The GBAC Green Building Certification System Review briefing meeting, held on August 13, 2024, was a comprehensive discussion on the current status and future directions of green building certification within the federal sector. The meeting comprised various stakeholders, including task group members, observers, and GSA attendees. The primary focus was on evaluating existing green building certification systems and their alignment with federal criteria, as well as exploring future directions and recommendations for certification systems.
Opening remarks were provided by Michael Bloom, the Designated Federal Official for GBAC, who emphasized the importance of adhering to the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This act governs the operation of advisory committees, ensuring transparency, public involvement, and accurate reporting. Members were reminded to adhere to Zoom meeting protocols to facilitate a smooth discussion.
Overview of the Green Building Certification System Review
The Mandate of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007
Bryan Steverson from GSA delivered an insightful presentation on the Green Building Certification System (GBCS) Review. The presentation outlined the process mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, which requires GSA to assess and recommend appropriate green building certification systems every five years. The goal is to identify a certification system that encourages comprehensive and environmentally sound building practices within the federal sector. Once GSA makes its recommendations, the Department of Energy (DOE) publishes a regulatory rule specifying which systems federal agencies can use.
Understanding the EISA mandate is essential because it sets the framework for continuous evaluation and improvement of green building standards in federal projects. This legislation aims to drive sustainability by ensuring that best practices evolve alongside technological advancements and environmental priorities. The review spans various aspects such as energy efficiency, water conservation, materials usage, and indoor environmental quality, which are critical in developing and maintaining high-performing buildings.
Key Aspects of Green Building Certification Systems
Green building certification systems are vital tools for evaluating and measuring the sustainability of building design, construction, and operations. They cover various elements such as siting, energy efficiency, water conservation, materials use, and indoor environmental quality. Certification systems not only reward compliance with sustainability standards but also help verify conformance to federal building performance requirements. Although federal agencies are not required to use these systems, those that do must ensure the system meets the criteria outlined in the 2014 DOE Final Rule.
These systems offer a structured approach to achieving green building goals, making it easier for federal agencies to adopt sustainable practices. The comprehensive nature of these certifications means they address the entire lifecycle of a building, from design through construction to operation and maintenance. By employing these systems, agencies can set benchmarks, track progress, and demonstrate their commitment to environmental stewardship. This not only benefits the environment but also results in operational efficiencies and enhanced occupant well-being.
Criteria Under the 2014 DOE Final Rule
Independent Verification and Consensus-Based Development
The 2014 DOE Final Rule outlines several criteria that green building certification systems must meet. One of the primary criteria is independent verification, ensuring that the system’s criteria are verified independently. Another crucial criterion is consensus-based development, which involves a process that allows public input and consensus in the development and revisions of the certification system.
Independent verification is crucial to maintaining the integrity and credibility of certification systems. It ensures that buildings genuinely meet the specified standards rather than relying on self-assessments or internal audits. Consensus-based development, on the other hand, ensures that the standards reflect broad industry agreement and incorporate diverse perspectives. This inclusive approach helps create standards that are both robust and adaptable to varying needs across the federal sector.
National Recognition and Periodic Evaluation
The certification system must be recognized nationally within the building industry. Additionally, there must be a regular assessment of the environmental and energy benefits of the system. This periodic evaluation ensures that the certification system remains relevant and effective in promoting sustainable building practices. National recognition signifies that the system is trusted and utilized across the industry, enhancing its applicability and acceptance.
Periodic evaluation is essential for keeping the certification systems up-to-date with the latest advancements in building technology and sustainability practices. It involves reviewing performance metrics, gathering feedback, and making necessary adjustments. This iterative process helps ensure that the systems continue to drive improvement and meet evolving environmental goals. It also provides an opportunity to incorporate new findings, address any shortcomings, and enhance the overall effectiveness of the certification criteria.
Post-Occupancy Verification
Inclusion of a system to verify performance post-occupancy is another essential criterion. This ensures that the building continues to meet the sustainability standards even after it is occupied, providing a comprehensive evaluation of its performance over time. Post-occupancy verification is critical for understanding how buildings function in real-world conditions and ensuring they deliver the expected benefits.
This criterion highlights the importance of ongoing performance monitoring and maintenance in sustaining green building achievements. It involves assessing factors such as energy usage, indoor air quality, and water consumption after the building is operational. By doing so, it helps identify areas for improvement, validate the effectiveness of sustainability interventions, and ensure long-term compliance with green building standards. This continuous feedback loop is essential for achieving and maintaining high-performance buildings throughout their lifecycle.
GSA’s Process for Evaluating Certification Systems
Market Analysis and Screening Criteria
GSA’s process includes a market analysis to screen available certification systems based on availability in the U.S. market, evaluation of whole building performance, use of third-party certification, and measurement of actual building performance. Systems that meet these screening criteria are then evaluated for their effectiveness in employing integrated design principles, optimizing energy performance, conserving water, enhancing indoor environments, controlling moisture and mold, reducing the environmental impact of materials, and assessing building resilience.
This thorough market analysis ensures that the certification systems chosen are both relevant and practical for federal projects. It considers the availability and recognition of systems, ensuring that they can be readily adopted and implemented. The evaluation of whole building performance and third-party certification adds another layer of credibility, ensuring that certified buildings truly adhere to high sustainability standards. Additionally, measuring actual building performance helps verify that theoretical benefits translate into tangible results.
Development and Conformance Criteria
In addition to effectiveness, systems are also evaluated based on development and conformance criteria, such as a consensus-based approach, transparency, usability, maturity, independence, verification, and post-occupancy evaluation. These criteria ensure that the certification systems are developed through a transparent and inclusive process and are capable of providing reliable and accurate assessments of building performance.
