in green management at its facilities by implementing
environmental management systems and hiring energy managers and
environmental coordinators. We are building lasting change by
constructing sustainable new facilities with energy efficiency and
renewable energy features. Reducing environmental impacts and
increasing energy efficiency are a top priority of the Green Management
Program while we maintain our focus on our core mission of caring for
our Nation's Veterans and their families. Thank you again for the
opportunity to testify. My colleagues and I are prepared to answer your
questions.
Statement of Hon. Harry E. Mitchell, a Representative
in Congress from the State of Arizona
I would like to thank Chairman Filner for calling this important
hearing. And a thank you to our panelists for appearing today, as well.
The VA is the 6th highest in energy consumption intensity and 3rd
highest in water consumption intensity among Federal agencies.
For fiscal year 2008, energy and water costs were $512-million and
$27-million, respectively. With close to $540-million in energy costs,
even the most modest upgrades aimed toward sustainability could save
taxpayers millions of dollars.
I share the conviction that energy efficiency and conversation can
lead to a greener and more sustainable VA. However, these improvements
must be made in a manner that does not compromise the delivery of care
and services to our veterans.
To the extent that energy efficiency and conservation can lead to
more efficient use of American taxpayer dollars and better overall
services and benefits for our heroic veterans, that is certainly a good
thing as well.
I look forward to hearing from our panelists today and working to
achieve a more efficient and sustainable VA.
I yield back the balance of my time.
MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
BACKGROUND MATERIAL
CHART SHOWING JULY 2009 MANAGEMENT SCORECARDS--SUMMARY
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3431.009
POST-HEARING QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
Gail Vittori
Co-Director, Center for Maximum
Potential Building Systems
8604 FM 969
Austin, TX 78724
Dear Gail:
In reference to our full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
Memorandum
To: Chairman Bob Filner House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
From: Gail Vittori, Co-Director
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems
Austin, TX
Date: November 13, 2009
Re: Follow-up hearing questions for 9-30-09 VA Committee Hearing
1. You stated that San Diego, California, has one of the strongest
recycling programs across the board. Please discuss what practices they
are implementing and how the VA could take those practices and apply
them to buildings and hospitals across the country?
My testimony and oral statement did not discuss the recycling
program in San Diego.
2. All new VA construction projects beginning in 2009 will
incorporate green building principles. What should the VA be
strategically focused on to ensure that there is not a significant
achievement gap, and that these buildings can sustain energy savings
over the long term?
As I mentioned in my testimony, there are a number of
recommendations that should be adopted or expended to ensure that
energy efficiency and sustainability are achieved over the long run in
VA facilities.
These include:
For existing facilities, adopt a regular maintenance
regime including ``green'' housekeeping methods, establish continuous
commissioning, adding meters and controls to mechanical and plumbing
equipment, and retrofit electrical lighting to energy conserving lamps
to optimize operational performance.
For new construction, support an integrative design
process, establish aggressive energy and water goals, and assess
renewable energy strategies. Design for solar readiness to enable
installation of renewable energy systems when they have favorable life
cycle costs. Ensure strategies that promote patient healing and staff
well-being and productivity, such as access to daylight and views,
connection to the outdoors, and enhanced indoor air quality through
low-emitting materials, are strategic considerations during space
planning, programming, and design.
Take advantage of existing tools to measure, manage and
continuously improve performance. These include the Green Guide for
Health Care, particularly the v2.2 Operations section that is beginning
a pilot in 2010, LEED 2009 and, when launched, LEED for Health Care. In
addition, U.S. EPA's Energy Star Target Finder (for new construction)
and Portfolio Manager (for existing buildings) provide a benchmarking
protocol to measure performance relative to health care sector peers.
Engage in collaborative research initiatives with other
health care systems and governmental agencies on critical performance
topics, including but not limited to displacement ventilation,
appropriate implementation of reclaimed water sources with special
regard for infection control consequences, appropriate lighting
strategies, and pathways to achieve energy use reductions by more than
30 percent in varying climatic zones.
Expand bottom line evaluation to provide for life cycle
cost assessment, factor in patient length of stay, employee recruitment
and retention, energy and water savings, and long-term mechanical
performance as key indicators of economic performance.
3. Can you elaborate on the benefits of green health care
facilities both in patient care and safety, employee satisfaction, cost
savings, conservation of energy and water, and reduction of waste and
the carbon footprint?
The benefits of green health care facilities are numerous.
Dell Children's Hospital, discussed in greater detail in my testimony,
serves as one example of the benefits to adding sustainability measures
to health care facilities. Dell Children's is designed to achieve a
17.2-percent reduction in direct energy use. The installation of low-
flow plumbing fixtures saves 1.4 million gallons of water a year.
There has also been a positive response from the staff as
well. Dell Children's had a 2.4 percent nursing turnover rate in the
first year, compared to 10-15 percent national average. With a cost of
more than $70,000 to replace one nurse, Dell Children's low turnover
rate is also a significant financial savings for the hospital.
4. How is the VA doing in relation to most private health care
facilities?
As I mentioned in my testimony, the Department of Veterans
Affairs has had a visible presence in supporting efforts in sustainable
development and has invested in their own research to advance
sustainable practices in their portfolio, including the release of
Innovative 21st Century Building Environments for VA Health Care
Delivery.
It is also laudable that 15 of the 48 acute care and
children's hospitals that have earned the ENERGY STAR designation are
owned and operated by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
With that said, more can and should be done to expand
sustainable practices in the Department of Veterans Affairs. My
testimony elaborates on a number of health care systems and facilities
that are helping to lead the way on greening health care operations.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
Thomas W. Hicks
Executive Director
Building Performance Initiative
U.S. Green Building Council
2101 L Street, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20037
Dear Tom:
In reference to our full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
Post-Hearing Question for Tom Hicks
Executive Director, U.S. Green Building Council
From the Honorable Bob Filner
September 30, 2009
Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
All new VA construction projects beginning in 2009 will incorporate
green building principles. What should the VA be strategically focused
on to ensure that there is not a significant achievement gap, and that
these buildings can sustain energy savings over the long term?
__________
U.S. Green Building Council
Washington, DC.
November 9, 2009
Chairman Bob Filner
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
335 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Chairman Filner:
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the full committee
hearing (``Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs'') on September 30, 2009 and thank you for your question in
your October 2, 2009 letter. As a non-profit organization that has
promoted green buildings for the past 16 years, the U.S. Green Building
Council (USGBC) has had the opportunity to work with many leading
organizations, companies, and people and to witness their success in
translating green building principles into action. The ability of the
Department of Veterans Affairs to ensure that it succeeds in the same
way and does not experience an achievement gap as it incorporates green
building principles into all new construction projects is a matter of
leadership and commitment: the leadership to provide the vision and the
commitment to the strategies that deliver upon that vision. USGBC
provides the following recommendations to the Department of Veterans
Affairs.
