Almost a decade after the 2018 study, and amidst a number of changes in GSA building operational practices, federal priorities, and significant fluctuations to building utilization and occupancy driven by the COVID-19 pandemic and return to in-office work, GSA’s high-performance buildings continue to perform better than their legacy stock counterparts. In fact, upgrading the legacy stock buildings in GSA’s portfolio to achieve the same levels of efficiency as we found for GSA’s high-performance buildings would save over $80 million per year in utility costs, operating expenses, and waste disposal fees. As agencies seek to reduce the federal government’s expenses and right-size the portfolio while maximizing occupancy, investments in high-performance building systems, technologies, practices, and infrastructure will save money. This study, among others, also shows that such investments and upgrades will promote tenant satisfaction, reliable operation, workplace productivity, and responsible stewardship of GSA’s exceptional portfolio of federal office buildings, U.S. courthouses, and land ports of entry across the United States.
In deciding which upgrades will best maximize performance on each measure, GSA recommends that decision makers:
- Examine the existing conditions and performance of legacy stock buildings to identify opportunities for improvement, and leverage previously identified building improvement projects with appropriated funds and public-private partnerships to holistically integrate performance improvements into renovations to the maximum extent practicable.
- Maintain a portfolio-wide approach to reducing excess costs of legacy stock buildings via updates or replacement with high-performance buildings, including factoring a building’s high-performance status into determinations on building retention vs. disposal.
- Prioritize improvement opportunities within individual buildings and across the portfolio according to net present value, savings to investment ratio, return on investment, and net operating income.
- Leverage external financing wherever possible, such as Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPC) and Utility Energy Service Contracts (UESC) as well as utility incentives/rebate programs which can be reinvested into energy and water conservation projects in GSA facilities that stretch valuable taxpayer dollars as far as possible.
Appendix
GSA data systems used
Metering, Utilities, Sustainability, Energy (MUSE) Envizi
GSA’s system for utility billing information, including energy and water consumption and the amount of solid waste generated and recycled for each GSA-owned building. GSA’s owned portfolio tracks billing and utility expenses based on the metering configuration of the building or project.
Financial Management Information System (FMIS)
GSA’s financial reporting system for building-related expenses.
Sustainable Operations and Maintenance Tool
GSA’s system for tracking buildings that meet the Guiding Principles for Existing Buildings.
Real Estate Across the United States (REXUS)
GSA’s system for identifying physical building details including the building’s name, property type, age, address, GSA Region, and gross square footage (GSF).
Tenant Satisfaction Survey (TSS)
GSA’s process for capturing annual Federal Tenant Satisfaction Survey results by building and by tenant.
Acknowledgements
GSA
- Kelli Canada
- Nazmi Ahmed
- David Leites
- Jed Ela
- Saritha Cheriyan
- Jonathan Perez
- Randy Vel
- Jeremey Alcorn
- Josh Van Bogaert
- Lena Kofas
- Rebecca Cotton
- Joshua Banis
- Walter Tersch
Benchmark organizations
- U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) ENERGY STAR and WaterSense® programs
- David Lehrer, Allison Herbert, and Tobias Kramer, Center for the Built Environment, University of California Berkeley