[Senate Report 109-358]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 660
109th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 109-358
======================================================================
HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS ACT OF 2006
_______
November 9, 2006.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Inhofe, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany S. 3591]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred a bill (S. 3591) to improve the efficiency in the
Federal Government through the use of high-performance green
buildings, and for other purposes, having considered the same
reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill, as
amended, do pass.
GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND
On April 24, 2002, the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works hosted a roundtable that involved all relevant
Federal agencies, State and local green building officials, the
U.S. Green Building Council, universities, and environmental
building experts, including designers and architects. The
purpose of the roundtable was to begin a dialogue between the
Congress and green building interests. The findings and
recommendations that came out of the roundtable were summarized
in a report entitled, ``Building Momentum: National Trends and
Prospects for High-Performance Green Buildings.''
In addition, the Environment and Public Works Committee
conducted a hearing on October 1, 2002, to assess green school
initiatives: environmental standards for schools, school siting
in relation to toxic waste sites, and ``green'' building codes.
The Committee reviewed activities undertaken by the EPA's
Office of Children's Environmental Health, the Office of Indoor
Air Quality, and the Department of Energy concerning
environmental and energy issues relevant to school properties.
In September 2003, the White House Office of the Federal
Environmental Executive published a report entitled, ``The
Federal Commitment to Green Building: Experiences and
Expectations,'' that included a list of recommendations to
improve the Federal effort on green building activities. These
recommendations included better coordination of all green
building activities, better guidance and direction for Federal
agencies, a need for research on the benefits of green
buildings, and the development of green building tools. Soon
after, the Federal Green Building Council, whose members
include senior officials of many Federal agencies including
GSA, EPA, DOE, DOD and ten others was established in 2003 to
guide policy development and research on green building
initiatives within each Federal agency.
Federal green practices for buildings and operations have
been started through various directives such as Executive Order
13123, ``Greening the Government through Efficient Energy
Management'' (June 1999) and Executive Order 13101, ``Greening
the Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal
Acquisition'' (September 1998). The Interagency Sustainability
Working Group (ISWG) was established in 2001 in response to
Executive Order 13123, and was designed as a forum for the
exchange of information on sustainable design activities within
the Federal government.
Earlier this year, the White House Summit on Federal
Sustainable Buildings resulted in the signing of a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) for Federal Leadership in High
Performance and Sustainable Buildings between the Office of the
Federal Environmental Executive and 19 Federal agencies. A copy
of the MOU is attached.
With regard to school environments, the President's Task
Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to
Children was created in 1998 under Executive Order 13045 (April
21, 1997) to coordinate and promote children's environmental
health issues across the Federal government. The task force
addressed a number of important environmental school issues,
including asthma, lead-based paint, childhood cancers, and
unintentional injuries. In 2001, the task force created a
schools workgroup, which developed a Federal inventory of
school environmental health programs and activities and
supported the development of a government-wide web portal on
school environmental health issues. The task force expired in
2005. In early 2005, OFEE convened an interagency task force to
address promoting environmental and energy stewardship in
schools by having agencies share their case studies and best
practices with the educational community. This group was merged
with the Education Initiative Team under the Cooperative
Conservation Executive Order 13352 Task Force.
In the 108th Congress, Senator Jeffords introduced S. 2620,
the High-Performance Green Buildings Act of 2004 based upon the
recommendations and findings of both reports mentioned above.
No Committee action was taken on S. 2620.
In the 109th Congress, Senator Jeffords reintroduced his
original green building legislation, slightly modified, as S.
3591, the High-Performance Green Buildings Act of 2006.
OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION
S. 3591 creates an office within the General Services
Administration to ensure full coordination of all Federal green
building activities including agency performance with green
initiatives, research on the latest tools, findings and impacts
of green buildings on the environment, health and productivity
of occupants, to improve the leadership of the Federal
government in this area, and to address barriers for building
high-performance green buildings.
This bill also strives to assist schools with the
identification of potentially hazardous environmental
conditions and solutions for addressing and correcting these
conditions through a Federal grant program administered by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to qualified State
agencies.
In addition, passage of this bill would codify green
building policies present in various executive orders and the
recent Federal MOU.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
This section provides that this Act may be cited as the
``High-Performance Green Buildings Act of 2006.''
Section 2. Definitions
This section defines the terms ``Administrator,''
``Committee,'' ``Director,'' ``Federal Facility,'' ``High-
Performance Green Building,'' ``Life-Cycle,'' ``Life-Cycle
Assessment,'' ``Life-Cycle Costing,'' and ``Office.''
