U.S. Department of Energy

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Federal Energy Management Program

United States

Environmental

Protection Agency

L A B O R A T O R I E S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y :

C A S E S T U D I E S

Case Study Index

Laboratory Type

 Wet lab

 Dry lab

 Clean room

Construction Type

 New

 Retrofit

Type of Operation

 Research/development

 Manufacturing

 Teaching

 Chemistry

 Biology

 Electronics

Service Option

 Suspended ceiling

 Utility service corridor

 Interstitial space

Featured Technologies

 Fume hoods

 Controls

 Mechanical systems

 Electrical loads

 Water conservation

 Renewables

 Sustainable design/

planning

 On-site generation

 Daylighting

 Building commissioning

Other Topics

 Diversity factor

 Carbon trading

 Selling concepts to 

stakeholders

 Design process

LEED Rating

 Platinum

 Gold

 Silver

 Certified































WHITEHEAD BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH 

BUILDING AT EMORY UNIVERSITY, 

ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Introduction

The eight-story Whitehead Biomedical Research Building, which was completed in 2001, is the 

largest of its kind in the southeastern United States; it has incorporated many energy- and waterefficient features. This new building at Emory University supports three science departments within the School of Medicine—Cell Biology, Genetics, and Physiology. And an entire floor is devoted 

to interdisciplinary programs for the Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, Pathology and 

Laboratory Medicine, Psychiatry, and Behavioral Sciences. 

Sandy Mendler, AIA, HOK/PIX
2 L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 

This case study of the Whitehead Research Building 

is one in a series produced by Laboratories for the 21st 

Century, a joint program of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE). Geared toward architects and engineers 

who are familiar with laboratory buildings, the case studies exemplify the “Labs 21” approach, which encourages 

the design, construction, and operation of safe, sustainable, high-performance laboratories.

The energy and water efficiency strategies incorporated in the Whitehead Research Building’s design and 

construction reflect a significant commitment to environmental stewardship on the part of both Emory University 

and the design team. Emory University’s new buildings 

are guided by a comprehensive master plan that emphasizes sustainable design practices, which include creating 

a pedestrian-friendly campus that replaces cars and concrete with greenspaces and walkways. This facility was 

one of the first buildings at Emory to incorporate new 

architectural guidelines while integrating the design into 

the context of a historic campus.

..........

“We may be making just a small dent in local 

environmental problems in the state of Georgia, 

but what if everybody did the same?” John Wegner, 

Emory University Campus Environmental Officer

.......... These are some of the building’s many sustainable, 

high-performance features: 

• Energy recovery—The energy recovery system is made 

up of four desiccant cooling enthalpy wheels, each 

20 feet (ft) in diameter, that use air exhausted from the 

facility to preheat the outside air in winter and to precool outside air in summer before it is drawn into the 

building. 

• Condensate recovery for cooling towers—Air-conditioning condensate water is piped from the air-handling units (AHUs) and chilled water coils back into 

nearby cooling towers for use as make-up water. This 

diverts an estimated 2.5 million gallons of condensate 

water per year from the county’s sanitary sewer and 

reduces municipal water consumption at the central 

plant. The resulting savings could supply 100 people 

in the United States with their daily water needs for 

125 days of the year. 

• Rainwater harvesting for irrigation—Storm water 

from the roof and the plaza is collected into an underground storage vault and reused for irrigation.

• Natural lighting and lighting controls—

Approximately 90% of regularly occupied spaces have 

large windows for daylighting, saving energy that 

would otherwise be consumed by the electric lights, 

many of which are controlled by photo sensors and 

motion detectors.

The building received a Leadership in Energy and 

Environmental Design (LEEDTM) silver rating in 2002 

from the U.S. Green Building Council. It also won an 

Energy User News “Best New Project” Award in 2002, 

and it received an Honorable Mention in 2003 from 

Environmental Design + Construction magazine for 

“Excellence in Design.” The additional cost incurred to 

achieve a LEED silver rating was about $990,000, or 1.5% 

of the building’s total construction cost. Emory’s savings 

in energy costs alone over the next decade will cover the 

additional first cost. 

