PROGRAM
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION
PROGRAM
FY 2010 ANNUAL REPORT
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report January 18, 2011
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report January 18, 2011
-------
CONTENTS
Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Highlights 3
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Energy Management and Conservation Program 7
GHG Emissions Reduction Efforts and Inventory 7
Reported Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emission Reductions 7
Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emission Reductions Without Green Power Credits 8
Reported Scope 3 GHG Emissions 9
Energy Efficiency Performance 9
Current Energy Retrofits and Capital Improvement Projects 10
EISA Section 432 Implementation—Energy Assessments 11
Renewable Energy and Green Power 14
Advanced Metering 14
Water Conservation 15
Water Conservation Retrofits and Capital Improvements 16
EISA Section 423 Implementation—Water Assessments 18
Nonpotable Water Baseline 20
Sustainable Building Design and High Performance Buildings 20
Building Sustainability Assessments 20
Building Management Plan Guidelines 21
Strategic Plans 21
GreenCheck 21
Green Building Accomplishments 22
Improving Performance of New GSA-Provided Buildings 22
ENERGY STAR® 22
On Track for the Future 23
Revision to Energy Baseline Appendix A
List of Excluded Facilities Appendix B
EPA's FY 2010 EPAct 2005 Goal Subject Building Inventory Appendix C
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report January 18, 2011
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report January 18, 2011
-------
FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2010 HIGHLIGHTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has consistently demonstrated leadership among
federal agencies in the challenge to reduce its environmental footprint and promote sustainability. In
addition to continuing to exceed federal requirements for energy and water performance, in 2010,
EPA won two Federal Energy and Water Management Awards and won jointly with the U.S.
General Services Administration (GSA) an Honorable Mention in the Workplace Innovation
category of GSA's Real Property Awards.
In FY 2010, EPA focused on meeting the new federal requirements included in Executive Order
(EO) 13514, including setting greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets and drafting its
Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan (SSPP), completing the contracting for three major energy
efficiency projects, implementing its water conservation plan, and assessing and furthering its
progress toward meeting high performance sustainable buildings requirements.
In June 2010, in accordance with the requirements of EO 13514, EPA submitted its SSPP to the
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
EPA's SSPP reiterates the Agency's plans to reduce GHG emissions, energy, water, waste, and other
resource use, and to incorporate sustainable design and operations across its facilities.
Energy Intensity Down 18.3 Percent From FY 2003
In FY 2010, EPA continued to exceed federal energy conservation requirements. The Agency's
overall energy intensity reported in FY 2010 was 317,577 British thermal units per gross square foot
(Btu/GSF), 18.3 percent lower than its FY 2003 baseline intensity (the required reduction over this
period is 15 percent), and 0.2 percent lower than its FY 2009 intensity. When green power purchases
and source energy savings credits are taken into account, the Agency actually reduced its energy
intensity 22.8 percent from the FY 2003 baseline.
In August and September 2010, EPA completed construction of Phase II, continued construction of
Phase III, and awarded a contract for construction of Phase IVA of an Infrastructure Replacement
Project at the Agency's second largest laboratory, the Andrew W. Breidenbach Environmental
Research Center (AWBERC) in Cincinnati, Ohio. The project includes replacing mechanical systems
with more efficient systems that reduce energy consumption. At the end of FY 2010, EPA awarded
contracts for the construction of a heat recovery system for its largest laboratory, New Main in
Research Triangle Park (RTF), North Carolina, which is expected to reduce energy intensity at that
facility by 7 to 9 percent when construction is completed in FY 2011. EPA also awarded contracts
for a fume hood and laboratory controls improvement project for two of four laboratory wings at
New Main.
Water Intensity Down 18.7 Percent From FY 2007
In FY 2010, EPA reported water intensity of 28.5 gallons per gross square foot (GSF), which is 8.5
percent lower than its FY 2009 water intensity, for a total reduction of 18.7 percent relative to its FY
2007 water intensity baseline. These reductions were due in part to water conservation projects at
AWBERC in Cincinnati, Ohio; the National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory (NHEERL) in RTP, North Carolina; and the Western Ecology Division (WED)
Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon. EPA's water conservation performance in FY 2010 significantly
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 3 January 18, 2011
-------
exceeds the 6 percent reduction goal from an FY 2007 baseline required by EO 13423. In FY 2010,
EPA received a Federal Energy and Water Management Award for the quality and breadth of its
water conservation program.
GHG Emissions Inventory and Progress
In January 2010, EPA submitted its Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions reduction target to CEQ and
OMB in accordance with the requirements of EO 13514. The Agency committed to reducing its
combined Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions 25 percent by FY 2020 from an FY 2008 baseline. In
addition, EPA quantified initial estimates of its baseline FY 2008 Scope 3 GHG emissions and
submitted estimates for a required subset of its overall Scope 3 GHG emissions in June 2010. The
Agency also submitted a target for reducing the required categories of Scope 3 GHG emissions by 8
percent from the FY 2008 baseline by FY 2020.
Thanks to ongoing energy efficiency projects and other efforts, EPA is on track to meet or exceed
its Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions reduction target. The Agency's purchases of green power and
renewable energy certificates (RECs) enabled EPA to report total Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions of
28,900 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) in FY 2010, resulting in a net Scope 1
and 2 GHG emissions reduction of 111,880 MTCO2e, or approximately 79.5 percent, since FY
2008.
EPA estimates its FY 2008 baseline for Scope 3 GHG emissions as 67,315 MTCO2e and its FY
2010 emissions as 68,146 MTCO2e, an increase of 1.2 percent. An unexpected increase in air travel
in FY 2010 prevented EPA from making progress toward its reduction goals, but it is anticipated
that deployment of significant new videoconferencing facilities across the Agency and a tighter travel
budget will lead to Scope 3 GHG emission reductions in FY 2011. The Agency also anticipates
meeting or exceeding its Scope 3 emissions reduction target by FY 2020.
Green Buildings Promote Guiding Principles
Using EPA's projected FY 2015 Federal Real Property Profile (FRPP) inventory, 8.2 percent (by
number of buildings) of EPA's FRPP buildings measuring greater than 5,000 square feet (as
specified in EO 13514) meet the Guiding Principles for High Performance and Sustainable buildings (Guiding
Principles). In FY 2010, EPA occupied 10 large buildings certified Gold or Silver under the U.S.
Green Building Council's (USGBC's) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for New
Construction (LEED -NC) rating system, including the sustainably renovated, historic John W.
McCormack Post Office and Courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, home of the Agency's Region 1
Office. The Agency also occupied three buildings certified Platinum or Gold under LEED for
Existing Buildings (LEED-EB) and is pursuing LEED for Commercial Interiors (LEED-CI)
certification at two more offices. Five office buildings that EPA occupies received the ENERGY
STAR® label in FY 2010, and the Agency performed sustainable building assessments at seven
laboratories in calendar year 2010. In summer 2010, EPA and GSA jointly received an Honorable
Mention in the Workplace Innovation category of GSA's Real Property Awards for the John W.