1. Commit to a Single Green Building Rating System. The General
Services Administration concluded in its July 2006 study on green
building rating systems that ``LEED' is not only the U.S.
market leader, but is also the most widely used rating system by
Federal and State agencies, which makes it easy to communicate a
building's sustainable design achievements with others.'' LEED is also
the only rating system in the United States that was wholly designed
within, by, and for the U.S. and is the only one that requires third
party evaluation to obtain certification. By aligning its green
building goals within the framework of LEED, the Department of Veterans
Affairs would ensure its green building principles are credibly
evaluated. Furthermore, alignment with LEED would enable the Department
to take advantage of opportunities to scale its green building
principles across the building portfolio.
Commit to Specific Performance Goals. Many organizations,
including many Federal agencies, have seen great success by committing
to specific performance goals as a way to easily communicate both
internally and externally the vision of the organization. The
Department of Veterans Affairs should also commit to and communicate
performance requirements across a range of energy and environmental
issues. Examples of leadership positions for new construction projects
might include:
40 percent more efficient than ASHRAE Standard 90.1
20 percent of energy use from renewable, on-site sources
50 percent reduction in water use relative to Energy
Policy Act 1992
Elimination of potable water for landscaping
90 percent diversion of construction debris from
disposal in landfills
Elimination of materials manufactured with volatile
organic compounds (VOCs)
Establishment of a green cleaning policy for VA for new
and existing facilities
Provide 90 percent of building occupants with direct
access to daylight and exterior views
Select only transit friendly project sites
The above examples are just a few that should be seriously
considered for all new construction projects to ensure that buildings
can sustain both the energy savings and environmental performance for
the long term. In addition to these choices, all new construction and
existing buildings projects should be required to do the following:
The integrated design process is a core principle and
formal process of good green building design and construction and
typically achieves the best results. By including representatives
across the entire spectrum of the life of the building--designers,
occupants, owner, contractors--a holistic and a common vision for the
green principles to be included in the building can be achieved.
Building commissioning should be required in new and
existing buildings. As I discussed in my testimony, commissioning is
the process of verifying and documenting that all of its systems are
planned, designed, installed, tested, operated and maintained to meet
the owner's project requirements. Done correctly, building
commissioning not only identifies potential construction and
operational issues during design and construction, it also optimizes
the performance of the building. As I stated in my testimony, if the
Federal Government were to re-commission its entire building stock and
achieve the estimated 15-percent reductions in energy use, it could
generate more than $650 million in annual energy savings and eliminate
roughly 2.7 million tons of carbon in 1 year.
Perhaps the most prevalent and significant factor
affecting the sustained energy and environmental performance of
buildings is occupant behavior. For each new project, education should
be provided to building occupants both before and immediately after
occupancy begins. Education should focus on the performance goals for
the building, the role the occupants play in achieving those goals, the
green and energy efficient attributes of the building, and how the
occupants are expected to interact with the building, its attributes,
and the building management team. As part of the education process, the
Department of Veterans Affairs should set up and administer a
continuous improvement process that directly involves the occupants so
that both the building management team and the occupants themselves
have a role in the outcome of the building.
Thank you again for the opportunity to participate in the Full
Committee hearing and for the opportunity to respond to your question
on sustaining savings over the long term. I would be happy to provide
any additional information you may need.
Respectfully,
Thomas W. Hicks
U.S. Green Building Council
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
Jane M. Rohde
Principal
JSR Associates, Inc.
8191 Main Street, 2nd Floor
Ellicott City, MD 21043
Dear Jane:
In reference to our Full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all Full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
JSR Associates, Inc.
Ellicott City, MD.
October 28, 2009
Dear Honorable Bob Filner,
The following are in response to your post-hearing questions for
Jane Rohde, Principal of JSR Associates, Inc. regarding the Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Hearing on
September 30, 2009.
1. All new VA construction projects beginning in 2009 will
incorporate green building principles. What should the VA be
strategically focused on to ensure that there is not a significant
achievement gap, and that these buildings can sustain energy savings
over the long term?
a. One observation that was consistent while completing the
Green GlobesTM assessments for the existing VA hospitals was
for new construction projects there is little or no involvement/input
from the people currently working at the existing facility. It is
strongly recommended that local staff expertise (including the Energy
Manager) be involved at the on-set of the design process, through the
design process, and through the construction, commissioning, and
occupancy process. An integrated team from the outside, without in-side
staff being involved, does not provide an environment that is conducive
to sustainability over time. Once the new construction project is
completed, the outside team goes away without the local staff and
operations team being completely updated in the maintenance and
operation of the new building. Sustainability is a dynamic process,
requiring training and involvement of on-site staff.
i. In addition, design guidelines that are developed from
VACO are often completed prior to receiving input from those working in
the field. If the process required input first, then guidelines and
specifications were developed in tandem with the VA sites, there would
be substantial improvement in the specifications and guidelines that
includes saving of time and resources in their development.
ii. In evaluating hospitals, there is also concern that
guidelines and specifications that are being issued from VACO are not
as current as those being utilized in the private sector. For example,
there are lighting guidelines provided by the Illuminating Engineers
Society of North American (IESNA) for both acute care and senior living
settings. VACO has their own guideline that may not reflect the current
recommendations. Further, there are proposed lighting sustainability
guidelines in development by DOE. The ultimate concern is that the DOE
guidelines do not take into account the aging eye and health care
settings. The VACO guidelines do need to be updated and it is
recommended to provide direct reference to the most current IESNA
guidelines.
iii. Another recommended venue for creating guidelines is
for VACO to evaluate the 2010 cycle of the Guidelines for Design and
Construction of Health Care Facilities as a basis for design of VA
facilities. The 2010 version includes basic sustainability information,
ties to ASHRAE standards, and includes different types of health care
settings. The 2010 guidelines are anticipated for publication in
January, 2010. Information is available at www.fgiguidelines.org
(Facilities Guidelines Institute).
b. Second observation is the utilization of the Green Globes
Continual Improvement of Existing Buildings (CIEB) allows the local
staff to continually evaluate and improve the operation of the
buildings. From this perspective, it would make sense to evaluate the
utilization of the Green Globes New Construction Module, as it feeds in
naturally to the CIEB module; again allowing the local staff to
complete continual commissioning and post occupancy evaluations as they
are operating not only the existing facility, but also the expansions
and new construction projects on the VA campuses as they come online.
c. Recommend continual or retro-commissioning being completed
with in-house staff and contracted staff as required once a new
construction project is completed. Internal audits would also be
valuable, as most third party external audits are not on the sites over
an extended period of time.
d. It is recommended that cross-training programs from VA
hospital to VA hospital be implemented; utilizing existing expertise to
improve energy performance VA wide. Currently there are training
programs set up in Augusta, Georgia and Portland, Oregon for plant
management. Expanding this program both online and on-site to include
GEMS programming would be beneficial in assisting all VA Hospitals to
improve in the areas of waste management, water and energy
conservation, environmental purchasing, and training.
e. Another issue brought out in assessments is a current
movement by H.R. to reduce the pay grade of Energy Managers (which may
also extend to existing positions). In speaking to one of the VISN
Energy Managers there is a concern that G11, which is used for open
positions, will not attract qualified persons to the position. And if
they are; once the recession abates, the person would immediately leave
the position. This creates issues with consistency, knowledge base, as
well as continual sustainable improvement.