TITLE I--OFFICE OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS
Section 101. Oversight
This section establishes and appoints an SES career
individual to serve as Director for the Office of High-
Performance Green Buildings and provides compensation.
Subsection (a) establishes the Director position and
appoints a career SES individual to manage the office in
accordance with section 102.
Subsection (b) provides compensation for the Director at a
maximum rate of basic pay for a Senior Executive Service under
section 5382 of title 5, U.S. Code.
Section 102. Office of High-Performance Green Buildings
This section establishes an office within the General
Services Administration as the Office of High-Performance Green
Buildings and outlines the duties of the Director of the
Office.
Subsection (a) establishes the Office of High-Performance
Green Buildings within the General Services Administration.
Subsection (b) outlines the duties of the Director to
include: (1) ensuring full coordination of all green building
activities within the General Services Administration and all
relevant Federal agencies that at a minimum include: the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of the Federal
Environmental Executive, Department of Energy, Office of the
Federal Procurement Policy, Department of Health and Human
Services, and the Department of Defense; (2) establishing a
senior-level green building advisory committee to provide
advice and recommendations to the Director; (3) identifying and
biennially reassessing improved or higher rating standards; (4)
establishing a high-performance green building clearinghouse;
(5) ensuring full coordination of research and development
information; (6) identifying and developing green building
standards; (7) establishing green building practices for
Federal facilities; (8) reviewing and analyzing Federal budget
practices relating to green buildings; and (9) providing a
report to Congress.
Subsection (c) requires that a report be submitted to
Congress within 2 years of enactment and biennially thereafter
that includes: (1) a description of green building initiatives
under this act and other programs in effect prior to this Act
along with the current status of each and funding levels; (2)
identification of barriers within the planning, budgeting and
construction process that prevent new and existing facilities
from becoming high-performance green buildings as defined by a
silver rating under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design Building Rating System (LEED) established by the U.S.
Green Building Council or an equivalent rating obtained through
a comparable, or an improved or higher rating standard; (3)
identification of inconsistencies within current law; (4)
recommendations of language for uniform standards for all
Federal agencies; (5) a review of the budget process for
alternatives to address energy and environmental cost
accounting and include benefits to health and productivity,
permitting Federal agencies to retain savings accrued through
life-cycle costing, and identifying short and long term savings
from high-performance green building initiatives, including
those related to health and productivity; (6) identification of
green self-sustaining technologies to address operational needs
of Federal facilities in times of national security
emergencies, natural disasters, or other dire emergencies; (7)
a summary of developments at the State and local levels; and
(8) recommendations to address these issues.
A variety of green building rating systems are currently
available for use by the U.S. building industry. While this
bill specifically references the United States Green Building
Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED),
the Committee intends that other rating systems be eligible
under this bill to determine high-performance green buildings.
Both LEED and the Green Globes rating system from the Green
Building Initiative (GBI) have U.S.-specific versions; examples
of other rating systems include (but are not limited to) the
Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment
Method (BREEAM), the Comprehensive Assessment System for
Building Environmental Efficiency (CASBEE), and GBTool. The
Committee intends that the Office of High-Performance Green
Buildings evaluate all credible green building rating systems
as they develop to determine how they may be applied to help
new and existing facilities become high-performance green
buildings.
Subsection (d) requires that the Office carry out a plan
for implementing these initiatives.
Section 103. Green Building Advisory Committee
This section establishes a Green Building Advisory
Committee of both Federal and non-Federal entities, sets
specific parameters on the membership, and requires that the
Director set a regular schedule of meetings. This section
explains the role of the Committee and provides an exemption to
section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Subsection (a) establishes that no later than 180 days
after enactment, the Director shall create the Green Building
Advisory Committee.
Subsection (b) outlines the membership of the Committee to
include all relevant Federal agencies and at least one
representative of each of the following: state and local
government green building programs, independent green building
associations or councils, building experts, security advisors,
and environmental health experts for both adults and children.
The Committee may not have more than 15 non-Federal members.
Subsection (c) requires that a regular schedule of meetings
be set. The Committee recommends that the Green Building
Advisory Committee meet as often as 6 times each year, if
deemed necessary by the Director in consultation with other
members of the Advisory Committee, but realizes that a physical
meeting may not always be necessary.