McCormack Post Office and Courthouse project.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 4 January 18, 2011
-------
Green Power Purchases Offset 100 Percent of Electricity
In FY 2010, EPA continued purchasing enough green power to offset 100 percent of its
Agencywide electricity use via delivered green power and RECs. Two major contracts, one signed in
FY 2009 and one in early FY 2010, ensured that EPA offset 100 percent of its electricity use
throughout FY 2010. The Agency also signed contracts in FY 2010 that ensure EPA will offset 100
percent of its electricity use throughout FY 2011.
Advanced Metering on Track
In FY 2010, EPA awarded construction contracts for new advanced metering hardware at six
laboratory facilities and one support building. Advanced metering hardware is now installed or under
construction to capture 61 percent of Agencywide reportable energy consumption.
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report 5 January 18, 2011
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report 6 January 18, 2011
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Energy Management and Conservation Program
FY 2010 ANNUAL REPORT
On June 2, 2010, EPA submitted to OMB and CEQ its SSPP, a comprehensive, multiyear planning
document that identifies targets for reducing Agencywide GHG emissions by FY 2020 and outlines
steps the Agency will take to achieve those reductions. Through this report, EPA outlines its strategy
for meeting the federal requirements of EO 13514 by reiterating its plans to reduce energy, water,
waste, and other resource use, and to incorporate sustainable design and operations across its
facilities. The report details Agency key priorities and strategies for achieving its plans, including
GHG emissions inventories and reduction through energy efficiency, renewable energy, and
transportation management, as well as high performance sustainable buildings, regional and local
planning, water conservation, recycling, pollution prevention, sustainable acquisition, and electronics
stewardship. EPA's SSPP is available at .
GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTION EFFORTS AND INVENTORY
On January 4, 2010, EPA submitted its initial FY 2008 Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions inventory and
its reduction target to CEQ and OMB in accordance with the requirements of EO 13514. The
Agency committed to reducing its combined Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions 25 percent by FY 2020
from an FY 2008 baseline of 140,780 MTCO^.1 EPA's long-term Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions
reduction goal is based on improving energy and transportation efficiency at its reporting
laboratories while using green power purchases as a short-term "cushion" strategy. More details on
the Agency's GHG emissions reduction strategies are available in the Agency's SSPP.
Reported Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emission Reductions
EPA's energy performance currently exceeds the reduction requirements of EO 13423 and the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), even though EPA's energy intensity has
been relatively flat in FY 2009 and FY 2010. Under CEQ guidance and generally accepted GHG
accounting principles, EPA's reported emissions reflect the benefits of green power purchases.
Because of the Agency's purchases of green power and RECs, EPA is reporting total FY 2010 Scope
1 and 2 GHG emissions of 28,900 MTCO2e, which represents a reported Scope 1 and 2 GHG
emissions reduction of 111,880 MTCO2e, or approximately 79.5 percent, since FY 2008 (see Figure
Since January 2010, EPA has refined its FY 2008 GHG emissions data. This number represents EPA's current estimate
of its combined FY 2008 Scope 1 and 2 emissions, which matches the data in the comprehensive FY 2008 GHG
emissions inventory that EPA submitted to OMB and CEQ in January 2011. EPA's estimate of its combined FY 2008
Scope 1 and 2 emissions when its reduction target was submitted in January 2010 was 140,911 MTCO2e.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 1 January 18, 2011
-------
Figure 1. Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions as Reported by EPA per CEQ Guidance, FY 2008
and FY 2010
160,000
140,000
0
g
120,000
100,000
0 80,000
(3
5
40,000
20,000
FY 200S Reported GHG Emissions
FY 2010 Reported GHG Emissions
Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emission Reductions Without Green Power Credits
Back in FY 2008, EPA had reduced its energy intensity 18.1 percent from its FY 2003 baseline, well
ahead of that year's 9 percent reduction requirement of EO 13423 and EISA. Since FY 2008, EPA's
energy reduction progress has leveled out. With construction of a heat recovery system at EPA's
New Main facility in RTP, North Carolina, under contract, and fume hood and laboratory control
upgrade projects being implemented at the same facility, and with continued energy reduction
progress at the Agency's Cincinnati, Ohio, facilities, EPA anticipates again seeing significant energy
intensity reductions in FY 2011.
EO 13514 set a new baseline year for GHG emission reductions (FY 2008), but did not change the
energy reduction baseline year (still FY 2003). Thus, the new FY 2008 baseline year for Scope 1 and
2 GHG emissions does not allow EPA to take advantage of its early energy successes between FY
2003 and FY 2008. Because EPA's energy reduction progress leveled out in FY 2009 and FY 2010,
EPA has not yet achieved Scope 1 and 2 GHG emission reductions based solely on energy intensity
reductions and must rely on green power credits for FY 2010. EPA does not expect to use green
power credits in FY 2011 to meet its Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions reduction goals.
Without the benefit of green power purchases, EPA's FY 2010 Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG
emissions increased slightly relative to the Agency's FY 2008 baseline—by 1,199 MTCO2e, or an
increase of approximately 0.9 percent. By reinvigorating its progress reducing energy intensity in FY
2011, EPA should see Scope 1 and 2 GHG emission reductions next year regardless of green power
purchases.
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report
January 18,2011
-------
Reported Scope 3 GHG Emissions
In FY 2010, EPA quantified initial estimates of its baseline FY 2008 Scope 3 GHG emissions and
identified targets for reducing them, which it submitted to CEQ and OMB on June 2, 2010.
Acknowledging that the quality of its Scope 3 GHG emissions inventory will continue to improve
over time, EPA used the best emissions data available and CEQ's Scope 3 Target Tool to develop
its emission reduction targets. Based on current estimates, the Agency plans to reduce the required
categories of Scope 3 GHG emissions 8 percent overall by FY 2020. EPA estimates its FY 2008
baseline for these emissions as 67,315 MTCO2e and its FY 2010 emissions as 68,146 MTCO2e, an
increase of 1.2 percent. As data quality continues to improve and federal GHG accounting guidance
and reporting requirements evolve, EPA anticipates including additional and likely significant
sources of Scope 3 emissions within its comprehensive GHG emissions inventory in the future.