2. Can you elaborate on the benefits of green health care
facilities both in patient care and safety, employee satisfaction,
costs savings, conservation of energy and water, and reduction of waste
and the carbon footprint?
a. The best way to demonstrate the benefits of green health
care facilities is through examples of projects that have been
implemented in some of the existing VAs that include positive patient
and staff outcomes. These are considered best practices:
i. Implementation of a microfiber mop and cleaning program
completes not only reduction of infection risk and cross contamination;
protecting patients and staff, but also reduces the water and chemical
usage for cleaning, less exposure to chemicals for staff, less lifting
of heavy cleaning equipment reducing potential staff back injuries, and
faster drying times reducing the opportunity for falls.
1. There is a distinction between up front costs (first
costs) and operational savings. The microfiber mops initially cost
more, but save operationally through less workman's compensation,
decrease in infection risk, and safer environments for both patients
and staff.
2. This type of improvement could be recognized through
staff incentives for providing creative and resourceful ideas that not
only improve the environmental footprint, but most importantly improve
patient and staff outcomes and satisfaction.
ii. Energy efficient boiler equipment with low emissions
not only reduces the carbon footprint, but also saves energy and
provides costs savings. New direct digital controls (changed over from
pneumatic controls) provides not only better monitoring of equipment,
but provides tools to monitor energy usage over time, better control of
heating and cooling, and opportunities for adjustment for patient and
staff comfort and satisfaction.
iii. Providing gardens, roof gardens, and indigenous plants
reduces heat island effect by having less exposed pavement and roofing.
Other advantages include less storm water run off, reduction of need
for irrigation (cost savings), places of respite for veterans and their
families, access to daylight for long term stay patients to reset their
circadian rhythms (promoting improved sleep patterns) and the
opportunity for access to vitamin D, and an opportunity for the
community at-large to participate with service projects at VA
facilities.
iv. Recycling and reusing sharps containers avoids disposing
of the entire container plus its contents; reducing the waste to only
the biomedical waste contents. This waste reduction measure has proven
to be effective in reducing potential needle sticks by staff members
(promoting staff and patient safety). The sharps containers are removed
on a regular basis, contents are removed for disposal, and then
containers are disinfected and reused.
3. How is the VA doing in relation to most private health care
facilities?
a. Most private health care facilities do not serve the same
breadth of patient types and needs that the VA serves. Generally
speaking, in the public sector, there are teaching/research hospitals,
community based hospitals, and specialty hospitals. Many VA hospitals
are working with universities completing research within VA hospitals,
providing long term care (including nursing homes: Community Living
Centers, palliative/hospice care, rehabilitation, polytrauma, spinal
chord injury, and brain trauma), surgery, radiology, in-patient care,
out-patient care (all types including dental, ophthalmology, podiatry)
and community based services. In many ways, VA hospitals are a one-stop
shop, providing all services in a holistic manner for veterans. Often
sites include a Fisher House, which is equivalent to the Ronald
McDonald House found located near private health care facilities. This
comparison information is provided as background, because it is
difficult to compare private facilities to VA facilities, because they
usually do not cover the breadth of services that VA facilities
provide.
b. There is a growing trend for private health care systems to
evaluate green building principles as well as evidence based design
initiatives. Evidence based design utilizes research to demonstrate
outcomes based upon the physical setting and environment. It is a
process that utilizes evidence to better inform the decisionmaking and
design processes. Because of the broad breadth of services that VA
hospitals provide, they would be excellent sites to complete research
that can benchmark not only sustainability through tools such as Green
GlobesTM, but also benchmark impacts of the healing
environment on patient and staff outcomes. More information on evidence
based design can be found at www.healthdesign.org.
i. As an example, the VA is in a perfect position to provide
the private sector with research on the efficacy of sustainable
cleaners versus traditional cleaners as they relate to infection
control. With over 90,000 people dying annually of hospital acquired
infections (Burke JP. Infection control-A problem for patient safety. N
Engl J Med 2003; 348:651-656), this undertaking would provide excellent
data for VA hospital standards as well as data for private sector
hospitals. Particularly for private sector hospitals, nosocomial
infections are a high priority, because reimbursements are no longer
being paid for patient services related to a hospital acquired
infection (HAI).
c. From a care model perspective, the VA is piloting and moving
toward the use of the Planetree care model, which is a patient centered
model. The idea behind Planetree is that staff is trained and decisions
are made based upon patient needs and comfort versus being only staff
driven. Some VA facilities are also evaluating culture change and the
Eden AlternativeTM, which are similar to Planetree, in that
the long term care patient or resident is the center of the care model.
Interdisciplinary teams, universal worker training, breaking down
departmental silos and improving quality of life for patients and staff
are all instrumental to these types of care models. Additional
information on these models can be found at www.planetree.org,
www.pioneernetwork.net, www.culturechangenow.com, www.edenalt.org, and
www.smallhousealliance.org.
d. Overall, with the VA evaluating patient-centered care
models, sustainability and green building initiatives, and their
potential to be centers of excellence for evidence based design
initiatives there is an opportunity to lead the private sector through
the demonstration of best practices. There are opportunities for the VA
to learn from the private sector as well and a forum to promote
communication between VA facilities and the VA and private health care
facilities would be worthwhile for both types of organizations.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your post-hearing
questions. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at
(410) 461-7763 or jane@ jsrassociates.net.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane M. Rohde, AIA, FIIDA, ACHA, AAHID, LEED AP
Principal
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
James L. Hoff, DBA
Director of Research
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing
816 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20006
Dear James:
In reference to our full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
United States House of Representatives
Post-Hearing Question for James L. Hoff
Director of Research, Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing
From the Honorable Bob Filner
September 30, 2009
Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Question:
All new VA construction projects beginning in 2009 will incorporate
green building principles. What should the VA be strategically focused
on as to ensure that there is not a significant achievement gap, and
that these buildings can sustain energy savings over the long term?
