Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) commitments have reached 10,000 validated companies globally as of January 2026. Among those companies are many of the commercial property owners, REITs, and institutional real estate operators who hire restoration contractors. When your client has an SBTi commitment, the data quality standard they need from your RCP Job Carbon Reports is materially higher than what GRESB or CDP alone require. This article explains the difference, what it means for the data you deliver, and how the SBTi landscape is changing through 2028.
What SBTi Is and Why It Affects Your Clients
What SBTi is and why it affects your clients.
The Science Based Targets initiative is a collaboration between CDP, the UN Global Compact, the World Resources Institute, and WWF. It provides a framework for companies to set emissions reduction targets that are scientifically aligned with limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Companies that commit to SBTi submit their targets for validation and are required to report progress annually.
The current operative standard is the Corporate Net-Zero Standard V1.3, released September 2025. These updates are non-substantive minor revisions improving clarity and alignment with the GHG Protocol — they do not alter the ambition level or intent of the Standard. Companies may continue setting targets under V1.3 through 2027. Version 2.0 is expected to become mandatory for new targets from January 1, 2028, following publication in 2026.
The 67% Rule: Why Scope 3 Coverage Is Mandatory
The 67% rule — why Scope 3 coverage is mandatory.
Here is the specific SBTi requirement that makes restoration contractors relevant to their clients’ climate programs: to be in line with SBTi Criteria, companies must set Scope 3 targets — supplier engagement targets and/or reduction targets — that collectively cover at least 67% of total Scope 3 emissions, if those emissions represent over 40% of their total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
For commercial real estate companies, Scope 3 emissions represent well over 40% of their total footprint — typically 85–95%. This means every commercial property owner with an SBTi commitment is required to set supplier engagement targets covering at least 67% of their Scope 3. Restoration contractor work sits in their Scope 3. If restoration spend is material enough to be in that 67% coverage boundary — and for large property portfolios with significant loss history, it can be — they need your emissions data.
Supplier engagement targets require suppliers to set SBTi-approved targets themselves, usually within 3–5 years. This is the escalation path: right now, your clients need your per-job carbon data. Within 3–5 years, some will require you to set your own science-based targets as a condition of preferred vendor status.
What SBTi Data Quality Requirements Mean for RCP Records
What SBTi data quality requirements mean for RCP records.
The SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard V1.3 states that companies must collect high-quality primary data from suppliers and other value chain partners for Scope 3 activities. This is a stricter bar than GRESB or CDP, which accept supplier-estimated data with appropriate disclosure. For SBTi-committed clients, the preference hierarchy is:
Primary data: Metered kWh, weighed waste manifests, GPS-derived vehicle miles. RCP records flagged as “primary_data_points” in the data_quality section.
Activity-based secondary: Calculated from documented activity (miles × mpg × emission factor). Still a defensible RCP record with proper calculation_method flagging.
Spend-based or proxy: Acceptable for initial Scope 3 inventory building, but not sustainable as a primary data source for SBTi reporting. RCP proxy records should be actively replaced with primary data as job management systems improve.
The practical implication: if your largest commercial clients have SBTi commitments, prioritize metered equipment energy and manifest-confirmed waste weights on their properties. The RCP data_quality section explicitly distinguishes primary from proxy data points — use it to show your SBTi-committed clients that their records are primary-data quality where possible.
SBTi V2.0: What’s Coming and What It Means
The draft V2.0 standard moves away from fixed percentage thresholds, instead encouraging companies to prioritize Scope 3 emissions based on intensity of activities and where they have the greatest influence. This is a meaningful shift. Under V1.3, clients must cover 67% of Scope 3 by emissions volume. Under V2.0, they may need to cover the categories where they have the most procurement influence — which may or may not include restoration, depending on their portfolio.
The new standard may require companies to set supplier engagement targets with the goal of increasing the number of Tier 1 suppliers transitioning to net-zero compatible performance. Restoration contractors are Tier 1 suppliers for their commercial property clients. Being RCP-certified and showing a documented emissions reduction trajectory positions you as a net-zero-compatible vendor before your clients are required to ask.