EPA's air travel increased significantly in FY 2010 relative to FY 2008; this was not expected, and
caused an increase in the Agency's Scope 3 GHG emissions. With the installation (already
completed) of 50 new video conferencing facilities through EPA Headquarters, its 10 regional
offices, and major research centers, and smaller FY 2011 travel budgets, EPA expects to make
significant progress reducing its Scope 3 GHG emissions in FY 2011.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE
EPA FY 2010 Energy Intensity Is Down 18.3 Percent From FY 2003 Baseline I
In FY 2010, EPA's energy intensity remained relatively flat at 317,577 Btu per GSF2 (see Figure 2);
however, that figure is 18.3 percent below the FY 2003 baseline. Under EISA and EO 13423, EPA
was required to reduce its energy intensity 15 percent in FY 2010 from its FY 2003 baseline.
Extreme temperatures in both summer and winter may have affected EPA's ability to reduce its
energy intensity further in FY 2010.
Several new projects now underway will allow EPA to realize significant energy reduction progress
in FY 2011. At the end of FY 2010, EPA awarded a contract for the construction of a heat recovery
system at its largest laboratory, New Main in RTP, North Carolina. In addition, EPA awarded
contracts for an upgrade of fume hoods and controls at two of four laboratory wings at New Main.
EPA also awarded a construction contract for Phase IVA of the Infrastructure Replacement Project
(IRP) at AWBERC in Cincinnati, Ohio, which includes upgrades to the building chiller plant and
control systems. These new initiatives, along with the August 2010 completion of Phase II of
AWBERC's IRP and continued work on Phase III, are expected to produce significant energy
intensity reductions in FY 2011.
Minor historical adjustments and updates to account for small quantities of fuel consumed in emergency/backup
generators resulted in revisions to EPA's FY 2003 energy intensity baseline. See Appendix A for details.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 9 January 18, 2011
-------
Figure 2. EPA Average Energy Intensity Relative to EO 13423/EISA Target
425,000
FY 2003 Baseline: 388,561 Btu per G3F
.S 305.000
v.
£ 265,000
225. OM
Year-e fld FY 2010:317; 577 Btu per GSF
in v[> r-- oa (7h
O
O
Fiscal Year
^~ Historical Energy Intensity ^~
O
(N
^
E
o
is
iH
EO 13423/EISA
(3 I'eicent Annual Hednction)
Current Energy Retrofits and Capital Improvement Projects
In FY 2010, EPA made progress on the energy efficiency efforts listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Energy Conservation Projects Underway or Completed in FY 2010
Facility Improvements
AWBERC in Continued with multiyear IRP, including
Cincinnati, upgrading mechanical equipment such as
Ohio fans, pumps, and motors; installing high
performance variable air volume (VAV)
fume hoods; manifolding laboratory
exhaust systems; improving the air
distribution system (including ductwork
and air handling units [AHUs]); eliminating
unnecessary one-pass air; and implementing
a heat recovery system.
Savings
Once the IRP is completed, EPA projects energy
reduction of more than 41 billion Btu, or 25
percent, compared with the pre-renovation
baseline. EPA completed construction of Phase II
in August 2010. Phase III is projected to be
finished in February 2011. EPA awarded the
construction of Phase IVA in September 2010.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
10
January 18,2011
-------
Improvements
Savings
New Main in
RTF, North
Carolina
Completed design of a heat recovery
system, which covers three of four
laboratory wings, on June 30, 2010.
Awarded construction in September 2010,
with completion expected by end of FY
2011.
Completed proof of concept pilot retrofits
of fume hoods, upgraded laboratory
controls, and reduced airflow to offices.
Limited nighttime supply air reheat at New
Main, based on earlier pilot projects. Issued
contracts for fume hood and control
upgrades for two of four laboratory wings
in September 2010.
Once the heat recovery project is completed, EPA
projects energy consumption savings of nearly 28
billion Btu, or 7 to 9 percent, compared with FY
2008.
EPA expects energy savings of 14.8 billion Btu per
year, representing 4.2 percent of the facility's FY
2009 energy consumption.
Chapel Hill
Laboratory in
Chapel Hill,
North
Carolina
Terminal box calibration and building
automation system repairs.
When completed in FY 2012, EPA anticipates 2
percent energy savings compared with FY 2010
baseline.
Manifolding exhaust fans, replacing
constant volume system with VAV,
converting air handling units to VAV,
replacing fume hoods with high
performance models, and replacing existing
air flow stations.
When all projects are completed in FY 2015, EPA
anticipates 21 percent savings compared with an
FY 2009 baseline.
Atlantic
Ecology
Division
(AED) in
Narragansett,
Rhode Island
Construction of Phase I of a multiyear IRP
began in August 2010. The multiphased
project includes renovating chemical
laboratories, replacing air handlers and
mechanical and boiler systems, and
installing a new ground source heat pump
(GSHP) system.
Once the IRP is completed, EPA projects an
energy reduction of 8,274 million Btu, or 30
percent, compared with an FY 2009 baseline; the
IRP's payback period is approximately 25 years.
Construction of Phase I is expected to be
completed by the end of FY 2011. Phase 2 design
is expected to be awarded in FY 2011.
Science and
Technology
Center (STC)
in Kansas
City, Kansas
Recommissioning and O&M
improvements, including resequencing
boilers.
Completed June 2010. The facility's FY 2010
energy consumption was 3.9 percent lower than in
FY 2009.
EPA excluded one facility from energy reporting following the criteria laid out in the Federal Energy
and Management Program's (FEMP's) Guidelines for Establishing Criteria for Excluding Buildings; this
facility is listed in Appendix A.
EISA Section 432 Implementation—Energy Assessments
In FY 2010, during its second round of EISA-mandated energy assessments and recommissioning,
EPA focused on facilities (see Table 2) that represent approximately 26 percent of the total energy
use of EPA's covered facilities (based on FY 2008 data, per EISA Section 432 guidance).
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
11
January 18,2011
-------
The Agency collected information on potential energy conservation measures and compiled the
associated implementation costs, estimated annual energy savings, and estimated annual cost savings
in a comprehensive report submitted to FEMP on June 18, 2010. See Table 2 for a list of the
reported measures.3
Table 2. Potential Energy-Saving Projects From EISA Energy Assessments
Facility
Environmental Science
Center (ESC) in Fort
Meade, Maryland
Potential Projects
Installing smaller packaged boilers.
Replacing existing interior lighting fixtures.
Replacing parking lot light fixtures.
Retrofitting chiller plant and optimizing cooling towers.
Using solar hot water heating.
Projected Savings
(Approxima te)
7,587 million Btu
1,022 million Btu
245 million Btu
178 million Btu
30 million Btu
New England Regional
Laboratory in
Chelmsford,
Massachusetts
Replacing existing fume hoods with low-flow fume
hoods.
1,953 million Btu
Recovering exhaust air energy.
1,725 million Btu
Resetting static pressure.
613 million Btu
Installing a dry cooler to supplement the process chiller.
134 million Btu
Using solar hot water heating.
31 million Btu
Gulf Ecology Division
(GED) in Gulf Breeze,
Florida
Upgrading the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
PVAC) to a VAV system.
