Developed by the Michigan Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Program: December 20, 2016
POLLUTION PREVENTION, WASTE REDUCTION,
AND ENERGY CONSERVATION REPORT
CLIENT/FACILITY FULL NAME [All CAPs and BOLD]
Street Address [Not Bold]
City, Michigan Zip Code [Not Bold]
[CLIENT NAME] [or other appropriate noun] ASSESSMENT HOST or TEAM
Name(s), Title(s)
[Please make sure all client team names and titles above are correctly spelled as per their business card!]
RETIRED ENGINEER TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (RETAP)
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Name, Team Leader
Name(s), Team Member(s)
Name, Team Member and Report Writer
[Please add appropriate title(s) such as CEA, P.E., Ph.D. after each RETAPer name]
On behalf of the
Michigan Agency for Energy
Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs
Assessment Date: [Date]
DO NOT DELETE ANY BLANK PAGES THAT FOLLOW
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subject Page
Acknowledgement, Disclaimer, Purpose and Objective 1
Executive Summary 2
I. Introduction and Background p
II. Facilities and Operations p
III. Current Status, Waste Streams, and Recommendations for Improvement p
Environmental Conservation - General (EC) p
Hazardous Waste and Universal Waste, Handling, and Disposal (HW) p
Solid Waste, Handling, and Disposal (SW) p
Liquid Waste, Handling, and Disposal (LW) p
Electricity - General (EL) p
Electricity - Lighting (LT) p
Electricity – Compressed Air (CA) p
Natural Gas (NG) or Propane Gas (PG) p
Heating and Cooling (HC) p
Water and Sewer (WS) p
IV. Conclusion p
V. Feedback……………………………………………………………………….. p
VI. Attachments p
This report is submitted on recycled paper, printed on both sides,
as required by the State of Michigan.
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This report is made possible by the State of Michigan through funds appropriated in support of the pollution prevention technical assistance activities of the Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Program (RETAP).
DISCLAIMER
This report is based largely on information provided by the assessed business or institution. The quality of the analysis is only as valid as the quality of the information received. The contents of this report are offered as guidance. The Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Foundation (RETAF) does not make any warranty or representation, expressed or implied (a) with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or (b) that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe on privately owned rights. The Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Foundation does not assume any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY
The services of the RETAP are confidential. The report generated for a client and any information that can be used to identify the assisted facility will not be shared outside of the RETAP without preauthorization from the client.
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE
The Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Program (RETAP) was established by the State of Michigan to help Michigan businesses and institutions prevent pollution, reduce waste and conserve energy. The Michigan Agency for Energy within the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) administers the program. The Retired Engineer Technical Assistance Foundation, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) foundation incorporated in the State of Michigan, provides these technical services through a contract with the State of Michigan. RETAP assessment teams are made up of retirees from many Michigan industries willing to apply their skills, expertise and time to identify and assess potential pollution prevention and energy efficiency opportunities and to provide recommendations for improvement.
The program is not one of compliance with or enforcement of regulations. Implementation of the recommendations is entirely voluntary and at the discretion of the facility management. Acceptance of the offered assistance is evidence of a good faith effort to improve energy efficiency and reduce waste.
The following report presents the findings and recommendations of an on-site energy conservation assessment by a RETAP team.
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT
An indemnification agreement between RETAP and CLIENT’S NAME was signed by NAME, TITLE on MONTH, DAY, YEAR.
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CLIENT FULL NAME [ALL CAPS]
On [insert date], a RETAP team conducted a pollution prevention, waste reduction, and energy conservation assessment of [Full name of the Client] in [City], MI. Table 1 below shows the major recommended opportunities that the RETAP team was able to identify. Savings are quantified where the team was able to do so; implementation of those recommendations that are quantified will result in estimated savings of about [$XXX,000] in annual waste disposal and utility costs shown in Table 2 (i.e., excluding savings related to the goal setting recommendation EC-#); that represents savings of XX%. Additional savings will also result from implementing those recommendations that could not be readily quantified. Included are the potential savings and payback time for the quantified recommendations. Note that these estimates are based on information gathered during the assessment and application of basic “rules of thumb” and engineering judgment. As such, each estimate, whether quantitative or qualitative, should be viewed as a reasonable order of magnitude of savings, cost, and payback time. The best estimates, of course, can only be made by Client Full Name, whose personnel have access to the best cost figures for materials, background data, and labor costs directly applicable to its operations. In addition, Table 1 shows the positive effect to the environment that each of the major quantified recommendations will have if implemented. Implementing these recommendations has the potential for avoidance to the environment of the equivalent of about ### metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) annually. The pages referenced at the right include more detailed information on the recommendations. Additional recommendations are included in Section III, which starts on page __ of this report. The nomenclature key is shown at the end of the table below. Note: A payback time indicated as “Immediate” means that savings start accruing upon implementation of the recommendation without the outlay of significant capital or labor expense.