How to Identify Whether Your Client Has an SBTi Commitment
The SBTi maintains a public Target Dashboard at sciencebasedtargets.org/target-dashboard. Any company with a validated SBTi target or a commitment to set one appears there. Search your top commercial clients by company name before your next renewal conversation. If they appear on the dashboard, the data quality bar is higher than if they are GRESB-only reporters.
Signs a client has or is moving toward an SBTi commitment: they have a net-zero pledge on their website with a year attached, they reference “science-based targets” in procurement communications, they are a GRESB “Green Star” participant, or their investor base includes institutional investors with their own SBTi commitments (who in turn pressure portfolio companies).
The RCP as Pre-Positioning for SBTi Supplier Engagement
When a commercial client with an SBTi commitment initiates a supplier engagement program — asking vendors to provide emissions data and eventually set their own targets — the contractors with established RCP records are in a fundamentally different position than those starting from zero. You already have the data infrastructure. You already know your per-job emissions. You already have a documented trajectory if you have implemented any reduction levers from the RCP Carbon Reduction Playbook.
The contractor who can respond to a supplier engagement questionnaire with two years of RCP portfolio data and a documented 15% reduction in per-job emissions is not a compliance burden to the client — they are evidence that the engagement program works.
Every RCP article published so far covers how to measure Scope 3 emissions from restoration work. This one covers something different: how to reduce them. Measurement without a reduction pathway is compliance theater. The contractors who win long-term commercial relationships are not the ones who hand over a carbon number — they are the ones who show a trajectory. This playbook gives you the operational levers, the realistic timelines, and the actual emission reduction math for each.
A realistic 30% reduction in per-job Scope 3 emissions by 2030 is achievable for most commercial restoration operations. It requires no exotic technology, no wholesale fleet replacement in year one, and no sacrifice of job performance. It requires a sequence of deliberate decisions made over four years.
Where Your Emissions Actually Come From
Where restoration Scope 3 emissions actually come from.
Before you can reduce emissions, you need to know what generates them. Across the five RCP job types, transportation (Domain 2) consistently accounts for the largest share of per-job emissions — typically 45–65% of total job Scope 3 — followed by demolished materials (Domain 5) at 15–30%, with equipment energy, consumable materials, and waste disposal making up the remainder.
This matters because it tells you where to focus. Fleet electrification and route optimization attack the largest emission source. Material substitution attacks the second-largest. Equipment energy reduction is meaningful but secondary to the first two. The playbook is sequenced accordingly.
Lever 1: Fleet Electrification — The Highest-Impact Reduction
Lever 1: fleet electrification — highest-impact reduction.
Transportation is the dominant emission source in restoration Scope 3 because restoration work is inherently mobile — multiple daily trips, equipment-laden vehicles, waste hauling. Every gallon of diesel your fleet burns generates 10.21 kg CO₂e. Replacing a diesel van with an electric equivalent driven on US average grid electricity generates approximately 0.35 kg CO₂e per kWh consumed, which at typical commercial van efficiency (0.4–0.5 kWh/mile) translates to roughly 0.14–0.18 kg CO₂e per mile — compared to 0.47 kg CO₂e per mile for a diesel van at 22 mpg. That is a 60–70% per-mile emissions reduction on day one of EV operation.
EV Options Available Now for Restoration Fleets (2026)
The Ford E-Transit remains the most affordable and most widely available electric cargo van on the market, starting at approximately $53,000–$60,000 depending on configuration, with a maximum estimated range of about 159 miles. The 2026 Ram ProMaster EV offers a 200-kilowatt electric motor with 268 horsepower, 302 pound-feet of torque, a maximum payload of 3,161 pounds, and a combined driving range of up to 164 miles.
Both vans are production-ready and available now. Critical note for restoration operations: federal EV tax credits expired on September 30, 2025, so fleet EV economics now depend entirely on fuel and maintenance savings rather than purchase incentives.
Which Vehicles to Electrify First
Not all restoration vehicles are equally suitable for immediate electrification. The 159–164 mile daily range of current commercial EVs constrains which duty cycles work. The priority sequence:
Immediate candidates (electrify now): Daily monitoring and check visit vehicles — the vans that drive to job sites for psychrometric readings and equipment checks. These make predictable, short-radius trips (typically 20–50 miles round trip) that are well within EV range and return to base each night for charging.