Response:
Establish Specific Insulation Targets for All New and Replacement Roofs
The Green Buildings Action Plan as currently published by the
Department of Veterans Affairs, establishes a 30 percent overall
improvement target for building energy efficiency, with special
emphasis on new building construction and major renovation. However,
many roofing projects, especially the re-roofing of existing Department
facilities, fall outside new building or major renovation activities.
As a result, there may be some confusion as to how the 30 percent
energy improvement target should be applied to a roofing-only project.
To avoid this potential confusion, the Center recommends that a
specific target be established for roof insulation by applying the 30
percent overall savings target to the current minimum roof thermal
conductance requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2007 (for roofs with above deck
insulation). The calculation for this recommendation for the applicable
ASHRAE climate zones is illustrated in the following table:
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Min. Adjusted For 30% Equivalent Min. Roof
ASHRAE Climate Zone Roof U-Value 1 Energy Improvement R-Value 2
Zone 1 0.067 0.047 21.3
Zone 2-8 0.050 0.035 28.6
\1\ U-value is a measure of thermal conductance.
\2\ R-value is a measure of thermal resistance and the reciprocal of U-value.
Include Roof Condition Assessment in all Roof-Mounted Renewable Energy
Projects
Long-term durability of a building's roofing system becomes a
critical factor whenever the roof also serves a platform for renewable
energy production. Because the Department will certainly expect 20 or
more years of continuous service from any investment as sizable as
rooftop solar or other renewable energy systems, the Center strongly
recommends that the condition and design of the roof be evaluated to
assure that both the renewable energy system and the roof system will
have compatible service lives.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
Honorable Steven Chu
Secretary
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave. SW
Washington, DC 20585-0001
Dear Secretary Chu:
In reference to our full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, DC.
November 19, 2009
Hon. Bob Filner
Chairman
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chairman Filner:
On September 30, 2009, Richard Kidd, Program Manager, Federal
Energy Management Program, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy testified on energy efficiency goals for Federal Agencies.
Enclosed are the responses to two questions that you submitted for
the hearing record.
If we can be of further assistance, please have your staff contact
our Congressional Hearing Coordinator, Lillian Owen, at (202) 586-2031.
Sincerely,
Betty A. Nolan
Senior Advisor
Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs
Enclosures
__________
QUESTIONS FROM CHAIRMAN FILNER
Question 1: What are your thoughts on how VA is planning to spend
the $405 million provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act?
Answer: Each agency is responsible for determining how it will
spend American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding, in line with
Congressional direction and guidance. Since the VA is the third largest
consumer of total facility energy use in the Federal Government (after
the 000 and the Postal Service), it has numerous opportunities for
investing in improved energy efficiency, management and sustainability.
Question 2: Is there anything that you would emphasize more or put
more funding into than what the VA plans to do at this time?
Answer: FEMP encourages agencies to use alternative financing,
annual appropriations, and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA) funds in a flexible financing approach that supports
comprehensive projects which maximize the benefits of their energy
savings investments. ARRA and annual appropriations can be particularly
helpful in financing longer payback projects like renewables, water-
efficiency, metering and other energy conservation measures that do not
provide the near-term return on investment necessary for alternative
financing.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 2, 2009
Honorable Eric K. Shinseki
Secretary
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
Dear Secretary Shinseki:
In reference to our full Committee hearing entitled ``Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on September
30, 2009, I would appreciate it if you could answer the enclosed
hearing questions by the close of business on November 13, 2009.
In an effort to reduce printing costs, the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs, in cooperation with the Joint Committee on Printing, is
implementing some formatting changes for materials for all full
Committee and Subcommittee hearings. Therefore, it would be appreciated
if you could provide your answers consecutively and single-spaced. In
addition, please restate the question in its entirety before the
answer.
Due to the delay in receiving mail, please provide your response to
Debbie Smith by fax at 202-225-2034. If you have any questions, please
call 202-225-9756.
Sincerely,
BOB FILNER
Chairman
MH:ds
__________
Questions for the Record
Hon. Bob Filner, Chairman
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
September 30, 2009
Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Question 1: Currently the VA has six facilities that are either
LEED or Green Globes certified and 18 more for 2009. What is the
strategic plan to continue to grow the certification process? How is VA
selecting which facilities are getting rated and when?
Response: As of October 20, 2009, VA received 10 Green Globe
certifications and three LEED certifications, and is expecting 11 more
Green Globe certifications by the end of 2009. VA is selecting
facilities for the certification process based on the following
criteria: (1) sustainable building self-assessment results; (2) Energy
Star rating; and (3) implementation of energy efficiency and renewable
energy projects. The self-assessment is an annual survey that each VA-
owned facility must complete, with questions based on the Guiding
Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable
Buildings. VA uses this criteria to select additional facilities to
complete any needed improvements and obtain certification.
Question 2: Please discuss the differences in cost between
utilizing Green Globes rating system and LEED rating system? Please
explain why VA is utilizing both systems and what benefits and
drawbacks each system has specific to VA's needs.
Response: The certification fees for both LEED and Green Globes
vary depending on building size and other factors. For an existing
building over 500,000 square feet, the current certification fee for
Green Globe is $10,000, and between $12,500 and $15,000 for LEED
depending on U.S. Green Building Council membership status. The
following hyperlinks provide certification fee information for each
system:
LEED: http://www.gbci.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=127
Green Globes: http://www.thegbi.org/assets/pdfs/Green-Globes-Price-
List-7-01-09-Building-Certifications.pdf
VA has elected to use LEED for assessment of new construction and
Green Globes for assessment of existing buildings. LEED and Green
Globes are both based on the five Guiding Principles for Federal
Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings specified in
Executive Order 13423, ``Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy,
and Transportation Management.'' Both incorporate related Department of
Energy (DOE) guidance. Different rating elements apply within each
system depending on whether the facility is a new construction project
or an existing building. Per DOE analysis, Green Globe and LEED equally
cover all elements of the five Guiding Principles for new construction.
For existing buildings, Green Globe covers all of the Guiding
Principles, while LEED leaves out certain elements. Specifically, LEED
does not account for the following components of the Guiding Principles
in its existing building certification: (1) measurement and
verification; (2) process water (water used in non-plumbing
applications such as cooling systems); (3) moisture control; and (4)
construction waste.
Question 3: How can you be sure that the energy conservation
percentages being collected at each facility are accurate and true?
What metrics are in place to ensure these numbers are being reported
honestly? At what point will this data become objective and not self-
reported by each facility?
