2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Tribal code
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
1 | Page
Bay Mills Indian Community
The Big Green Up Report
2022
Energy Efficiency
Waste Characterization
Single-Use Items Survey
Building Recycling Efforts
Procurement Policy
Green Building Recommendations
Stormwater Management Infrastructure
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
2 | Page
To assess current energy and waste trends across Bay Mills Indian Community’s
government, education, enterprise, and business holdings operations. Priorities include,
identifying areas for improving energy efficiency, determining most feasible materials for
landfill diversion through waste characterization studies, single-use item surveys, greener
procurement policies and building recycling efforts, developing a green buildings checklist
and assessing storm water management infrastructure to create sustainability standards for
future development. This assessment was completed in an effort to create long-lasting,
energy-conscious practices and positively affect the quality of the natural environment.
Prepared by:
BMIC Green Infrastructure Committee
Brianna Gunka, Jennifer Parks, Aubrey Maccoux-LeDuc, Carmen Kincaid and
assistance from the Superior Watershed Partnership
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
3 | Page
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
6
Chapter 1.0 Introduction
8
Chapter 1.1 Project Background and Description
9
Chapter 1.2 Project Scope
9
Chapter 2.0 Energy Assessment
10
2.1 Energy Assessment Methods
10
2.1.i Billing and Historical Use Assessment Methods
10
2.1.ii Energy Efficiency Assessment of 2022 by Superior Watershed Partnership—Methodology
12
2.2 Energy Assessment Results
14
2.2.i Energy Assessment Results of 2011
14
2.2.ii Energy Assessment Results of 2022
18
2.3 Recommendations of the Energy Assessment 2022
27
Chapter 3.0 Waste Assessment
29
3.1 Description of Current Waste Management Practices
29
3.2 Waste Assessment Results
30
3.3 Waste Characterization Study of 2020-- community
31
3.4 Waste Characterization Study of 2022—BMRC
36
3.5 Single-Use Item Survey
39
3.5.i Single-Use Item Survey Methods
39
3.5.ii Single-Use Item Survey Results
39
3.5.iii Single-Use Item Recommendations
41
3.6 Building Recycling
41
3.6.i Building Recycling Survey Methods
41
3.6.ii Building Recycling Survey Results
42
3.6. iii Building Recycling Recommendations
43
Chapter 4. Procurement
44
4.1 Procurement Policy Recommendations
45
4.2 Proposed Procurement Policy
46
Chapter 5. Green Buildings and Grounds
55
5.1 Definitions
55
5.2 Background
56
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
4 | Page
5.3 Green Building Recommendations and Checklist
58
Chapter 6. Stormwater Management Infrastructure and Roads Network
65
6.1 Stormwater Management Recommendations
68
References
69
Appendix A: Energy Conservation Measures
70
Appendix B: Energy Efficiency Assessment of 2022
71
B.1 Tribal Administration (12140 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.2 Biological Services and Conservation Depts (11801 Plantation Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.3 BMIC Public Works (5463 S Nbiish Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.4 Advanced Office Technologies (12061 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.5 Boys and Girls Club of Bay Mills (12435 Industrial Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.6 BMIC Justice Center (12449 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.7 Bay Mills Head Start Child Development (12471 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.8 Armella B Parker Elder Center/ History Department (12485 W. Lakeshore Dr)
defined.
Error! Bookmark not
B.9 Commodity Foods (12497 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.10 Mukwa Health and Fitness Center (12400 W. Spectacle Lake Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.11 BMIC Culture Department (12498 W. Tower Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.12 Bay Mills Housing Authority (3095 S. Towering Pines Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.13 Ojibwe Charter School (11507 W. Industrial Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.14 Bay Mills Resort and Casino (11386 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.15 Wild Bluff Golf Course (11335 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.16 Bay Mart Gas Station (10001 W. Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.17 Four Seasons Market and Deli (9253 W. 6 Mile Rd)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.18 Bay Mills Fire Crew, Migizi Hall (1895 S Iroquois Row)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
B.19 Ellen Marshall Health Center (12455 Lakeshore Dr)
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix C: Excerpts from 2011 Energy Efficiency Study
121
C.1 BMIC Current Tribal Administration Building
127
C.2 Ojibwe Charter School original building
137
C.3 Waishkey Center
146
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
5 | Page
Executive Summary
In December, 2021, President Gravelle directed the Green Infrastructure Committee to assess
current energy and waste trends across government, enterprise, and business holdings
operations. The Bay Mills Indian Community (BMIC) Energy and Waste Study was conducted
over a 12-month period, beginning January, 2022. This final report was submitted to the Bay
Mills Indian Community Executive Council on January 23, 2023. The project scope included
conducting energy audits and reviewing two years of energy use bills of BMIC facilities,
conducting a waste characterization study for the Bay Mills Resort & Casino, assessing current
procurement and use of single-use goods, determining recycling efforts in BMIC facilities,
developing a green buildings checklist and procedure policy for future development, and
assessing storm water management across the reservation. The ultimate goal of the study is to
better understand energy consumption and waste generation, and identify methods of
increasing efficiency and sustainability across BMIC entities to create long lasting practices that
consider changing climatic changes and weather patterns while positively affecting the quality
of the natural and built environment.
In June, 2022, the Green Infrastructure Committee secured a Michigan Department of
Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy Community Energy Management Program grant,
allowing BMIC to contract with the Superior Watershed Partnership to complete the energy
audits and waste characterization study. Over a period of six weeks, Superior Watershed
Partnership staff conducted 24 energy audits using the Department of Energy’s Building Energy
Asset Score Tool, and sorted approximately 975 lbs of Bay Mills Resort and Casino waste using
the EPA’s waste characterization data collection log and standard operating procedures.
The energy audits and related power consumption analyses conducted for this study revealed
numerous significant energy conservation and efficiency opportunities for all of the subject
buildings. In addition, many of the energy conservation measures require no cost and serve to
help balance other measures requiring capital investment. Reoccurring deficiencies relating to
heating, cooling and thermostat inefficiencies, powering computers, lighting, items linked to
weatherization and numerous other items were encountered that can be mitigated with the
energy conservation measures developed in the following document.
The waste characterization study, single-use item survey and facility recycling survey brought to
light many areas where improved recycling practices, greener procurement practices and use of
reusable items can be implemented to divert materials from entering the landfill.
In 2021 alone, Bay Mills Indian Community as a whole, procured over $19.6 million in goods.
Bay Mills Indian Community’s existing Procurement Policy was designed to ensure that supplies,
services, and construction are procured at the most favorable prices available to BMIC, not
taking into consideration the environmental implications of such purchases. The Green
Infrastructure Committee developed a draft Environmentally Preferable Products (EPP) policy
to work in concert with the current procurement policy, to ensure that future procurement is
assessed in terms of favorable pricing and environmental preferability.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
6 | Page
In recent years, BMIC completed several new development projects; including, the Health
Center, Elder’s Housing, Boys and Girls Club, Maintenance, and Public Works. In addition, BMIC
redeveloped old Maintenance into Boys and Girls Club offices, Great Lakes Composite Institute
into Northern Lights Cannabis Company, and is in the process of redeveloping the old health
center into a new Administration facility. In the next several years, BMIC will develop housing
on Plantation Hill, additional Elders Housing, another Boys and Girls Club facility, a Waste
Transfer Station, a long-term care facility, storage units, a fish ice shack, a dental clinic, Justice
Center and Commodity Foods expansions, Child Development Center expansion, and a BMRC
expansion. In addition, the Kings Club Casino, Chippewa Landing, Riverview Park, and properties
in Brimley will be redeveloped. Extensive development and redevelopment presents the
opportunity for Bay Mills Indian Community to take a proactive approach to development by
prioritizing sustainability and a healthy built environment through thoughtful design. To
facilitate this effort, the Green Infrastructure Committee compiled a Procedural Checklist for
Development and Redevelopment, and Green Elements Building Checklist. Together, these
documents will guide future infrastructure efforts by ensuring 1) due diligence steps are
completed prior to development, and 2) infrastructure is designed to be more efficient, provide
a healthier indoor environment, minimize harmful effects on human health and the
environment, and ensure long-term resiliency of the structure.
A dozen road-stream-crossing culverts were surveyed on Bay Mills trust lands. Of the crossings
surveyed two are high priority due to their eroding nature and impacts on fish passage in the
stream. An additional four are ranked as medium priority for repair or replacement.
Improvements at these locations will benefit stormwater management needs and create a
more natural condition for fish in the stream.
Two supplemental reports on energy use at Bay Mills buildings were completed. Highlights of
these reports, with details for each building, are included in Appendices B through C.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
7 | Page
Chapter 1.0 Introduction
Bay Mills Indian Community is located in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and in a climate that is
characterized by long cold winters that require heating homes and workplaces for much of the
year. In addition to cold temperatures, exposure to strong north winds directly off Lake
Superior and short winter daylight means additional energy use to offset these conditions.
These conditions contribute to an intensive use of energy to overcome cold and darkness in
buildings with design, heating, cooling, and lighting system inefficiencies. Increasing the energy
efficiency of Bay Mills Indian Community buildings that are so dependent on energy for heating,
lighting and numerous other uses is an important first step in reducing the use of carbon-based
energy and costly energy expenditures. Energy efficiency measures are often called the “low
hanging fruit” of an energy program because of the often-significant reductions for relatively
low capital expenditures.
Waste characterization studies provide important data regarding solid waste generation and
landfill diversion opportunities. Assessing the waste streams generated by BMIC informs
recycling and procurement decisions by determining which material streams can be landfill
diverted through improved recycling opportunities and green procurement policies.
Determining recycling availability and use of disposable single-use items in facilities also
provides data to assist with recommendations and support for improved recycling
opportunities for various departments and buildings.
Future consequences and the practice of thinking forward seven generations are tied to strong
family and environment values within the Bay Mills Indian Community. This project is
integrated with these values because it plans for actions to positively affect the health and wellbeing of family, community and the environment. Reducing the amount of energy that
originates from a source like that of coal fired electricity plants is very much in line with BMIC’s
values. Lowering electricity use lowers air emissions and leads to improved health especially for
a population that consumes high amounts of fish. Mercury can be traced from coal fired
electricity plants, deposited to the surface, ingested by living organisms, accumulated within
living organisms and consumed by people. People that consume high amounts of fish, like Bay
Mills Indian Community members, are at higher risk of consuming mercury in this way.
Reductions in carbon dioxide and particulate matter similarly influence positive changes for
current and future generations.
The benefits from the energy and waste reduction measures in this project include sustainable
monetary savings, air emission and pollution reduction and strong integration with cultural
values. Monetary savings from reduced energy bills and landfill expenditures would be a
significant benefit from the implementation of this project’s findings. These savings offer
various future opportunities including reinvestment into expanding and continuing energy
efficiency measures, weatherization, investment into renewable energy production systems
and increased recycling.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
8 | Page
This study and resulting recommendations create opportunities for reducing air emissions,
pollution and environmental degradation that occurs with mining and drilling operations.
Numerous environmental benefits would be associated with the implementation of this
project’s results with reductions of mercury, carbon dioxide reduction, nitrogen oxides
reduction, carbon monoxide reduction, particulate matter reduction, erosion, sedimentation
and others.
The anticipated cultural benefits of the proposed project would uphold the belief that
stewardship of our environment and resources is vital. Continuously working towards care of
the environment is a core value and would be part of the benefit of energy efficiency and
energy reduction objectives of this project.
Chapter 1.1 Project Background and Description
In December, 2021, President Gravelle directed the Green Infrastructure Committee to assess
current energy and waste trends across government, enterprise, and business holdings
operations. Priorities included improving energy efficiency and use, and reducing waste
entering the landfill.
Chapter 1.2 Project Scope
The Green Community Assessment and Recommendations report was conducted over a 12month period, beginning January 2022, and ending December, 2022. The study focused on six
key areas: conducting an energy audit, conducting a waste audit, determining single-use
product use, determining recycling efforts in BMIC facilities, developing a green buildings
checklist, developing procedures that promote sustainability and assessing storm water
management.
Due to modified building usage during the COVID-19 pandemic, this assessment tried to use
records less impacted by changes in building usage and staff behavior. Generally, researchers
preferred to use records from 2018-2019 and 2020-2021. Some records were also chosen for
analysis because buildings were newly acquired or renovated; in those cases, 2021 data was
analyzed. Further explanation of record analysis is described in relevant sections below.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
9 | Page
Chapter 2.0 Energy Assessment
2.1 Energy Assessment Methods
An energy assessment was first completed in 2011. Some of the buildings surveyed at the time
have been significantly remodeled or repurposed since then. Some have also been renamed
over the past decade. The table below highlights the old and new names for these buildings.
Table 2.1. Building Name Comparison
2011 Survey Building Name
Tribal Administration Building
Ellen Marshall Health Center
BMIC Charter School
Waishkey Center Community Building
Bay Mills Community College Library
Bay Mills Community College Admin.
Bay Mills Community College Mikanuk
2022 Survey Building Name
Tribal Administration Building
Future Admin
OCS
Waishkey Center
Library
Adikameg Hall
Mikanuk
2.1.i Billing and Historical Use Assessment Methods
The Bay Mills Indian Community Energy Efficiency Feasibility Study of 2011 was accomplished
by collecting historical energy consumption data, analyses of historical energy use data,
detailed energy audits including occupant and building manager interviews, thermography
evaluation, itemized energy consumption calculations, energy conservation and energy
efficiency alternatives research, energy conservation measure choice, energy conservation
measure savings and cost calculations and community awareness throughout the project. These
efforts were utilized with the objective of reducing each building’s energy consumption by 30%
or greater.
Before looking at each building’s current energy use it was important to look at past energy use
in the form of electricity and natural gas utility bills. Two years of previous utility bills were
averaged together and formed the numbers representing existing energy use. This will serve as
a baseline for comparison to energy conservation measures. In addition to yearly energy use,
plotting historical monthly use was analyzed to determine increases associated with seasonal
loads tied to heating and cooling.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
10 | Page
Figure 2.1.i Map of Bay Mills Indian Community Main Reservation
The study completed in 2022 followed a similar format. Records from 2021 and 2019 were used
to determine current energy usage. Due to COVID-19, records from 2019 were used in place of
2020. This gives a more complete illustration of energy usage as many buildings were being
used significantly less in 2020. For consistency, one year was the December of the previous year
included with January-November bills of that year. For example, “2021” was December 2020
combined with January through November 2021. All buildings included in the billing assessment
used records from 2021. While researchers hoped to assess the billed utility use of all Bay Mills
buildings, that was not possible at the time. Numerous buildings, departments, programs have
been in the midst of moves, reorganizations, and/ or renovations in the last three years. For this
reason, major facilities such as the health center or Northern Lights were not included in this
portion of the assessment. Additionally, data for some buildings was not in time to be included
in analysis, such as the Housing Authority office. Still other buildings are combined in aspects of
their utility billing and where therefore combined for simplicity in this assessment, such as the
BMCC Main Campus buildings. The table below lists the primary buildings that were included in
the assessment. They are grouped by primary manager for the facility and not necessarily by
department(s) using the facility.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
11 | Page
Table 2.1.i. Buildings Assessed for Energy Efficiency in 2022
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
Tribal Admin. Building / Kings Club
Future Admin (12124 Lakeshore)
Elders/History Dept
Culture Dept
Justice Center
Head Start Child Center
AOT
Biological Services/Conservation Dept
Commodity Foods
Public Works (5463 Niibish)
Maintenance (5414 Niibish)
Ojibwe Charter School
Waishkey Center
BMCC Main Campus (Library + Mikanuk)
BMCC West Campus: Trades
Mukwa Fitness Center
Waishkey Bay Farm
BMCC Migizi Hall
ENTERPRISE AND BUSINESS HOLDINGS
Bay Mart gas station
Four Seasons Market & Deli
Wild Bluff Golf Course
Wild Bluff Mntn/ Cart Barn
Laundry
Bay Mills Resort and Casino
2.1.ii Energy Efficiency Assessment of 2022 by Superior Watershed Partnership—Methodology
In 2022, Bay Mills Indian Community contracted with Superior Watershed Partnership and the
Great Lakes Climate Corps to perform an assessment on building energy usage and efficiency.
The full report is available in Appendix B.