2027–2028 candidates: Initial response and equipment delivery vehicles — longer trips but predictable from a home base. Suitable once charging infrastructure at the depot is established.
Longer-term (2028+): Equipment trailer towing and heavy haul vehicles. EV towing range is significantly reduced; wait for next-generation commercial EVs with extended range before committing here.
The Reduction Math
A typical mid-size restoration company runs 5 service vans, each averaging 15,000 miles per year for job-related trips. At 22 mpg diesel, that is 3,409 gallons of diesel annually across the fleet, generating 34,806 kg CO₂e per year from fleet operations alone. Replacing 2 monitoring vans with EVs at the WECC grid emission factor (0.27 kg CO₂e/kWh, cleaner than national average) reduces fleet emissions by roughly 12,000 kg CO₂e per year — a 35% reduction in fleet emissions with just 2 vehicles changed.
Lever 2: Route Optimization — Immediate, Zero-Cost
Before spending on new vehicles, optimize the trips you are already making. Monitoring visit frequency is the easiest lever. IICRC S500 requires psychrometric monitoring at minimum every 24 hours, but many contractors visit more frequently than necessary during stable drying periods. Reducing a 5-day drying job from 5 monitoring visits to 3 (initial setup, mid-point check, close-out) reduces Category 4 transportation emissions by 40% on that job with no impact on drying outcome, provided moisture readings confirm stable drying progression.
Remote monitoring technology — IoT moisture sensors that transmit readings without technician presence — can reduce physical monitoring visits further. The emissions reduction from eliminating one 40-mile round trip per day on a 5-day job is approximately 18 kg CO₂e per job, which compounds meaningfully across a high-volume portfolio.
Consolidated equipment runs — combining equipment delivery and pickup for multiple jobs in a single route — reduce per-job transportation emissions without changing equipment or crew. A fleet management system that plans equipment logistics across active jobs rather than individually can reduce monitoring and equipment trip mileage by 15–25%.
Lever 3: Low-Carbon Material Substitution
Demolished and replacement materials are the second-largest emission source in most restoration jobs. Two substitution opportunities stand out as practical and commercially available:
Insulation: Switch from Fiberglass to Cellulose
Cellulose insulation, made from recycled paper, offers a carbon footprint of just 0.2 to 1.1 kg CO₂e per square meter per inch of thickness, compared to fiberglass insulation which ranges from 1.7 to 2.5 kg CO₂e per square meter per inch. For restoration contractors who control the material specification on reconstruction scope, switching to cellulose where applicable cuts insulation-related emissions by roughly 60–75%. Cellulose is also well-suited to restoration applications — dense-pack cellulose can be pneumatically injected into wall cavities without demolition, which itself reduces Category 4 (haul-away) and Category 12 (demolished materials) emissions simultaneously.
Drywall: Source Recycled-Content Product
Standard gypsum drywall has an emission factor of approximately 0.12 kg CO₂e/kg. High recycled-content drywall (products with 95%+ post-industrial gypsum content) carry materially lower production emissions — some EPD-verified products report as low as 0.06 kg CO₂e/kg, a 50% reduction. This substitution requires no change in installation practice or performance specification. The primary requirement is supplier selection and EPD documentation for auditability.
Carpet: Specify Recycled-Content Nylon
Standard nylon carpet carries an emission factor of 5.40 kg CO₂e/kg — the highest of any common restoration replacement material. Carpet products with high recycled nylon content (from post-consumer carpet) carry meaningfully lower embedded carbon, with some EPD-verified products reporting 30–40% lower production emissions. For restoration contractors involved in carpet replacement, specifying recycled-content nylon where client specifications allow reduces Category 1 material emissions substantially.