Response: Data is validated upon entry into the energy consumption
database with a combination of automated and manual review. Engineering
staff at the local, network and Administration program office level
review facility data regularly, along with quarterly Departmental
program office review. During the past two years, VA has brought over
100 energy engineers on board to provide subject matter expertise,
which has resulted in improved data quality and consistency.
Responsible program officials at each level review and certify energy
data, and any significant changes in data are corrected or justified.
Additionally, VA is installing building-level metering at VA-owned
facilities nationwide. Meter data for electricity, natural gas, steam,
chilled water and water consumption is being sent electronically to a
VA-wide database. As metering is implemented, this data will allow VA
energy engineers to validate billed consumption. It will also allow
them to spot problems such as leaks and potential opportunities for
energy efficiency improvements. VA is on track to meet mandated
deadlines for metering implementation with electric metering by 2012,
and other metering by 2016.
VA is rolling out third-party utility bill data validation for all
facilities nationwide, and is within 30 days of bringing the first
stations online. It is anticipated that all stations will be ready to
begin within the next 60 days. The third party will be entering billed
consumption and cost into a database, and reviewing the data to ensure
that the billing entity is using the applicable tariff/contract, and
that there are no errors in billing calculations. The vendor will also
be flagging unusually high billed consumption/costs, and monitoring
periodically to ensure that the facility is on the most favorable rate
schedule. The system is constructed so that no one except the vendor
can address discrepancies and inaccuracies in the utility invoice or
make changes to the database. Each modification to the data, whether
instigated by the vendor or by the station, will be accompanied by a
written, documented justification.
Question 4: Please provide an analysis of cost differentials
between new construction with and without green building practices, as
well as estimate cost savings over the long term for new construction
in energy and water consumption.
Response: VA commissioned development of an Energy Reduction and
Sustainable Design Guide to outline requirements for implementing
energy efficiency and sustainability mandates contained in the Energy
Policy Act of 2005, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007,
and Executive Order 13423. As part of that effort, VA determined the
cost of implementing these requirements would be an additional 7
percent (not including renewable energy features). Subsequently, VA has
added 7 percent to all new major project funding requests in FY 2009
and beyond.
VA has not yet completed construction of buildings that have been
specifically designed to meet all of the Federal mandates. However, we
have established goals for all FY 2009 projects and beyond to reduce
energy usage by 30 percent and water by 20 percent, and to obtain LEED
Silver certification. Specific operating data for energy and water
savings is not yet available. However, based on extensive studies and
life-cycle analysis on our most recent projects, we are confident that
VA will see a significant savings when these facilities begin
operations.
Question 5: Please explain if there is a proposed employee
incentive plan for rewarding VA employees for energy saving ideas. If
not, please explain why something like that has not been developed to
capitalize and reward those who work in the VA facilities every day and
have frontline knowledge of potential savings?
Response: Various individual VA facilities offer recognition and
reward to employees for energy saving ideas and other suggestions for
``going green.'' To promote awareness and education of energy and
environmental impacts at the corporate level, VA recently launched the
Green Routine. The Green Routine is a product of a working group of VA
employees to promote a broad collection of ideas. Among other features,
it includes a publicly accessible VA webpage, www.va.gov/greenroutine.
We are working on developing an online forum for employees to share
ideas and solutions that have worked for their facility. Since the
launch of the webpage, VA's Office of Asset Enterprise Management has
received numerous emails with ideas on energy saving and recycling
techniques. We are reviewing these suggestions and the forum as a
potential basis for a corporate-level incentive program. Plans are
already under way to initiate a corporate-wide program to acknowledge
Greening VA best practices, innovation, and initiatives at all levels
of the organization.
Question 6: Expert witnesses and leading experts in the industry
state that having natural light and green space for patients reduces
stress and facilitates a quicker recovery. Does the VA have any plans
to try to incorporate these principles into their new construction? If
so, how and if not, why?
Response: VA has been incorporating such concepts into its
facilities' designs for many years. VA has included, as part of our
standard design practices, atria, patient green spaces, day lighting,
indoor air quality, and other initiatives that significantly improve
patient outcomes. Examples include the Detroit and Minneapolis VA
medical centers constructed in the mid-1980s, and most recently the
design of the new medical center in New Orleans. VA also keeps abreast
of the latest environment-of-care literature and studies, and is
updating its design criteria to ensure our facilities are state-of-the-
art and incorporate design concepts that significantly improve patient
outcomes.
Question 7: Bringing about culture change has always been a
challenge for VA. With a majority of leadership at the VISN and
facility level having a background in health care, how is the VA
focusing these medical professionals on the importance of energy, fleet
and environmental management as well as sustainability? Is there, or
are there plans, to incorporate performance measures in the Executive
Career Field Performance Plan for VISN Directors and Service Chiefs?
Response: During FY 2009, VA implemented Network Director
performance monitors related to energy and vehicle fleet management.
For FY 2010, VA has added a monitor for environmental management
performance. These monitors exist in addition to the Network Directors'
performance plans and measures. For FY 2011, the responsible program
offices will work with the Veterans Health Administration's Office of
Quality and Performance to develop and implement performance measures
in the Executive Career Field Performance Plans.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 16, 2009
Gail Vittori
Chair, Executive Committee
U.S. Green Building Council
Co-Director, Center for Maximum
Potential Building Systems
2101 L Street, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20037
Dear Ms. Vittori,
During the September 30, 2009, full Committee hearing on Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, I provided each
of the witnesses in the first panel a summary of H.R. 292, and asked
them to provide input into this bipartisan legislative initiative.
I am writing to follow up on this request, and am providing you
with a full copy of the legislation, as well as the bill summary and
CBO preliminary estimate of the cost of implementation.
It would be appreciated if you could provide your views by November
13, 2009 on letter size paper, single spaced.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your input is
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Steve Buyer
Ranking Republican Member
SB:dwc
Enclosures
__________
Memorandum
To: Ranking Member Steve Buyer House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
From: Gail Vittori, Co-Director
Center for Maximum Potential Building Systems
Austin, TX
Date: November 13, 2009
Re: Comments on H.R. 292, Department of Veterans Affairs
Sustainability Act of 2009--``To Improve energy and water efficiencies
and conservation throughout the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for
other purposes.''
1. Implement a comprehensive sustainability program
Recommend define scope of ``comprehensive
sustainability program''--is it comprehensive to view the totality of
building operations, procurement/supply chain and dependencies (such as
transportation) in a life cycle context?
Present in context of a healing environment (perhaps
better wording than ``. . .meeting the responsibilities of the
Department)--should be viewed as ``both/and'' vs. ``either/or''--for
example, minimizing consumption (such as water flow in nurse's sinks
where they are trying to fill up a container actually don't benefit
from low-flow since it adds significant time to their task).
2. Establish and maintain a database to track and report on
energy and water expenditures.