Table 2.1.ii.Building with DOE Score and Potential Cost Savings_
Building and Address
DOE Score
Potential Cost
Savings
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Tribal Administration (12124 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
1%
Biological Services/Conservation (11801 Plantation Rd)
9.0/10
11%
Public Works (5463 S Nbiish Rd)
6.5/10
2%
Advanced Office Technologies (12061 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
14%
Waishkey Center/ Boys & Girls Club (11435 W. Lakeshore Dr)
7.5/10
4%
Tribal Justice Center (12449 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
16%
Elder Center/ History (12485 W. Lakeshore Dr)
7.5/10
2%
Commodity Foods (12497 W. Lakeshore Dr)
8.0/10
1%
Housing Authority (3095 S. Towering Pines Rd)
8.0/5
11%
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
12 | Page
Culture Department (12498 W. Tower Rd)
10/10
12%
Maintenance Building (5414 S Nbiish Rd.)
0/0
5%
Ellen Marshall Health Center (new) (12455 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
1%
Head Start Child Care Center (12471 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
14%
Ojibwe Charter School (11507 W. Industrial Dr)
6.0/10
>50%
BMCC Migizi Hall (Fire Crew building) (1895 S Iroquois Row)
9.5.10
3%
Bay Mills Community College (12214 W. Lakeshore Dr)
8.0/10
10%
Waishkey Bay Farm (10135 W. Mills Rd.)
5.0/10
10%
Mukwa Health/ Fitness Center (12400 W. Spectacle Lake Rd)
9.0/10
1%
Bay Mills Resort & Casino (11386 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
11%
Wild Bluff Golf Course (11335 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
14%
Bay Mart Gas Station (10001 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
2%
Northern Light Cannabis Company (2735 W. M-28, Dafter)
9.5/10
2%
Four Seasons Market & Deli (9253 W. 6 Mile Rd)
10/10
13%
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ENTERPRISES
GLCC surveyors with energy efficiency scoring certifications from the Department of Energy
(DOE), along with a contractor-partner, utilized a DOE’s Building Energy Score Data Collection
tool for building assessments. The Asset Score assesses the energy efficiency of these assets
and identifies opportunities for improvement. Using building information input by the user, the
tool runs a building energy simulation and generates a report. Throughout the process, the
surveyors completed DOE data collection sheets for each building. The tool had the capability
of assessing physical and structural energy efficiency. Measurements were taken of building
envelope, orientation, and window area. Through the use of various sensors and detectors, the
efficiency of windows and light fixtures was determined. Heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning (HVAC) equipment was also inspected. The efficiencies for HVAC equipment was
calculated using nameplate data and through data provided by manufacturers. BMIC Public
Works Department and the History Department provided information about the age and
features of buildings. Using the DOE’s Online Asset Scoring System, each building was given a
rating on a scale of one to ten. This system does not take into account occupant behavior or
operations. This does allow for the comparison of buildings, but fails to consider the functions
of buildings. The measures taken to decrease energy consumption should outweigh the cost
both financially and environmentally of the proposed improvements, but it is not clear if that
was taken into consideration.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
13 | Page
The DOE tool is useful, but limited and should not be considered the only measure of efficiency
building assessment. The DOE Asset Scoring Tool applies standard assumptions concerning
miscellaneous loads (e.g., office equipment, vending machines) based on building type.
Building-specific energy and operational costs are not included in the calculation of the building
score. The Asset Score Report contains estimated annual building energy usage and estimated
savings associated with identified energy efficiency measures. These estimates are based on
average regional utility rates and standard assumptions about operational factors such as
occupancy density, hours of operation, and miscellaneous loads (such as office equipment).
Currently, the Asset Scoring Tool does not include on-site renewable energy generation in the
calculation. This tool may be increasingly useful if more detailed information is inputted into
the tool. But when only basic information is inputted, it may be challenging to compare
buildings with great differences in design and operation, for example the Tribal Office
compared to the Public Works building. Additionally in some buildings, limited
recommendations for improvement may be offered by the tool if the building and appliances
are fairly new, and/or if the building design would have to be significantly altered to improve
efficiency (for example, large garage spaces).
2.2 Energy Assessment Results
2.2.i Energy Assessment Results of 2011
The results of the 2011 baseline energy assessment indicate that of the Ellen Marshall Health
Center, Tribal Administration Building and the BMIC Charter School have ranking scores
available within Energy Star’s Portfolio Manager. The ranking of these three facilities show the
Charter School is average in energy consumption, Ellen Marshall Health Center consumes more
than average and the Tribal Administration Building consumes less energy than average
buildings with similarly characterized use. While the remaining buildings don’t have available
ranking scores compared to their “peers” they do have Energy Intensity values. Energy
Intensity and “peer” rankings (for buildings with available score) are shown in the following
table that compares and summarizes each building’s energy consumption. None of the BMIC
facilities were eligible for an Energy Star EPR.
Based on each facility’s energy use, estimates of greenhouse gas emissions were generated
using Energy Star Portfolio Manager. The College consumed the most total site energy and also
generating the greatest amount of GHG emissions at 411 MT CO2-e in 2011 and was close
followed by the Ellen Marshall Health Center at 400 MT CO2-e. The total annual GHG emissions
was 1,292 MT CO2-e, which to put in more tangible terms is equivalent to the annual emissions
from 269 cars or the amount of carbon sequestered annually 1,059 acres of forest.7 The
following table and charts illustrate the current state of energy consumption in the subject
buildings.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
14 | Page
Table 2.2.i: 2011 Building Energy Performance
Building Energy Performance
Energy
Performance
Rating (1-100)
Site Energy
Intensity/National
Median
(kBtu/ft2/yr)
Source Energy
Intensity/National
Median
(kBtu/ft2/yr)
Total
Annual
Site Energy
(kBtu)
Total Annual
GHG
Emissions
(MT CO2-e)
85
51/82
118/189 (-38%)
586,009
81
44
111/104
227/213 (+7%)
3,329,503
400
52
106/109
165/170 (-2%)
1,717,715
150
NA
88/39
145/100 (+45%)
2,589,427
242
BMCC Library
BMCC (old) Admin
Building
NA
65/104
139/244 (-43%)
429,411
55
NA
70/104
186/244 (-24%)
926,286
148
BMCC Mikanuk
NA
157/104
308/244 (+26%)
1,880,608
216
Building
Tribal Admin Building
(12140)
Ellen Marshall Health
Center (12142)
Ojibwe Charter School
Waishkey Center
Building
Source: Energy Star Portfolio Manager
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
15 | Page
Current Individual Building Energy Consumption
$70,000
$3.50
A $60,000
n
$50,000
n
u $40,000
a $30,000
l
$20,000
$3.00 C
o
$2.50
s
$2.00 t
$
$1.50
$10,000
$0
BMIC
Admin
Health
Center
Waishkey
Center
Charter
School
BMCC
Admin
BMCC
Mikanuk
BMCC
Library
Building
$1.00 f
t
$0.50
2
$0.00
Annual Energy $
Energy Cost/Floor Area
Figure 2.2.i.A. 2011 Individual Building Energy Consumption
20000
18000
16000
14000
c 12000
c 10000
f 8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Natural Gas Consumption
$1.20
C
o
$0.80 s
t
$0.60
$1.00
Tribal
Admin.
Building
Health
Center
Waiskey
Center
Charter
School
BMCC
Admin
Building
Mikanuk
Building
Library
History
Dept
$0.40 f
$0.20 t
2
$0.00
2009/2010
2010/2011
Cost/Floor Area 2009/2010
Cost/Floor Area 2010/2011
Figure 2.2.i.B: 2011 Natural Gas Consumption per Building
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
16 | Page
Electricity Consumption
450,000
$2.50
400,000
$2.00
350,000
300,000
KWH
$1.50
250,000
Cost ft2
$1.00
200,000
150,000
100,000
$0.50
50,000
0
Health
Center
Tribal
Admin.
Building
2009/2010
Waiskey
Center
2010/2011
Charter
School
BMCC
Admin
Mikanuk
Building
Cost/Floor Area 2009/2010
Library
$0.00
Cost/Floor Area 2010/2011
Figure 2.2.i.C: 2011 Electricity Consumption per Building
Annual Energy Expenditures
BMIC Admin, $12,706
BMCC, $67,494 Health Center,
$65,627
Charter School,
$24,235
BMIC Admin
Health Center
Waishkey
Center,
$42,232
Waishkey Center
Charter School
BMCC
Figure 2.2.i.D: 2011 Annual Energy Expenditures per Building
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
17 | Page
Annual Energy $ After ECMs
100%
90%
80%
70%
AXIS TITLE
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
BMIC Admin
Health Center
Waishkey Center
Charter School
BMCC
Savings
$6,333
$23,880
$10,734
$10,171
$28,181
Annual Energy $
$6,373
$41,747
$31,498
$14,064
$39,313
Figure 2.2.i.E: 2011 Annual Energy Savings after Energy Conservation Measures per Building
2.2.ii Energy Assessment Results of 2022
This assessment was performed for 26 total buildings. Due to this large number, results are
grouped below by building type. Total building gas consumption, electrical consumption,
combined energy costs and their relative square footage have been compared in the figures
below.
Summary Results of Billing/ Use Assessment
Results in the graphs below reflect expected numbers. Numerous buildings are well-known to
have high energy usage due to their building use, for example, BMRC. Others are known to
have higher energy use and costs due to the age of the building and presumed poor insulation
envelop. The graphs below also reflect anticipated energy use changes. For example, Kings
Club casino (a combined energy bill with Tribal Admin) was open in 2019, but was closed in
2021; therefore the electrical use was significantly reduced. Other changes reflect building
renovations such as new windows (AOT) or roofing (OCS). In a handful of cases, facility use
increased in 2021 and as a result, energy use increased.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
18 | Page
Gas Consumption: Government Operations (A)
$2.20
18,000
16,000
$1.70
12,000
$1.20
10,000
Cost/ft²
Combined Annual CCF
14,000
8,000
$0.70
6,000
4,000
$0.20
2,000
$(0.30)
-
2019
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.A. 2022 Government Operations Gas Consumption (A).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
19 | Page
Gas Consumption: Education Facilities(B)
Gas Consumption: Enterprises & Business
Holdings (C)
$5.00
$4.50
120,000
$5.00
140000
$4.50
120000
$4.00
$4.00
$3.00
80,000
$2.50
60,000
$2.00
$1.50
40,000
$1.00
20,000
$3.50
$3.00
80000
$2.50
60000
$2.00
$1.50
40000
$1.00
20000
$0.50
$0.50
$-
-
2019
Combined Annual CCF
100000
$3.50
Cost/ft²
Combined Annual CCF
100,000
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.B 2022 Educational Facilities Gas Consumption (B).
Consumption (C).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
$-
0
2019
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.C. 2022 Enterprises & Business Holdings Gas
20 | Page
Cost/ft²
140,000
600,000
$3.00
500,000
$2.50
400,000
$2.00
300,000
$1.50
200,000
$1.00
100,000
$0.50
Cost/ft²
Annual kWh
Electricity Consumption: Government Operations (A)
$-
-
2019
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.D. 2022 Government Operations Electricity Consumption (A).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
21 | Page
Electricity Consumption: Educational
Facilities (B)
Electricity Consumption: Enterprises &
Business Holdings (C)
$3.00
500,000
$2.50
$7.00
4,500,000
4,000,000
$6.00
3,500,000
$2.00
$1.50
200,000
$1.00
Annual kWh
300,000
3,000,000
Cost/ft²
Annual kWh
400,000
$5.00
$4.00
2,500,000
$3.00
2,000,000
1,500,000
Cost/ft²
600,000
$2.00
1,000,000
$0.50
100,000
$-
-
2019
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.E. 2022 Educational Facilities Electricity Consumption (B).
Electricity Consumption (C).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
$1.00
500,000
$-
-
2019
2021
2019 Cost ft2
2021 Cost ft2
Figure 2.2.ii.F. 2022 Enterprises & Business Holdings
22 | Page
Annual Energy Cost
Combined Energy Costs: Government Operations (A)
$100,000
$5.00
$90,000
$4.50
$80,000
$4.00
$70,000
$3.50
$60,000
$3.00
$50,000
$2.50
$40,000
$2.00
$30,000
$1.50
$20,000
$1.00
$10,000
$0.50
$-
$0.00
Annual $ 2019
Annual $ 2021
Cost ft2 2019
Cost/ ft² 2021
Figure 2.2.ii.G. 2022 Government Operations Individual Government Operations Energy Consumption (A).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
23 | Page
Combined Energy Costs: Enterprises
and Business Holdings (C)
Combined Energy Costs: Educational (B)
$80,000
$4.00
$70,000
$3.50
$60,000
$3.00
$50,000
$2.50
$40,000
$2.00
$30,000
$1.50
$20,000
$1.00
$10,000
$0.50
$-
$0.00
$9.00
$500,000
$8.00
$400,000
$7.00
$6.00
$300,000
$5.00
$4.00
$200,000
$3.00
$2.00
$100,000
$1.00
$0.00
$-
Annual $ 2019
Annual $ 2021
Annual $ 2019
Annual $ 2021
Cost ft2 2019
Cost/ ft² 2021
Cost ft2 2019
Cost ft2 2021
Figure 2.2.ii.H. 2022 Educational Facilities Individual
Government Operations Energy Consumption (B).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Annual Cost/ft²
$4.50
Annual Energy Cost
$90,000
$10.00
Annual Cost/ft²
$5.00
Annual Energy Cost
$100,000
Figure 2.2.ii.I. 2022 Enterprises & Business Holdings
Individual Government Operations Energy Consumption (C).
24 | Page
Summary Results of Energy Efficiency Assessment (by Superior Watershed Partnership)
All of the buildings audited utilize air conditioners, chillers, heat pumps, furnaces, and boilers for
cooling and heating these properties. The efficiency and quality of technology used in newer
available iterations of this equipment have improved dramatically over the past forty years. Most
units currently in use at BMIC do not warrant replacement based on energy savings alone.
However, the useful life of air conditioners is 12 to 15 years and over 20 for furnaces and boilers.
Therefore, building managers should keep track of repair bills; once they become comparable to
replacement rates, upgrading to the most efficient equipment available should be considered.
Many buildings are only occupied 40 to 50 hours per week. Programmable thermostats should
be used to maintain lower temperatures during the unoccupied hours during the heating
season. Air conditioners should be turned off. After a general upgrade to LED lighting, lighting
fixtures should be linked to occupancy sensors to reduce waste. The new Ellen Marshall
Medical Center does have a Building Management System which has the capability of saving
energy through supply-demand alignment; this model should stand as an example to other
buildings as they are upgraded.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
25 | Page
Table 2.2.ii. Building with DOE Score and Potential Cost Savings
Building and Address
DOE Score
Potential Cost
Savings
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Tribal Administration (12124 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
1%
Biological Services/Conservation (11801 Plantation Rd)
9.0/10
11%
Public Works (5463 S Nbiish Rd)
6.5/10
2%
Advanced Office Technologies (12061 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
14%
Boys & Girls Club/ Waishkey Center (11435 W. Lakeshore Dr)
7.5/10
4%
Tribal Justice Center (12449 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
16%
Elder Center/ History (12485 W. Lakeshore Dr)
7.5/10
2%
Commodity Foods (12497 W. Lakeshore Dr)
8.0/10
1%
Housing Authority (3095 S. Towering Pines Rd)
8.0/5
11%
Culture Department (12498 W. Tower Rd)
10/10
12%
Maintenance Building (5414 S Nbiish Rd.)
0/0
5%
Ellen Marshall Health Center (12455 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
1%
Head Start Child Care Center (12471 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
14%
Ojibwe Charter School (11507 W. Industrial Dr)
6.0/10
>50%
BMCC Migizi Hall (Fire Crew building) (1895 S Iroquois Row)
9.5.10
3%
Bay Mills Community College (12214 W. Lakeshore Dr.)
8.0/10
10%
Waishkey Bay Farm (10135 W. Mills Rd.)
5.0/10
10%
Mukwa Health/ Fitness Center (12400 W. Spectacle Lake Rd)
9.0/10
1%
Bay Mills Resort & Casino (11386 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
11%
Wild Bluff Golf Course (11335 W. Lakeshore Dr)
10/10
14%
Bay Mart Gas Station (10001 W. Lakeshore Dr)
9.0/10
2%
Northern Light Cannabis Company (2736 M-28, Dafter)
9.5/10
2%
Four Seasons Market & Deli (9253 W. 6 Mile Rd)
10/10
13%
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
ENTERPRISES
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
26 | Page
2.3 Recommendations of the Energy Assessment 2022
This energy efficiency audit elicited useful and actionable data for 23 BMIC-owned properties
constructed between 1981 and 2022. While the body of this report contains building-specific
assessments and recommendations, several emergent recommendations, which apply to all or
most structures considered, are worth noting.