Lever 4: Equipment Energy — Grid Decarbonization and Efficiency
Equipment energy (Domain 1) is a meaningful but secondary emission source. Two approaches apply:
Passive: Grid Decarbonization Does the Work
If your equipment runs on building electricity, your equipment energy emissions will decline automatically as the US grid decarbonizes. The EPA eGRID national average was 0.3499 kg CO₂e/kWh in 2023. The EIA projects continued grid decarbonization through 2030 as renewable capacity additions outpace demand growth. For contractors operating in WECC (Western US), the subregion factor is already significantly lower (approximately 0.27 kg CO₂e/kWh). Simply using eGRID subregion factors rather than the national average can show meaningful reductions on paper for contractors in clean-grid markets.
Active: Energy-Star Equipment Selection
When replacing drying equipment, prioritize Energy Star certified dehumidifiers. Energy Star certified commercial dehumidifiers use at least 15% less energy per pint of moisture removed than non-certified units. Across a fleet of 20 LGR dehumidifiers running on an average of 3 days per job at 24 hours per day, a 15% efficiency improvement reduces per-job equipment energy emissions by approximately 20 kg CO₂e — meaningful at scale, particularly for high-volume operations.
Lever 5: Waste Diversion from Landfill
Landfill disposal generates 0.021 metric tons CO₂e per short ton of mixed C&D waste. Recycling the same material eliminates the landfill methane contribution. For drywall specifically — which is 100% recyclable gypsum — landfill disposal generates 0.006 tCO₂e/ton while recycling to a gypsum recycler generates near zero. Many regional gypsum recyclers accept clean drywall waste, and some offer jobsite dumpster pickup directly.
For a typical commercial water damage job generating 2 tons of mixed C&D debris, diverting drywall fraction (often 40–50% of demolition waste by weight) to a recycling facility reduces Category 5 waste disposal emissions by approximately 40% on that stream. This requires establishing a relationship with a regional C&D recycler and documenting the diversion for data quality purposes.
The 30% Reduction Roadmap: 2026–2030
Year
Actions
Estimated Reduction vs. 2026 Baseline
2026
Establish baseline (12-point RCP data capture on all commercial jobs). Begin route optimization and monitoring visit consolidation. Establish drywall recycling relationship with regional recycler.
5–8% from route optimization and waste diversion alone
2027
Electrify 1–2 monitoring vehicles (E-Transit or ProMaster EV). Begin specifying cellulose insulation where applicable. Switch to recycled-content drywall for standard losses.
12–18% cumulative
2028
Expand EV fleet to response vehicles. Install depot charging at primary office. Implement IoT monitoring sensors on high-value commercial losses to eliminate physical monitoring visits.
20–25% cumulative
2029–2030
Replace next diesel van cycle with EV. Implement Energy Star equipment policy for all dehumidifier replacements. Expand drywall recycling to all jobs. Document and deliver annual RCP portfolio summary to key commercial clients.
30%+ cumulative — meaningful for commercial client SBTi and GRESB reporting
How to Present This to Commercial Clients
How to present a reduction roadmap to commercial clients.
The reduction roadmap becomes a sales and retention tool when you present it proactively. Commercial property managers with SBTi commitments or GRESB targets need their Scope 3 supply chain to show a reduction trajectory — not just a static measurement. A contractor who can say “here is our 2026 baseline, here is our 2028 target, and here is how we are getting there” is materially more valuable as a long-term vendor than one who simply produces a number.
The annual RCP Portfolio Summary — a document that aggregates all per-job carbon reports for a specific client’s properties across the reporting year, shows a per-job average, and includes a year-over-year comparison once a second year of data exists — is the vehicle for this conversation. It takes the per-job Job Carbon Report data and turns it into the portfolio-level trend that ESG reporting requires.
The Restoration Carbon Protocol was designed from the start to be implemented by software, not filled out by hand. The 12 RCP data points map almost entirely to fields that restoration job management platforms already capture — or can capture with minimal configuration. This guide is a direct call to action to the restoration software industry: Encircle, PSA, Dash, Xcelerate, Albiware, Restoration Manager, and any platform serving restoration contractors. Here is exactly what RCP compatibility requires and how to implement it.
The Business Case for Software Vendors
The business case for RCP software vendors.