Project Description 

The Whitehead Biomedical Research Facility is an 

eight-story, 325,000 gross ft2 (212,264 net ft2) laboratory 

building that houses special facilities for tissue culture and 

a vivarium. It was completed in October 2001, one month 

ahead of schedule, at a total construction cost of $65 million, or $200/gross ft2. The facility was designed by 

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK) of Atlanta, 

Georgia. The structural engineers were Standley D. 

Lindsey of Atlanta, and the mechanical, electrical, plumbing and fire-protection engineers were Nottingham, 

Brooke and Pennington of Macon, Georgia. The WhittingTurner Contracting Company of Atlanta was the general 

contractor and construction manager. 

Layout and Design 

The building includes 150 faculty offices and 

150 laboratory modules built around the “open lab” concept. This concept calls for large, flexible laboratory spaces 

and fewer walls, resulting in a building designed for 

greater interaction and better flow among researchers. 

Dry benches are along the windowed walls. Corner break 

rooms with dry-erase wall coverings were designed to 

foster collaboration. The largest wing of the building is 

oriented along an east-west access, which allows natural 

light to enter the building from the north or south. The 

facility supports both Biosafety Level (BL)-2 and BL-3 

research activities. 

The basic planning module for the labs measures 

10 ft x 39 ft. Laboratories are organized in open groups 

of 10 modules each. The design allows for increases or 

decreases in occupied square footage for individual 

research programs, in response to changing program 
L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 3

��������� �����

��� ������ ������

������������

�������� �������� �������

�������������

������ ����

����� ��������� ���������� �������� �������� � ������� ���������� ����� ����

� �� �� ���

needs. This adjustment is accomplished by simply connecting individual laboratory modules via openings in 

shared partitions. The large, open labs also allow multiple 

research groups to work very near each other with minimal separation. The interdisciplinary interaction benefits 

all of the building’s occupants. 

Each open lab grouping has its own controls for lighting; heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC); 

and piping. Controls for these services are located outside 

the lab. In addition to designing standardized modules for 

the labs, the piping and HVAC are also modular in design 

to allow the lab units to adapt quickly and respond to 

changes in technologies, equipment, processes, and techniques. The flexibility offered by this modular approach 

allows Emory to change labs without affecting adjacent 

spaces. The enhanced laboratory design greatly increases 

the research efficiency of departments such as Cell Biology 

and Physiology, which had been housed in buildings constructed in the 1920s before the new facility was built. 

The third-floor plan is shown in Figure 1. A breakdown of space by function is shown in Table 1. 

Utility Servicing 

Figure 1 depicts the duct and pipe shafts and lab piping closets; this illustrates how utilities are integrated into 

the building. Much of the work in the labs, up to 24 hours 

per day, is done on the bench top rather than in fume 

hoods. So, building energy loads are driven by the air 

change rate, instead of by the number of fume hoods. 

The HVAC system was designed to operate at constant 

volume and to include energy recovery; four enthalpy 

wheels, each one 20 ft in diameter, are used. The building 

has a general exhaust system and a separate fume hood 

exhaust system. Only the general exhaust goes through 

the energy recovery wheels. 

Figure 1. Third-floor plan of Whitehead Biomedical Research Building at Emory University

Table 1. Whitehead Biomedical 

Research Building Space 

Breakdown (Net ft2, unless otherwise noted)

Function Size (ft2) Percentage(1)

Labs (BL-2 and BL-3) and lab 

support space

148,000 70%

Office and program support 35,600 17%

Environment, health, and safety 

space

5,000 2%

Vivarium 23,664 11%

Total net ft2 212,265 100%

Other(2) 112,735

Total gross ft2 325,000

Notes:

1. The percentage shows a breakdown of net ft2 only. Net ft2 equals gross ft2

minus “other.”

2. “Other” includes circulation, toilets, stairs, elevator shafts, mechanical and 

electrical rooms and shafts, and structural elements like columns. The net-togross-ft2 ratio is 0.65. 
4 L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 

The general labs were designed for a ventilation rate 

of 10 air changes per hour (ACH). The building has 69 

chemical fume hoods. Each of the fume hoods uses a valve 

to keep the airflow constant in case the duct static pressure 

varies. The building also includes 16 exhausted biosafety 

cabinets. The cabinets in the BL-3 area connect to the fume 

hood exhaust. 