Recommendations from billing study:
The billing assessment showed that the Bay Mills Resort and Casino was by far the greatest
energy user. Followed by the Waishkey Center, BMCC Main Campus, and OCS. However, when
cost per square foot of building was analyzed Bay Mart, Bay Mills Laundry & Linen, and Four
Seasons are the largest energy users. Of government operations Public Works, Commodity
Foods, and Maintenance Departments were the highest energy users per square foot. Energy
use total costs and cost per square foot was very high in OCS in 2019 but dropped dramatically
in 2021 with the installation of the new roof. Additional assessments on insulation, appliance
upgrades and other energy-reducing measures should be explored. However, some buildings
will struggle due to their high energy consumption purely due to the nature of building use (for
example, the Laundry will always, by its nature, be operating energy-intensive appliances.)
In general, a number of steps may be taken to reduce energy consumption. Additional
assessment using more applicable methods could be done on the aforementioned buildings,
prioritizing those with the highest usage/ square foot. Following the additional assessment,
upgrades will be quantified. Upgrades will then be completed after being prioritized from most
to least impactful or achievable. For some buildings, significant changes may not be realistic,
such as those with larger work spaces that need to be heated/cooled to allow acceptable
working conditions. For others, impactful changes may be as simple as adjusting the thermostat
in areas with little use or improving insulation.
All of the buildings audited utilize air conditioners, chillers, heat pumps, furnaces, and/or boilers
for cooling and heating these properties. The efficiency and quality of technology used in newer
available iterations of this equipment have improved dramatically over the past forty years. Prior
to 2000, the SEER (Season Energy Efficiency Ratio) rating for air conditioners and heat pumps
when cooling was 10; in 2015, it increased to 14, a 40% increase in efficiency. Now, there are
units available with a SEER as high as 22. HSPF (Heating Seasonal Performance Factor) is used to
rate heat pumps during the heating season. Before 2000, the standard was 6.7. It was raised to
eight in 2015. High-end units are now available with an HSPF of 13, almost double the old
standard. Similarly, furnace and boiler efficiency standards have gone from 81% to 91%. There
are many models available with 95+ % efficiency. Most units currently in use at BMIC do not
warrant replacement based on energy savings alone. However, the useful life of air conditioners
is 12 to 15 years and over 20 for furnaces and boilers. Therefore, building managers should keep
track of repair bills; once they become comparable to replacement rates, upgrading to the most
efficient equipment available should be considered.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
27 | Page
Many buildings are only occupied 40 to 50 hours per week. Programmable thermostats should
be used to maintain lower temperatures during the unoccupied hours during the heating
season. Air conditioners should be turned off. After a general upgrade to LED lighting, lighting
fixtures should be linked to occupancy sensors to reduce waste. The new Ellen Marshall
Medical Center does have a Building Management System which has the capability of saving
energy through supply-demand alignment; this model should stand as an example to other
buildings as they are upgraded.
Building by building recommendations for each building are described in Appendix B.
Table 2.3. Upgrades Recommended in SWP Report
Recommended Upgrades to Make Now
Recommended Upgrades to Make as Existing Appliances
Fail
Transition to LED lighting
Replace AC units and chillers
Install occupancy sensors for light fixtures
Replace heat pumps, furnaces, and boilers
Programmable thermostats programmed for business hours
Improvements to building envelope (insulation)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
28 | Page
Chapter 3.0 Waste Assessment
3.1 Description of Current Waste Management Practices
Solid waste and recycling is managed in varied ways depending on the facility. BMIC
Maintenance Department operates a waste transfer station which serves numerous
government operations buildings as well as residents in the community. A complete description
of these operations is available in the BMIC Solid Waste Management Plan (2022 BMIC).
● Solid Waste: The solid waste program in place consists of a manned transfer and
compacting station located at the Maintenance grounds. This transfer station is manned 8
hours a day from Tuesday to Saturday. Maintenance staff performs curbside pickup at 8
locations including BMIC Administration offices and buildings. For all other residents, waste
is disposed of using the “dollar a bag” policy. Once waste is collected at the transfer station
and compacted, it is collected by GFL Environmental and taken to the Dafter Landfill.
● General Recycling: There is currently stationed at the BMIC Maintenance Transfer Station a
self-sort recycling trailer. Residents can self-sort plastic, metal, glass and paper at this unit.
Recycled materials are taken to Chippewa County Recycling in Sault Ste. Marie and recycled
at no cost to the BMIC. There exists a second recycling trailer that is rotated into place while
the first is being taken into Sault Ste. Marie to be emptied or undergoing maintenance.
● Cardboard Recycling: Starting in 2017 the BMIC initiated a corrugated cardboard recycling
program. The maintenance department acquired a bailer and procured some space on the
south end of the maintenance building for storage. The cardboard is bailed and stacked
then ultimately loaded into a semi for transportation to a paper mill in Manistique. The
frequency of pickup of this cardboard is variable and determined by several factors
including how much storage room is present, weather conditions for storage, and pickup
availability. This endeavor has and will continue to eliminate cardboard from entering into
the waste stream.
● Electronic Waste: Electronic waste is collected throughout the year. This is a free service to
Tribal Members. Other community members are encouraged to provide a donation at the
time of drop off of their e-waste. This collection program is supported by the Michigan
Department of Environmental, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE). Through this program, BMIC
is provided boxes and pallets for collection, shipping services and recycling of most
materials free of charge. Disposal of some miscellaneous items do include a charge. The
donation request is to cover the expense of disposal of these items.
● Special Collections: Currently there are several special collection events that happen at the
BMIC on a recurring basis. There is a spring and fall cleanup available for residents where
they can dispose of large or bulky items at no cost to themselves. These are large events
which are widely participated in. Additionally, there is a regular Household Hazardous
Waste collection event which is held in the spring and fall each year where residents can, at
no charge, drop off these materials to the BMIC Biological staff for appropriate disposal.
Drop-off for the recycling of tires is available to residents from spring to October 15 at the
Maintenance Building.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
29 | Page
Waste Generators
The following tribal buildings and residential areas have been identified as the main “waste
generators” at BMIC. These generators utilize 13 waste disposal containers, including 4, 6, and
8 yard dumpsters, as well as 2 trash compactors and a cardboard recycling compactor. As
mentioned in section 3.1 many of these generators are responsible for their own waste
collection and do not currently utilize the facilities at the BMIC Waste Transfer Station.
Table 3.1.i. Waste Generator Locations and Fate of Waste Generated
BMIC GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Advanced Office Technologies (AOT)
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Maintenance Department
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Ellen Marshall Health Center
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Tribal Administration Building
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Commodities Distribution Building
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Elders Center/ History Dept
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
Head Start/ Child Development Center
GFL pickup
Cultural Center
GFL pickup
Emergency Medical Connection
GFL pickup
Housing Authority
GFL pickup
Public Works/Construction
GFL pickup
EDUCATION FACILITIES
Bay Mills Community College (collectively)
GFL pickup
Ojibway Charter School
GFL pickup
Waishkey Center
Maintenance Transfer Station Compactor
ENTERPRISES & BUSINESS HOLDINGS
Bay Mart Store
GFL pickup, Cardboard to Maintenance Transfer Station
Bay Mills Resort and Casino
Laundry and Linen
BMRC Compactor, Cardboard to Maintenance Transfer
Station
BMRC Pickup
Wild Bluff Golf Course
GFL pickup
OTHER
Residential Curbside Pickup
GFL pickup
The dumpsters and compactors are emptied by GFL Inc., (SS), on either a weekly or bi-weekly
basis. Each container, after a conducting walk through examinations, averaged 70% capacities
prior to pick up.
3.2 Waste Assessment Results
Below are figures showing a yearly total of the amount of waste generated by the key
generators on the BMIC; those being the Bay Mills Resort and Casino Enterprises (BMRC) and
the Municipal Waste Transfer Station located at the Bay Mills Maintenance Department. The
records here comprise a 12 month period from December 2018 to December 2019.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
30 | Page
Figure 3.2.i.A: Bay Mills Resort and Casino Monthly Tonnages of Waste
Figure 3.2.i.B: Monthly Tonnage of waste disposed of (* denotes a special cleanup event)
3.3 Waste Characterization Study of 2020—Community
In September of 2020 a waste audit was conducted with waste from the BMIC Maintenance
Waste Transfer Station. The waste audit performed was intended to characterize the amount of
waste being disposed of at the facility, and to determine if, and to what extent, recycling and
other waste sorting practices were being utilized by BMIC residents.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
31 | Page
There were plans to conduct a waste audit for the casino waste streams in order to determine if
BMIC enterprises could be better incorporated into recycling efforts on the reservation. Due to
complications from Covid-19 pandemic and how the casino tourism was affects by this event it
was deemed that data collected from enterprise sources would not be representative of a
typical season’s business.
It should also be noted that the sort took place during the Covid-19 pandemic; it was
determined that since the bulk of waste is from private residences, that the waste stream
obtained from the Maintenance Waste Transfer station would be representative of typical use.
Waste was collected in a 16ft enclosed trailer for the week leading up to the sort. In all a total
of 9 volunteers composed of BMIC, ITCMI, and EPA staff were able to sort through a total of
677 lbs of waste over the course of an 8 hour day. The waste was sorted into 26 categories.
These categories were chosen to determine what waste could potential be removed from the
waste stream and recycled with increased infrastructure, outreach, and/or education. The
categories that were used as part of the study were chosen to identify recycling facilities that
could be immediately available to the BMIC through outside contracts and to determine what
types of alternative waste disposal could be feasible for the BMIC to implement directly.
Figures 3.3.i and 3.3.ii Staff sorting waste at 2020 characterization survey.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
32 | Page
BMIC Waste Audit Results 2020
Results of characterization are listed below. Many pounds of recyclable items were found in the
garbage. When these percentages are extrapolated across the costs of a year, the costs of
recyclable items being sent to landfill is in the tens of thousands. If BMIC recycled all materials
that are accepted throughout the local area (at the BMIC WTS and Chippewa County Recycling
Center), approximately $24,000 could be saved per year in disposal costs. Additional money
could be saved if recycling efforts were made during clean-up weeks as well.
•
•
•
•
Other waste/ true garbage: Other waste comprised approximately 15% of the total
waste at BMIC. This included items that could not be diverted from a landfill. Examples
include diapers, trash bags, and other non-recyclable or non-compostable materials.
Paper: The paper stream was almost completely free of corrugated cardboard.
Newsprint/paper and recyclable paper/craft/paperboard was approximately 50lbs and
7.5% of the total waste stream. Non-recyclable paper was represented by plastic coated
paper, mostly in the form of packaging of food/medicines. Even with these nonrecyclable paper products over 50% of the total 97lbs of paper waste is considered to be
recyclable.
Plastic Waste: While plastics made up 19% of the total waste in the study there was a
minimal amount of recyclable materials found. Only approximately 2% each of total
waste was easily recyclable plastic (HDPE, PET, and #3-7 plastics). Most of the plastic in
the general waste stream (54 of a total of 127lbs of plastic) was attributed to film and
flexible packaging, which is not generally considered recyclable with typical facilities.
Most of the EPS foam identified in the waste stream is attributed to foam food service
containers which were identified to be from home meal delivery to school age children
and elders during the Covid-19 pandemic; thus, this amount of EPS foam in the waste
stream is not considered typical. Due to a lack of PET, HDPE and other plastic containers
in the waste stream it seems that the recycling efforts at the BMIC are being utilized
effectively by residents.
Organic waste: As is shown in the totals from the waste audit conducted the largest
category of waste that was represented was organic waste. At ~33% of the total waste
stream the vast majority of waste is organic in nature. Two thirds of the organic waste
are food scraps while approximately one third of all organic waste is compostable fibers
(napkins, paper towels, etc.). While much of the organic waste was not of a composition
that could be recycled by conventional means there was a large amount of food waste
that could be reused through the use of a digester. There were many materials, such as
paper-based materials, and coffee grounds that, if separated from the main waste
stream, could potentially be part of a community recycling program.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
33 | Page
Figure 3.3.iii: 2020 BMIC Community Percentage of Major Waste Categories.
Table 3.3.i 2022 BMIC Waste Audit Totals
Waste Category
Percentage
Other/ true garbage
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Organics
Metals
Textiles
HHW
Construction
15%
15%
19%
7%
34%
5%
3%
0%
2%
Annual Garbage Tipping Fee
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Annual Cost
$ 5,625.00
$ 5,625.00
$ 7,125.00
$ 2,625.00
$ 12,750.00
$ 1,875.00
$ 1,125.00
$
$ 750.00
= $37,500.00
34 | Page
Table 3.3.ii 2022 BMIC Waste Audit Totals (detailed)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
35 | Page
3.4 Waste Characterization Study of 2022—BMRC
In June 2022 a waste audit was conducted with waste from the Bay Mills Resort and Casino
(BMRC). The waste audit was intended to characterize the amount of waste being disposed of
by the hotel, casino, kitchen/restaurants and offices at BMRC and to determine if, and to what
extent, recycling and other waste sorting practices were being utilized by BMRC.
Garbage waste was collected in a 16ft enclosed trailer during the weekend leading up to the
sort. Items already intended for recycling and/or bottle return were not included in this
characterization. BMRC was at approximately 50% capacity during the weekend that the waste
was collected for the audit. In all, a total of 9 volunteers comprised of BMIC staff and the Great
Lakes Climate Corps members were able to sort through a total of 976.5 lbs of waste over the
course of 6 hours. The waste was sorted into 26 categories. These categories were used to
determine which waste streams could be diverted through increased recycling infrastructure,
outreach, and education. These also help identify recycling facilities that could be immediately
available to BMRC through outside contracts and to determine what types of alternative waste
disposal could be feasible for the BMRC to implement directly.
BMRC Waste Audit Results 2022
Results of characterization are listed below. Many pounds of recyclable items were found in the
garbage. When these percentages are extrapolated across the costs of a year, the costs of
recyclable items being sent to landfill is in the tens of thousands. If BMRC recycled all materials
that are accepted throughout the local area (at the BMIC WTS and Chippewa County Recycling
Center), approximately $23,000 could be saved per year in disposal costs.
Other waste/ true garbage: Other waste comprised approximately 20% of the total waste at
BMRC. This included items that could not be diverted from a landfill. Examples include diapers,
trash bags, and other non-recyclable or non-compostable materials.
● Organic waste: As shown in the totals from the waste audit conducted at BMRC, the largest
category of waste that was represented was organic at approximately 31% of the total
waste stream. Approximately one half of the organic waste was food scraps while the other
half was compostable fibers, mainly brown paper towels from the public restrooms. While
much of the organic waste was not of a composition that could be recycled by conventional
means there was a large amount of organic waste that could be diverted from the landfill
through the use of a digester.
● Plastic Waste: Plastics made up 18% of the total waste in the study. The majority of plastics
included materials that could be recycled at the Chippewa County Recycling Facility such as
Plastics # 2-7 and PET. PET was mainly clear plastic bottles including water bottles. Much of
the plastic by volume included film and flexible packaging, which is not generally considered
recyclable with typical facilities. Most of the EPS foam identified in the waste stream was
attributed to foam food service to-go containers.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
36 | Page
Figure 3.4.i 2022 BMRC Percentage of Major Waste Categories.
Table 3.4.i 2022 BMRC Waste Audit Totals
Waste Category
Percentage
Other/ true garbage
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Organics
Metals
Textiles
HHW
Construction
20.43%
12.85%
17.72%
9.06%
30.93%
3.02%
2.51%
2.25%
1.23%
Annual Garbage Tipping Fee
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Annual Cost
$ 6,741.90
$ 4,240.50
$ 5,847.60
$ 2,989.80
$ 10,206.90
$ 996.60
$ 828.30
$ 742.50
$ 405.90
= $33,000.00
37 | Page
Table 3.4.ii 2022 BMRC Waste Audit Totals (detailed)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
38 | Page
3.5 Single-Use Item Survey
3.5.i Single-Use Item Survey Methods
In a survey separate, but similar to the waste characterization studies, an assessment of singleuse items was made for each building. Due to the waste management method for each facility,
these items may not have been captured in the characterization studies. Examples of singleuse items range from napkins to small shampoo bottles to plastic to-go forks and many others.
For each facility, the top ten items were listed. In specialized facilities, such as the Health
Center, the survey was restricted to employee break room areas so medical supplies were
excluded.