1,338 million Btu
Replacing a chiller and retrofitting its controls.
604 million Btu
Replacing existing fume hoods with low-flow VAV
fume hoods.
542 million Btu
Replacing windows.
72 million Btu
Retrofitting penthouse conditioning.
37 million Btu
Adjusting exhaust fans.
37 million Btu
Insulating laboratory ceilings.
35 million Btu
Using solar hot water heating.
31 million Btu
National Exposure
Research Laboratory in
Athens, Georgia
Implementing VAV controls conversion.
2,387 million Btu
Reducing airflow in the administrative and server
rooms.
478 million Btu
Improving the chiller plant controls and operations.
223 million Btu
3 Because of temporary heating and cooling needs from initiating a new IRP at EPA's AED Laboratory in Narragansett,
Rhode Island, the EISA findings for AED report an energy use increase. When the IRP is completed in FY 2015, it is
projected to save 8,274 million Btu, or 30 percent, compared with a pre-project baseline.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
12
January 18,2011
-------
Facility
Potential Projects
Projected Savings
(Approximate)
STC in Kansas City,
Kansas
Implementing a laboratory nighttime setback.
Installing laboratory occupancy sensors.
Installing a primary condensing boiler.
Installing burner controls in boiler plant.
Installing variable frequency drives (VFDs) on primary
chillers.
Resetting chilled water and hot water loads.
Resetting the zone supply air temperature.
Installing a water-side economizer.
993 million Btu
806 million Btu
453 million Btu
421 million Btu
491 million Btu
223 million Btu
164 million Btu
58 million Btu
National Vehicle and
Fuel Emissions
Laboratory (NVFEL) in
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Replacing lighting fixtures, installing occupancy sensors
and automated lighting controls, and increasing
daylighting.
447 million Btu
AWBERC in Cincinnati,
Ohio
Improving the air distribution system (including
ductwork and AHUs); rezoning office and laboratory
space to eliminate unnecessary one-pass air; and
implementing a heat recovery system (These are the
energy-saving measures of Phase III of AWBERC's
ongoing multiyear IRP. For details, see Table 1 on page
10).
9,675 million Btu
EPA also began its third round of EISA energy assessments and recommissioning in fall 2010. For
the round of EISA assessments to be reported in June 2011, the Agency plans to perform energy
assessments and recommissioning of the High Bay facility and Building D at New Main in RTP,
North Carolina; AWBERC in Cincinnati, Ohio; the WED Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon; the
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center in Ada, Oklahoma; the Region 6 Laboratory in
Houston, Texas; and the National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) in
Montgomery, Alabama.
The EISA assessments EPA will report in June 2011 collectively represent nearly 23 percent of the
energy use of the Agency's covered facilities (based on FY 2008 data, per EISA Section 432
guidance). EPA will assess non-EISA-covered facilities in FY 2011, including the Agency's National
Exposure Research Laboratory and Radiation and Indoor Environments National Laboratory, both
in Las Vegas, Nevada, and the Large Lakes Research Station in Grosse He, Michigan, reflecting
EPA's policy that no major facility will be excluded from EISA energy and water assessment and re-
commissioning work.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
13
January 18,2011
-------
Renewable Energy and Green Power
EPA Remains at 100 Percent Green Power, Completes Two Solar Projects
For more than a decade, EPA has been a leader among federal agencies in supporting the renewable
energy market through its green power purchasing program. In FY 2010, EPA continued offsetting
100 percent of the estimated Agencywide electricity use at its 175 facilities across the country with
delivered green power and RECs, as it has done since FY 2006. With the added benefit of unusually
low REG prices last year, EPA finalized a contract for 130 million kilowatt hours (kWh) of RECs in
June 2009 and signed an additional contract in November 2009 for 142.8 million kWh of RECs.
These two major contracts support renewable energy generation from wind, landfill gas, and
biomass resources in six states. Combined with five existing contracts, these green power purchases
provided more than 287 million kWh of RECs and delivered green power to offset 100 percent of
the Agency's electricity use throughout FY 2010. Looking ahead to FY 2011, EPA also procured
green power contracts to purchase 257 million kWh of RECs, which, combined with three
additional contracts, will ensure that EPA continues offsetting 100 percent of that year's
Agencywide estimated electricity use.
Generally accepted GHG accounting principles allow EPA to benefit from its green power
purchases when it reports its Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions. Even though EPA plans to achieve its
FY 2020 goal of a 25 percent reduction in GHG Scope 1 and 2 emissions through energy reductions
alone, the Agency will continue to purchase green power as an additional method of reducing its
reported GHG emissions and promoting the development of green power markets. In FY 2010,
EPA's green power purchases helped EPA achieve its 79.5 percent reduction in its reported Scope 1
and 2 GHG emissions.
In April 2010, EPA installed a new 52.5 kilowatt (kW) polycrystalline photovoltaic (PV) system on
the roof of Building B of the New Main campus in RTP, North Carolina. EPA used energy cost
savings realized through completed energy conservation projects to fund the project. Building B
draws directly from this power source, reducing the facility's demand for grid-delivered electricity. In
the same month, Duke Power installed and began operating a 476-panel, 169 kW PV system on the
roof of EPA's First Environments Early Learning Center (FEELC) in RTP, North Carolina,
covering 13,000 square feet of roof. In summer 2010, EPA installed a sonic anemometer in the
Building C plaza at New Main and subsequently collected wind speed and directional data through
fall 2010. This data collection will inform a feasibility study of a vertical wind turbine at this location.
In addition, EPA is managing a competitive procurement for a power purchase agreement (PPA),
which will include a large PV array, at the Region 2 Laboratory in Edison, New Jersey.
Advanced Metering
Advanced Metering Hardware Is Installed or Under Construction to
Capture 61 Percent of Agencywide Reportable Energy Consumption
EPA is well positioned to exceed the advanced metering requirements included in EISA and the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), which specify advanced metering for electricity, steam,
and natural gas. EPA's strategy calls for advanced metering to be implemented for all energy utilities
and domestic water where it is cost-effective to do so.
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report 14 January 18, 2011
-------
In FY 2010, EPA awarded construction contracts for new advanced metering hardware at six
laboratory facilities and one support building, which include the following:
o ESC in Fort Meade, Maryland
o AWBERC in Cincinnati, Ohio4
o Testing and Evaluation Center in Cincinnati, Ohio
o Center Hill Facility in Cincinnati, Ohio
o New Main Building in RTF, North Carolina5
o Chapel Hill Laboratory in Chapel Hill, North Carolina
o FEELC in RTF, North Carolina
By the end of FY 2010, EPA was capturing approximately 46 percent of its Agencywide reportable
energy consumption with advanced metering hardware. New construction contracts are in place, and
construction is underway to capture an additional 14.9 percent of Agencywide reportable energy
consumption with advanced metering hardware. EPA also worked to improve the core functionality
of its national advanced metering software system during FY 2010 and began developing a critical
data quality module to ensure accurate collection and reporting of data transmitted from advanced
metering hardware installed in the field.