Subsection (d) explains that the role of the Committee is
to provide advice and expertise to the Director for carrying
out his duties under this Act.
Subsection (e) exempts the Committee from section 14 of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act that dissolves committees after
2 years.
Section 104. Public outreach
This section requires the Director to carry out public
outreach to inform individuals and entities of green building
activities government-wide through the creation of a national
high-performance green building clearinghouse that identifies
similar green building activities and provides direct links to
each Federal agency's green building activities, as well as
major developments, findings or studies at the State and local
level, the private sector, and other relevant organizations,
including those of other countries. The clearinghouse shall
also provide access to technical information, including tools
and resources helpful for making decisions that are more cost-
effective, energy-efficient, health-protective and
environmentally beneficial, and that would be useful for
constructing a high-performance green building, as well as
information on how to certify a green building.
Section 105. Research and development
This section requires the Director to coordinate ongoing
green building activities, to survey recent findings and
developments, and to develop a research plan on high-
performance green buildings. The research shall involve the
relationship between human health, occupant productivity and
each of the following: emissions from materials and products in
the building, natural day lighting, ventilation choices and
technologies, heating and cooling systems, moisture control and
mold, maintenance and cleaning, pest control, and other issues
relating to health, comfort, productivity, and performance of
the occupants of the building.
The research plan shall also include the development and
dissemination of tools to measure the life-cycle performance of
a building, a review of the benefits of using high-performance
green buildings during a natural disaster or national
emergency, as well as other areas the Director deems necessary.
Section 106. Budget and life-cycle costing and contracting
This section requires the Director to identify, review, and
analyze current budget and contracting practices for building a
high-performance green building, to develop guidance and
conduct training sessions on life-cycle costing, to identify
tools to aid in life-cycle cost decision making, and to explore
the feasibility for including the benefits of green buildings,
such as security benefits, into life-cycle cost decision
making.
Section 107. Authorization of appropriations
This section authorizes $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2008 through 2012, to remain available until expended.
TITLE II--HEALTHY HIGH-PERFORMANCE SCHOOLS
Section 201. Definition of high-performance school
This section defines a healthy high-performing school.
Section 202. Grants for healthy school environments
This section authorizes the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency in consultation with the
Secretary of Education to provide grants to qualified State
agencies to provide technical assistance in implementing EPA
school environmental programs such as the Tools for Schools
Program and the Healthy School Environmental Assessment Tool.
The grant money may also be used to develop State school
environmental quality plans that include standards for school
building design, construction and renovation that would achieve
a healthy high-performing school and plans that would identify
ongoing environmental problems in the school and include
recommendations on how to address these problems that would
also include an assessment of information on the exposure of
children to environmental hazards in school facilities.
The Committee intends that such grants may also be made
available to tribes.
Section 203. Model guidelines for siting of school facilities
This section directs the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretaries of
Education and Health and Human Services to develop school site
selection guidelines that take into account the special
vulnerability of children to hazardous substances or pollution
exposures in any case where possible contamination would exist,
modes of transportation available to students and staff, and
the potential use of the school facility as an emergency
shelter in the event of a natural disaster or other national
emergency.
Section 204. Public outreach
This section requires the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency to report to the Director on
all activities carried out under this Title. The Director is
required to make this information available on the
clearinghouse established in section 104 to the maximum extent
practicable, in particular, information on the exposure of
children to environmental hazards in school facilities.
Section 205. Authorization of appropriations
This section authorizes $5,000,000 for the period of fiscal
years 2008 through 2012, to remain available until expended.
TITLE III--STRENGTHENING FEDERAL LEADERSHIP
Section 301. Incentives
This section requires that the Director identify incentives
to encourage the use of green buildings and related
technologies in the operations of the Federal Government that
would include recognition awards and the ability of an agency
to keep any financial savings they accrue by utilizing green
building initiatives.
Section 302. Federal procurement
This section requires that regulations be issued requiring
that to the maximum extent practicable, all Federal building
projects for new construction, major repair and renovation be
sustainable and that leases be in facilities that are both
energy efficient and constructed or repaired with high-
performing and sustainable design. In addition, guidance shall
also be issued to aid in the redesign of proposed facilities.