Table 2 on page _ shows the current waste disposal cost and utility usage and cost summary for the assessed facility. The table includes current indices that can be useful in monitoring energy usage efficiency as recommendations in Table 1 are implemented or as other changes are made.
Table 1 - Summary of Pollution Prevention, Waste Reduction, and Energy Conservation Recommendations
/ Client Full Name, City, Michigan /Ref.
No. / Recommendation
Description / Estimated Annual Savings / Estimated Cost / Payback
Time / Page
No. /
Resource / Value / MTCO2e /
EC-1 / Set specific, measurable, and achievable goals. / All forms of waste and energy / $##,### for 5% reduction goal
EC-2 / Implement suggested administrative steps that will help meet the goals suggested in EC-1. / All forms of waste and energy / P2, E2, Cost control
LT-1 / Conduct a lighting intensity audit throughout the facility. / Electricity / E2, Cost control
HC-1 / Institute a program to make sure that HVAC equipment is working correctly and tuned to the building’s use. / X,XXX CCF for #% reduction / $X,XXX
Nomenclature Key for Tables 1 and 2:
EC - Environmental Conservation - General
HW - Hazardous/Universal Waste, Handling, and
Disposal
SW - Solid Waste, Handling, and Disposal
LW - Liquid Waste, Handling, and Disposal
EL - Electricity - General
LT - Electricity - Lighting
CA - Electricity - Compressed Air
NG - Natural Gas
HC - Heating and Cooling
WS - Water and Sewer / Symbols and Abbreviations:
Btu - British thermal unit
CCF - hundred cubic feet
CO2 - carbon dioxide
E2 - energy efficiency
kWh - kilowatt-hours
LED - light-emitting diode
MH - metal halide
MMBtu - million Btu
MTCO2e - metric tons of CO2 equivalent
P2 - pollution prevention
PCBs - polychlorinated biphenyls
Table 2 – Annual Waste Disposal Cost and Utility Usage and Cost Summary
Insert Client Full Name
[Modify table to best suit the client. Fill in the total waste disposal cost and utility usage data and cost as actual. Editors will fill in all Energy MMBtu data.]
Waste/Utility / Utility Usage / Units / Annual Cost
All Waste Disposed / NA / NA / $WW,WWW
Electricity / E,EEE,EEE / kWh / $EE,EEE
Electricity Energy / ABC,000 / MMBtu/yr
Natural Gas / GG,GGG / CCF / $GG,GGG
Gas Energy / DEF,000 / MMBtu/yr
Domestic Water / WWW,WWW* / Gallons/yr / $W,WWW*
Water Utilization Index / WWW** / Gal/Work Day
Total / $TTT,TTT
* Total annual water and sewer cost; water-only cost was $#,###. ** Based on ### work days per year.
4
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND [Use 2 spaces between sentences]
On [insert date], a RETAP team conducted a pollution prevention, waste reduction, and energy conservation assessment of [Full name of the Client] in [City], MI. The team met with Name(s), Title(s). Name(s) hosted the tour of the facilities.
[Insert below a brief description, preferably one paragraph, providing an overview of the Client/facility and its purpose/function. Include the client’s website.]
[A client name of 3 words or more may be shortened, using one or two words, or it can be abbreviated to form an acronym.]
Suggest adding reason for assessment if client expresses particular items of interest, such as:
Example 1: CLIENT requested the assessment to explore opportunities for pollution prevention and waste reduction and for possible savings in energy usage and cost.