The vivarium was first designed for 15 ACH but was 

redesigned to 10 ACH when ventilated cages were selected for use in it. However, because the cages were not 

scheduled to be available when the building opened, the 

vivarium was redesigned back to 15 ACH. The cages were 

added later. A portion of the vivarium’s exhaust, from 

rooms containing general animal housing, goes through 

the general exhaust. Exhaust air from animal rooms that 

contain contaminants or pathogens goes through the fume 

hood exhaust system. 

The vivarium exhaust represents about 4% of the total 

volume of air exhausted through the energy recovery 

wheels. At one point, however, it was found that the 

vivarium exhaust didn’t mix as well as expected with the 

general exhaust, and some odors were being recirculated 

back into the building. The lesson learned from that 

experience was to reduce the ratio of vivarium exhaust 

to general exhaust even further, to about 2%.

Chilled water is supplied to the building from a 

chilled water plant. The tonnage of cooling required was 

computed by allowing credit for the heat recovery from 

the enthalpy wheels, with one wheel offline for service at 

or near the peak design date. A central plant provides the 

building with steam for heating. 

Design Approach

From the start, the project design reflected a commitment to sustainable design practices. However, achieving 

the LEED silver certification did not become a design goal 

until a few months after construction began in March 1999, 

when Emory University decided to make LEED certification mandatory for all new campus projects, starting with 

the Whitehead Research Building. Typically, planning for 

LEED certification occurs during the early stages of the 

design process. In this case, however, the design team 

was already sensitive to the need to save energy and water 

and to integrate the building into an overall campus plan 

emphasizing pedestrian movement. So, the design team 

needed to incorporate only a few things to achieve a 

silver rating. 

The project delivery method was Construction 

Manager At-Risk, with a fast-track, phased design document process. After the construction of the first and the 

second packages (the foundation and structure) of this 

project were well under way, cost reports showed that the 

completed project would be $6 million over budget. At 

that point, the project team—including the designers, construction manager, and owner—went through an intense 

value engineering phase that lasted 2 months. During that 

phase, the team kept its focus on the life-cycle cost of the 

project. They worked hard to protect the features of the 

building that made good business sense for the owner in 

the long run, even though those features added to the first 

cost. At the end of the value engineering phase, the project 

team was successful in bringing the project within striking 

distance of the budget. 

Technologies Used 

The building is on a site that had been developed 

previously, increasing density without losing green space. 

A greenhouse already on the site was relocated to another 

site on campus instead of being demolished. The new 

building is served by Emory’s alternative transportation 

system, with no net increase in parking and a reduction 

in local vehicle emissions. To support this and other new 

projects, Emory built a parking garage a few miles from 

the campus. A new shuttle road served by alternatively 

fueled vehicles—both compressed gas and electrical 

ones—allows Emory to ferry people back and forth from 

the parking area to the campus. 

The university also has a policy that assures no net 

loss of the tree canopy. This means that, for each tree 

removed, one tree is planted elsewhere on campus. 

Energy Efficiency

The primary strategy for energy efficiency is to 

use the four 20-ft-diameter enthalpy wheels for energy 

recovery. The enthalpy wheels recover heat energy from 

exhaust air and use the air exhausted from the facility to 

preheat outside air in the winter and to precool outside air 

in the summer. The wheels are in a mechanical penthouse 

room on the top floor of the building; this mechanical 

penthouse is hidden from view by a sloped roof. The air 

intake is below the eve of the roof. An exterior view of the 

building is shown in the photograph on page 1. 

The added first cost of the heat recovery system was 

$450,000, with a simple payback of about 4 years. The 

mechanical engineer convinced the design team of the 

usefulness of this feature, and the owner had the foresight 

to see that this was the right decision in the long run. Their 

efforts helped to keep the wheels in the project during the 

cost-cutting phase. 

Return air from clean zones, such as offices, is mixed 

back into the supply air so that supply air is approximately 75% outside air to all zones. This strategy saves on the 

amount of air that needs to be conditioned. 
L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 5

An energy analysis was performed to compare the 

building as designed with a base case building meeting 

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers/Illuminating Engineering Society 

of North America (ASHRAE/IENSA) standard 90.1-1999. 