Subsection (a) directs the Director of the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy, in consultation with the Director
of the Office of High-Performance Green Buildings and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics,
within two years of enactment, to revise applicable regulations
directing Federal procurement executives to apply, to the
maximum extent practicable, the key principles of the
Memorandum of Understanding signed by 19 Federal agencies in
January of 2006 to every Federal project for new construction,
major repair and renovation. These principles of integrated
design, optimizing building and systems energy performance,
protecting and conserving water, enhancing indoor environmental
quality, and reducing environmental impacts of materials and
waste flows will assist the Federal government in utilizing
more high-performing green buildings.
The regulations shall also be revised to give preference,
to the maximum extent practicable, to the leasing of facilities
that are energy efficient and have applied high-performance and
sustainable design principles during construction and
renovation.
Subsection (b) requires that 90 days after the regulations
have been revised, guidance be issued by the Director of the
Office of Federal Procurement Policy providing direction and
the option to renegotiate the design of proposed facilities to
incorporate improvements consistent with this section.
Section 303. Federal Green Building performance
This section requires that a General Accountability Office
(GAO) report be issued on the implementation of this Act and
its initiatives and provides for specific requirements of the
report. In addition, authorization is given for the Director to
enhance and expand the existing scorecard system currently used
to rate agency performance in green initiatives.
Subsection (a) requires that by October 31 of each of the
two fiscal years following the fiscal year of enactment, the
Comptroller General of the United States conduct an audit on
the implementation of this Act and submit a report on its
findings to the Office, the Committee, the Administrator and
Congress.
Subsection (b) outlines that the report shall include an
assessment of budget, life-cycle costing and contracting
issues, the level of coordination among the Office, OMB and
relevant agencies, the performance of the Office in carrying
out the implementation plan, the design stage of high-
performance green building measures and findings associated
with high-performance green building data that has been
collected and reported to the office, as well as other issues
the Comptroller deems appropriate.
Subsection (c) requires the Director consult with the
Advisory Committee on how best to enhance and implement the
existing Environmental Stewardship Scorecard system to measure
the performance of each Federal agency in implementing
sustainable design and green building initiatives.
TITLE IV--DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
Section 401. Coordination of goals
This section establishes guidelines for implementing a
Federal demonstration project in the State of Vermont that
would achieve the highest rating under the U.S. Green Building
Council's LEED rating system or equivalent rating of a
comparable system.
Subsection (a) authorizes the Director to establish a
demonstration project.
Subsection (b) provides for a Federal demonstration project
in the State of Vermont to evaluate green building initiatives
covered under the Act and requires that the facility achieve a
platinum rating under the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED
rating system or equivalent rating under a comparable system.
Subsection (c) outlines the criteria of the Federal
demonstration project to ensure that the project be an
appropriate model on the effectiveness of high-performing green
building technologies, to provide an analysis of materials,
components and systems used in the building on occupant health
and productivity, to analyze life-cycle costing and life-cycle
assessment of materials and systems, to provide a location and
design that promotes access to the facility through walking,
hiking, and mass transit, and that possesses sufficient
technological and organizational adaptability.
Subsection (d) requires that a report be provided to the
Administrator one year after enactment, and annually thereafter
through September 30, 2013, on the current status and findings
of the demonstration project.
Section 402. Authorization of appropriations
This section authorizes $5,000,000 for the period of fiscal
years 2008-2012, to remain available until expended.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 3591 was introduced by Senator Jeffords on June 28,
2006, with Ms. Snowe, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Chafee, Mrs. Boxer,
Mrs. Feinstein, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Obama as
original cosponsors. Additional cosponsors include Mr. Wyden,
Mr. Menendez, and Mr. Bingaman. S. 3591 was referred to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works and ordered reported
favorably out of Committee with an amendment in the nature of a
substitute on September 13, 2006.
In the 108th Congress, a similar bill, S. 2620, was
introduced by Senator Jeffords and referred to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
HEARINGS
There were no legislative hearings held on S. 3591.
A public hearing was held by the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works on October 1, 2002, entitled,
``Green Schools: Environmental Standards for Schools.''
ROLLCALL VOTES
The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to
consider S. 3591 on September 13, 2006. The Committee accepted
an amendment in the nature of a substitute to the introduced
bill. The Committee members completed action on the bill and
reported S. 3591, as amended, favorably by voice vote. Senator
Bond was recorded as voting against the bill and Senator
Lautenberg was recorded as voting in support of the bill.
REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT
In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes evaluation of
the regulatory impact of the reported bill.
The bill does not create any additional regulatory burdens,
nor will it cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of
individuals.
MANDATES ASSESSMENT
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4), the Committee finds that S. 3591 would impose
no Federal intergovernmental unfunded mandates on State, local,
or tribal governments.