WATER CONSERVATION
EPA Reduces FY 2010 Water Intensity 18.7 Percent From FY 2007
Despite starting with a low 35.0 gallons per GSF baseline in FY 2007, EPA continued to reduce its
water intensity in FY 2010, achieving an intensity of 28.5 gallons per GSF. This represents a
reduction of 8.5 percent compared with FY 2009 for a total 18.7 percent reduction compared with
the FY 2007 baseline (see Figure 3), greatly surpassing the 6 percent required federal reduction.
Water conservation efforts in FY 2010 were guided by the Agency's Water Conservation Strategy,
discussed in the Agency's SSPP.
The Agency's second-largest facility, AWBERC in Cincinnati, Ohio, dropped water use by 16.6
percent compared to FY 2009 after installing new steam sterilizer retrofit kits, a control flash tank
sensor, dry vacuum pump seal, and high-efficiency restroom fixtures. Water use at the NHEERL in
RTP, North Carolina, fell 14.9 percent compared with FY 2009 after the facility took a single-pass
cooling electron microscope offline. At the WED Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon, high-efficiency
replacements for toilets, urinals, and faucets over the past few years and optimization of irrigation
equipment helped the facility lower its water use 37.7 percent compared with FY 2009.
4 EPA previously completed the installation of advanced meters at AWBERC for electricity and natural gas in early FY
2009; in FY 2010, EPA awarded a contract for the installation of additional advanced metering at AWBERC for fuel oil
and domestic water.
5 EPA previously completed the installation of advanced meters at New Main for electricity, chilled water, high-
temperature hot water, and domestic water in early FY 2006; in FY 2010, EPA awarded a contract for the installation of
advanced metering for additional electricity feeds and natural gas at New Main.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 15 January 18, 2011
-------
Figure 3. EPA Water Intensity Relative to EO 13514 Target
-^ 40
I
C
5
FY 2007 Baseline: 35.0 Gallons perGSF
30-
25
5
JS 20
15
Year -end FV" 2010:
23.5 Gallons per GSF
IA ^5
f5 ri
Fiscal Year
Historical Water Intensity EO l3514 Tariet
(2 Percent Annual Reduction)
Water Conservation Retrofits and Capital Improvements
EPA continued or completed many water conservation projects in FY 2010, as listed in Table 3.
EPA has started construction of a condensate recovery system at its New Main laboratory in RTP,
North Carolina, that is expected to provide approximately 8 million gallons of cool reclaimed
condensate to a cooling tower complex on an adjacent federally owned property. EPA completed
construction of condensate collection systems in its New Main facilities and funded construction of
a pipe to carry the condensate to the receiving facility in fall 2010.
Table 3. Water-Saving Projects by Technology
Facility
Project
Expected
Savings
(Approximate)
Status
Optimizing Cooling Tower Operations
NAREL in
Montgomery, Alabama
Adjusted the cooling tower blowdown line and basin
overflow drain to improve efficiency.
1 million
gallons per year
Completed
March 2010.
Installing Condensate Recovery Systems
New Mam in RTP,
North Carolina
Collecting condensate and routing it to the cooling
towers at the central utility plant (CUP) that serves
New Main.
8 million
gallons per year
(when
complete)
Under
construction;
completion
expected in
FY2011.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
16
January 18,2011
-------
Facility
Project
Expected
Savings
(Approximate)
Status
NAREL in
Montgomery, Alabama
ESC in Fort Meade,
Maryland
Completed a project in late FY 2010 to collect
condensate from air handling units throughout the
building and route it to the cooling tower for make-
up water.
Redirected clean steam condensate to the boiler
system, reducing potable water needs for the boiler
system.
740,000 gallons
per year
600,000 gallons
per year
Completed
September
2010.
Completed
December
2009.
Achieving Landscape Irrigation Reductions
Robert S. Kerr
Environmental
Research Center in
Ada, Oklahoma
WED Laboratory in
Corvallis, Oregon
Optimized irrigation system by implementing
recommendations provided by irrigation
professionals certified by a WaterSense® labeled
program.
Optimizing irrigation system by implementing
recommendations provided by irrigation
professionals certified by a WaterSense labeled
program.
400,000 gallons
per year
250,000 gallons
per year
Completed
June 2010.
Ongoing.
Eliminating Single-Pass Cooling
NHEERL in RTF,
North Carolina
Eliminated the use of single-pass cooling in a
laboratory electron microscope.
530,000 gallons
per year
Completed
June 2010.
Controlling Tempering Water Flow
AWBERC in
Cincinnati, Ohio
New Main in RTF,
North Carolina
Region 2 Laboratory in
Edison, New Jersey
Chapel Hill Laboratory
in Chapel Hill, North
Carolina
Installed a new temperature sensor in the boiler flash
tank discharge line that allows tempering water to
flow only when the flash tank is discharging instead
of continuously.
Adjusted/reduced tempering water flow to boiler
blowdown drain.
Installed a temperature sensor in one steam sterilizer
discharge line and a solenoid valve to allow tempering
water to flow only when the temperature sensor
indicates it is necessary, instead of continuously.
Retrofitted steam sterilizers to control tempering
water flow when the units are in standby mode.
750,000 gallons
per year
400,000 gallons
per year
450,000 gallons
per year
240,000 gallons
per year
Completed
June 2010.
Completed
June 2010.
Completed
March 2010.
Completed
August 2010.
Replacing Sanitary Fixtures
NAREL in
Montgomery, Alabama
Upgraded toilets and urinals with high-efficiency
models.
Replaced or retrofitted lavatory faucets.
81,000 gallons
per year
14,000 gallons
per year
Completed
December
2009.
Completed
December
2009.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
17
January 18,2011
-------
Facility
Project
Expected
Savings
(Approxima te)
Status
AWBERC in
Cincinnati, Ohio
National Computer
Center (NCC) in RTF,
North Carolina
Region 2 Laboratory in
Edison, New Jersey
Completed replacement of some older toilets and
urinals in its main building in FY 2010 with high-
efficiency models. (The remainder of the restrooms in
the 10-story building will be renovated as funding is
available, and are expected to save an additional 1.8
million gallons per year. Restroom retrofits at
AWBERC are 25 percent complete as of FY 2010.)
Replaced or retrofitted lavatory faucets.
Replaced or retrofitted lavatory faucets.
210,000 gallons
per year
57,000 gallons
per year
133,000 gallons
per year
Completed
March 2010.
Completed
December
2009.
Completed
March 2010.