What is being measured? Direct use only or also
looking upstream/downstream and at procurement/supply chain and
dependencies for a broader view of energy/water footprints. For
example, UK's National Health Service found that transportation was 18
percent of carbon footprint, with direct energy use 22 percent.
Recommend include energy and water sources, such as
on-site renewables, captured rainwater and/or condensate; other
graywater sources.
Ensure have proper meters to gather energy and water
data (NOTE: process water use is about 70 percent vs. 30 percent
domestic/fixture water use). Proper metering should categorize energy
and water end--use to understand patterns and provide hierarchical
display from high to low.
3. Require annual audit of energy usage.
As above, important to understand if this is intended
to capture direct energy use only, or extend upstream and downstream.
Should this also be an audit of water use, especially
given the energy intensity of water?
4. Establish Office of Energy Management.
Recommend reconsider this as Office of
Sustainability, providing the context for a broader view of scope--or
Energy Management and Sustainability as with the Advisory Committee in
#5.
5. Create Advisory Committee on Energy Management and
Sustainability
No comment.
6. Ensure compliance with EO13423.
Clarify whether the purpose of the bill is to ensure
compliance or encourage industry best practices and leadership.
7. Report on use of funds to install fueling stations at 35
medical facility campuses.
No comment.
8. Submit plan to increase use and installation of energy
efficient and renewable energy systems in Department buildings.
Establish ROI/life cycle cost assessment basis
recognizing investments can result in substantial operational cost
savings.
Add solar readiness for new buildings where economics
may not support procurement
Add water efficiency systems, esp. addressing process
water use (70 percent of total hospital water use) and potential
infection control concerns associated with water conserving fixtures
and reclaimed water.
Provide guidance on appropriateness of energy
efficient and renewable energy systems based on climate zone, scale of
building, etc.
Include technologies such as displacement ventilation
and natural ventilation than can have favorable energy performance
outcomes.
Note that most medical equipment does not have energy
rating--EPA doing initial work but needs more money to accelerate to
lead to Energy Star rating for major medical equipment. (NOTE that GGHC
and LEED-HC has created a medical equipment efficiency credit that I
believe is headed to Pilot Credit Library.)
9. Authorize use of electrical sub-metering of buildings.
Recommend add water sub-metering; also consider
measurement and verification for water, as with credit in draft LEED
for Health Care and GGHC. Should controls be added as complementary
element?
10. Ensure energy efficient products meeting VA requirements are
purchased applicable to items that consume electricity.
Note that most medical equipment does not have energy
rating--EPA doing initial work but needs more money to accelerate to
lead to Energy Star rating for major medical equipment. (NOTE that GGHC
and LEED-HC has created a medical equipment efficiency credit that I
believe is headed to Pilot Credit Library).
Provide a roadmap to target the products that are
biggest consumers of electricity to guide strategic procurement-biggest
bang for the buck.
11. Grants up to $10,000 for Adaptive Housing to encourage use of
high efficiency systems and products, and other energy reduction items.
Recommend provide strategic guidance/ROI--i.e.,
relative benefit of investment in PVs, solar thermal, relamping,
including correlating to climate zone.
12. Provide grants for adaptive vehicles to encourage purchase of
alternative fuel vehicles.
No comment.
13. Require study on water and energy consumption by National
Cemetery Administration.
Recommend guidance on how comprehensive--upstream/
downstream--and also diversify water sources, reuse strategies. Etc.
14. All VA to directly utilize expertise of National Laboratories
re: energy and water efficient technologies.
Track performance of systems once installed.
15. Authorize Secretary of VA to conduct pilot program for sale of
air pollution emission reduction incentives and retain proceeds from
sales.
No comment.
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 16, 2009
Thomas W. Hicks
Executive Director
Building Performance Initiative
U.S. Green Building Council
2101 L Street, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20037
Dear Mr. Hicks,
During the September 30, 2009, full Committee hearing on Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, I provided each
of the witnesses in the first panel a summary of H.R. 292, and asked
them to provide input into this bipartisan legislative initiative.
I am writing to follow up on this request, and am providing you
with a full copy of the legislation, as well as the bill summary and
CBO preliminary estimate of the cost of implementation.
It would be appreciated if you could provide your views by November
13, 2009 on letter size paper, single spaced.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your input is
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Steve Buyer
Ranking Republican Member
SB:dwc
Enclosures
__________
U.S. Green Building Council
Washington, DC.
November 9, 2009
Ranking Member Steve Buyer
House Committee on Veterans' Affairs
335 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Ranking Member Buyer:
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the full committee
hearing (``Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs'') on September 30, 2009 and thank you for the opportunity to
have input on your legislation. Below are my comments on H.R. 292:
Section 2: While tracking and reporting on energy and water
expenditures is a good start, other areas should be included. Given the
impact that employee and patient transportation can have on the overall
energy and carbon footprint, VA should perform annual commuting surveys
to better understand their energy footprint (and so that they can take
positive steps to improve it). Performing an annual employee and
patient satisfaction survey to understand the impacts that energy
efficiency and green features are having would also be valuable.
Section 3: Include water, commuting, and occupant satisfaction as
well.
Section 4: Establishing an office with the name ``Office of Energy
Management'' too narrowly focuses the purview. Broadening the mission
to incorporate wider sustainability goals would maximize the
effectiveness of the office.
Section 8: Under (b) specify green or vegetative roofs.
Section 9: Adding requirements that the energy and water
consumption on all buildings are individually metered, managed, and
tracked on no less than a monthly basis would be beneficial.
Section 10: Beyond energy efficient products, VA should also be
utilizing products that are green, sustainable, no-VOC/low-VOC,
recyclable, re-usable, and recycled.
I hope you find these comments helpful in advancing more
sustainable VA facilities. Please contact me if I can be of further
assistance in this matter.
Respectfully,
Thomas W. Hicks
U.S. Green Building Council
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 16, 2009
Ward Hubbell
President
The Green Building Initiative
2104 SE Morrison
Portland, OR 97214
Dear Mr. Hubbell,
During the September 30, 2009, full Committee hearing on Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, I provided each
of the witnesses in the first panel a summary of H.R. 292, and asked
them to provide input into this bipartisan legislative initiative.
I am writing to follow up on this request, and am providing you
with a full copy of the legislation, as well as the bill summary and
CBO preliminary estimate of the cost of implementation.
It would be appreciated if you could provide your views by November
13, 2009 on letter size paper, single spaced.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your input is
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Steve Buyer
Ranking Republican Member
SB:dwc
Enclosures
__________
JSR Associates, Inc.
Ellicott City, MD.