Expected annual savings include 2161 MBtu of heating 

fuel and 3.4 million kWh of electricity, or $167,730 in 

energy costs. This takes into account the savings from 

daylighting controls and high-efficiency equipment. And 

it translates into a 22.2% overall energy savings, when 

compared with the base case. 

System design decisions were made on a life-cycle 

cost basis, and a “value management” process was 

employed to ensure that cost-reduction decisions did 

not reduce the facility’s long-term value to the university. 

For the energy recovery system alone, the internal rate of 

return on a $450,000 investment yielding $136,028 annually over 10 years would be 28% (this assumes no escalation 

in utility costs over that time). If costs and benefits of other 

efficiency measures were taken into consideration, the 

actual rate of return relative to a code-compliant facility 

would be significantly greater.

The ventilated cages used in the viviarium provide 

several opportunities for energy and material savings 

and health benefits to occupants. The system used in the 

Whitehead Building provides supply and exhaust air 

directly to and from each individual cage. And the system 

allows a reduction in the ventilation air rate from 15 ACH 

to 10 ACH. In new construction, this could allow a reduction in the size of the fans serving the vivarium. The ventilated racks also keep the corncob bedding drier, so that it 

must be changed only every 14 days rather than every 

7 days. The ventilated racks provide health benefits for 

workers and reduce the spread of allergens. 

Daylighting and Lighting

Ninety percent of the building’s lab and office spaces 

line the perimeter and include windows to the outside. 

Thus, the vast majority of occupied rooms receive natural 

light during the day. The building’s perimeter electric 

lighting system is tied to an on/off switch controlled by a 

photocell (with manual overrides) to control the row of 

lights parallel to the window. These lights are automatically switched off when there is adequate natural lighting. 

Each 2500-ft2 zone in lab areas has six 3-way switches 

to control lights. Individual offices and small rooms use 

motion detector lighting controls. The lighting inside the 

building uses T-8 lamps with electronic ballasts in twolamp, 1x4 recessed parabolic fixtures located directly 

over each bench. The lighting level at bench top is 75 footcandles. 

Water Efficiency

Emory University incorporated several water-saving 

measures into this project. These include storm-water 

harvesting for irrigation, a condensate recovery system 

for make-up water in cooling towers, and advanced 

cage-washing techniques. 

The building’s storm-water harvesting system captures water from the roof and the outdoor plaza and 

moves it to a large retention vault beneath the plaza. The 

water is then filtered and reused for site irrigation. Fulton 

County required Emory to build a retention vault to slow 

down the runoff of storm water from the roof and the 

site. When they decided to go for LEED certification, the 

Emory design team made the underground retention 

vault 3 feet deeper so it would hold about 70,000 gallons 

of water. They also added a filter, a pump, and a bit of 

piping to connect this catchment area into the site’s 

irrigation system. Figure 2 shows the retention vault 

under construction.

In addition, the design team recognized that the airconditioning system would create a tremendous amount 

of condensate water. So, they decided to pipe the condensate from the AHUs and chilled water coils back into 

nearby cooling towers for use as make-up water. This 

system not only conserves water, it also diverts an estimated 2.5 million gallons a year from the county’s sanitary 

sewer system, saving energy and money as well. 

The vivarium includes a state-of-the-art, automated 

cage-washing system. The cage washer, which was manufactured in Finland, is one of the first ones installed in the 

United States. It saves energy, water, and chemicals by 

recycling water through four stages of cleaning using a 

counter-current rinsing process. In counter-current rinsing, the flow of rinse water for cage washing is the oppoFigure 2. Retention vault

Stuart Lewis, HOK/PIX
6 L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 

site of that of the workflow. In other words, the cleanest 

water is used only for the final rinsing stage; water for 

early rinsing tasks, in which the quality of rinse water is 

not as important, is water that was previously used in the 

later stages of rinsing operations. An automated process 

using robotics disposes of the dirty bedding, feeds the 

cages through a washer, fills the clean cages with clean 

bedding, and replaces cages in the racks. This has eliminated much of the manual labor associated with this task. 

Figure 3 shows the robotics. 