COST OF LEGISLATION
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
S. 3591--High-Performance Green Buildings Act of 2006
Summary
S. 3591 would authorize the appropriation of $25 million
over the 2008-2012 period to make federal buildings more energy
efficient, develop building technologies that minimize adverse
effects on the natural environment to build structures known as
``green buildings,'' and provide environmental grants to
schools. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 3591 would cost $4 million in
2008 and about $20 million over the 2008-2011 period. An
additional $5 million in outlays would fall in 2012. Enacting
the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues.
S. 3591 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
The bill would benefit state and local governments, and any
costs to those governments would result from complying with
grant conditions.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government
The estimated budgetary impact of S. 3591 is shown in the
following table. The costs of this legislation fall within
budget functions 300 (natural resources and environment) and
800 (general government).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars
-----------------------------------------------------
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Office of High-Performance Green Buildings:
Authorization Level................................... 0 3 3 3 3 3
Estimated Outlays..................................... 0 2 3 3 3 3
Healthy High-Performance Schools:
Estimated Authorization Level......................... 0 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Outlays..................................... 0 1 1 1 1 1
Demonstration Project:
Estimated Authorization Level......................... 0 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Outlays..................................... 0 1 1 1 1 1
Other Provisions:
Estimated Authorization Level......................... * * * 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... * * * 0 0 0
Total Changes:
Estimated Authorization Level......................... * 5 5 5 5 5
Estimated Outlays..................................... * 4 5 5 5 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: * = less than $500,000.
Basis of estimate
For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 3591 will be enacted
near the start of fiscal year 2007 and that amounts authorized
will be appropriated beginning in 2008. Estimates of outlays
are based on historical spending patterns for similar programs.
S. 3591 would authorize the appropriation of $25 million over
the 2008-2012 period. These amounts would be used to make
federal buildings more energy efficient, develop green
buildings, and provide environmental grants to schools.
Office of High-Performance Green Buildings
Title I would authorize the appropriation of $3 million
annually over the 2008-2012 period to establish an Office of
High-Performance Green Buildings within the General Services
Administration to coordinate and promote green building
technologies within the federal government. The office would
conduct research, outreach programs, and coordinate budget and
procurement issues. Assuming appropriation of the authorized
amounts, CBO estimates that the office activities would cost
about $15 million over the 2008-2012 period.
Healthy High-Performance Schools
Title II would authorize the appropriation of $5 million
over the 2008-2012 period for the Environmental Protection
Agency to award grants to states to assist schools in
addressing environmental issues. CBO expects that $1 million
would be provided each year over the 2008-2012 period.
Appropriation of the authorized amount would result in
discretionary spending of $5 million over the 2008-2012 period.
Demonstration project
Title IV would authorize the appropriation of $5 million
over the 2008-2012 period to the Office of High-Performance
Green Buildings to fund a demonstration project of a federal
building in Vermont that employs green building technologies.
CBO expects that $1 million would be provided each year over
the 2008-2012 period. Assuming appropriation of the authorized
amount, CBO estimates that the project would cost $5 million
over the 2008-2012 period.
Other provisions
Title III would require the Office of Federal Procurement
Policy to revise procurement regulations to encourage the use
of energy efficient and green building technologies. In
addition, the legislation would require the Government
Accountability Office to provide reports to the Congress on the
impact of the legislation. CBO estimates that these provisions
would cost less than $500,000 a year.
Intergovernmental and Private-Sector Impact
S. 3591 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in UMRA. Title II would authorize $5
million in grants to build environmentally friendly schools and
to remedy environmental problems at current schools. Any costs
to state, local, or tribal governments would result from
complying with grant conditions.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Matthew Pickford.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Sarah Puro.
Impact on the private sector: Amy Petz.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
Section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate
requires the committee to publish changes in existing law made
by the bill as reported. Passage of this bill will make no
changes to existing law.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR BOND
Mr. Bond, from the Committee on Environment and Public
Works, submitted the following additional views to accompany
the report on S. 3591, the High-Performance Green Buildings Act
of 2006.
TITLE I--OFFICE OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS
Section (c) requires a report to be submitted to Congress
within 2 years of enactment and biennually thereafter. Section
(c)(2)(A) indicates that this report is to identify within the
planning, budgeting and construction process all types of
Federal facility procedures that inhibit new and existing
Federal facilities from becoming high-performance green
buildings as measured by--(A) a silver rating, as defined by
the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Building Rating System standard established by the United
States Green Building Council (or equivalent rating obtained
through a comparable system).