Other
National Institute of
Environmental Health
Sciences in RTF,
North Carolina
AWBERC in
Cincinnati, Ohio
NAREL in
Montgomery, Alabama
NAREL in
Montgomery, Alabama
Working with National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences (co-located on the RTF campus) to
capture cooling tower blowdown at the CUP, treat it
with reverse osmosis, and reuse it as cooling tower
make-up water.
Replaced liquid-ring vacuum pump, which was
nearing the end of its 35-year life, with a new pump
that uses claw technology to create its vacuum
without any liquid.
Improved float-operated switches associated with the
vacuum pump.
Modified the reverse osmosis system so that it only
runs when there is a demand for purified water.
2.4 million
gallons per year
(when
complete)
200,000 gallons
per year
140,000 gallons
per year
200,000 gallons
per year
Under
construction.
Completed
March 2010.
Completed
April 2010.
Completed
April 2010.
Total Water Savings From Projects Completed and Underway in FY 2010
\^^^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~
Total water savings from projects completed in FY 2010
Total anticipated water savings from projects underway but not completed in FY '2010
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
6.1 million gallons
10.7 million gallons
EISA Section 423 Implementation—Water Assessments
Per EISA requirements, in FY 2010 EPA reported potential water projects identified during EISA
water assessments at seven facilities and updated those facilities' water management plans and
facility-specific reduction targets. EPA reported the potential water-saving projects from these
assessments (described in Table 4) to FEMP on June 18, 2010, and is working with facility managers
to implement or analyze the following projects for feasibility and cost-effectiveness.
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report
18
January 18,2011
-------
Table 4. Potential Water-Saving Projects From EISA Water Assessments
Facility Potential Projects Projected Savings (Approximate)
ESC in Fort
Meade,
Maryland
New England
Regional
Laboratory in
Chelmsford,
Massachusetts
GED in Gulf
Breeze,
Florida
National
Exposure
Research
Laboratory in
Athens,
Georgia
STCm
Kansas City,
Kansas
NVFEL in
Ann Arbor,
Michigan
AEDm
Narragansett,
Rhode Island
Replacing urinals with WaterSense labeled
models.
Recover air handler condensate recovery and
reuse as cooling tower make-up water.
Replace urinals with WaterSense labeled
models.
Recover air handler condensate and reuse as
cooling tower make-up water.
Maximize cooling tower cycles of
concentration.
Replace older toilets with high-efficiency,
dual-flush models.
Replace urinals with WaterSense labeled
models.
Retrofit faucets to flow at 0.5 gallons per
minute (gpm).
Retrofit 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf) toilets with
dual-flush fixtures.
Replace toilets with high-efficiency models.
Replace urinals with WaterSense labeled
models.
Retrofit faucets to flow at 0.5 gpm.
Make adjustments to the graywater system
based on recommissioning.
Reroute collected air handler condensate
directly to the cooling tower.
Maximize cooling tower cycles of
concentration.
Retrofit faucets to flow at 0.5 gpm.
Recover air handler condensate recovery and
reuse as cooling tower make-up water.
Route reverse osmosis concentrate to the
cooling tower to be used as make-up water.
Recover air handler condensate and reuse as
cooling tower make-up water.
Collect rainwater to use for green roof
irrigation.
50,000 gallons per year
170,000 gallons per year
14,000 gallons per year
960,000 gallons per year
190,000 gallons per year
78,000 gallons per year
55,000 gallons per year
40,000 gallons per year
6,000 gallons per year
137,000 gallons per year
84,000 gallons per year
13,000 gallons per year
600,000 gallons per year
137,000 gallons per year
117,000 gallons per year
14,000 gallons per year
100,000 gallons per year
76,000 gallons per year
170,000 gallons per year
2,000 gallons per year
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report
19
January 18,2011
-------
Nonpotable Water Baseline
EO 13514 set new requirements for reducing industrial, landscaping, and agricultural water use by 2
percent per year compared with an FY 2010 baseline, even if the water used for these purposes is
nonpotable, fresh water. Seven EPA facilities use nonpotable water from sources such as lakes,
creeks, and wells for purposes such as irrigation, agricultural research, and process cooling. To help
meet this requirement, EPA created a baseline development plan. Using that plan, the Agency was
able to estimate its industrial, landscaping, and agricultural water use baseline at seven facilities
where nonpotable water is used for these purposes as 216,719,276 gallons for FY 2010. (EPA may
revise this figure when CEQ releases baseline calculation guidance, expected in March 2011.) Using
best practices, recommending equipment upgrades, and working with research scientists to increase
efficiency, EPA intends to implement projects at these facilities in FY 2011 to help the Agency meet
EO 13514's nonpotable water reduction requirement. During the ongoing water assessment process,
EPA will identify additional measures to help meet these new EO 13514 goals. EPA plans to begin
design of a project to significantly reduce nonpotable water use at WED in Corvallis, Oregon—the
Agency's largest source of nonpotable water use—in FY 2011.
SUSTAINABLE BUILDING DESIGN AND HIGH PERFORMANCE
BUILDINGS
8.2 Percent of EPA's Projected FY2015 FRPP Meets Guiding Principles;
Agency Is More Than Halfway to 15 Percent by FY 2015 Requirement
Although the Agency occupies approximately 11 million square feet of space, EPA's FRPP
inventory—EPA-owned or EPA direct leased facilities—consists of just 4 million square feet of
space in 49 buildings at 18 Agency locations. EO 13514 requires 15 percent of these buildings (by
number of buildings) to meet the Guiding Principles for High Performance Sustainable Buildings (Guiding
Principles) by FY 20156. At the end of FY 2010, 8.2 percent of the buildings in EPA's projected FY
2015 FRPP inventory, or four buildings out of 49 total buildings, meet the Guiding Principles.
GSA provides EPA with the remaining 7 million square feet of laboratory, office, and support space,
either in GSA-owned facilities or in facilities leased by GSA from private owners. For new major
lease acquisitions, GSA is required to acquire high performance sustainable buildings for EPA. EPA
has developed a variety of strategies and tools to help GSA meet these objectives. More details on
these strategies are available below and in the Agency's SSPP.
