Key Stakeholders Stakeholder Current Snapshot (Needs, expectations, issues) Role and Desired Mindset Communications Approach Principle Contact Senior Management Project Control Board Building Occupants Facility Managers On-site Maintenance Contractor Department (which oversees the agency undertaking the project) Department of Treasury and Finance Owners of the Greener Government Buildings Program. DTF are responsible for managing and reporting whole of government targets and providing facilitation and administration support to all projects. DTF facilitators to be invited to project meetings and utilised as required Sam Burke Etc..
Risk Log # Author & Date Description Likelihood (H/M/L) Impact (H/M/L) Risk Rating (H/M/L) Proximity (when likely to occur?) Countermeasures (Treatment: to prevent, reduce, transfer, contingency, accept) Owner Status 1 SB Annual project savings not achieved – installations unable to realise guaranteed savings L M/H M Annually EPC process followed to ensure savings are monitored, verified and guaranteed by service provide, utilising expertise of DTF facilitator(s) Energy services company (ESCo) 2 SB Annual project savings not achieved - Energy services company entering insolvency L L L Unknown Inclusion of a Bank Guarantee in the Energy Performance Contract. EPC Building owner/ operator 3 SB Major disruption to operations of facility L M/H M During installation / work Potentially disruptive works to be implemented outside of work hours All contractors to be inducted and to follow processes required by facility manager(s). Head contractor required to address any major issues within an appropriate timeframe Building owner/ operator 4 SB Maintenance costs incurred to address latent site defects and unsafe conditions M M M During installation and DFS Targeted hazmat audit before works. Contract allows for impacted works to be stopped. Building owner/ operator Low Risk L Medium Risk M Medium/High Risk M/H High Risk H
Appendix A – Glossary of Terms DTF Department of Treasury and Finance GGB Greener Government Buildings EPC Energy Performance Contract ESCO Energy Services Company RFP Request for Proposal DFS Detailed Facility Study ECM Energy Conservation Measure M&V Measurement and Verification MVP Measurement and Verification Plan IPMVP International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol Appendix B – Measurement & Verification There are four generic M&V options as outlined in the International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol (IPMVP), and are summarised in the table below. IPMVP How Savings Are Calculated Common Use Option A: Partially Measured Retrofit isolation Engineering calculations using short term of continuous post-retrofit measurements and stipulations For a single ECM where the performance of the ECM can be measured but it may be best to stipulate its operation. Option B: Retrofit Isolation Engineering calculations using short term or continuous measurements For a single ECM where the performance and operations of the ECM should be measured. Option C: Whole Facility (Building) Analysis of whole facility of building utility meter or sub-meter data, available continuously, using techniques from simple comparison to regression analysis For a single ECM or multiple ECMs with or without energy interactions within a whole facility or building. Energy use is measured by utility meters for at least 12 months of the base year and continuously