A central plant system is used for cooling. The cooling 

load, and thus the amount of chilled water needed, is 

reduced approximately 20% by the operation of the 

enthalpy wheels. 

Indoor Environmental Quality

To protect the building’s indoor air quality, paints 

and adhesives with low levels of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, were used, and it has been designated 

a nonsmoking facility. During construction, a management plan was implemented to prevent the contamination 

of building materials by water, dirt, and other sources of 

pollutants. Before the staff moved in, the office areas were 

flushed with 100% outside air. 

Materials

The building materials incorporate products (such as 

lab counters) that are manufactured using post-consumer 

and post-industrial waste. In addition, the construction 

featured materials that are manufactured locally, reducing 

energy used for transportation. Emory also followed a 

construction recycling plan. They recycled 300 tons of 

metal and saved about $20,000 by being conscientious 

about recycling. 

Measurement and Evaluation 

Approach 

Meters were installed at the main switchboard to 

track electrical loads off individual feeder lines as well as 

to measure the use of steam and water, including chilled 

water. Electric power and steam usage is reported in 

Table 2. 

Commissioning 

Emory’s standard approach is to commission all new 

buildings before they open for business. This includes 

commissioning all the building systems to ensure that 

they are operating in the intended ways. The owners 

believe that, while commissioning improves the efficiency 

of most buildings, it is especially important for laboratory 

buildings, which use a large amount of energy and have 

special safety requirements as well as sophisticated control systems, like fume hoods. 

Building Metrics

In Table 2, data on annual energy use that was estimated from design parameters is compared with actual 

metered data summed from three electric meters and 

metered steam data. The metered data were tabulated for 

2 years for comparison purposes and were similar in both 

years; the table shows annual data for May 2003 through 

April 2004. Metered data are 20% lower than the estimate. 

This is generally the case in laboratories featured in 

Labs 21 case studies because the estimates are usually 

conservative, and they take into account only very general 

usage information. Since the cooling load at the central 

plant was not accounted for by the building’s electric 

meters, an estimate for cooling was added to the data for 

actual energy use measured at the building. Water use at 

this facility was measured at 11,715,000 gallons per year. 

Figure 3. Robotics used in cage washing operation

Sandy Mendler, AIA, HOK/PIX
L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y 7

Summary

The Whitehead Biomedical Research Building design 

team was sensitive to the need to save energy and water 

and to integrate the building into an overall, pedestrianfriendly campus plan. These became key factors in the 

success of this building as a high-performance laboratory. 

The mechanical engineer advocated the use of energy 

recovery wheels early in the process, and they are integrated effectively into the building’s architecture under a 

sloped roof. The design team also strongly emphasized 

water efficiency by incorporating an underground water 

storage vault for storm water to use in irrigating the site, 

and by piping air-conditioning condensate from the airhandling units and chilled water coils back into nearby 

cooling towers for use as make-up water. 

Emory University’s strong commitment to sustainability is evident in building designs that are guided by 

a comprehensive master plan for the campus that includes 

replacing cars and concrete with green spaces and walkways. Emory’s tree canopy policy also makes it a leader 

in the university community for environmental responsibility. In addition, the university requires all new buildings to achieve a LEED silver certification rating. 

Table 2. Whitehead Biomedical Research Center Building Metrics

System Key Design Parameters Annual Energy Usage Estimate

(based on design data)

Annual Energy Use

(based on measured data)

Ventilation (sum of 

wattage of all the 

supply fans and all the 

exhaust fans)

Supply = 1.0 W/cfm

Exhaust = 1.25 W/cfm

Total = 1.13 W/cfm(1)

(1.0 cfm/gross ft2; 1.5 cfm/net ft2

and 2.1 cfm/gross ft2 of labs)(2)

19.8 kWh/gross ft2 (3) NA

Cooling plant 2300 tons, 1.0 kW/ton 20.4 kWh/gross ft2 (4) NA

Lighting 1.6 W/ft2 average 7.25 kWh/gross ft2 (5) NA

Process/Plug 11 W/net ft2 32.4 kWh/gross ft2 (6) NA

Heating plant Not available Not available 68,298,447 pounds of steam

Total 79.85 kWh/gross ft2/yr 

(estimate based on design data 

for electricity only)