Building Sustainability Assessments
Beginning in FY 2009, OMB and the Office of the Federal Environmental Executive (OFEE)
required sustainable building assessments to evaluate FRPP facilities against the Guiding Principles. In
FY 2010, EPA performed assessments at the following facilities:
o Gulf Ecology Division Laboratory—Gulf Breeze, Florida
o NAREL—Montgomery, Alabama
o National Exposure Research Laboratory—Athens, Georgia
EO 13514 specifies that buildings under 5,000 GSF are excluded from this requirement.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 20 January 18, 2011
-------
o STC—Kansas City, Kansas
o NVFEL—Ann Arbor, Michigan
o AED Laboratory—Narragansett, Rhode Island
o Large Lakes Research Station—Grosse He, Michigan
The assessments focused on how each facility employs integrated operations and maintenance
(O&M) principles, optimizes energy performance, protects and conserves water, enhances indoor
environmental quality, and reduces the environmental impact of materials. EPA's assessment team
determined that the seven facilities assessed in FY 2010 have been proactive in their approaches to
sustainability and are already meeting many of the Guiding Principles. The team identified
opportunities for improvement, including developing comprehensive building O&M plans, moisture
control strategies, and phaseout plans for ozone-depleting compounds, and creating procurement
policies to track the selection of low-emitting materials, recycled content, and biobased content. At
the end of FY 2010, EPA had conducted sustainability assessments covering 31 buildings greater
than 5,000 GSF, representing 76.3 percent of the Agency's projected FY 2015 FRPP inventory by
GSF and 61.2 percent by number of buildings.
Building Management Plan Guidelines
The results of the building sustainability assessments indicated that EPA facility managers and staff
would benefit from the issuance of Agencywide guidance for developing a building management
plan. As a result, in FY 2010, EPA developed Building Management Plan Guidelines (BMPG), a
comprehensive set of sustainable building management practices for both EPA-owned and GSA-
owned or GSA-leased facilities. The BMPG will be used to help facilities assess and update their
existing plans or develop new plans that meet the requirements of the Guiding Principles, as well as
develop sustainable O&M and janitorial contract language.
EPA is working with three of its laboratories to pilot the BMPG as it works to bring these facilities
up to the high performance sustainable building standards called for in the Guiding Principles; those
facilities include NVFEL in Ann Arbor, Michigan; ESC in Fort Meade, Maryland; and the Large
Lakes Research Station in Grosse He, Minnesota. EPA will solicit feedback on the BMPG from
these facilities as the process moves forward, leveraging the "on-the-ground" experience of the
facility managers to efficiently turn policy into practice. Based on the feedback received from the
initial pilots, EPA will refine the BMPG and implementation approach, as necessary, for use at
additional facilities.
Strategic Plans
In FY 2010, EPA continued to refine its Sustainable Buildings Implementation Plan (SBIP) to
reflect EO 13514 requirements. EPA included the most current version of the SBIP with the
Agency's SSPP submission in June 2010. EPA also revised its Strategy for Meeting the Guiding Principles
in 15 Percent of Existing Buildings by FiscalYear 2015 in December 2009.
GreenCheck
GreenCheck is a process EPA uses to formally identify environmental performance goals for each
new EPA facility, significant construction project, and lease of EPA-occupied space. These goals
include meeting the requirements of EO 13514, the Guiding Principles, EISA, EO 13423, and EPAct
2005, as well as the Agency's own policies as reflected in its Best Practice (Environmental) Lease
Provisions and updated Architecture and Engineering Guidelines.
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 21 January 18, 2011
-------
In June 2010, EPA updated the GreenCheck form to reflect EO 13514 requirements and
commitments made in the Agency's SSPP. Approximately 50 EPA construction projects and lease
actions were screened through the GreenCheck process in FY 2010, and all projects requiring
funding in excess of $85,000, affecting at least 5,000 GSF, or increasing impervious area by more
than 5,000 GSF qualified for and underwent a full GreenCheck review.
Green Building Accomplishments
Even in non-FRPP buildings, EPA works with GSA to achieve sustainability. In December 2009,
EPA completed moving its Region 1 Office into GSA's historic, recently renovated John W.
McCormack Post Office and Courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, which was certified LEED-NC
Gold in June 2010. EPA worked in partnership with GSA for nearly 10 years to complete this
project, and in summer 2010 the Agencies received an Honorable Mention in the Workplace
Innovation category of GSA's Real Property Awards for their joint efforts. In November 2009, Park
Place, the office building in downtown Seattle where EPA's Region 10 has its offices, received
LEED-EB Platinum certification. Because of these certifications and the Agency's historic
commitment to green buildings, in FY 2010 EPA occupied 10 buildings certified LEED-NC Gold
or Silver and three buildings certified Platinum or Gold under LEED-EB. EPA is also pursuing
LEED-CI certification at its Region 10 Office in Seattle, Washington, which consists of 172,320
GSF of space, and its new office in Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, which consists of 21,620 GSF of space.
Improving Performance of New GSA-Provided Buildings
EPA compiles Best Practice (Environmental) Lease Provisions in a standard GSA Solicitation for
Offer (SFO) format, which it uses to develop new lease solicitations that work to ensure compliance
with EO 13514, the Guiding Principles, EISA, EO 13423, and EPAct 2005. In FY 2010, EPA
developed a green market survey to supplement GSA's customary market research for lease
procurements. Using the survey, GSA gathers information on existing building energy performance,
LEED certifications, water use, green cleaning, and other environmental factors. Working with
GSA, EPA then uses the results of these surveys to understand the regional green building market
and tailor the SFO to acquire the greenest building possible while also ensuring adequate market
competition. Two EPA regional office building leases are ending: the Region 7 Office in Kansas
City, Kansas, and the Region 9 Office in San Francisco, California. The Best Practice
(Environmental) Lease Provisions and the green market survey are being used in the competitive
acquisition processes for these buildings.
ENERGY STAR®
In addition to requiring all new major office leases to obtain the ENERGY STAR label for buildings
after their first year of operation, EPA recently included a requirement in all new leases for major
office buildings to achieve the ENERGY STAR label every three years where market conditions
make doing so feasible. EPA's goal is for all its regional office buildings to be ENERGY STAR
labeled; currently, nine of 10 regional offices plus EPA's Potomac Yard One Headquarters satellite
building qualify for the ENERGY STAR label. EPA buildings that achieved or renewed ENERGY
STAR labels in late FY 2009 and FY 2010 include:
o Potomac Yard One EPA Headquarters Building—Arlington, Virginia
o Region 3 Office—Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
o Region 4 Office—Atlanta, Georgia
EPA FY 2010 Annual Energy and Water Report 22 January 18, 2011
-------
o Region 6 Office—Dallas, Texas
o Region 9 Office—San Francisco, California
ON TRACK FOR THE FUTURE
EPA is constantly working to improve its efforts to be a model of sustainability for other federal
agencies. In FY 2011, the Agency will continue to focus on improving its GHG emissions
inventories and reducing its GHG emissions. EPA will continue to pursue new energy efficiency
projects and complete ongoing ones, leading to reductions in energy intensity as well as GHG
emissions. These efforts, together with projects in areas such as green power, water conservation,
green buildings, and advanced metering, will continue EPA's leadership among federal agencies in
the challenge to reduce the environmental impact of its facilities and operations and promote
sustainability. For further data on the Agency's FY 2010 environmental performance, consult the
U.S. Department of Energy's Annual GHG and Sustainability Data Report.