While S. 3591 specifically references the United States
Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED), the Committee intends other rating systems to be
eligible under this bill to determine high performance green
buildings under this bill. Both LEED and the Green Globes
rating system from the Green Building Initiative (GBI) have
U.S.-specific versions. Examples of other rating systems
include, (but are not limited to) the Building Research
Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), the
Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental
Efficiency (CASBEE), and GB Tool. The Committee expects the
Office of High-Performance Green Buildings to evaluate all
credible green building rating systems as they develop to
determine how they may be applied to help new and existing
facilities become high-performance green buildings. Under no
circumstances does this legislation favor one rating system
over another.
TITLE II--HEALTHY PERFORMANCE SCHOOLS
Section 203 of Title II directs the EPA in consultation
with the Department of Education and the Department of Health
and Human Services to develop model (non-mandatory) guidelines
for the siting of local schools. Increasing unnecessary
paperwork on local schools in a system already overburdened by
paperwork and bureaucracy is a concern. When selecting school
sites, schools already take into consideration potential
hazardous substance/pollution exposure, transportation concerns
and the use of the facility as an emergency shelter. The
involvement of the EPA may create additional bureaucratic steps
without necessarily adding any benefit to the process. Further,
school facilities are primarily funded with local dollars and
additional EPA involvement could create delays and add costs to
the construction projects as schools have to expend additional
resources to file paperwork and wait for approvals.
Christopher S. Bond.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR VITTER
S. 3591 contains language referencing to the Leadership in
Energy Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building rating system
designed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) which is of
great concern to the forestry and chemical industries in
Louisiana.
Specifically, section 102 of the bill defines ``high-
performance green buildings'' must meet the USGBC's LEED silver
standard. In addition, Title IV of the bill specifies federal
buildings must meet the USGBC's LEED platinum standard. These
two sections of S. 3591 essentially create a congressionally
mandated monopoly requiring the General Services Administration
to the USGBC's LEED rating standard for government building.
The LEED rating system discriminates against the use of
renewable wood products and plastics.
S. 3591 should include language which ensures that all
alternative rating systems are made eligible to participate in
the bill's objectives. Until other alternative rating systems
are included I believe the Louisiana forestry and chemical
industries will be adversely affected. The exclusion of wood
products and plastics in this legislation could possible harm
the recovery efforts being made post Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita.
David Vitter.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATORS JEFFORDS, LAUTENBERG, LIEBERMAN, CLINTON,
OBAMA, AND BOXER
The High-Performance Green Buildings Act of 2006 has
received wide support from many organizations, including the
American Institute of Architects, the National Association of
Realtors, the Healthy Schools Network, Center for Health,
Environment, and Justice, the U.S. Green Building Council, the
Environment and Energy Study Institute, the American Society of
Civil Engineers, and the Greenguard Environmental Institute.
At the direction of Congress through Section 609 of the
Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, The
Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-115), the General Services
Administration (GSA) was asked to report on their progress of
recognizing other building ratings systems within their
sustainable building process. To do so, GSA contracted a third
party, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), to
study available sustainable rating systems and measure how each
rating system meets the building needs of GSA. The findings of
this study were published in a July 2006 report, ``Sustainable
Building Rating Systems.''
The PNNL report does not recommend a particular rating
system to GSA, but provides a complete summary of each rating
system and its ability to address the different building
projects of GSA. In addition, a review is made on the
reliability and completeness of each rating system and its
ability to achieve an end rating that is understood and clearly
conveyed.
In a September 15, 2006, letter submitted to Congress, GSA
stated, ``Based upon the results of the study, GSA finds that
the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED rating system continues
to be the most appropriate and credible sustainable building
rating system available for evaluation of GSA projects.''
The purpose of this report is not to endorse or reject any
particular green building rating system but to provide to the
Congress and the public objective and fact based information on
currently available green building rating systems and a third
party examination of their utility and credibility for the
primary federal agency that constructs and renovates real
property for use by the government.
We believe a credible rating system is one that has been
proven, has the ability to track quantifiable aspects of
building design, is verified by trained professionals, and
enables buildings to achieve a high-performing green
certification that is easily understood and measured.
Jim Jeffords,
Frank R. Lautenberg,
Joe Lieberman,
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Barack Obama,
Barbara Boxer.