272 kBtu/gross ft2/yr for 

electricity only

42.90 kWh/gross ft2/yr for electricity only (based 

on metered data from 05/03 – 04/04)

Since cooling is provided by a central plant, the 

estimate of 20.4 kWh/gross ft2/yr is added back in

Total electrical energy = 63.3 kWh/gross ft2/yr 

(222.6 kBtu/gross ft2/yr)

Steam = 210 kBtu/gross ft2/yr

432.6 kBtu/gross ft2 for electricity, cooling (est.) 

and steam

Notes:

1. W/cfm for supply air = 910 hp x 746 W/hp/681,000 cfm (supply) = 1.0 W/cfm; for exhaust air = 530.5 hp x 746 W/hp/317,040 cfm = 1.25 W/cfm; average = 1.13 

(based on nameplate rating data).

2. 317,040 cfm (total cfm based on exhaust)/212,265 net ft2 = 1.5 cfm/net ft2; 317,040 cfm/325,000 gross ft2 = 1.0 cfm/gross ft2; 317,040 cfm/148,000 net ft2 of labs 

= 2.1 cfm/net ft2 of labs. 

3. 1.13 W/cfm x 1.0 cfm/gross ft2 x 8760 hours x 2/1000 = 19.8 kWh/gross ft2 (30.5 kWh/net ft2).

4. 1 kW/ton x 2300 tons x 2890 hours/325,000 gross ft2 = 20.4 kWh/gross ft2 (assumes cooling runs 33% of the hours in a year). 

5. 1.6 W/gross ft2 x 4534 hours/1000 = 7.25 kWh/gross ft2 (2.46 W/net ft2 x 0.65 = 1.6W/gross ft2) (assumes lights are on 87.2 hours\week).

6. 7.71 W/gross ft2 x 0.80 x 5256 hours/1000 = 32.4 kWh/gross ft2 (11 W/net ft2 x 0.65 = 7.71 W/gross ft2) (assumes that 80% of all equipment is operating 60% of the 

hours in a year). 

7. Estimated data are presented in site Btu (1 kWh = 3412 Btu). To convert to source Btu, multiply site Btu for electricity by 3. Note: Atlanta has approx. 3089 heating 

degree-days and 1611 cooling degree-days (based on weather data for Atlanta, GA). 
8 L A B S F O R T H E 2 1 S T C E N T U R Y

Laboratories for the 21st Century

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Administration and Resources Management

www.labs21century.gov

In partnership with the 

U.S. Department of Energy

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Bringing you a prosperous future where energy is clean, 

abundant, reliable, and affordable

www.eere.energy.gov

Prepared at the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

A DOE national laboratory

Acknowledgements

This case study would not have been possible without 

the contributions of Rohit Saxena, AIA, and Stuart Lewis, 

AIA of HOK Architects in Atlanta, GA; Bill Nottingham, 

PE, and Tim Trotter, PE, of Nottingham, Brook and 

Pennington in Macon, GA; and Laura Case of Emory 

University in Atlanta. The author is grateful to all of them 

for contributing their expertise, time, and valuable assistance. This case study was written by Nancy Carlisle of the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory with assistance 

from Otto Van Geet, Paula Pitchford, editor, and Susan 

Sczepanski, graphic artist, also of NREL. 

For More Information

On the Whitehead Biomedical Research 

Building:

Laura Case

Facility Manager

Emory University

638 Asbury Circle, Building C

Atlanta, GA 30322

404-727-5543

lcase2@fmd.emory.edu

Rohit Saxena, AIA

HOK, Science + Technology

235 Peachtree Street, N.E. 

Suite 500

Atlanta, GA 30303

404-439-9222 

rohit.saxena@hok.com

On Laboratories for the 21st Century:

Dan Amon, P.E.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. (3204R)

Washington, DC 20460

202-564-8234

amon.dan@epa.gov

Will Lintner, P.E.

U.S. Department of Energy

Federal Energy Management Program

1000 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20585

202-586-3120

william.lintner@ee.doe.gov

Nancy Carlisle, AIA

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Blvd.

Golden, CO 80401

303-384-7509

nancy_carlisle@nrel.gov

DOE/GO-102005-2046

April 2005

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at least 

50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste