NEWS

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

PLANNING AND DESIGN POLICY STATEMENT - 98-01

DESIGN OF SUSTAINABLE FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

18 JUNE 1998

References:

a. NAVFAC Planning and Design Policy Statement 98-02, "Criteria Supporting the Design of Sustainable Facilities and Infrastructure" dated 18 June 1998

b. NAVFAC Planning and Design Policy Statement 98-03, "Procurement of Sustainable Facilities and Infrastructure Through Architect-Engineer (A-E) and Related Contracts" dated 18 June 1998

c. Sustainable America: A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity and a Healthy Environment for the Future, The President's Council on Sustainable Development, February 1996

Attachments:

1. National Goals Toward Sustainable Development (extracted from reference c)
2. Overview of NAVFAC's Early Initiatives for Implementation of Sustainable Design
3. Definitions of Sustainable Design
4. Integrated Design and its Relationship to First Cost

Policy Statement:

It is the policy of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) to incorporate sustainability principles and concepts in the design of all facilities and infrastructure projects to the fullest extent possible, consistent with budget constraints and customer requirements. It is further the policy of NAVFAC to seek to do this with no increase in first cost. In the case of larger projects, the application of integrated design concepts is the key to this accomplishment. This policy, which will lead to substantial improvements in life-cycle operations and reduce life-cycle costs, applies to renovation and alteration projects as well as new construction; applies to projects regardless of funding source or amount; applies to projects accomplished for all customers; applies to projects accomplished both in-house and through A-E contracts; and applies to design associated with all procurement methods, including design-build.

Purpose of Policy Statement:

The purpose of this policy statement is to identify and establish sustainability principles and concepts as the basis for the design of facilities and infrastructure accomplished by NAVFAC, both in-house and by means of A-E and related contracts. Sustainability principles and concepts, as herein defined, and as reflected in NAVFAC's criteria, guide specifications database, and other identified sources of facilities and infrastructure guidance, shall be a major consideration in all facilities and infrastructure design decisions.

This policy implements the design portion of NAVFAC's comprehensive Sustainable Development Program which was established to meet the Navy's facilities infrastructure needs for improved performance, economy and productivity, while maximizing efficiency in resource utilization. In an integrated manner, this program addresses planning, programming, design, construction, and facilities management practices, and accommodates significant changes in NAVFAC's philosophy and procedures for meeting facilities and infrastructure needs. Policies addressing criteria and A-E selection are found in references (a) and (b). Policies addressing planning, programming, value engineering, construction, and other areas will be issued in the near future, as developed.

This policy statement provides overall policy for the inclusion of sustainability principles and concepts in the design of facilities and infrastructure. Future revisions and supplements to this policy statement will incorporate more specific design policies relative to site development, energy efficiency and conservation, the use of renewable energy resources, materials selection based on life-cycle environmental impacts and recycled content, efficiency in materials utilization, building ecology, and occupant productivity as a reflection of both interior and exterior environments.

Background:

Continuing worldwide population growth and technological achievements have resulted in increased natural resource utilization. The consequences have been a depletion of natural resources; air, land and water pollution; ozone depletion; global warming; and a wide range of other consequences detrimental to the environment. As a result, the earth's ability to replenish depleted resources and provide the ingredients necessary to sustain life is being threatened.

The built environment represents one of the major opportunity areas where NAVFAC, along with the entire Federal Government and the nation, can constructively address the environmental dilemma. As the world's population continues to expand and resources continue to be depleted, the implementation of resource-efficient facilities-related practices becomes imperative. The construction industry has started to approach the planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance of facilities with a new set of values -- values that appropriately balance environmental concerns with those associated with function, safety, aesthetics, expediency and cost.

In June, 1993, President Clinton created the President's Council on Sustainable Development which was tasked with finding ways to "bring people together to meet the needs of the present without jeopardizing the future." In their publication, reference (c), the Council noted that prosperity, fairness, and a healthy environment were integrated elements of the human dream for a better future. Sustainable Development was identified as a way to pursue that dream and the framework that integrates economic, environmental and social goals. The National Goals Toward Sustainable Development, as established by the Council and summarized in Attachment 1, have provided the overall framework for NAVFAC's Sustainable Development Program. Recent policies to reduce ozone depletion and control global warming have accentuated the importance of sustainability initiatives.

Since 1995, NAVFAC has conducted sustainability workshops at its Engineering Field Divisions and trained personnel in the basics of sustainable design. From these workshops came hundreds of ideas for how NAVFAC should change it policies, criteria and procurement practices to fully implement sustainable design Command-wide. This grassroots initiative, which has assisted in creating a sustainable design culture within NAVFAC, contributed significantly to the formulation of this policy statement and those of references (a) and (b). A Pilot Project Program, also initiated in 1995, has successfully tested these concepts. The most significant aspect of the pilot project initiative is the convincing demonstration that a substantial number of sustainable features can be implemented in the typical project without necessarily increasing first costs. An overview of both the workshop initiative and the Pilot Project Program is contained in Attachment 2.

Basis for Policy Statement:

Building on existing definitions of "Sustainable Design," some of which are included in Attachment 3, NAVFAC's definition of "Sustainable Design," reflected in its criteria, its guide specifications database, and other policy and guidance for planning, programming, design, construction and facilities management, incorporates the following sustainability initiatives:

• Increased energy conservation and efficiency
• Increased use of renewable energy resources
• Reduction or elimination of toxic and harmful substances in facilities and their surrounding environments
• Improvements to interior and exterior environments leading to increased productivity and better health
• Efficiency in resource and materials utilization, especially water resources
• Selection of materials and products based on their life-cycle environmental impacts
• Increased use of materials and products with recycled content
• Recycling of construction waste and building materials after demolition
• Reduction in harmful waste products produced during construction
• Facility maintenance and operational practices that reduce or eliminate harmful effects on people and the natural environment

Sustainable design concepts and principles can be applied to any type of facility, anywhere, under any cost constraints. However, the extent to which specific sustainability strategies can be applied to a given project will vary, based on a wide array of local conditions, customer requirements, budget constraints, and other considerations. A sustainable building, quite likely, will look no different than any other building. NAVFAC's philosophy of sustainable design reflects an increased commitment to the principles of environmental stewardship and conservation. However, it also incorporates the concept that sustainable facilities and infrastructure do not necessarily have a higher initial cost -- that a substantial number of sustainability initiatives can typically be accommodated within original project budgets if those budgets are adequate from the start. (See Attachment 4)

The critical key to accomplishing this is an integrated design approach, where the evaluation of any building element, material or system is not viewed solely on the basis of its own isolated merit and cost, but is designed and then appraised as an integrated part of the entire building, facility or infrastructure system. Under an integrated design approach, specific materials or systems within a facility may have higher first costs, but these are balanced by lower first costs for other components of the design. The goal is to design a facility for which overall quality is higher, life-cycle costs are lower, sustainability concepts and principles are incorporated to the greatest extent possible, and first costs are held to the original budget amounts. NAVFAC's Whole Building Design Guide, currently in the final stages of development, will provide guidance in the application of integrated design concepts within a sustainable design environment.

This policy statement recognizes the fact that increases in first costs could lead to improved life-cycle costs and higher degrees of sustainability implementation, and that this can be in the best interest of the customer and the Unites States as a whole. In this regard, the policy below in no way diminishes the importance and value of continuing to establish these concepts and seek increases in budgets for projects such that life-cycle cost and sustainability concepts can be implemented to a greater extent. It also does not preclude, for specific projects, decisions being reached jointly with customers, major claimants and other involved parties to establish higher construction budgets that incorporate sustainability and life-cycle cost considerations to a greater degree.

Action and Procedures:

Traditional approaches to the planning, design and construction of facilities have not typically included a coordinated look at the environmental consequences of decisions, although areas such as reduced energy use have received attention over the years. This coordinated or holistic approach, of necessity, affects most areas of NAVFAC business. To that end, NAVFAC's Sustainable Development Program reaches far beyond the design process, although changes in design policies and criteria are central to successful implementation.

To implement this policy statement, Engineering Field Divisions (EFDs), Engineering Field Activities (EFAs) and Public Works Centers (PWCs) shall apply this policy, effective with its issue date, to all design-bid-build projects and all design-build projects for which CBD announcements have not been made; to all projects utilizing other procurement methods where criteria for selection of designers can be determined or influenced; and to all projects for which in-house design has not started or reached a point where incorporation of sustainability principles and concepts would detrimentally affect the project. Where the A-E selection process or in-house design process has proceeded beyond the points noted above, this policy shall be applied on a selective basis consistent with project requirements, customer needs and other appropriate considerations. The intent is to apply this policy to the greatest extent possible without detrimentally affecting the progress of the project.

Points of Contact:

NAVFAC Headquarters POC for sustainable design policy is Terrel M. Emmons, FAIA, Associate Director for Engineering, NAVFAC HQ Code ENG; Phone: (202) 685-9170;

Fax: (202) 685-1577; E-Mail: emmonstm@hq.navfac.navy.mil

Attachment 1

National Goals Toward Sustainable Development

(Extracted from the President's Council on Sustainable Developmentis report, Sustainable America: A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment of February 1996)

The following goals express the aspirations of the Presidentis Council on Sustainable Development. They reflect the Council's understanding that it is essential to seek economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social equity together. Accompanying the goals are indicators of progress, yardsticks to measure progress toward each goal. Some of these goals and indicators are directly relevant to NAVFAC and its responsibilities for the built and natural environment, and are presented in underlined italics.

Goal 1: Health and the Environment: Ensure that every person enjoys the benefits of clean air, clean water, and a healthy environment at home, at work, and at play.

Clean Air

Safe Drinking Water

Reduced Releases of Toxic Substances

Decreases in Diseases and Mortality

Goal 2: Economic Prosperity: Sustain a healthy U. S. economy that grows sufficiently to create meaningful jobs, reduce poverty, and provide the opportunity for a high quality of life for all in an increasingly competitive world.

Increases in Per Capita Economic Performance

Increases in Employment

Decreased Poverty

Higher Per Capita Savings and Investment

Development and Use of New Economic Measures Reflecting Resource Depletion and Associated Economic Costs

Increased Per Capita Productivity

Goal 3: Equity: Ensure that all Americans are afforded justice and have the opportunity to achieve economic, environmental and social well-being.

Increases in Average Income

Development of Measures of Any Disproportionate Environmental Burdens Borne by Different Economic and Social Groups

Social Equity

Goal 4: Conservation of Nature: Use, conserve, protect, and restore natural resources o land, air, water, and biodiversity o in ways that help ensure long-term social, economic, and environmental benefits for ourselves and future generations.

Increases in the Health of Ecosystems, including Forests, Grasslands, Wetlands, Surface Waters, and Coastal Lands

Reduced Habitat Loss

Decreased Numbers of Threatened and Endangered Species

Decreased Releases that Contribute to the Exposure of Natural Systems to Toxics and Excess Nutrients

Reduced Ecological Impacts to Exotic Species

Reduced Emissions of Greenhouse Gases and of Compounds that Damage the Ozone Layer

Goal 5: Stewardship: Create a widely held ethic of stewardship that strongly encourages individuals, institutions, and corporations to take full responsibility for the economic, environmental, and social consequences of their actions.

Increased Efficiency of Materials Use

Increased Source Reduction, Reuse, Recovery, and Recycling

Reduced Energy Intensity - Increased Energy Efficiency

Decreased Rate of Harvest or Use Compared to Rate of Regeneration in Fisheries, Forests, Soils, and Groundwater

Goal 6: Sustainable Communities: Encourage people to work together to create healthy communities where natural and historic resources are preserved, jobs are available, sprawl is contained, neighborhoods are secure, education is lifelong, transportation and health care are accessible, and all citizens have opportunities to improve the quality of their lives.

Increased Local Per Capita Income and Resulting Community Economic Vitality

Safe Neighborhoods

Increases in Urban Green Spaces, Park Space and Recreational Areas

Investment in Future Generations through Healthcare, Childhood Development, Education and Training

Decreases in Traffic Congestion; Increased Use of Public and Alternative Transportation Systems

Community Access to Information

Decreased numbers of Homeless People

Reduced Disparity in Per Capita Income between Urban Areas and their Suburbs

Decreased Infant Mortality Rates

Goal 7: Civic Engagement: Create full opportunity for citizens, businesses, and communities to participate in and influence the natural resource, environmental, and economic decisions that affect them.

Increased Voter Participation

Increased Citizen Engagement

Increased Community Participation in Civic Activities

Increased Use of Successful Civic Collaborations Such as Public-Private Partnerships, Community-Based Planning and Goal-Setting Projects, and Consensus-Building Efforts

Goal 8: Population: Move toward stabilization of U. S. population.

Reduced Rates of Population Growth

Increased Educational Opportunities for Women

Decreased Numbers of Unintended Pregnancies

Decreased Numbers of Teenage Pregnancies

Decreased Number of Illegal Immigrants

Goal 9: International Responsibility: Take a leadership role in the development and implementation of global sustainable development policies, standards of conduct, and trade and foreign policies that further the achievement of sustainability.

Increased Levels of U. S. Assistance for Sustainable Development Worldwide

Development and Use of New measures for Assessing Progress Toward Sustainable Development in Countries Receiving U. S. Assistance

Increased U. S. Exports or Transfers of Cost-Effective and Environmentally Sound Technologies

Increased Levels of U. S. Research on Global Environmental Problems

Goal 10: Education: Ensure that all Americans have equal access to education and lifelong learning opportunities that will prepare them for meaningful work, a high quality of life, and an understanding of the concepts involved in sustainable development.

Increased Access to Information

Curriculum Development Incorporating Sustainable Principles

Increased School Adoption of the National Goals 2000 Initiative

Increased Number of School Systems and Communities with Programs for Lifelong Learning

Increased Skill Performance of U. S. Students

 

Attachment 2

EBN Webmaster's note: the following discussion refers to a diagram that I was unable to format for inclusion at this time.

Overview of NAVFAC's Early Initiatives for

Implementation of Sustainable Design

In the summer of 1993, the Navy's Environmental Performance Standards Quality Management Board (QMB), a top-level Navy management group, chartered a Process Action Team (PAT) within NAVFAC to change how the Navy approached facilities in the future. Simply stated, NAVFAC was to focus on how the Navy could demonstrate environmental leadership and a proactive commitment to not just environmental compliance, but also to global environmental responsibility. The terms "Sustainable Design" or "Green Architecture" had not yet been introduced and were generally unknown to most.

There were three reasons identified by the QMB for this tasking. First, it was acknowledged that, over the past two decades, environmental concerns had mushroomed in the United States and other industrialized countries. These concerns dealt with issues spanning both the built and natural environments for which NAVFAC had significant responsibility, both in the United States and abroad. Second, it was recognized that many of the most compelling answers to our environmental dilemma lie in the planning, design, construction and management of facilities. By considering the environmental consequences of facilities decisions before NAVFAC undertook design and construction, a significant and positive impact could be made on the environment. Third, NAVFAC was simply tired of always fixing environmentally-related problems after they occurred through such initiatives as site remediation. The extent and cost of environmental remediation and clean-up required at Navy bases throughout the United States in conjunction with their closing and conversion to other uses under the Federal Government's Base Realignment and Closure Programs, clearly got everyone's attention.

After forming the Headquarters-level PAT with representatives from all major functional areas, research was undertaken to determine how other federal agencies and corporations were incorporating environmental responsibility into their corporate climate. Despite extensive searches, few meaningful examples could be located, and those that were found were generally isolated projects, such as the Audubon Building in New York City, offering good project-specific information on what was being called "Sustainable Design," but little in the way of the broad-based program NAVFAC was searching for.

Turning to industry for guidance, NAVFAC, in October of 1993, convened a one-day workshop at NAVFAC Headquarters in Alexandria, VA, to which were invited leaders from industry organizations, professional societies and private design firms. The following questions were asked:

• What are the issues associated with a major federal agency seeking to become more environmentally responsible in all its facilities matters?
• How should we pursue these issues?
• What should we anticipate in the way of benefits if we pursue this?
• How much will it cost?

A variety of issues were identified, including: energy conservation; the use of materials and building products with recycled content; improved interior environments, especially better air quality; better waste management, especially during construction; and the selection of material and building products based on their life-cycle environmental impact. As these issues were discussed, it was suggested that an integrated approach would be required, and that to effectively change NAVFACis facilities business, wholesale changes would be required in all areas of planning, design, construction and facilities management. However, none of the "experts" could identify an example to follow that reflected the scale of changes NAVFAC was contemplating. All were excited, however, that an endeavor of the size indicated was being considered.

In the course of the workshop, the concept of "Sustainable Design" (or "Green Architecture") was introduced. While a few members of the PAT had already become somewhat familiar with these concepts, the term was completely new to most. It was determined, however, that pursuing a course toward Sustainable Design was what NAVFAC needed to do -- that this encompassed the essence of NAVFAC's desire to be more environmentally responsible.

In addressing the questions of benefits and cost, all experts seemed to agree that the very best thing NAVFAC could do for the environment was to simply use less energy -- that energy conservation was the single most important way to have a positive effect on the environment. It was also noted that using less energy would also lead to lower life-cycle costs. No one, however, indicated that NAVFAC could get serious about being environmentally responsible without spending significantly more money up front in construction cost.

PAT members left the workshop excited about the possibilities for improving NAVFAC's facilities in conjunction with being better stewards of our environmental resources. Members also anticipated that this would come at a cost, and especially, that facilities would cost more initially. The key to implementing a sustainable design program within NAVFAC seemed, then, to be tied to three issues: (1) demonstrating the importance of better environmental stewardship; (2) demonstrating the benefits of life-cycle costs approaches to both NAVFAC and its customers; and (3) finding ways to obtain increased funding for projects to cover the anticipated increase in first costs.

In a climate where the Cold War had just recently ended and reduced military spending seemed to be a given, none of the above seemed very promising. Nevertheless, NAVFAC proceeded with its plans to incorporate sustainability principles and concepts into its facilities business, specifically identifying the need for a pilot project initiative.

In June 1995, long before the projected pilot project initiative was to start, a representative from Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) of Snowmass, CO, addressed a gathering of top Navy officials, presenting the concepts and benefits of an integrated or holistic approach to Sustainable Design. Specifically noted were potential energy savings of 60% to 80%, achievable in typical non-DoD buildings, concepts for improved working conditions that would lead to increased productivity, lower life-cycle costs, and realization of a wide range of other environmental benefits. What got everyone's attention, however, was RMI's claim that all of this could occur without significantly increasing first costs o that, in some instances, first costs might even be lower!

Subsequently, through a series of pilot projects undertaken in concert with the RMI philosophy, NAVFAC has successfully demonstrated the feasibility of implementing a substantial number of initiatives incorporating sustainability principles and concepts without significantly increasing first costs. These results have tracked well with experiences of others applying these concepts. On the basis of the success of these pilot projects and the high degree of correlation between NAVFAC's experiences and those of many others throughout industry, NAVFAC, through this policy statement, is implementing, Command-wide, its Sustainable Development Program.

Attachment 3

Definitions of Sustainable Design

Numerous definitions of "Sustainable Design" exist. The following are some that have influenced the development of the NAVFAC definition:

"Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (The World Commission on Environment and Development {The Brundland Commission} - 1987)

". . . the achievement of a dignified, peaceful, and equitable existence . . . a growing economy that provides equitable opportunities for satisfying livelihoods and a safe, healthy, high quality of life for current and future generations . . . protect the environment, its natural resource base, and the functions and viability of natural systems on which all life depends." (The President's Council on Sustainable Design - 1996)

"Doing more with less, in many cases by substituting information and intelligence in solving problems rather than additional material or energy resources." (John E. Young and Aaron Sachs in The Next Efficiency Revolution: Creating a Sustainable Materials Economy - 1994)

". . . sustainable design is not a new building style. Instead, it represents a revolution in how we think about, design, construct, and operate buildings. The primary goal of sustainable design is to lessen the harm poorly designed buildings cause by using the best of ancient building approaches in logical combination with the best of new technological advances." (Dianna Lopez Barnett and William D. Browning in A Primer on Sustainable Building, Rocky Mountain Institute - 1995)

 

 

Attachment 4

Integrated Design and its Relationship to First Costs

Under traditional design methods, an increase in quality can typically be realized in a project through the expenditure of increased funds. This increase in quality may be reflected through improved life-cycle costs, greater durability of materials, increased energy efficiency, better interior environments, or, increased application of sustainable design concepts and principles. How the increased quality is specifically manifested results from the direction given the designer and/or the expertise of the designer in carrying out the design. As costs increase, however, the corresponding extent to which quality typically increases diminishes proportionally. Each different combination of project and designer will have a unique "Value Curve" reflecting, among other things, the expertise of the designer.

For facilities designed by NAVFAC, budgets are established, typically on a square-foot basis, prior to design occurring. In other words, the designer seeks to design to a predetermined square-foot cost. The figure established for any given facility is that which is considered appropriate, given the facility type, geographical region, and other factors affecting cost. Many consider these square foot costs to be inadequate to fully or even appropriately consider life-cycle costs, sustainability, and other factors.

Considering sustainability features only, the portion of Line A which falls below Line C can, and typically has, incorporated some sustainability features, and perhaps there are some opportunities to incorporate a few others without increasing a project's first cost. Generally, however, and under traditional design procedures, a substantial increase in sustainability features adopted is feasible only through increased first cost expenditures.

"Integrated Design" concepts, however, offer an alternative to spending more to get more. A designer applying "Integrated Design" concepts to the same project represented by Diagram A4-1, causes a major shift of the "Value Curve" to a new position represented by Line B. In comparing the quality achieved under traditional design methods (represented by Line A) with the quality achieved under "Integrated Design" concepts (represented by Line B), a s _A is created which represents a net increase in quality, or, in our example, a net increase in the sustainability features that can be incorporated into a given project without increasing its first cost.

It is NAVFAC's position, based on data from its Sustainable Development Pilot Project Program combined with industry data, that the s _A represents a substantial increase in the sustainable features of the typical project over that typically obtained through traditional design methods o that Point E represents a facility which is significantly more sustainable than that represented by Point D. Consequently, the facility resulting from application of the "Integrated Design" methodology does incorporate substantial sustainability features, and readily qualifies to be called a "Sustainable Design" or a "Sustainable Facility."

Due to the newness of the concepts of "Integrated Design" and designersi knowledge and experience in applying sustainability concepts and principles through the design process, the placement of Line B may vary significantly from designer to designer. This fact places a special emphasis on the importance of selecting the project designer. Over time, it can be anticipated that the placement of Line B for the design profession as a whole, as well as for a given designer, will continue to move to a lower position on Diagram A4-1, as experience increases and new methodologies and tools are applied to a greater extent.

It is acknowledged that, for many projects, there are proponents for attaining increased levels of quality through increased first cost expenditures. These goals continue to remain valid especially with respect to improved life-cycle costs and the increased application of sustainable design concepts. NAVFAC's sustainable design philosophy and supporting policies in no way diminish their need or genuineness. If additional funds are available, more sustainability features can be incorporated into a project and a better life-cycle cost posture can be attained.