EPA FY 2010 Annual'Energy and Water Report 23 January 18, 2011
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
Appendix A:
Revision to Energy Baseline
For Submittal With EPA's
Energy Management and Conservation Program
FY 2010 Annual Report
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
FY 2003 ENERGY DATA BASELINE WORKSHEET - EXISTING ON RECORD
Agency:
Date:
EPA
12/15/2009
Prepared by:
Phone:
Evan Snyder
202-564-0358
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13123 REPORTING CATEGORIES
1-1. Standard Buildings/Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Standard Buildings/Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
1-2. Industrial, Laboratory, Research, and Other Energy-Intensive Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Energy-Intensive Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,543.2
525.4
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site- Delivered Btu
(Billion)
455.6
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,442.5
388,400
1-3. Exempt Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Exempt Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
ENERGY POLICY ACT 2005 REPORTING CATEGORIES
EPACT Goal-Subject Buildings/Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
EPACT Goal Buildings/Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,543.2
525.4
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
455.6
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,442.5
388,400
EPACT Excluded Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
EPACT Excluded Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site- Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
ALL FACILITIES COMBINED
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S.Ton
BBtu
BBtu
All Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,543.2
525.4
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
455.6
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,442.5
388,400
-------
FY 2003 ENERGY DATA BASELINE WORKSHEET - REVISED BASELINE
Agency:
Date:
EPA
12/29/2010
Prepared by:
Phone:
Evan Snyder
202-564-0358
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13123 REPORTING CATEGORIES
1-1. Standard Buildings/Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Standard Buildings/Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
1-2. Industrial, Laboratory, Research, and Other Energy-Intensive Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Energy-Intensive Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,707.1
525.7
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
456.2
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,443.1
388,561
1-3. Exempt Facil ties
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
Exempt Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
ENERGY POLICY ACT 2005 REPORTING CATEGORIES
EPACT Goal-Subject Buildings/Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
EPACT Goal Buildings/Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,707.1
525.7
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
456.2
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,443.1
388,561
EPACT Excluded Facilities
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
EPACT Excluded Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total Costs:
0.0
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.0
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#DIV/0!
ALL FACILITIES COMBINED
Energy
Type
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Natural Gas
LPG/Propane
Coal
Purch. Steam
Other
Consumption
Units
MWH
Thou. Gal.
Thou. Cubic Ft.
Thou. Gal.
S. Ton
BBtu
BBtu
All Facilities
(Thou. Gross Square Feet)
Annual
Consumption
133,707.1
525.7
354,470.0
9.8
0.0
13.1
534.5
Total Costs:
3,713.9
Annual Cost
(Thou. $)
$7,844.1
$513.9
$2,604.7
$18.3
$0.0
$526.1
$5,257.8
$16,764.8
Btu/GSF:
Site-Delivered Btu
(Billion)
456.2
72.9
365.5
0.9
0.0
13.1
534.5
1,443.1
388,561
-------
Appendix B:
List of Excluded Facilities
For Submittal With EPA's
Energy Management and Conservation Program
FY 2010 Annual Report
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
APPENDIX B - LIST OF EXCLUDED FACILITIES
Table B-l. List of Excluded Facilities
Facility Explanation
Research A research vessel based out of MED in Duluth, Minnesota, consumes
Vessel, Mid- energy when it is docked; this is known as "cold iron energy." FEMP's
Continent Guidelines for Establishing Criteria for Excluding Buildings, dated January 27,
Ecology 2006, states that "Federal ships that consume 'Cold Iron Energy'
Division (energy used to supply power and heat to ships docked in port)," are
Laboratory "assumed to already be excluded from the energy performance
(MED), requirements of Section 543" of EPAct 2005. Therefore, EPA is
Duluth, reporting the energy consumed by this vessel in FY 2010 in the Energy
Minnesota Goal Excluded category of the GHG and Sustainability Data Report
accompanying this narrative. The energy consumed by this vessel was,
however, included in the Agency's Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions
calculations per the EO 13514 Federal Greenhouse Gas Accounting and
Reporting Guidance.
FY 2010 Energy
Consumption
58,673 kWh
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
Appendix C:
EPA's FY 2010 EPAct 2005 Goal
Subject Building Inventory
For Submittal With EPA's
Energy Management and Conservation Program
FY 2010 Annual Report
-------
This Page Intentionally Blank
-------
APPENDIX C - EPA's FY 2010 EPAcT 2005 GOAL SUBJECT BUILDING
INVENTORY
Table C-l. EPA's FY 2010 EPAct 2005 Goal Subject Building Inventory1
Facility Name
Location
Site Energy
Manager
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Science and Ecosystem Support Division Laboratory
New England Regional Laboratory
Andrew W. Breidenbach Environmental Research Center
Test and Evaluation Facility
Center Hill Test and Evaluation Facility
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Western Ecology Division
Willamette Research Station
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division
Region 2 Laboratory
Environmental Science Center
Region 8 Laboratory
Large Lakes Research Station
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division
Region 6 Environmental Laboratory
Kansas City Science and Technology Center
University of Nevada, Las Vegas,
On-Campus EPA Facilities
Region 10 Laboratory
National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory
Ada, Oklahoma
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Athens, Georgia
Athens, Georgia
Chelmsford,
Massachusetts
Cincinnati, Ohio
Cincinnati, Ohio
Cincinnati, Ohio
Corvallis, Oregon
Corvallis, Oregon
Duluth, Minnesota
Edison, New Jersey
Fort Meade,
Maryland
Golden, Colorado
Grosse He, Michigan
Gulf Breeze, Florida
Houston, Texas
Kansas City, Kansas
Las Vegas, Nevada
Manchester,
Washington
Montgomery,
Alabama
Frank Price
Steven Dorer
Rick Pittman
Betty Kinney
Bob Beane
Rich Koch
Rich Koch
Rich Koch
Primo Knight
Primo Knight
Rod Booth
Joseph Pernice
Rick Dreisch
Craig Greenwell
Rod Booth
Clay Peacher
L.C. Miner
John Begley
Robert Andrews
Linda Donahue
Mike Clark/
Jonanthan Aplin
-------
Facility Name Location
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Atlantic Ecology Division
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Western Ecology Division
New Consolidated Facility
New Computer Center
National Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory
Chapel Hill Laboratory
New Page Road
Central Regional Laboratory
Narragansett, Rhode Island
Newport, Oregon
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina
Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina
Richmond, California
Site Energy
Manager
Russ Ahlgren
Primo Knight
Sam Pagan
Sam Pagan
Sam Pagan
Sam Pagan
Sam Pagan
Jennifer Mann
1 EPA is required to report to DOE and OMB the energy use at facilities for which the Agency pays utility bills.
Although EPA occupies other facilities, utility expenses for those facilities are paid by GSA.
------- |