3.5.ii Single-Use Item Survey Results
The top ten single-use items listed by departments include: toilet paper, trash can bags,
bathroom hand paper towels (brown, interfolding), kitchen paper towels (white, roll), facial
tissue, food prep gloves, paper/plastic plates/bowls/cups, sanitizing wipes, plastic tableware
and Ziplock-type bags. See Table 3.5.ii below for a complete list.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
39 | Page
Table: 3.5.ii Single-Use Item Use per Building
Ba
gs
mH
a
To nd P
Kit
a
che wels per
nP
ap
er
Fac
To
we
ial
Ti s
ls
sue
Fo
od
Pre
pG
lov
Pa
es
pe
rP
l at
es/
San
Bo
wls
itiz
/C
ing
up
Wi
s
pe
Pla
s
sti
cT
ab
lew
Zip
are
loc
kB
ag
Ha
s
nd
San
itiz
er
Na
bo sing
pk
t
le
t
l
e
ins
use
Pla
sti
cW
rap
Bo
ttle
dW
ate
r
Tin
Fo
il
Ha
nd
soa
ps
bo ingle
K-c
t tle
use
up
s/S
ing
le U
To
se
Go
Co
Bo
ffe
xes
e
Alu
mi
nim
un
Ba
So
kin
uff
gD
le C
is h
up
es
sw
ith
Lid
s
roo
an
Ba
th
sh
C
Tra
ile
t
Pa
p
er
Single-Use Item Consumption
To
Location
AOT
x
x
x
x
Biological Services
x
x
x
Boys and Girls Club
x
x
Casino
x
x
x
Charter School
x
x
x
x
x
Child Development/Head Start
x
x
Commodity Foods
x
x
Community College
x
x
Culture Department
x
x
x
x
Ellen Marshall Building
x
x
Health Center
x
x
x
Four Seasons Market and Deli
x
x
Gas Station
x
x
Golf Course
x
x
x
History Department/Elder Center
x
x
x
Housing Authority
x
x
x
Justice Center
x
x
x
X
Maintenance Department
x
x
Mukwa Fitness Center
x
x
x
NLCC
x
x
x
Public Works
x
x
x
Tribal Administration
x
x
x
Waishkey Bay Farm
x
x
x
Count
23
23
20
Facilities Using Single-Use Items 100% 100% 87%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
16
70%
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
14
61%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
12
52%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
12
52%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
12
52%
x
x
x
10
43%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
9
39%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
2
9%
2
9%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
8
35%
x
x
7
30%
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
6
26%
x
5
22%
x
x
x
x
5
22%
40 | Page
4
17%
3
13%
1
4%
3.5.iii Single-Use Item Recommendations
Many of the top ten single-use items are necessary health and sanitary items (toilet paper,
trash bags, facial tissue, napkins and food prep gloves). Replacing these with reusable items is
not recommended in a public or workplace setting. However, other single-use items could be
replaced with reusable options that will reduce waste going into the landfill.
Table 3.5.iii. Replacement Items for Single Use Items
Single-Use Item
Reusable Item
Bathroom hand paper towel
Electric hand dryer
Kitchen paper towel
Dish cloth
Paper plates/bowls/cups
Ceramic dishes, glass/stainless steel cups
Sanitizing wipes
Large glass spray bottle with cloth
Plastic tableware
Stainless steel silverware
Ziplock bags
Glass storage containers
Hand sanitizer
Wall mounted refillable dispenser
Plastic wrap
Glass storage containers
Bottled water
Encourage reusable water bottles and refilling from tap
Tin foil
Glass storage containers
Hand soap
Wall mounted refillable dispenser
K-cups/single use coffee
Refillable K-cup coffee filter
To-go boxes
Stainless or glass dishes
Aluminum baking dishes
Ceramic baking dishes
Soufflé cups/lids
Glass storage containers
Another option for paper products is to elevate the importance of purchasing recycled products
and those certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.
3.6 Building Recycling
3.6.i Building Recycling Survey Methods
Departments in each building were asked to self-report if they recycle materials including
paper, cardboard, aluminum or metal, plastic or glass. These were recorded on the table below.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
41 | Page
3.6.ii Building Recycling Survey Results
A surprising number of buildings practice little to no recycling. Four of the twenty-three
buildings surveyed are reported to do no recycling. Cardboard is the most recycled item
because the maintenance department provides pick-up service. Of the 23 buildings surveyed, 9
do not recycle paper, 12 do not recycle aluminum/metal, 10 do not recycling plastic and 12 do
not recycle glass. Some of these buildings have had recycling sorting bins purchased for them
by the Biological Services department in the past.
Table 3.6.ii: Recycling available in departmental buildings
Recyclable Material
Location
Paper
Cardboard
Aluminum/metal
Plastic
Glass
AOT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Biological Services
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Boys and Girls Club
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Casino (BMRC)
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Charter School
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Child Development/Head Start
No
Yes
No
No
No
Commodity Foods
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Community College
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Culture Department
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ellen Marshall Health Center
No
Yes
No
No
No
Future Admin (old Ellen Marshall) Building
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Four Seasons Market and Deli
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Gas Station
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Golf Course
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
History Department/Elder Center
No
Yes
No
No
No
Housing Authority
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Justice Center
No
No
No
No
No
Maintenance Department
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Mukwa Fitness Center
No
No
No
No
No
NLCC
No
No
No
No
No
Public Works
No
No
No
No
No
Tribal Administration (current)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Waishkey Bay Farm
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
14
9
61%
13
10
57%
11
12
48%
No
Facilities Recycling
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
19
4
83%
11
12
48%
42 | Page
3.6. iii Building Recycling Recommendations
Recycling efforts in all buildings can be improved. Self-sort recycling containers could be made
available in each building to promote recycling. These containers must be easily accessible.
Internal efforts would need to ensure that janitorial and maintenance crews complete the
recycling process by ensuring these recyclables are taken to the waste transfer station and
placed in the appropriate recycling storage bins and locations. Lastly, a cultural shift must be
made that prioritizes follow-through of all staff and renews trust in the whole waste stream
system.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
43 | Page
Chapter 4. Procurement
In 2021, Bay Mills Indian Community, including Governmental, Enterprise, and Business
Holdings operations procured roughly $19.6 million of goods. See Table 4.1.i below for a full
breakdown of procurement by entity. Note that, as a result of Coronavirus pandemic relief
funding, namely PPP, CARES Act, and ARPA programs, BMIC experienced an influx of funding;
therefore, total procurement figures may be atypical. Bay Mills Indian Community’s
Procurement Policy want not designed to consider or encourage the purchase of products that
are environmentally preferable, but to assure that supplies, services, and construction are
procured at the most favorable prices available to BMIC.
The goal of the Green Infrastructure Committee in relation to procurement; therefore, is to
provide direction for procurement of environmentally preferable products, and to empower
government, enterprise, and business holdings entities to factor sustainability into
procurement decisions. Environmentally Preferable Products (EPP) are those that have a
reduced negative impact on human health and the environment when compared to competing
products that serve the same purpose. This comparison may consider raw material acquisition,
production, manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, operation, maintenance or disposal
of the product or service.
Entity
Enterprise
Bay Mills Resort and Casino
Business Holdings
Bay Mart
Four Seasons
Northern Light Cannabis Company
Government
General Funds
Grants and Contracts
(many departments)
Procurement of Goods
TOTAL
$19,609,133.61
$364,052.20
$5,108,349.22
$484,998.98
$1,170,356.97
$4,362,731.06
$8,118,645.18
Table 4.1.i. 2021 Total Procurement of Goods by Entity
Factors to consider when determining EPP include, but are not limited to:
▪ Maximization of recycled products used in product lifecycle
▪ Environmental cost of entire product life cycle
▪ Reuse of existing products or materials in product life cycle
▪ Recyclability of product
▪ Cleanest mode of transportation used for distribution
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
44 | Page
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Biodegradability
Feedstock analysis; what is used to manufacture the product and is the product biobased or recycled
Minimization of packaging; use of reusable/recycled packaging materials
Reduction of energy/water consumption
Use of renewable energy
Manufactured from renewable materials
Reduction of GHG emissions
Toxicity reduction or elimination
Elimination of uncertified hardwoods in product life cycle
Durability and maintenance requirements
Ultimate disposal of the product; minimize landfill disposal
When considering future procurement, the benefits of favorable pricing will have to be
weighed against environmental preferability. In general terms, instituting an Environmental
Preferable Procurement Policy would necessitate the following:
▪
▪
▪
▪
Institute practices that reduce waste by increasing product efficiency and effectiveness;
Make a good-faith effort to use environmentally preferable purchasing methods when
purchasing products to minimize environmental impacts, toxics, pollution, and hazards
to worker and community safety;
Purchase products that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their production, shipping,
use and discard; and
Purchase products that include recycled content, are durable and long-lasting, conserve
energy and water, use agricultural fibers and residues, use unbleached or chlorine free
manufacturing processes, are lead-free and mercury-free, and use wood from
sustainably harvested forests.
4.1 Procurement Policy Recommendations
The BMIC Green Infrastructure Committee proposes the development of an Environmentally
Preferable Procurement Policy that promotes the following tenets:
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
Conserve natural resources for the next seven generations,
Minimize environmental impacts such as pollution and use of water and energy,
Eliminate or reduce toxins that create hazards to workers and our community,
Support strong recycling markets,
Reduce materials that are landfilled,
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
45 | Page
▪
▪
▪
▪
Increase the use and availability of environmentally preferable products that protect the
environment,
Identify environmentally preferable products and distribution systems,
Reward manufacturers and vendors that reduce environmental impacts in their
production and distribution systems or services, and
Create a model for successfully purchasing environmentally preferable products that
encourages the use of agricultural fibers, chlorine-free manufacturing processes, wood
from sustainably harvested forests, and other environmentally friendly practices, and
that encourages other purchasers in our community to adopt similar goals.
Given that BMIC already has an established Procurement Policy, the Green Infrastructure
Committee recommends that an EPP Policy be developed to act in concert with the current
Procurement Policy, assuring that supplies, services, and construction are procured at the most
favorable prices available to BMIC, as well as assuring BMIC is making a good-faith effort to
make environmentally preferable purchases. As a matter of policy, the Green Infrastructure
Committee looks to Executive Council to determine how stringent the EPP Policy should be in
terms of application. This could merely be an exercise of good-faith effort to purchase
environmentally-preferable products when economically feasible. Alternatively, Executive
Council may choose to establish a firm rule whereby an intangible benefit percentage is
allocated for green products. For example, if a green product costs $10,700, versus a
comparable product costing $10,000 that isn’t green, the green product should be given favor
because it is less than 10% more than the non-green product.
4.2 Proposed Procurement Policy
In line with the aforementioned recommendations, the BMIC Green Infrastructure Committee
proposes the following Environmentally Preferable Procurement Policy. Note that an intangible
benefit percentage has not been provided in this proposed policy draft. The proposed draft
language was developed to provide a launching point for future EPP Policy discussions, and will
require finetuning based on Executive Council and Executive Management feedback:
BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY
ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE PROCUREMENT POLICY
1.0
STATEMENT OF POLICY
It is the policy of Bay Mills Indian Community to:
•
Institute practices that reduce waste by increasing product efficiency and effectiveness;
•
Make a good-faith effort to use environmentally preferable purchasing methods when purchasing
products to minimize environmental impacts, toxics, pollution, and hazards to worker and community
safety;
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
46 | Page
2.0
•
Purchase products that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their production, shipping, use and
discard; and
•
Purchase products that include recycled content, are durable and long-lasting, conserve energy and
water, use agricultural fibers and residues, use unbleached or chlorine free manufacturing processes,
are lead-free and mercury-free, and use wood from sustainably harvested forests.
PURPOSE
This Policy is adopted in order to:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
3.0
Conserve natural resources for the next seven generations,
Minimize environmental impacts such as pollution and use of water and energy,
Eliminate or reduce toxins that create hazards to workers and our community,
Support strong recycling markets,
Reduce materials that are landfilled,
Increase the use and availability of environmentally preferable products that protect the
environment,
Identify environmentally preferable products and distribution systems,
Reward manufacturers and vendors that reduce environmental impacts in their production and
distribution systems or services, and
Create a model for successfully purchasing environmentally preferable products that encourages the
use of agricultural fibers, chlorine-free manufacturing processes, wood from sustainably harvested
forests, and other environmentally friendly practices, and that encourages other purchasers in our
community to adopt similar goals.
DEFINITIONS
3.1
“Bio-Based Products” means commercial or industrial products (other than food or feed) that
utilize agricultural crops or residues but does not include products made from forestry materials.
3.2
“Biodegradable plastic” means the degradation of the plastic must occur as a result of the action
of naturally occurring microorganisms.
3.3
“Buyer” means anyone authorized to purchase or contract for purchases on behalf of this
jurisdiction or its subdivisions.
3.4
“The Carpet and Rug Institute” (CRI) is the national trade association representing the carpet and
rug industry. CRI has developed and administered the “Green Label” indoor air quality testing
and labeling program for carpet, adhesives, cushion materials and vacuum cleaners. The “Green
Label Plus” testing program incorporates additional requirements to meet California’s
Collaborative for High Performance Schools low-emitting materials criteria.
3.5
“Compostable plastic” means plastic that is biodegradable during composting to yield carbon
dioxide, water and inorganic compounds and biomass, at a rate consistent with other known
compostable materials and leaves no visually distinguishable or toxic residues.
3.6
“Contractor” means any person, group of persons, business, consultant, designing architect,
association, partnership, corporation, supplier, vendor or other entity that has a contract with
Bay Mills Indian Community or serves in a subcontracting capacity with an entity having a
contract with Bay Mills Indian Community for the provision of goods or services.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
47 | Page
3.7
“Degradable plastic” means plastic that undergoes significant changes in its chemical structure
under specific environmental conditions.
3.8
“EcoLogo” is a third-party, multi-attribute eco-labeling program founded by the Canadian
government in 1988 and part of UL Environment since 2010. The Program compares products /
services with others in the same category, develops rigorous and scientifically relevant criteria,
and awards the EcoLogo to those that are environmentally preferable throughout their entire
lifecycle.
3.9
“Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool” (EPEAT) is a procurement tool to help
institutional purchasers in the public and private sectors evaluate, compare and select personal
computers, displays, imaging equipment and televisions based on their environmental attributes.
3.10
“Energy Star” means the U.S. EPA’s energy efficiency product labeling program.
3.11
“Energy-Efficient Product” means a product that is in the upper 25% of energy efficiency for all
similar products, or that is at least 10% more efficient than the minimum level that meets
Federal standards.
3.12
“Environmentally Preferable Products (EPP)” means products that have a reduced negative effect
on human health and the environment when compared to competing products that serve the
same purpose. This comparison may consider raw material acquisition, production,
manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, operation, maintenance or disposal of the product
or service.
3.13
“Federal Energy Management Program” is a program of the Department of Energy that issues a
series of Product Energy Efficiency Recommendations that identify recommended efficiency
levels for energy-using products.
3.14
“Forest Stewardship Council” is a global organization that certifies responsible, on-the-ground
forest management according to rigorous standards developed by a broad variety of stakeholder
groups.
3.15
“Green Seal” is an independent, non-profit environmental labeling organization. Green Seal
standards for products and services meet the U.S. EPA’s criteria for third-party certifiers. The
Green Seal is a registered certification mark that may appear only on certified products.
3.16
“Integrated Pest Management” is an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on long-term
prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological
control, habitat manipulation, modification of cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties.
Pesticides are used only after monitoring indicates they are needed according to established
guidelines, and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organism. Pest
control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks to human health,
beneficial and nontarget organisms, and the environment.
3.17
“LEED Rating System” means the most recent version of the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Rating System, approved by the U.S. Green Building Council, and
designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and residential buildings.
3.18
“NSF/ANSI” means NSF International follows the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
standards development process. Standards are developed by joint committees (balanced
stakeholder groups of public health, industry and user representatives).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
48 | Page
3.19
“Organic Pest Management” prohibits the use and application of toxic chemical pesticides and
strives to prevent pest problems through the application of natural, organic horticultural and
maintenance practices. All pest control products shall be in keeping with, but not limited to,
those products on the approved list of California Certified Organic Farmers (CCOF).
3.20
"Post-consumer Material" means a finished material which would normally be disposed of as a
solid waste, having reached its intended end-use and completed its life cycle as a consumer item,
and does not include manufacturing or converting wastes.
3.21
“Pre-consumer Material” means material or by-products generated after manufacture of a
product is completed but before the product reaches the end-use consumer. Pre-consumer
material does not include mill and manufacturing trim, scrap, or broke which is generated at a
manufacturing site and commonly reused on-site in the same or another manufacturing process.
