59–010 

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 reVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:44 Nov 15, 2006 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR358.XXX SR358

jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
2 

viewed 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, leadbased 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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
3 

In the 109th Congress, Senator Jeffords reintroduced his original 

green building legislation, slightly modified, as S. 3591, the HighPerformance 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 ‘‘HighPerformance 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, 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
4 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
5 

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, 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
6 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
7 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
8 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
9 

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: 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
10 

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-PerformVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:44 Nov 15, 2006 Jkt 059010 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR358.XXX SR358

jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
11 

ance 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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
(12) 

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 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
13 

and add costs to the construction projects as schools have to expend 

additional resources to file paperwork and wait for approvals. 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
(14) 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
(15) 

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. 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING
16 

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. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PRODPC62 with HEARING