Transparency and usability are particularly important, as they ensure that the standards are accessible and understandable to a wide range of stakeholders. A consensus-based approach fosters buy-in from the industry and helps create standards that are widely accepted and implemented. Independence and verification are critical for maintaining the integrity of the system, ensuring that certified buildings meet the specified criteria without biases. Mature systems benefit from years of refinement and practical application, while post-occupancy evaluation ensures that sustainability goals are met long after construction is completed.
Current Review Cycle
Identified Certification Systems
The current review cycle identified six systems that met the screening criteria for evaluation: LEED v4.1 for new construction and existing buildings, Green Globes versions 2021 and 2023 for new construction and existing buildings, Living Building Challenge v 4.0 and CORE for new construction and existing buildings, PHIUS version 2021 for new construction and existing buildings, BREEAM USA In-Use Commercial version 6 for existing buildings, and BOMA BEST 4.0 for Sustainable Buildings for existing buildings.
Each of these systems brings unique strengths and perspectives to green building certification. LEED v4.1, for instance, is known for its comprehensive approach, covering a wide range of sustainability aspects. Green Globes offers flexibility and user-friendly tools, while the Living Building Challenge sets some of the highest standards for sustainability. PHIUS focuses on energy performance and passive building principles, and BREEAM offers a robust framework for assessing existing buildings. BOMA BEST provides practical guidance for sustainable building operations.
Findings and Draft Recommendations
The review revealed several key findings and draft recommendations. No single system fully aligns with federal green building performance criteria, and each certification system demonstrates alignment with these criteria to varying degrees. All systems show general consistency in recognizing the aspects of building design, construction, operation, and maintenance that lead to high-performing buildings. They also agree on the value of taking a whole-building, integrated approach.
Each system offers a unique framework tailored to different user baselines and organizational sustainability expertise. Draft recommendations suggest that agencies, should they choose to use a certification system, consider specific systems based on whether they are dealing with new constructions, major renovations, or existing buildings. For new construction or major renovations, LEED v4.1 BD+C and Green Globes for New Construction 2021 are recommended. For existing buildings, a mix of systems including BOMA Best 4.0, BREEAM USA In-Use Commercial version 6, Green Globes for Existing Buildings 2023, LEED v4.1 O+M, Living Building Challenge 4.0, CORE, and PHIUS CORE Revive 2021 are recommended.
The draft recommendations also noted that several systems are in the process of revision, including LEED v5, Green Globes 2023 for New Construction, and PHIUS CORE Revive. A similar evaluation will be conducted once these revised versions are available in the market. This iterative review process ensures that federal agencies have access to the latest and most effective tools for achieving their sustainability goals.
Public Comment and Feedback
Public Comment Period
The public comment period for the Findings Report and draft recommendations was open until COB August 29, 2024. Comments could be submitted through Regulations.gov or emailed to highperformancebuildings@gsa.gov. This period allowed stakeholders and the general public to provide feedback on the review findings and recommendations, ensuring a transparent and participatory process.
Gathering public comments is a crucial step in the review process as it allows for a wide range of perspectives to be considered. This input can highlight areas that may need further investigation, suggest improvements, and provide additional insights from those directly impacted by the certification systems. By incorporating this feedback, the final recommendations can better reflect the needs and priorities of various stakeholders, enhancing the overall effectiveness and acceptance of the certification systems.
Questions and Insights
Several questions were raised during the meeting, providing valuable insights on various aspects of the review. For instance, despite having several red crosses in the evaluation chart, PHIUS was included because it met the four primary screening criteria. There was also discussion on alignment with sustainable procurement and Buy Clean Policy, building type and function influence, knowledge gaps, industry feedback, cost impact on system preference, performance vs prescriptive standards, and zero energy and zero carbon systems. These topics will likely influence future evaluations and potentially lead to the inclusion of additional criteria in the certification systems.
Health and wellbeing criteria were also highlighted as an area with potential for future inclusion. The integration of such criteria could further enhance the value of certification systems by promoting occupant health and productivity. As the review process evolves, these insights will guide the development of more comprehensive and relevant standards, ensuring that federal buildings not only meet sustainability goals but also provide healthy and comfortable environments for their occupants.
Conclusion
The review highlighted several important insights and draft recommendations. It appears no single certification system fully meets federal green building performance criteria. Each system aligns with these criteria to differing extents, yet all show general consistency in recognizing the elements of building design, construction, operation, and maintenance that lead to high-performing structures. They agree on the importance of an integrated, whole-building approach.
Each system provides a unique framework, tailored to different baselines and organizational sustainability expertise. Draft recommendations advise agencies to choose specific systems based on their projects. For new constructions or major renovations, LEED v4.1 BD+C and Green Globes for New Construction 2021 are recommended. For existing buildings, a blend of systems including BOMA Best 4.0, BREEAM USA In-Use Commercial version 6, Green Globes for Existing Buildings 2023, LEED v4.1 O+M, Living Building Challenge 4.0, CORE, and PHIUS CORE Revive 2021 are recommended.
The draft recommendations also noted several systems are undergoing revision, such as LEED v5, Green Globes 2023 for New Construction, and PHIUS CORE Revive. A similar assessment will be conducted once these versions are available. This ongoing review process ensures federal agencies have access to the most current and effective tools for achieving sustainability goals. Maintaining an iterative process allows for continuous improvement in alignment with evolving standards.