3.22
“Recovered Material” means fragments of products or finished products of a manufacturing
process, which has converted a resource into a commodity of real economic value, and includes
pre-consumer and post-consumer material but does not include excess resources of the
manufacturing process.
3.23
“Recycled Content” means the percentage of recovered material, including pre-consumer and
post-consumer materials, in a product.
3.24
“Recycled Content Standard” means the minimum level of recovered material and/or postconsumer material necessary for products to qualify as “recycled products.”
3.25
“Recycled Product” means a product that meets [the Organization’s] recycled content policy
objectives for post-consumer and recovered material.
3.26
“Remanufactured Product” means any product diverted from the supply of discarded materials
by refurbishing and marketing said product without substantial change to its original form.
3.27
“Reused Product” means any product designed to be used many times for the same or other
purposes without additional processing except for specific requirements such as cleaning,
painting or minor repairs.
3.28
“Source Reduction” refers to products that result in a net reduction in the generation of waste
compared to their previous or alternate version and includes durable, reusable and
remanufactured products; products with no, or reduced, toxic constituents; and products
marketed with no, or reduced, packaging.
3.29
“U.S. EPA Guidelines” means the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency for federal agency purchases as of October 2007 and any
subsequent versions adopted.
3.30
“Water-Saving Products” are those that are in the upper 25% of water conservation for all similar
products, or at least 10% more water-conserving than the minimum level that meets the Federal
standards.
3.31
“WaterSense” means a partnership program by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Independent, third-party licensed certifying bodies certify that products meet EPA criteria for
water efficiency and performance by following testing and certification protocols specific to each
product category. Products that are certified to meet EPA specifications are allowed to bear the
WaterSense label.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
49 | Page
4.0
STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION
4.1
Source Reduction
4.1.1
Institute practices that reduce waste, encourage reuse, and result in the purchase of fewer
products.
4.1.2
Purchase remanufactured products such as toner cartridges, tires, furniture, equipment and
automotive parts.
4.1.3
Consider short-term and long-term costs in comparing product alternatives. This includes
evaluation of total costs expected during the time a product is owned, including, but not limited
to, acquisition, extended warranties, operation, supplies, maintenance and replacement parts,
disposal costs and expected lifetime compared to other alternatives.
4.1.4
Purchase products that are durable, long lasting, reusable or refillable and avoid purchasing onetime use or disposable products.
4.1.5
Request vendors eliminate packaging or use the minimum amount necessary for product
protection. Vendors shall be encouraged to take back packaging for reuse. A vendor’s
willingness to take back packaging will be used as part of the consideration in the bid process.
4.1.6
Specify a preference for packaging that is reusable, recyclable or compostable, when
suitable uses and programs exist.
4.1.7
Encourage vendors to take back and reuse pallets and other shipping materials, unless these can
be used by departments.
4.1.8
Encourage suppliers of electronic equipment, including but not limited to computers, monitors,
printers, and copiers, to take back equipment for reuse or environmentally sound recycling when
Bay Mills Indian Community discards or replaces such equipment, whenever possible. Suppliers
will be required to state their take back, reuse or recycling programs during the bidding process.
If this is not feasible, departments can utilize the BMIC E-waste recycling facility and will be
expected to follow the disposal fee schedule.
4.1.9
Consider provisions in contracts with suppliers of non-electronic equipment that require
suppliers to take back equipment for reuse or environmentally sound recycling when Bay Mills
Indian Community discards or replaces such equipment, whenever possible. Suppliers will be
required to state their take back, reuse or recycling programs during the bidding process.
4.1.10
Promote electronic distribution of documents rather than printing or copying.
4.1.11
When producing paper documents, print and copy all documents on both sides to reduce the use
and purchase of paper. Printers and copiers shall be set to default to duplex.
4.1.12
Reduce the number and type of equipment needed to perform office functions to save energy
and reduce purchasing and maintenance costs. Eliminate desktop printers, redundant network
printers and reduce the number of fax machines leased or owned by Bay Mills Indian
Community]. Consider lease or purchase of multi-function devices.
4.1.13
Ensure all imaging equipment is installed with energy and resource-efficient settings set as
default.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
50 | Page
4.2
Recycled Content Products
4.2.1
Purchase products for which the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has
established minimum recycled content standard guidelines, such as those for printing paper, office paper,
janitorial paper, construction, landscaping, parks and recreation, transportation, vehicles, miscellaneous, and
non-paper office products, that contain the highest post-consumer content available, but no less than the
minimum recycled content standards established by the U.S. EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines.
4.3
4.4
4.2.2
Purchase multi-function devices, copiers and printers compatible with the use of recycled
content and remanufactured products.
4.2.3
When specifying asphalt, concrete, aggregate base or Portland cement concrete for road
construction projects, use recycled, reusable or reground materials.
4.2.4
Specify and purchase recycled content traffic control products, including signs, cones, parking
stops, delineators, channelizers and barricades.
4.2.5
Ensure pre-printed recycled content papers intended for distribution that are purchased or
produced contain a statement that the paper is recycled content and indicate the percentage of
post-consumer recycled content.
Energy Efficient and Water Saving Products
4.3.1
Purchase energy-efficient equipment with the most up-to-date energy efficiency functions. This
includes, but is not limited to, high efficiency space heating systems and high efficiency space
cooling equipment.
4.3.2
Replace inefficient interior lighting with energy-efficient equipment.
4.3.3
Replace inefficient exterior lighting, street lighting and traffic signal lights with energy-efficient
equipment. Minimize exterior lighting where possible to avoid unnecessary lighting of
architectural and landscape features while providing adequate illumination for safety and
accessibility. Refer to the BMIC Green Building Checklist, if needed.
4.3.4
Purchase U. S. EPA Energy Star certified products when available. When Energy Star labels are
not available, choose energy-efficient products that are in the upper 25% of energy efficiency as
designated by the Federal Energy Management Program.
4.3.5
Purchase U.S. EPA WaterSense labeled water-saving products when available. This includes, but
is not limited to, high-performance fixtures like toilets, low-flow faucets and aerators, and
upgraded irrigation systems.
Green Building Products and Practices
4.4.1
Consider Green Building practices for design, construction, and operation as described in the
LEED Rating Systems for all building and renovations undertaken by Bay Mills Indian Community.
Refer to the BMIC Green Building Checklist.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
51 | Page
4.5
4.6
Landscaping Products and Practices
4.5.1
Employ sustainable landscape management techniques for all landscape renovations,
construction and maintenance performed by Bay Mills Indian Community including workers and
contractors providing landscaping services for Bay Mills Indian Community, including, but not
limited to, integrated pest management, grasscycling, drip irrigation, computerized central
irrigation linked with the local weather station, composting, and procurement and use of mulch
and compost that give preference to those produced from regionally generated plant debris
and/or food scrap programs.
4.5.2
Choose Landscape Professionals for landscape design and maintenance services. Training and
qualifications shall include landscaping locally, landscaping for native and climate adapted
species, landscaping for less to the landfill, nurturing the soil, conserving water, conserving
energy, protecting water and air quality, and creating wildlife habitat.
4.5.3
Select plants to minimize waste by choosing species for purchase that are appropriate to the
microclimate, species that can grow to their natural size in the space allotted to them, and
perennials rather than annuals for color. Native and climate adapted plants that require no or
minimal watering once established are preferred.
4.5.4
Hardscapes and landscape structures constructed of recycled content materials are encouraged.
Limit the amount of impervious surfaces in the landscape. Permeable substitutes, such as
permeable asphalt or pavers, are encouraged for walkways, patios and driveways.
4.5.5
Create bioswales and rain gardens in all landscape renovations and construction performed by
Bay Mills Indian Community to assist in water run-off management. Develop outreach programs
to instruct the public in the proper maintenance of bioswales and rain gardens.
Toxics and Pollution Prevention Products and Practices
4.6.1
Manage pest problems through prevention and physical, mechanical and biological controls
when Bay Mills Indian Community and its contractors maintain buildings and landscapes. Bay
Mills Indian Community may either adopt and implement an Organic Pest Management (OPM)
policy and practices or adopt and implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policy and
practices using the least toxic pest control as a last resort.
4.6.2
Use products with the lowest amount of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), highest recycled
content, low or no formaldehyde and no halogenated organic flame retardants when purchasing
building maintenance materials such as paint, carpeting, adhesives, furniture and casework.
4.6.3
Purchase or require janitorial contractors to supply, industrial and institutional cleaning products
that meet Green Seal or UL/EcoLogo certification standards for environmental preferability and
performance.
4.6.4
Purchase, or require janitorial contractors to supply, vacuum cleaners that meet the
requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute Green Label/Seal of Approval Program for soil
removal, dust containment and carpet fiber retention for indoor air quality protection and
performance cleaning standards. Other janitorial cleaning equipment should be capable of
capturing fine particulates, removing sufficient moisture so as to dry within 24 hours, operate
with a sound level less than 70dBA, and use high-efficiency, low-emissions engines.
4.6.5
Purchase paper, paper products, and janitorial paper products that are unbleached or are
processed without chlorine or chlorine derivatives.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
52 | Page
4.7
4.8
5.0
4.6.6
Prohibit the purchase of products that use polyvinyl chloride (PVC) such as, but not limited to,
furniture and flooring.
4.6.7
Purchase products and equipment with no lead or mercury whenever possible. For products that
contain lead or mercury, Bay Mills Indian Community should give preference to those products
with lower quantities of these metals and to vendors with established lead and mercury recovery
programs. In addition, whenever lead- or mercury-containing products require disposal, Bay
Mills Indian Community will dispose of those products in the most environmentally safe manner
possible. All fluorescent lamps and batteries will be recycled or disposed of using the BMIC
Maintenance Department Bulb Crusher
4.6.8
Purchase or specify personal computers, displays, imaging equipment and televisions that meet,
at a minimum, all Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) environmental
criteria designated as “required” as contained in the IEEE 1680 family of Environmental
Assessment Standards.
4.6.9
Purchase or specify commercial carpeting that meets NSF/ANSI 140 Standard for Sustainable
Carpet Assessment and require old carpet that is removed be recycled.
4.6.10
Purchase or specify non-carpet floor coverings that meet NSF/ANSI 332 Standard for Resilient
Flooring including vinyl, linoleum and rubber flooring.
4.6.11
When replacing vehicles, consider less-polluting alternatives to diesel such as compressed
natural gas, bio-based fuels, hybrids, electric batteries, and fuel cells, as available.
Bio-Based Products
4.7.1
Purchase paper, paper products and construction products made from non-wood, plant-based
contents such as agricultural crops and residues.
4.7.2
Purchase bio-based plastic products that are biodegradable and compostable, such as bags, film,
food and beverage containers, and cutlery.
Forest Conservation Products
4.8.1
To the greatest extent practicable, do not procure wood products such as lumber and paper that
originate from forests harvested in an environmentally unsustainable manner. When possible,
give preference to wood products that are certified to be sustainably harvested by a
comprehensive, performance-based certification system. The certification system shall include
independent third-party audits, with standards equivalent to, or stricter than, those of the Forest
Stewardship Council certification.
4.8.2
Encourage the purchase or use of previously used or salvaged wood and wood products
whenever practicable.
RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1
The health and safety of workers and citizens is of utmost importance and takes precedence over
all other practices. Nevertheless, Bay Mills Indian Community recognizes its duty to act in a
fiscally responsible as well as a timely manner.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
53 | Page
6.0
7.0
5.2
Nothing contained in this policy shall be construed as requiring a department, purchaser or
contractor to procure products that do not perform adequately for their intended use, exclude
adequate competition, risk the health or safety of workers and citizens, or are not available at a
reasonable price in a reasonable period of time.
5.3
Nothing contained in this policy shall be construed as requiring Bay Mills Indian Community,
departments, purchasers, or contractors to take any action that conflicts with local, state or
federal requirements.
5.4
Bay Mills Indian Community has made significant investments in developing a successful
recycling system and recognizes that recycled content products are essential to the continuing
viability of that recycling system and for the foundation of an environmentally sound production
system. Therefore, to the greatest extent practicable, recycled content shall be included in
products that also meet other specifications, such as chlorine free or bio-based.
IMPLEMENTATION
6.1
The Chief Financial Officer shall implement this policy in coordination with other appropriate Bay
Mills Indian Community personnel.
6.2
Require successful bidders to certify in writing that the environmental attributes claimed in
competitive bids are accurate. Vendors shall be required to specify the minimum or actual
percentage of recovered and post-consumer material in their products, even when such
percentages are zero.
6.3
Upon request, buyers making the selection from competitive bids shall be able to provide
justification for product choices that do not meet the environmentally preferable purchasing
criteria in this policy.
6.4
Encourage vendors, contractors and grantees to comply with applicable sections of this policy for
products and services provided to Bay Mills Indian Community.
PROGRAM EVALUATION
7.1
8.0
The Chief Financial Officer shall periodically evaluate the success of this policy’s implementation
and report to the Executive Council.
EFFECTIVE DATES
The above Policy was adopted at a meeting of the Executive Council held on the ____day of __________, 2023, by a
vote of ____ in favor, ___ opposed, ___ absent, and ___ abstaining. As per the provisions of the Bay Mills
Constitutions, the President must abstain except in the event of a tie.
_____________________________
Beverly A. Carrick
Secretary
Executive Council
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
54 | Page
Chapter 5. Green Buildings and Grounds
Humans interact with the built environment constantly, from our homes, to the roads we drive
on, to the stores we shop in, to the offices where we work. The built environment; therefore,
literally shapes our everyday lives. Studies show that the design of infrastructure significantly
impacts the mental, emotional, and physical health of humans.
Partners with Biological Services and Inter-tribal Council of Michigan compiled a study in 2016 of
expected weather impacts to the Bay Mills region. The region has observed noticeable changes
in weather in recent years. These changes have been measured in mean season temperatures,
percentage of ice cover, frequency of severe storms and many other parameters. Since 1950 the
mean temperatures in winter and spring have increased more in the northern Great Lakes than
in other areas. The Eastern Upper Peninsula has witnessed warmer winters and warmer springs.
The frequency and intensity of storms in the Great Lakes region has also changed in the last fifty
years. GLISA reported that precipitation from 1981-2010 is 5.1% more intense and frequency has
increased 23.6% when compared to 1951-1980 (GLISA, Extreme Precipitation, 2015). Severe or
intense precipitation has numerous consequences that are cause for concern. Flooding and storm
water runoff are priority concerns, as rain from extreme participation events has inadequate time
to infiltrate the soil. Instead, it erodes land surfaces, infiltrates and damages infrastructure, and
carries soils, nutrients, and/or contaminants directly to surface waters (ITCMI, 2016). Stormwater
runoff has the potential to impact natural and manmade systems and structures (ITCMI, 2016).
Climate change is predicted to increase the number of extreme weather events and also decrease
our air quality which will impact human health and disease in many ways. With the projected
increases in temperature and frequency of extreme weather events, data suggests ground level
ozone and particulate matter will increase which causes many problems including decreased lung
function, increase in asthma attacks and increase in premature deaths. Also, with the increase in
frost-free days and warmer seasonal temperatures, allergenic plants are projected to have longer
pollen seasons and affect people with allergies. Buildings may also have increases in mold growth
due to the warmer temperatures and increased precipitation. Doctors may have a harder time
aiding people with allergies and asthma in the future (Luber et al. 2014). In addition, with these
health risks, the projected increase in temperature may increase heat-related illness including
heat exhaustion, heat stroke and death. Human health impacts from insect-borne diseases are
projected to become more prevalent as well.
Armed with this knowledge, Bay Mills Indian Community can make a conscious decision to
thoughtfully design future infrastructure in such a way as to maximize Mino Bimaadiziwin
“Good Life” of our citizens, employees, and visitors. Green buildings are one avenue through
which BMIC can achieve this goal.
5.1 Definitions
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
55 | Page
Sustainable Design: an architectural approach that seeks to reduce negative
environmental impact that promotes improved health outcomes.
Green infrastructure: planned natural and engineered features designed to deliver
ecosystem services for the benefit of human and environmental health.
Net Zero: a target of negating the amount of greenhouse gases produced by human
activity by reducing emissions and removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
Stormwater Management: the process of controlling stormwater runoff, primarily from
impervious surfaces.
Biophilic Design: an architectural approach that promotes the use of natural materials,
natural light, and landscape features to increase connectivity of building occupants to
the natural environment, and create a more productive, healthy built environment.
5.2 Background
Green buildings and grounds are those that exemplify biophilic and sustainable design.