Example 2: CLIENT requested this assessment, after a marketing call, for an in-depth analysis of its waste streams, natural gas use, plant lighting, and water use.
Example 3: A primary focus of the assessment is to determine the most beneficial method for the disposal or reuse of liquid waste generated from the manufacturing process.
Example 4: The primary concerns for requesting the RETAP assessment are high energy and solid waste costs.
II. FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS
Facilities [Insert a VERY brief description below of each building’s structural elements (e.g., walls, roof, ceilings, insulation, windows), but not including non-structural contents such as heating and cooling system. Include a short statement on the general layout. Include the number and type of buildings and square footage and the office area in each.]
Operations [Insert below a VERY brief description of the operations if it is not already covered in Section I above. The State requires that the report include the number of employees. Also include the hourly/daily/weekly work schedule(s).]
III. CURRENT STATUS, WASTE STREAMS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT [DO NOT CHANGE THE 2 PARAGRAPHS BELOW]
The following paragraphs describe the status of the present and potential waste streams found by the RETAP team during the assessment and offer recommendations for preventing pollution, reducing waste, and conserving energy. Often, implementing the recommendations will also result in improved operations and reduced costs for the facility. Quantitative estimates of the resource reductions, dollar savings, and implementation costs for the recommendations that follow are usually based on information gathered in Michigan or via the Internet. The estimates are calculated in most cases using simple engineering and scientific relationships and assumptions. As such, each estimate, whether quantitative or qualitative, should be viewed as a reasonable order of magnitude of savings, cost, and payback time. The best estimates, of course, can only be made by Client full name, whose personnel have access to the best cost figures for materials, background data, and labor costs directly applicable to its operations.
In the interest of reducing waste streams, preventing pollution and improving energy efficiency, the RETAP team has identified opportunities for improvements as discussed in the report that follows.
[REMEMBER TO SELECT FROM THE SAMPLE RECOMMENDATIONS GIVEN BELOW FOR THE SECTIONS THAT FOLLOW, BUT BE SURE TO CHANGE THE DATA FOR THE CLIENT OF THIS ASSESSMENT. SUPPLEMENT WITH FACILITY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS]
Environmental Conservation - General (EC)
Status – Overview of waste streams and energy use [Insert an overview description below of the client’s waste streams and any reduce/reuse/recycling efforts; also provide any significant summaries or analyses done either by the client or by the RETAP team. Be sure to include a total of all annual waste disposal costs; details about specific waste streams and costs can be included in an attachment or in each of the P2 sections that follow, i.e., Hazardous and Universal Waste, Solid Waste and/or Liquid Waste.]
Use paragraph below (modify if needed to suit the client) to characterize the energy usage for the entire facility. If there are multiple buildings, you may want to have a paragraph for the energy in each building, BUT only if the buildings are on separate electricity and gas meters. For most reports, we are generally using annual energy use (MMBtu/yr) instead of EUI (Btu/sq ft/yr), except for energy audits.
A review of the overall annual energy usage for a facility can be done by converting all types of energy used (e.g., electricity and natural gas) to a common energy form of MMBtu per year (million Btu/yr). The total energy for the assessed facility is simply the sum of each energy type used, which totals ###,000 MMBtu/yr as shown in Attachment 1, Energy Usage and Cost Data. The energy used for electricity is ##% (i.e., electricity MMBtu/yr is about ##,000) and natural gas is ##% of the total energy usage (i.e., gas MMBtu/yr is about ##,000). General usage and cost profiles for electricity and natural gas, which are also shown in Attachment 1, can be useful in monitoring energy usage efficiency as recommendations in this report are implemented and in identifying opportunities for energy efficiency improvement.
[Indicate who reviews and approves invoices now, such as “Waste and utility invoices for the facility are reviewed and approved by financial management personnel prior to payment.”]
Recommendations
EC-1 -- Beyond guiding the implementation of recommendations in this report, have the [lead individual? or team?] (i.e., as noted in recommendation EC-2 below) set specific, measurable, and achievable goals. Any of these goals would be in addition to reductions resulting from implementation of quantified recommendations in this report. For example, one realistic goal could be to reduce all waste and/or energy by 5% each year for the next several years.