October 21, 2009
Ranking Member Buyer
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
One Hundred Eleventh Congress
335 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
RE: Bill Summary: H.R. 292: Department of Veterans Affairs Energy
Sustainability Act of 2009: To improve energy and water efficiencies
and conservation throughout the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for
other purposes.
Dear Ranking Member Buyer,
Based upon your request during the testimony provided during the
``Energy Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs'' on
September 30, 2009 at 10:00 am, the following comments/responses are
provided regarding H.R. 292:
1. Direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to implement a
comprehensive sustainability program throughout the Department of
Veterans Affairs for the purpose of using resources in a manner that
minimizes consumption and encourages the use of alternative sources of
energy while still meeting the responsibilities of the Department.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. For the VA Hospitals this is already in place
through the GEMS (Green Environmental Management
System) policy that is required for all of the VA
facilities.
ii. This is staffed by a GEMS Coordinator (position
often includes more than the GEMS responsibility
depending upon the facility) working cooperatively with
the Energy Manager position.
iii. Note that in recent Green GlobesTM
assessments of VA hospitals, it has come to my
attention that the Energy Manager position is being
downgraded to a G11. This creates difficulty for the
VISN Energy Manager to fill these positions, and
maintain high quality personnel to sustain current
programming and improvements.
2. Direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish and
maintain a database to track and report on energy and water
expenditures by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The database would
provide a baseline to compare changes in Department energy and water
expenditures.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. Hospitals have been tracking and documenting this
online within a VA database; minimally since FY2005.
ii. However most hospitals have been tracking this
data from FY2003 or earlier.
3. Require an annual audit of energy usage by the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. Most of the facilities that have been assessed for
Green Globes TM certification have conducted
or have planned an energy audit. Some facilities have
been conducting energy audits every 2 years. If this is
proposed for all facilities, this would require
appropriate funding at the local levels.
ii. Note that with the Energy Managers in place, an
internal energy audit by existing staff is also
appropriate and may prove out to be more thorough than
a third part energy audit. Outside contractors would
only be available for short periods of time on the
site; whereas Energy Managers are on site on a
continual basis. Addition FTEs may be required for the
Energy Manager to complete an energy audit, but the
results could garner more complete information.
4. Establish an Office of Energy Management within the Department
of Veterans Affairs under the direction of a Deputy Assistant
Secretary, who would report to the Assistant Secretary for Management.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. Currently there is a position of Energy Manager at
each VA site, as well as VISN level Energy Managers.
They also meet annually at the GovEnergy Conference,
which is held at various locations around the country
in August.
5. Create an Advisory Committee on Energy Management and
Sustainability.
a. Comments/Responses: Recommendations for an Advisory
Committee include the following individuals that I have worked with at
different VA sites. All of the sites have exemplary staff that would be
valuable on an Advisory Committee:
i. Mark Hudson, VISN 6 Energy Manager
ii. Rick Hart, Dallas Energy Manager
iii. Jeffrey Means, VISN 11 Energy Manager
iv. Frank Moran, Portland Facilities Supervisor
v. Jim McCarthy, Portland Boiler/Chiller Plant Foreman
vi. Jean Wroblewski, Milwaukee Food Service/Nutrition
vii. Frank Novitzki, Richmond Energy Manager
viii. Jean Parkinson, San Diego GEMS Coordinator
ix. Mark Sargent, Augusta Energy Manager
x. Raphael Ciano, West Palm GEMS Coordinator
xi. Michael Dobbins, Augusta GEMS Coordinator
xii. Gary D'Alessandro, Detroit Energy Manager
xiii. Mary Francis, Durham RN
xiv. In addition to the recommended disciplines listed
above, it is recommended that the overall structure of the
Committee include an interdisciplinary team: Food Service/
Nutrition, EMS (including housekeeping), Nursing, Industrial
Hygiene, Infection Control, Biomedical Engineering, and Laundry
(if applicable) because all of these departments impact
sustainability and energy use directly. Specialty areas' staff;
such as those working in radiology and other energy intensive
use areas need to be aware of energy and water use goals when
selecting medical equipment; creating an opportunity for
discussion between the medical equipment specifiers and the
energy managers.
6. Ensure compliance with Presidential Executive Order 13423, on
Energy Management within federal agencies, and Department of Veterans
Affairs Directive 0055, which establish goals for energy efficiency and
sustainability.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. GEMS Policies are utilized as a basis for
Environmental Management Systems for each hospital.
GEMS directive includes reference to Presidential
Executive Order 13148 as well as Presidential Executive
Order 13423.
ii. Energy Managers through the Green
GlobesTM process are working toward
compliance of the Executive Orders.
iii. Note that the percentages of energy savings
required needs to be assessed in conjunction with the
increase of patient and staff load; versus evaluating
as a simple percentage.
iv. Another measurement that would be appropriate is
the Btu/square foot utilized as a better measurement
versus percentage of savings.
7. Require a report on the use of funds appropriated for
``Construction, minor projects'' for the installation of fueling
stations at 35 medical facility campuses under title II of the Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs and related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2009 (division E of Public Law 110-329; 122 Stat. 3708)
a. Comments/Responses:
i. None.
8. Require the Secretary to submit a plan to increase the use and
installation of energy efficient and renewable energy systems in
Department buildings, to include the use of:
a. Qualified solar technologies such as distributed amorphous,
crystalline and nanophotovoltaic technologies systems, solar heating
systems, solar cooling systems, solar hot water systems, solar lighting
systems, and hybrid technologies that incorporate one or more of such
systems;
b. Qualified energy efficient roof and building envelope
systems;
c. Qualified wind technologies; and
d. Qualified biomass materials such as wood-based renewable
fuels to be used for fueling boilers and heaters.
e. Authorize appropriations in the amount of $150,000,000 to
carry out the installation of qualified systems.
f. Comments/Responses:
i. Prior to completing expensive alternative and
renewable energy systems and pilots, consult with those
already working in the field (existing VA hospitals'
staff). For example, the return on investment (ROI) for
photovoltaic systems is not cost effective within the
constraints of current technology. Two sets of data are
available from the Dallas VA and the Loma Linda VA.
ii. Include ground source heat pump systems as
acceptable alternative energy systems; as a practical
cost and energy savings opportunity.
iii. Include green roofs as acceptable portions of
alternative energy systems; as they reduce heat island
effect as well as provide potential site amenity for
Veterans and families.
iv. Include the utilization of thermal imaging as a
funded means for evaluation of building envelope
systems. This would assist facilities in not only
identifying energy needs, but also necessary repairs;
such as sealing the envelope, replacement of energy
saving windows and doors, and identifying issues with
roofs. All these items contribute to energy savings.