Essentially, this means that infrastructure is designed in such a way as to reduce harmful impact
to the natural environment, while also promoting human health. This can be achieved through
use of natural materials, maximizing natural light, incorporating green infrastructure in
landscaping, and much more.
When thinking about sustainability in the context of Bay Mills Indian Community, there are
several aspects that we can contemplate. The first aspect is how infrastructure can impact
different components of a community, whether it be the built environment, social atmosphere,
cultural traditions, or human health. Human health is typically thought of as a cross-section of
physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being. These ideas can be melded together to
create a model of sustainability catered specifically to BMIC. While the word sustainability
typically focuses on the cross-section of community well-being, economic prosperity, and
environmental stewardship, the Green Infrastructure Committee felt it important to add a longterm resilience component to the mix. All of these concepts together form the basis of
sustainability, and the underlying goals for Green buildings in Bay Mills Indian Community (see
Figure 5.2. BMIC Sustainability Model).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
56 | Page
Cultural
Long-term
Resilience
Social
Human
Economic
Prosperity
Community
Well-being
Built
Environmental
Stewardship
Figure 5.2. BMIC Sustainability Model
“Green” development can be expressed/measured in terms of green building certifications or
standards. These certifications create, and hold buildings to specific environmental, energy,
human health, etc. standards related to the design, construction, and performance of the
building. This may include reduced water and energy consumption, maximizing natural light,
proving green space, contemplating physical, mental and emotional wellbeing in the design of a
building, meeting air quality standards, reducing light pollution, and much more. Dozens of
green building certifications exist for new development and redevelopment. Some of the most
popular new development certifications include Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED), WELL, Energy Start, and the Living Building Challenge. Common redevelopment
certifications include EnerPhit and Passive House Certificate. Organizations generally choose a
green building certification that aligns most closely with the specific project, organizational
goals and objectives. While these certifications/standards are great tools in assisting
communities or entities in reducing their ecological footprint, it is important to note that
meeting the stringent standards set by these certifications come at a cost, both in terms of time
it takes to receive the certification, and the amount of money it can cost to meet the standards.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
57 | Page
Given the extensive nature, time and monetary requirements associated with these
certifications, the Green Infrastructure Committee is proposing a BMIC Green Building checklist,
defined by the Tribe, to include elements of popular green building standards with the
additional consideration of culture, values, and traditions as set forth in the BMIC Sustainability
Model.
5.3 Green Building Recommendations and Checklist
To ensure future infrastructure, whether new development or redevelopment of existing
structures, incorporates sustainable and biophilic design, the Green Infrastructure Committee
developed a Procedural Checklist for Development and Redevelopment, and a Green Elements
Building Checklist.
The Procedural Checklist for Development and Redevelopment is a tool for departments or
entities to thoroughly review a proposed project while in its infancy. This procedural checklist
allows BMIC to take a proactive approach to development and redevelopment, instead of a
reactive approach, by thoughtfully assessing the proposed project and site on which it will be
placed. The procedural checklist includes the following steps:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Tribal Manager Review
Land Office Review
Biological Services GIS Desktop Review
THPO Review
Construction Manager Review
Team Review
Additional Committee/Departmental Review
Other Considerations, if warranted, including Phase 1 Archaeology Studies or BIA
Forestry Timber Cruise and/or Timber Sale
9. Additional Steps, including a presentation of the proposed project to Executive Council,
coordinating with the Grants Department to identify and secure funding, and posting a
Request for Quotes for Architecture and Engineering services
The full Procedural Checklist for Development and Redevelopment can be found on page 49-50
of this report.
Working through this procedural checklist will ensure any concerns regarding the project
and/or proposed location are identified right away. Findings during this initial process may
warrant additional reviews, such as a Phase 1 Archeology Study or contacting the BIA Forestry
Department. Should grant funding be required for a proposed project, this procedure will
provide much of the information for an Environmental Narrative, should that be required by
the funding agency/organization. Additionally, this comprehensive review ensures all aspects of
a development or redevelopment are considered prior to procurement of architecture and
engineering plans. This will safeguard against significant changes late in the development
process due to poor initial planning, thereby saving time and money.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
58 | Page
In addition to the Procedural CheckList, the Green Infrastructure Committee also developed a
Green Elements Building Checklist for extreme weather resilience. This Checklist is designed to
complement the Procedure Checklist, specifically when it is time to secure an Architect and
Engineering firm. The Green Elements Building Checklist is a Bay Mills Indian Communityspecific set of standards for future development or redevelopment that encourages facilities to
be designed and constructed to be more efficient, provide a healthier indoor environment,
minimize harmful effects on human health and the environment, and ensure long-term
resiliency of the structure.
The checklist includes sections focusing on the following:
10. Seven Generations
11. Stormwater Management
12. Disaster and Extreme Weather Mitigation
13. Net Zero Construction and Green Energy
14. Indoor Human Use and Biophilic Design
15. Outdoor Human Use and Biophilic Design
16. Human Health Impacts
17. Solid Waste and Materials
18. Considerations During Construction, including what to do if historic properties,
archeological resources, human remains, or other cultural items are discovered; a site
blessing in conjunction with the Cultural Department; and how to mitigate
environmental challenges in conjunction with the Biological Services Department.
Each of these categories puts forth general items that should be incorporated in the
development of Architect/Engineering plans and designs. Specific outcomes will be projectspecific, and should rely on proper planning. This checklist may be provided during the
Request-for-Proposal process to ensure standards and expectations are fully understood prior
to onboarding a A/E firm.
The full and Green Elements Building Checklist can be found on page 51-53 of this report.
In line with the aforementioned recommendations, the BMIC Green Infrastructure Committee
proposes the following Procedural Checklist for Development and Redevelopment, and Green
Elements Building Checklist:
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
59 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
60 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
61 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
62 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
63 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
64 | Page
Chapter 6. Stormwater Management Infrastructure and Roads Network
Like many communities, the network of roads, ditches, and stormwater management at Bay
Mills has changed and evolved as the community has grown. Main roads, such as Lakeshore
Drive, W Spectacle Lake Rd, Tower Rd, and Plantation Rd, are maintained by Chippewa County
Road Commission and so match their typical design parameters. Neighborhood roads, such as
Red Pine Lane, Crane Road, South Towering Pines Rd, and others are developed and maintained
by BMIC. Some areas have ditching for stormwater management while others do not.
BMIC ordinances for businesses and government building development date back to 1960s.
These ordinances do not include design specifications on parking lot green space or ditching
requirements. Snow plowing is also completed at the discretion of the operator, so piles
frequently concentrate along riparian and shoreline areas. Consequently, many BMIC
government, enterprise, business holdings, and residential facilities experience ponding or
flooding during rain events and spring melt.
Figure 6a. Road-stream-crossing locations around Waishkey Bay. Many more driveway and
ditch culverts exist, but were not assessed. Figure 6b. High priority crossing 281/282 at BMRC.
The Waishkey River Watershed Management Plan of 2020 included extensive surveys of area
road stream crossings (whether they are culverts or bridges). Many, many more culverts exist in
this area, allowing for ditch drainage, etc; in this survey, only crossings of permanent streams
were surveyed. Information was collected at a dozen specific crossings on Bay Mills trust land
within the Waishkey watershed (see Figure 6a). Data collected from the stream-crossings surveys
revealed point- and nonpoint sources of contamination. Many of the culverts in the watershed
and Bay Mills are undersized and should be considered for replacement. Additionally, their style
may be ill-suited for the flashy, clay streams they are placed in. The metal or concrete of these
structures may be in largely good condition, but due to alignment, sizing, embedded depth, etc,
these structures are less than ideal for the environment and human infrastructure (see figures
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
65 | Page
and table below). Potential negative outcomes from improper RSC range from environmental
degradation, to additional road maintenance, to catastrophic failure of the crossing. Of the RSC
surveys completed at Bay Mills, most are undersized. Two RSCs (located at BMRC parking lot) are
deemed high priority due to their alignment.
Figures 6c, 6d, 6e. Data summary from Great Lakes Road Stream Crossing data dashboard
(DNR).
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
66 | Page
Table 6.1. Road Stream Crossings recently surveyed with Great Lakes Road Stream Crossing Inventory. These priority levels have
been determined by BMIC Biological Services staff.
ID
RSX 276
Priority
Level
Medium
RSX 281
RSX 282
High
High
RSX 287
Low
RSX 291
RSX 292
RSX 314
Low
Low
Lakeshore Dr
Lakeshore Dr
Lakeshore Dr
RSX 315
Medium
Plantation
RSX 316
Low
Lakeshore Dr
RSX 317
Medium
Lakeshore Dr
RSX 318
Medium
Lakeshore Dr
RSX 319
Unranked
Lakeshore Dr
Road
Lakeshore Dr
BMRC Driveway
Lakeshore Dr,
BMRC
Lakeshore Dr
Stream/
Landmark
Deep Creek
Erosion
Extent
Entrenched
Parrish Creek
Parrish Creek
Moderate
Moderate
Unnamed,
Ash Preserve
Club Creek
Lil Waiska
Unnamed, RV
Park
Unnamed,
ditch
Ponty’s Creek
Moderately
entrenched
Minor
Minor
no
Fish Passage
Barrier at high
flows
Plugged
Barrier at high
flows
Plugged. Barrier
to Fish
No
No
no
Moderate
Unnamed,
Chippewa
Landing
Unnamed,
Gma Turtle
Unnamed,
College Pond
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Perch
Culvert
No
Undersized
Yes
Misalignment
Ok
No
No
Yes
Yes
Severe
Ok
BMIC
County
Perched
Yes
Ok
County
Slightly
No
no
No
Yes
Somewhat
Minor
Ok
Ok
County
County
County
No
No
Yes
Ok
County
Entrenched.
Moderate
Minor
Yes
No
Ok
County
No
Yes. Not
Buried
No
Yes
Ok
County
Moderate
Barrier to Fish
Yes
Yes
Poor
County
Not
assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not
assessed
Not assessed
County
67 | Page
Ownership
County
6.1 Stormwater Management Recommendations
General strategies have been developed by local land managers and partner organizations.
These strategies are outlined and further described in the Waishkey River Watershed
Management Plan (accepted in 2020 by Bay Mills Executive Council). These recommendations
should be employed around Bay Mills when opportunity arises.
Excerpts from Table 22. Nonpoint source pollution goals and proposed implementation
strategies for all Waishkey River subwatersheds.
SUBJECT
STRATEGY
PARTNER
Ordinances and Policies
(business development &
parking lots)
a.
BMIC
BMIC, CCRC,
CLMCD, MITC,
Townships
Ordinances and Policies
(BMIC neighborhood roads
network)
f.
g.
h.
Promote water infiltration on site (percolation through soil and plant uptake
and transpiration). Use soil and vegetation in a constructed technique, such as
rain gardens.
Build snow retention areas / bioswales DISCONNECTED from waterbodies.
Protect adjacent lands from direct stormwater discharge off of BMIC gov and
enterprise developments.
Build rain gardens or green roofs, to mimic natural hydrologic processes and
water infiltration.
Effectively minimize or disconnect impervious surfaces (for example, continuous
parking lots).
Reduce floodplain development and preserve small streams. Preserve natural
features, such as floodplains with a natural vegetation buffer along streams,
that can slow, filter, and store storm runoff.
Plan new neighborhoods with stormwater in mind.
Ensure long-term operation and maintenance of stormwater facilities.
Reduce streambank
erosion (due to culverts &
other anthropogenic
causes)
i.
j.
k.
l.
Stabilize slopes
Reseed areas with native plants
Replace undersized culverts
Encourage the use of bottomless culverts and bridges
b.
c.
d.
e.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
BMIC
68 | Page
References
Bay Mills Indian Community. 2022. Solid Waste Management Plan. Accepted by Executive
Council July 2022. Staff Jennifer Parks.
Bay Mills Indian Community. 2020. Waishkey River Watershed Management Plan. Accepted by
Executive Council Dec 2020. Staff Aubrey Maccoux-LeDuc.
Bay Mills Indian Community. 2016. Non-point Source Pollution Management Plan. Accepted by
Executive Council. Staff Brian Wesolek.
Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments. 2014. Change in Frost-Free Season Length.
Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments, Ann Arbor, MI (www.glisa.umich.edu,
Accessed June 2016).
Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments. 2014. Climate Change in the Great Lakes
Region. Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments, Ann Arbor, MI
(www.glisa.umich.edu, accessed June 2016).
Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan, Inc. 2016. Michigan Tribal Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessment and Adaptation Planning: Project Report.
Luber, G., K. Knowlton, J. Balbus, H. Frumkin, M. Hayden, J. Hess, M. McGeehin, N. Sheats, L.
Backer, C. B. Beard, K. L. Ebi, E. Maibach, R. S. Ostfeld, C. Wiedinmyer, E. ZielinskiGutiérrez, and L. Ziska. 2014. Ch. 9: Human Health. Climate Change Impacts in the
United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.)
Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 220-256.
doi:10.7930/J0PN93H5.
Superior Watershed Partnership. 2022. Bay Mills Indian Community Energy Efficiency Assess
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
69 | Page
Appendix A: Energy Conservation Measures
Thermostat Optimization
Setback & Setup Savings
Thermostat Temperature Savings
Lighting
Leviton Ultrasonic/Infrared Dual-Relay Multi-Technology Occupancy Sensor
Model # : 041-OSSMT-MDI
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
70 | Page
Appendix B: Energy Efficiency Assessment of 2022
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
71 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
72 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
73 | Page
Executive Summary
Project Profile
This report contains the results of a community-wide, collaborative energy audit/assessment
undertaken by the Superior Watershed Michigan Energy Assistance Program (SWP MEAP) at the
Bay Mills Indian Community (BMIC) in Chippewa County. Over eight weeks, surveyors from the
Great Lakes Climate Corps (GLCC) worked with an expert contractor to conduct audits on 24
buildings of importance to the BMIC population. The GLCC’s primary goal is to educate UP
communities regarding renewable energy and energy waste reduction to assist low-income
families in conserving energy and lowering their energy costs. UP communities pay some of the
highest electricity rates in the country. The GLCC addresses this issue throughout all 15 counties
in the Upper Peninsula by conducting basic home energy assessments in low-income households
and installing weatherization measures to improve self-sufficiency and lower heating and electric
costs. Their work with BMIC produced useful energy-asset characterizations and identified
opportunities for tangible efficiency improvements. This report includes a building-by-building
narrative description of assessment outcomes as well as figures and data pulled from DOE
Assessment Summaries. The original summaries are included in the report’s appendices.
Methodology
At the BMIC, two GLCC Surveyors holding Department of Energy (DOE) energy efficiency
scoring certifications and a contractor-partner deployed the DOE’s Building Energy Score Data
Collection tool, a nationally standardized tool for assessing buildings’ physical and structural
energy efficiency. Surveyors took measurements of each building’s envelope, orientation, and
window area. They used an ETEKT+ Low-E Coating Detector to determine whether glass had a
Low-E coating. Light fixtures were counted and listed by type, mounting, number of lamps per
fixture, and wattage. Occupancy sensors were noted. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) equipment was inspected. Equipment nameplate data was used to calculate efficiencies
available for air conditioners, chillers, boilers, and furnaces. Surveyors did this for hot water
heaters as well. Manufacturers were contacted to gather further details. Interviews were held with
building managers, maintenance personnel, and the BMIC Construction Department to glean
additional information about building age and features. When available, blueprints and
specifications were reviewed, and a discussion was held with the architect for the recently
completed Ellen Marshall Health Center. Finally, the History Department provided additional
information to fill knowledge gaps.
Throughout this process, surveyors filled out department of Energy data collection sheets for each
building. These were digitized, reviewed, and entered into the DOE’s Online Asset Scoring
System. The system scored buildings’ energy efficiency based on asset characteristics; the score
does not consider occupant behavior or operations, making inter-building score comparisons
possible. Each building’s score falls along a one to ten energy efficiency scale. The system
generates a series of energy conservation measures (ECMs) and shows how much a property score
could increase through the ECMs’ adoption. Therefore, this report shares DOE system-generated
property asset scores, property-specific ECMs, and expert recommendations offered by the
project’s contractor after investigating each site with GLCC surveyors.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
74 | Page
Assessments by Building
BMIC Tribal Administration
The BMIC Tribal Administration Building, built in 1981, received a ten-out-of-ten DOE asset
score. Occupant sensor assessments showed 248 average occupants and average usage at 48.6
hours a week.
Recommendations
The DOE building score summary identifies an upgrade opportunity in the Administration
building’s Hot Water System; installing low flow faucets in Block 2 would slightly increase hot
water efficiency for moderate investment cost. Building envelopes, Lighting Systems, and HVAC
Systems generated no recommendations.
If the recommended improvements are adopted, the building’s score would improve by one percent
and remain at a score of ten. It is worth noting that while the Administration Building’s score
reflects modern systems, only roughly a quarter of the building’s gross floor space is regularly
used. This may affect the DOE system’s calculation and warrants further operations assessment.
Regardless, the improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure
below.
(Fig. 1 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
75 | Page
BMIC Biological Services & Conservation
The BMIC Biological Services & Conservation Building, built in 2006, received a nine-out-of-ten
DOE asset score. The building hosts an average of 31 people with an average usage of 48.6 hours
per week.
Recommendations
DOE systems recommended several improvement measures. Firstly, the building envelope can be
made more efficient through air barrier renovations; a building’s air barrier is composed of
physical assemblies designed to prevent outside air infiltration. In most cases, unconditioned attics
and large conditioned spaces account for most envelope leakage. Insulation and other
improvements in such areas would help to reduce building air leakage resulting in a relatively low
increase in efficiency for a moderate cost. For lighting systems, shifting Fixture 1 to LED would
result in a moderate increase in efficiency at a low cost. Also, installing occupancy sensors would
further increase efficiency for a medium-high investment. In hot water systems, installing lowflow faucets would slightly increase efficiency for moderate cost. The system did not identify
ECMs for HVAC.
Implementing the above ECMs would increase the Biological Services and Conservation
Building’s score from nine to ten and capture an estimated 11% in energy savings. The
improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 2 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
76 | Page
BMIC Public Works
The BMIC Public Works Building, constructed in 2016, scored a 6.5 on the DOE asset assessment.
Occupancy was assumed at 12 persons, and hours of operation per week were found to be 48.6.
Recommendations
DOE recommendations for lighting systems improvement include the installation of occupancy
sensors to better coordinate energy supply with demand for a low to medium-sized investment
cost. Upgrading to low-flow faucets will also help decrease hot water heating waste for a mediumcost investment.
With these improvements, the Public Works Building’s score will remain a 6.5 and provide an
estimated 2% energy cost savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 3 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
77 | Page
Advanced Office Technologies
The Advanced Office Technologies building, built in 2006, received a ten-out-of-ten DOE asset
score. Occupancy is noted at 63 people with an average usage of 46.3 hours per week.
Recommendations
The DOE recommended several improvements. First, for lighting systems, the summary suggests
shifting lighting to LED, resulting in a low cost, moderate efficiency improvement. In HVAC
systems, data shows that installing an air-side economizer would moderately improve efficiency
for a medium-high investment. Economizers help reduce air-conditioning costs by sensing outside
air temperature in coordination with thermostat settings; the device draws in outside air for free
cooling when feasible. HVAC can be further made efficient with the installation of a variable
frequency drive for fan control. These devices allow the system to match output with demand
rather than overusing energy during low-demand periods. Neither building envelope nor hot water
service systems warranted improvement recommendations.
With these improvements, the building’s score will remain a 10; however, energy savings are
estimated at 14%. The improvement’s effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the
figure below.
(Fig. 4 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
78 | Page
Boys & Girls Club of Bay Mills
The Boys & Girls Club of Bay Mills, built in 2022, scored seven out of ten on the DOE asset
summary. The building sees an occupancy of 64 and 40.75 operation hours a week.
Recommendations
Occupancy sensors would help regulate lighting system waste by better coordinating fixture use
with demand. This would slightly increase efficiency for a medium-high investment. Low flow
faucets would improve hot water efficiency; slight efficiency improvements will occur for medium
investment. There are no DOE recommendations for the Club’s envelope or HVAC systems.
Implementing the changes listed above will increase the Club’s score to 7.5 with a 4% energy cost
reduction. The improvement’s effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure
below.
(Fig. 5 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
79 | Page
BMIC Justice Center
The BMIC Justice Center, completed in 2014, scored a ten on the DOE asset summary. Occupancy
was assumed at 265 and hours of operation per week at 90.5.
Recommendations
In relation to the property’s long hours and high occupancy, the DOE recommends the adoption
of occupancy sensing interior lighting control to better align light supply with occupant demand.
This lighting systems improvement would generate a relatively low increase for a moderate cost.
Next, the DOE system recommends several improvements for the Justice Center’s HVAC systems.
An air-side economizer would improve efficiency by capturing free cooling by circulating outside
air when appropriate. The investment would be low to medium with a moderate efficiency
increase. In tandem, implementing demand-controlled ventilation (DCV) will further improve the
economizer’s ability to respond to changes in demand. DCV would require a medium-sized
investment with moderate gains in efficiency. Upgrading fans with variable frequency drives
would improve ventilation even further. Again, this final HVAC investment requires medium
investment for moderate efficiency improvement. Finally, the installation of low-cost low-flow
faucets would slightly improve hot water efficiency.
While these improvements would keep the Justice Center at a ten score, energy savings come in
at an estimated 16 percent. The improvement’s effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated
in the figure below.
(Fig. 6 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
80 | Page
Bay Mills Head Start Child Development Building
The Bay Mills Head Start Child Development Building, built in 2008, was rated at seven out of
ten by the DOE asset system. Occupancy was noted at 105, with weekly use at an average of 40.75
hours.
Recommendations
In lighting systems, transitioning lighting in fixture 1 to LED would moderately increase energy
efficiency for low investment costs. Combining these more-efficient light sources with occupancy
sensors would further increase efficiency for a low to medium investment cost. Shifting HVAC
systems with the addition of demand-controlled ventilation will align ventilation expenditure with
occupancy demand, moderately increasing conditioning efficiency for medium-cost investment.
Further increasing demand alignment, installing variable frequency fans would allow for more
efficiency with another medium-cost investment. Finally, low-flow faucets will provide relatively
lower efficiency increases for a medium investment cost. The DOE system found no improvement
opportunities in the building’s envelope system.
Adopting the above recommendations will increase the Child Development Building’s score to a
9, with energy cost savings calculated at 14%. The improvement’s effect in terms of fuel end use
change is illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 7 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
81 | Page
Armelia B. Parket Elder Center & History Department
The Armelia B. Parket Elder Center & History Department Building, constructed in 2001, scored
a 7.5 on the DOE system. Occupancy was noted to be 65, and the building sees an average use of
46 hours a week.
Recommendations
Again, the property’s lighting system can be improved by replacing older lighting with LED light
fixtures. For a low investment, efficiency can be moderately increased. Variable frequency drive
fans will moderately increase HVAC efficiency through supply-demand alignment for a medium
cost. Low flow faucets can slightly increase heating efficiency for a medium investment cost. The
building envelope elicited no recommendations.
With these improvements, the Center would remain at a score of 7.5; energy cost savings is
calculated at 2%. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the
figure below.
(Fig. 8 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
82 | Page
Commodity Foods
The Commodity Foods Building, constructed in 2005, scored a 7.5 on the DOE asset score.
Recommendations
The DOE assessment recommends a building-wide upgrade to LED lighting; this low-cost
improvement would offer moderate energy efficiency gains.
The LED installation will improve the building’s asset score to an eight as well as provide 1% in
energy cost savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the
figure below.
(Fig. 9 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
83 | Page
Mukwa Health & Fitness Center
The new Mukwa Health & Fitness Center, built in 2022, scored an 8.5 out of ten on the DOE asset
assessment. Occupancy was estimated at 36 and weekly hours of use at 48.6.
Recommendations
The DOE system recommended the installation of low-flow faucets to improve hot water
efficiency for a medium investment cost. The DOE tool made no other recommendations were
made.
The low-flow faucet upgrade would increase the Health & Fitness Center’s score to an even 9 with
a 1% savings in energy costs. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 10 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
84 | Page
Culture Department
The BMIC Culture Department, finished in 2016, was rated ten out of ten on the DOE asset
assessment. Occupancy was assumed at 41, and average weekly hours of use were set at 46.
Recommendations
Most improvements were identified in the building’s HVAC system. First, the DOE assessment
recommends the installation of an air-side economizer to capture amenable outside air for free
cooling. For low to medium investment, the economizer offers a moderate increase in energy
efficiency. In tandem with the economizer, adding variable fan drives will help adjust ventilation
for closer alignment with occupant demand. This improvement would require another low to
medium investment and offer moderate energy efficiency improvements. Finally, the assessment
recommends installing low-flow faucets to moderately improve hot water efficiency for a medium
investment cost. No opportunities were identified in the building envelope and lighting systems.
Should these recommendations be adopted, the Culture Department’s score will remain a ten;
however, there will be a 12% energy cost savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end
use change is illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 12 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
85 | Page
Bay Mills Housing Authority
The Bay Mills Housing Authority Building, completed in 2001, received a seven out of ten DOE
asset score. Occupancy was estimated at 22 and weekly hours of use at 48.6.
Recommendations
Lighting systems improvement recommendations included light fixture replacements with LED
lighting. This low-cost improvement would provide a moderate increase in energy efficiency.
Again, adding occupancy sensors will augment LED replacement benefits by better coordinating
lighting demand and energy supply for a low to medium-cost investment. Finally, low-flow faucet
installation will improve hot water efficiency. HVAC and Lighting systems warranted no
improvement recommendations.
These changes will increase the property’s DOE asset score to 8.5 while providing an 11% energy
costs savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in
the figure below.
(Fig. 13 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
86 | Page
Ojibwe Charter School
The Ojibwe Charter School, constructed in 2002, received a six out of ten DOE asset score.
Occupancy was estimated at 161 persons, and hours of operation per week averaged 40.75.
Recommendations
In lighting systems, the DOE assessment recommends upgrading to LED lighting, a low-cost
investment for a moderate efficiency increase. Secondly, interior lighting systems efficiency can
be improved with the addition of occupancy sensors to better align usage with demand. These
sensors would require a medium-sized investment. Low-flow faucet upgrades would increase
water heating efficiency for a medium-sized investment cost. For HVAC, the School relies on
seven wall-mounted heat pumps for heating and cooling; these were installed during construction
in 2002. Heat pump technology and heating capabilities have since improved dramatically. In fact,
the use of older heat pumps adds high costs to the building’s HVAC usage, especially when outside
air temperatures approach freezing. Newer units available for northern climates can now provide
heat to -13 degrees F. Upgrading to these newer models would decrease Electrical consumption
by 15% for cooling and at least 50% for heating. Purchasing heat pumps with Variable Refrigerant
Flow (VRF) can provide even more savings by only running compressors at speeds to match the
loads.
The Charter School has one of the highest potential improvement rates through recommendation
upgrades. Adopting non-HVAC improvements would improve its score to a 7; however, the heat
pump upgrades alone will improve overall efficiency by over 50%. The figure below represents
the improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure below. Heat
pump upgrades are not included in the figure as these recommendations were made by the project’s
contractor, not the DOE system.
(Fig. 15 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
87 | Page
Bay Mills Resort & Casino
Overall, the Bay Mills Resort & Casino, built in 1995, scored a 7.5 out of 10 on the DOE
assessment. Because of the structure’s size, the DOE assessment output sheet contains several
section-specific ratings for the retail and lodging portions of the structure; this report will focus on
overall recommendations from the project expert contractor and include the original scoring sheet
in the appendix.
Recommendations
In the lodging section, 163 Wall-Mounted Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (PTAC) are used
to heat and cool individual hotel rooms. These units rely on inefficient electric resistance for
heating. Heat pump PTACs are now available, which move heat out of the rooms to the outside
air in the summer and extract heat from the air in the winter to warm the room. The existing PTACs
were installed in the 1990s and had a coefficient of performance (COP) of 3.2 for cooling but only
1.0 for heating. A modern heat pump will approach a COP of 4.0 for both heating and cooling.
Thus cooling electrical consumption may decline by 25%, while heating will go down by 75%.
Furthermore, smart heat pump units are available that use occupancy sensors to reduce energy
expenditure when the room is unoccupied, generating further savings.
In lighting systems, an overall conversion to LED lighting will greatly reduce costs. Also,
upgrading to advanced lighting controls (ALC) fixtures will allow for programming, dimming,
and adjusting to daylight to further reduce unnecessary energy use. The recommended order for
improvement is the Casino, Lobby, Back Bay Bar & Casino, hotel rooms, Conference Center, and
Sacy’s restaurant.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
88 | Page
Wild Bluff Golf Course
The Wild Bluff Golf Course Building, constructed in 1999, was rated at 9.5 on the DOE assessment
score. Occupancy was estimated at 89 persons and hours of use per week at 46.3.
Recommendations
The DOE system recommended the improvement of HVAC systems via air-side economizer
instillation. This would allow HVAC systems to make use of free conditioning opportunities
presented by amenable outside weather. The upgrade would provide a moderate efficiency increase
at a low to medium-cost investment. In addition, upgrading the HVAC with variable drive fans
will further reduce energy waste through increased customizability. For a medium cost, this
improvement offers moderate efficiency gains. Finally, low-flow faucets will decrease waterheating waste at a medium cost.
The above improvements would improve the Gulf Course’s DOE score to a ten and provide an
estimated 14% energy cost savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 16 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
89 | Page
Bay Mart Gas Station
The Bay Mart Gas Station, completed in 1998, was rated by the DOE asset assessment at an 8.5.
The building’s occupancy was estimated at 31 persons, and its average weekly hours of use at
46.3.
Recommendations
The DOE assessment recommends upgrading all non-LED fixtures to LED lighting, a low
investment improvement creating moderate efficiency improvements. Low-flow faucet upgrades
were also identified as an improvement opportunity.
The recommended improvements would raise Bay Mart’s score to a nine and create 2% in energy
savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 17 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
90 | Page
Four Seasons Market & Deli
The Four Seasons Market & Deli, built in 2020, received a ten on the DOE asset assessment.
Occupancy was estimated at 95 persons and weekly hours of operation at 46.3.
Recommendations
The only DOE recommendation for the property is in regard to envelope improvement. Assessing
potential leakage points, doors, windows, walls, attics, and basements for integrity under both
negative and positive pressure can help identify points requiring improvement. Assessment and
improvement stand to increase efficiency for a low to medium investment cost.
While the building’s DOE score will remain a 10, these improvements stand to provide 13% in
energy cost savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the
figure below.
(Fig. 18 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
91 | Page
Bay Mills Fire Crew - Migizi Hall
Migizi Fire Hall, built in 1998, was rated a nine during the DOE assessment process. Its occupancy
was estimated at 63 persons and the weekly average hours of operation at 48.6.
Recommendations
Lighting systems could be improved by installing occupancy sensors to limit overuse for a low to
medium-cost investment. HVAC systems can be made more efficient by upgrading ventilation
control to better align demand and supply. This upgrade could be further augmented through the
addition of variable frequency drive fans; both improvements require a medium cost investment
for a moderate efficiency increase. Finally, low-flow faucets would reduce water-heating waste
for a medium investment cost.
The recommendations above will increase Migizi Fire Hall’s rating to 9.5 and provide 3% energy
savings. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 19 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
92 | Page
Ellen Marshall Health Center
The new Ellen Marshall Health Center, completed in 2022, received a 9 on the DOE asset rating
scale. Its assumed occupancy was set at 159 persons and its average hours of use per week at 48.6.
Recommendations
Both recommended improvements create efficiency benefits in the building’s HVAC system.
Firstly, the DOE system recommends adjustments to the HVAC’s VAV flow boxes where
possible, lowering the minimum ventilation flows to reduce waste when demand is low. For a
medium sized investment cost, this change would provide high efficiency gains. Secondly, the
assessment recommends the addition of air temperature reset sensors. This technology
automatically resets building average temperature in response to demand and outside weather
conditions, moderately increasing efficiency for a low cost.
Adoption of the above upgrades would keep the Ellen Marshall Center’s score at 9 while providing
a 1% energy cost savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 20 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
93 | Page
Waishkey Bay Farm
Waishkey Bay Farm, built in 2015, was scored at 5 on the DOE asset rating scale. Its assumed
occupancy was set at 14 persons and its average hours of use per week at 48.6.
Recommendations
The DOE system generated several recommendations. For the building envelope, the tool
recommends whole-building pressurization tests to determine leakage locations. Improving the
building envelope for a moderate investment cost will improve efficiency. Occupancy sensors
throughout the building can help reduce lighting systems waste for a moderate to high investment.
Low-flow faucets will reduce how-water waste for a moderate investment.
Adoption of these improvements would improve Waishkey Bay Farm’s score to a 5.5 with a 10%
energy cost savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated
in the figure below.