9. Authorize the use of electrical sub-metering of buildings on
the Department of Veteran Affairs.
a. Comments/Responses:
i. For 2010, VACO has in place a submetering project
for all VA hospitals. The submetering includes any
buildings 50,000 square feet or larger and higher
energy user areas; such as MRI, surgery, research labs,
etc. This initiative includes not only metering
electricity, but also water and gas metering.
ii. Note that the Dallas VAMC does include
submetering, which was installed locally by the Energy
Manager and staff.
10. Direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to ensure, to the
maximum extent practicable that energy efficient products meeting the
requirements of the Department of Veterans Affairs are purchased
whenever the Department purchases items that consume electricity. In
determining the energy efficiency of products, the Secretary would be
required to consider products that:
a. Meet or exceed Energy Star specifications; or
b. Are listed on the Federal Energy Management Program Product
Energy Efficiency Recommendations product list of the Department of
Energy.
c. Comments/Responses:
i. This is included in the Purchasing Policy included
within the GEMS Policies and Procedures for setting up
GEMS Policies for VA hospitals. Some hospitals have
Purchasing Policies in place and others are in
progress, but they are required by the overall VACO
GEMS policy requirements to include energy savings
equipment.
1. Depending upon the VA Facility, the Energy
Managers have some input on specifications of medical
and other equipment purchases, but this is not
consistent. Obviously, patient safety and care can not
be compromised, but in order to make sure that the
Energy Manager has an opportunity for input on
equipment; it would have to be required within the sign
off process.
2. Some VA hospitals have worked with
Acquisitions/Contracting to include a sign off line by
the Energy Manager on purchase requests; so that
evaluation and recommendations are taking place. Often
recommendations, in addition to verifying the
specification for energy savings and alternatives, will
also head off issues with having the appropriate power
supply available for a specific piece of equipment.
ii. Further recommend that NSF, Energy Star/FEMP, and
VA work together to evaluate commercial kitchen
equipment for energy compliance and ratings.
11. Provide grants up to $10,000 for Adaptive Housing to encourage
use of high efficiency systems and products, and other energy reduction
items.
a. Comments/Responses
i. None.
12. Provide grants for adaptive vehicles to encourage purchase of
alternative fuel vehicles for eligible individuals under section 3902
(a) of title 38, United States Code.
a. Comments/Responses
i. None.
13. Require a study on water and energy consumption by the
National Cemetery Administration.
a. Comments/Responses
i. None.
14. Allow the Department of Veterans Affairs to directly utilize
the expertise of the National Laboratories regarding energy and water
efficient technologies.
a. Comments/Responses
i. Note that Augusta VA has had a complete assessment
through the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) that
has provided baseline data for energy projects,
decision making, and prioritization of projects on
their site.
15. Authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to conduct a pilot
program for the sale of air pollution emission reduction incentives
(also known as emission reduction credits or ERCs) and retain the
proceeds from the sales.
a. Comments/Responses
i. In addition to ``retaining the proceeds from the
sales''; recommend ``retaining the proceeds and
directing the funds to the GEMS program and/or Energy
Management budget''. This would make sure that the
funds that are retained are not placed into a general
fund versus for utilization by GEMS Committee and
Energy Manager. Currently savings that are made through
GEMS and Energy Projects do not come back to the
departments to make further improvements.
16. General Funding Comments:
a. Comments/Responses
i. It is recommended to streamline the funding
processes. The following is an example of good planning
for energy projects, but funding processes holding up
the implementation.
In reviewing the Seattle VA Hospital, the
list of all of their energy improvements is
tied to an ESPC (Energy Savings Performance
Contract). Acquisitions wanted to revise the
ESPC, and as a result the rewrite has prevented
the Seattle plans to be completed. The contract
has been held up for 2 years. In the meantime,
other available funding within the Seattle VA
was re-directed to other projects identified in
fiscal year budgets; in anticipation of the
ESPC being approved. As a result none of the
energy projects have been completed; although
the planning has been in place for over 2
years.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on H.R. 292: Department of
Veterans Affairs Energy Sustainability Act of 2009. If I can be of
further assistance please contact me directly at (410) 4617763 (O),
(410) 978-2112 (C), or by email: [email protected].
Respectively Submitted,
Jane M. Rohde, AIA, FIIDA, ACHA, AAHID, LEED AP
Principal
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Washington, DC.
October 16, 2009
James L. Hoff, DBA
Research Director
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing
816 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20006
Dear Mr. Hoff,
During the September 30, 2009, full Committee hearing on Energy
Efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, I provided each
of the witnesses in the first panel a summary of H.R. 292, and asked
them to provide input into this bipartisan legislative initiative.
I am writing to follow up on this request, and am providing you
with a full copy of the legislation, as well as the bill summary and
CBO preliminary estimate of the cost of implementation.
It would be appreciated if you could provide your views by November
13, 2009 on letter size paper, single spaced.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your input is
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Steve Buyer
Ranking Republican Member
SB:dwc
Enclosures
__________
Center for Environmental Innovation in Roofing
Washington, DC.
February 1, 2010
Hon. Steven Buyer
Ranking Republican Member
United States House of Representatives
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
335 Cannon Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Reference: H.R. 292 Department of Veterans Affairs Energy
Sustainability Act of 2009
Dear Representative Buyer:
Thank you again for the opportunity for the Center for
Environmental Innovation in Roofing to testify before the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs as part of the September 30, 2009 hearing regarding
energy efficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. And thank
you for your request for comments regarding H.R. 292.
As a research and advocacy organization representing roofing
manufacturers and roofing contractors across the country, we are very
encouraged by the bipartisan support for H.R. 292, and we have asked
our members to offer their comments and support to their Congressional
Representatives.
We are particularly encouraged by the provisions of section 9 of
H.R. 292, which calls for the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs to submit
to Congress a detailed plan for increasing the use of energy efficient
and renewable energy technologies in VA facilities and operations,
including the provision for qualified energy efficient roofing systems.
The Green Buildings Action Plan as currently published by the
Department of Veteran's Affairs, establishes an overall improvement
target for building energy efficiency, with special emphasis on new
building construction and major renovation. However, many roofing
projects, especially the re-roofing of existing Department facilities,
fall outside new building or major renovation activities. As a result,
there may be some confusion as to how the energy improvement target
should be applied to roofing-only projects. The provisions of section 9
of H.R. 292 will remove this potential confusion and help assure that
the Department of Veteran's Affairs develops a comprehensive energy
efficiency plan incorporating proper consideration for the importance
of roofing systems--both new and existing--at all Veterans Affairs'
facilities.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony at the
September 30, 2009 hearing and for your consideration of our comments
regarding H.R. 292. Please do not hesitate to call on us if you have
any questions or require additional information.
Yours very truly,
James L. Hoff, DBA
Research Director
JLH/jh