(Fig. 21 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
94 | Page
BMIC Maintenance Department
The DOE system generated several recommendations. The BMIC Maintenance Department
building, finished in 2022, scored a 3 on the DOE asset rating scale. Its assumed average hours of
use per week was set at 48.6. The structure is used for vehicle and equipment storage and office
space.
Recommendations
Sealing the building envelope and upgrading the roof insulation will provide some benefit.
Installing occupancy sensors for interior lighting was also recommended. Recommendations for
HVAC and Hot Water are as follows. For the former, the tool recommends installing an air-side
economizer system to allow for cooling with outside air. This low to moderate sized investment
offers middle range efficiency improvements. Relatedly, installing a Variable Frequency Drive
Fan Control will allow for demand synchronized air conditioning. Improving the HVAC for a
medium sized investment cost will moderately improve efficiency. For Hot Water systems, lowflow faucets will improve efficiency for moderate cost.
Adoption of these improvements will improve the Maintenance Building’s score to 6.0, and offer
28% energy cost savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 22 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
95 | Page
Northern Lights Cannabis Company
The Northern Lights Cannabis Company, constructed in 2019, scored a 9.5 on the DOE asset rating
scale. Its assumed occupancy was 390 persons and average hours of use per week was set at 46.3.
Recommendations
Given how efficient this structure is, the only generated recommendation was the addition of low
flow faucets. This would improve the hot water system’s efficiency for a medium investment cost.
While, adoption of these improvements won’t improve the building’s score, they do offer 2%
energy cost savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is illustrated
in the figure below.
(Fig. 23 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
96 | Page
Bay Mills Community College
The Bay Mills Community College, opened in 2018, received an 8 on the DOE asset rating scale.
Its assumed occupancy was 434 persons and average hours of use per week was calculated at
45.11.
Recommendations
There were a variety of improvement recommendations for the college. First, conducting pressure
tests to identify building envelope leakage and enhancing the envelope’s weak points and joints
would reduce leakage for a medium sized investment. Occupancy lighting sensors would improve
system efficiency by coordinating lighting supply and demand for moderate to large investment
cost. Similarly, implementing demand controlled ventilation will moderately improve HVAC
efficiency for medium cost. This improvement requires variable frequency drive supply fans,
which will further improve efficiency for medium cost. Finally, installation of low flow faucets
throughout the building will improve hot water efficiency for a medium investment.
Adopting these improvements will increase the Community College’s score to a 9.5, conferring a
10% energy cost savings benefit. The improvements’ effect in terms of fuel end use change is
illustrated in the figure below.
(Fig. 24 DOE)
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
97 | Page
Conclusion
This energy efficiency audit elicited useful and actionable data for 27 BMIC properties constructed
between 1981 and 2022. While the body of this report contains building-specific assessments and
recommendations, several emergent recommendations, which apply to all or most structures
considered, are worth noting.
All of the buildings audited utilize air conditioners, chillers, heat pumps, furnaces, and boilers for
cooling and heating. The efficiency and quality of technology used in newer available iterations
of this equipment have improved dramatically over the past forty years. Prior to 2000, the SEER
(Season Energy Efficiency Ratio) rating for air conditioners and heat pumps when cooling was 10;
in 2015, it increased to 14, a 40% increase in efficiency. Now, there are units available with a
SEER as high as 22. HSPF (Heating Seasonal Performance Factor) is used to rate heat pumps
during the heating season. Before 2000, the standard was 6.7. It was raised to eight in 2015. Highend units are now available with an HSPF of 13, almost double the old standard. Similarly, furnace
and boiler efficiency standards have gone from 81% to 91%. There are many models available
with 95+ % efficiency. Most units currently in use at BMIC do not warrant replacement based on
energy savings alone. However, the useful life of air conditioners is 12 to 15 years and over 20 for
furnaces and boilers. Therefore, building managers should keep track of repair bills; once they
become comparable to replacement rates, upgrading to the most efficient equipment available
should be considered.
Many buildings are only occupied 40 to 50 hours per week. Programmable thermostats should be
used to maintain lower temperatures during the unoccupied hours during the heating season. Air
conditioners should be turned off. After a general upgrade to LED lighting, lighting fixtures should
be linked to occupancy sensors to reduce waste. The new Ellen Marshall Medical Center does have
a Building Management System which has the capability of saving energy through supply-demand
alignment; this model should stand as an example to other buildings as they are upgraded.
Please contact the Superior Watershed Partnership with any questions, more recommendations, or
other inquiries.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
98 | Page
Appendix
Tribal Administration
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
99 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
100 | Page
BMIC Biological Services & Conservation
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
101 | Page
BMIC Public Works
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
102 | Page
Advanced Office Technologies
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
103 | Page
Boys and Girls Club of Bay Mills
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
104 | Page
Bay Mills Justice Center
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
105 | Page
Bay Mills Head Start Child Development Center
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
106 | Page
Armelia B. Parket Elder Center & History Department
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
107 | Page
Commodity Foods
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
108 | Page
Mukwa Health & Fitness Center
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
109 | Page
Culture Department
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
110 | Page
Bay Mills Housing Authority
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
111 | Page
Ojibwe Charter School
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
112 | Page
Bay Mills Resort & Casino
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
113 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
114 | Page
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
115 | Page
Wild Bluff Golf Course
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
116 | Page
Bay Mart Gas Station
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
117 | Page
Four Seasons Market & Deli
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
118 | Page
Bay Mills Fire Crew - Migizi Hall
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
119 | Page
Ellen Marshall Health Center
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
120 | Page
Appendix C: Excerpts from 2011 Energy Efficiency Study
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
121 | Page
Executive Summary
In 2011 the Inter-Tribal Council of Michigan, Inc. was awarded an Energy Efficiency
Development and Deployment in Indian Country grant from the U.S. Department of Energy’s
Tribal Energy Program. This grant aimed to study select Bay Mills Indian Community
community/government buildings to determine what is required to reduce each building’s energy
consumption by 30%. The Bay Mills Indian Community (BMIC) buildings with the largest
expected energy use were selected for this study and include the Bay Mills Ellen Marshall Health
Center building, Bay Mills Indian Community Administration Building, Bay Mills Community
College, Bay Mills Charter School and the Waishkey Community Center buildings. These five
sites are the largest energy consuming Community buildings and comprise the study area of this
project titled “Energy Efficiency Feasibility Study and Resulting Plan for the Bay Mills Indian
Community”.
The ultimate objective of this study, plan and the Tribe is to reduce the energy consumption at
the Community’s most energy intensive buildings that will, in turn, reduce emissions at the
source of energy production, reduce energy expenditures, create long lasting energy conscious
practices and positively affect the quality of the natural environment.
This feasibility study and resulting plan act as a guide to the Community’s first step towards
planned energy management within its buildings/facilities. It aims to reduce energy
consumption by 30% or greater within the subject facilities with an emphasis on energy
conservation and efficiency. The primary goals of the plan are to maximize long-term savings
and foster a culture of energy conservation. In order to meet these goals, this plan provides both
specific strategies and efficiency items for reducing energy usage and a step-by-step planning
guide. The document contains short-term, mid-term, and long-term action plans nested within the
overall process. No cost conservation measure will constitute the short-term actions. The midterm and long-term actions could be funded by contributing 50% of the cost savings to an energy
savings account. This mechanism of reinvesting energy savings has been very successful in
cutting energy cost over the long-term (Ann Arbor, MI has demonstrated great success since
founding an energy fund in 1998). By utilizing this reinvestment mechanism this energy action
plan stands as both a powerful resource and a model for successful energy management. This
Plan is intended to be a living document that provides focus and resources for an ongoing
process of planning, implementation, and evaluation of energy efficiency, conservation, and
renewable energy measures.
The energy audits and related power consumption analyses conducted for this study revealed
numerous significant energy conservation and efficiency opportunities for all of the subject
buildings. In addition, many of the energy conservation measures require no cost and serve to
help balance other measures requiring capital investment. Reoccurring deficiencies relating to
heating, cooling and thermostat inefficiencies, powering computers, lighting, items linked to
weatherization and numerous other items were encountered that can be mitigated with the energy
conservation measures developed in the following plan.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
122 | Page
The two charts below depict the existing state of energy consumption within the subject
buildings and that of the same buildings with the energy conservation measures developed in this
project.
Annual Energy Expenditures
BMIC Admin, $12,706
BMCC, $67,494
Health Center, $65,627
Charter School,
$24,235
Waishkey Center, $42,232
Annual Energy $ After ECMs
100%
90%
80%
70%
Health Center, $23,880
Waishkey Center,
$10,734
BMIC Admin, $6,333
Charter School, $10,171
BMCC, $28,181
Charter School, $14,064
BMCC, $39,313
Charter School
BMCC
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
Health Center, $41,747
Waishkey Center,
$31,498
BMIC Admin, $6,373
10%
0%
BMIC Admin
Health Center
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
Waishkey Center
123 | Page
Based on each facility’s energy use, estimates of greenhouse gas emissions were generated using
Energy Star Portfolio Manager. The College consumed the most total site energy and also
generating the greatest amount of GHG emissions at 411 MT CO2-e in 2011 and was close
followed by the Ellen Marshall Health Center at 400 MT CO2-e. The total annual GHG
emissions was 1,292 MT CO2-e, which to put in more tangible terms is equivalent to the annual
emissions from 269 cars or the amount of carbon sequestered annually 1,059 acres of forest.7
The following table and charts illustrate the current state of energy consumption in the subject
buildings.
Building Energy Performance
Energy
Performance
Rating (1-100)
Building
Tribal
Administration
85
Building
Ellen Marshall
44
Health Center
BMIC Charter
52
School
Waishkey Center
Community
NA
Building
Bay Mills
Community
NA
College Library
Bay Mills
Community
NA
College Admin.
Bay Mills
Community
NA
College Mikanuk
Source: Energy Star Portfolio Manager
Total
Annual
Site
Energy
(kBtu)
Total
Annual
GHG
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Site Energy
Intensity/National
Median
(kBtu/ft2/yr)
Source Energy
Intensity/National
Median
(kBtu/ft2/yr)
51/82
118/189 (-38%)
586,009
81
111/104
227/213 (+7%)
3,329,503
400
106/109
165/170 (-2%)
1,717,715
150
88/39
145/100 (+45%)
2,589,427
242
65/104
139/244 (-43%)
429,411
55
70/104
186/244 (-24%)
926,286
148
157/104
308/244 (+26%)
1,880,608
216
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
124 | Page
Current Individual Building Energy
Consumption
$70,000
A $60,000
n
$50,000
n
u $40,000
a $30,000
l
$20,000
$
$3.00 C
o
$2.50
s
$2.00 t
$1.50
$10,000
$0
BMIC
Admin
Health
Center
Waishkey
Center
Charter
School
BMCC
Admin
BMCC
Mikanuk
BMCC
Library
Building
20000
18000
16000
14000
c 12000
c 10000
f 8000
6000
4000
2000
0
$3.50
$1.00 f
t
$0.50
2
$0.00
Annual Energy $
Energy Cost/Floor Area
Natural Gas Consumption
$1.20
C
o
$0.80 s
t
$0.60
$1.00
Tribal
Admin.
Building
Health
Center
Waiskey
Center
Charter
School
BMCC
Admin
Building
Mikanuk
Building
Library
History
Dept
$0.40 f
$0.20 t
2
$0.00
2009/2010
2010/2011
Cost/Floor Area 2009/2010
Cost/Floor Area 2010/2011
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
125 | Page
Electricity Consumption
450,000
$2.50
400,000
$2.00
350,000
300,000
KWH
$1.50
250,000
Cost ft2
$1.00
200,000
150,000
100,000
$0.50
50,000
0
Tribal
Admin.
Building
Health
Center
Waiskey
Center
Charter
School
Building
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
BMCC
Admin
Mikanuk
Building
Library
$0.00
2009/2010
2010/2011
Cost/Floor Area 2009/2010
Cost/Floor Area 2010/2011
126 | Page
C.1 BMIC Current Tribal Administration Building
(ECMs Totaling 50% Energy Reduction)
The Bay Mills Indian Community Administration Building is an 11,400ft2 split level office
building owned by the Tribe. The Administration Building was constructed in the early 1970s
and is situated directly on the south shore of the Saint Marys River/Lake Superior. The
Administration Building is connected via a hallway to the Kings Club Casino. The administration
and casino portions of the building share an electric meter but separate gas meters. The shared
electricity meter posed some challenge in differentiating electricity for just the administration
activities portion but was successfully determined from the completed energy auditing
performed in the project. Like many older buildings, the Administration Building has had
additions and building alterations performed. The building serves approximately 25 staff and is
utilized year round.
The Administration Building utilizes grid electricity and natural gas as sources of energy.
Electricity is used for all items requiring energy and natural gas is the primary heating fuel
source and is supplemented by electric baseboard heating in some parts of the building.
Heating is controlled by two programmable thermostats, each tied to a natural gas forced air
furnace and six upstairs offices with individual manual thermostats controlling electric
baseboard heating. The six upstairs offices and the Tribal court offices have individual wall AC
units.
The Administration Building features wood frame construction, fiberglass insulation, vinyl
siding, a combination of wood framed and vinyl sliding windows, one glass/aluminum framed
double exterior door, one single metal entry door, one sliding glass door, pitched roof and half
of the building with a blocked basement and the other half on a slab foundation.
Analyses of the Administration Building’s energy consumption history and energy audit
information revealed that computers is the largest energy consuming item followed by heating,
interior lighting, hot water, computer servers and other items shown in the following chart.
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
127 | Page
Energy Consuming Items
Refrigeration Plug In
6%
3%
Hot Water
Cooling
4%
8%
Heating
24%
Lighting
22%
Servers
7%
Computers
26%
Figure B.1. Energy Consuming Items
To improve building energy performance, the following Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs)
were developed in response to energy audit and analyses findings. Each ECM is further
described below.
Table B.1. Energy Conservation Measures
ECM
Description of Energy Conservation
Measures
% Energy Use
Savings
Total Cost
Savings
($/year)
Estimated
Capital Cost
($)
Simple
Payback
(years)
1
Hibernate computers during non-work
hours
67.4%/13.8%
$1,753
$0
0
2
Interior Lighting
(T8 Fixtures, bulbs and occupancy sensors)
49.4%/9.5%
$1,208
$8,372
6.93
3
Energy Efficient Water Heaters (2)
62%/5.2%
$665
$2,298
3.46
4
Thermostat optimization
(6pm-6am 10 degree setback/stepup;
thermostat heat setting @ 70 degrees; 76
degrees AC) & Turning Off Electric
Baseboard and Wall AC Units at Close of
Work Day
Energy Efficient Refrigerators
(Replace 2 w/ 1 Efficient fridge)
29%/7.7%
$968
$0
0
89.4%/2.6%
$336
$945
2.81
6
Replace Incandescent Bulbs with CFLs
78.3%/2.0%
$256
$14
0.06
7
Timed Power Supplies
(Copiers, Printers, Postage)
53.4%/1.6%
$200
$323
1.61
8
Coffee Makers w/lnsulated Carafe
92%/1.0%
$132
$130
0.98
5
2022 Energy and Waste Assessment of BMIC
128 | Page
9
Eliminate Redundant Items
(Space heaters, ½ fridge)
100%/0.7%
$88
$0
0
10
Energy Star Water Cooler
45.2%/0.3%
$40
$191
4.81
11
Insulation & Air Sealing
(Air seal attic deck and wall AC; Insulate
attic and foundation)
Total
20%/5.4%
$687
$10,000
14.5
49.8%
$6,333
$22,273
3.51
ECM 1: Computer Power Management
Existing Conditions
The energy audit of the Administration Building determined that work station computer
systems largely remain powered on 24 hours per day. Computers that remain on after work
cause unnecessary power consumption and can be mitigated by hibernating computers
after/before work hours.
Energy Conservation Measure
Hibernating is a power management setting that every computer operating system has for
reducing energy consumption. Utilizing this feature to power down computers outside of
work hours will reduce the current wasted energy associated with keeping computers
powered on when the building is unoccupied. Enabling the Hibernate feature to the
specifications below will cause each computer to consume near zero energy outside of work
hours (approximately 14 hours/day) and thereby result in a significant reduction in energy.
Computer
Type
Workstatio
n
Existing Condition
New Condition
Powered on 24/7
Enable Hibernate feature in each computer’s
Power Management settings after 90 minutes
of inactivity.
Savings
Computer energy reduction: 67.4%
Overall building energy reduction: 13.8%
Annual savings: $1,753
Capital investment: $0
Payback: 0 years
Savings are calculated using the followin
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.