Restoration platforms that implement RCP compatibility give their contractor customers a differentiator that commercial property managers will actively request. As California SB 253 Scope 3 reporting requirements come into effect in 2027 and GRESB, CDP, and CSRD pressure continues to build, commercial clients will increasingly require their restoration vendors to provide per-job carbon data. The contractor that can push a button and produce an RCP-compliant Job Carbon Report wins the commercial renewal. The platform that makes that button possible wins the contractor.
RCP compatibility is also a concrete AI-era feature: it transforms job documentation from a liability tool into a value delivery mechanism. Every well-documented job becomes a carbon asset that the contractor can monetize with commercial clients.
Platform-by-Platform RCP Compatibility Analysis
Platform-by-platform RCP compatibility analysis.
Encircle
Encircle’s strength is field documentation — photos, moisture readings, drying logs, contents inventories, and report generation. It is the platform closest to capturing the data RCP needs at the source.
RCP Data Point
Encircle Field / Location
Implementation
1 — Vehicle log
Not currently captured natively
Add custom “Vehicle Trips” section to job close-out form: vehicle type, fuel type, trip count, miles
3 — Equipment power source
Drying log / equipment log
Add “Power Source” toggle (building power / generator) to equipment placement form. If generator, add fuel type and gallons fields.
4 — Chemical treatments
Notes / photo documentation
Add structured chemical application form: product type, volume in liters, application area. Currently unstructured.
5 — PPE consumption
Not currently captured
Add PPE close-out field to job form with unit counts by type. Can default to RCP proxy rates based on damage category/class.
Link demolition scope to material weight calculation. Encircle already captures sqft demolished; apply RCP weight-per-sqft table to produce weight by material type.
No change needed. Map Encircle category/class fields directly to RCP job_identification fields.
12 — Job timeline
✅ Start and completion dates — already captured
No change needed. Direct mapping to RCP job_start_date and job_completion_date.
RCP JSON export implementation: Encircle’s existing report generation engine can be extended to produce an RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON file as an additional report type at job close-out. The JSON structure maps directly to Encircle’s data model with the additions described above.
PSA (Canam Systems)
PSA is a full job management, CRM, and accounting platform with open API access. It integrates with Xactimate, XactAnalysis, Encircle, and Matterport. PSA’s open API makes it the platform most ready for RCP integration without UI changes.
RCP Data Point
PSA Field / Module
Implementation
1 — Vehicle log
Job tasks / time tracking
Add vehicle dispatch fields to job tasks: vehicle ID, fuel type, departure/return mileage. Or pull from GPS integration if enabled.
4-6 — Materials and PPE
Job expenses / purchase orders
Map RCP chemical, PPE, and containment line items to job expense categories. Add RCP category tags to existing expense item types.
7-8 — Waste log
Job expenses / subcontractor
Add waste disposal as structured expense type with weight, method, and facility fields. Currently tracked as cost, not as physical quantity.
9 — Demolished materials
Job scope / Xactimate import
Parse Xactimate line items for demolition scope. Map Xactimate line item codes to RCP material types. Weight is derivable from sqft and material type.
11-12 — Classification, timeline
✅ Job intake form — already captured
Direct mapping. PSA damage type and class fields map to RCP job_type, damage_category, damage_class.
API integration path: PSA’s open API allows an RCP calculation engine to pull job data at close-out, compute emissions, and POST the resulting RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON to a client-facing endpoint or ESG platform directly. This is the most powerful implementation path and requires no UI changes to PSA itself.
Dash (Next Gear Solutions)
Dash is a full restoration business management platform with Xactimate integration and strong insurance claims workflow support. Its equipment tracking and job financials modules are the primary RCP integration points.
RCP Data Point
Dash Module
Implementation
1 — Vehicle log
Job scheduling / dispatch
Add vehicle type, fuel type, and round-trip miles to dispatch records. GPS integration if available.
3 — Equipment power source
Equipment tracking
Add “Power Source” field to equipment deployment record. Dash tracks equipment placement dates already — add power source and generator fuel log.
9 — Demolished materials
Xactimate integration
Same as PSA — parse Xactimate line items for RCP material type mapping.
11-12 — Classification, timeline
✅ Job type, dates — captured
Direct mapping from Dash job record to RCP fields.
Xcelerate
Xcelerate focuses on operational efficiency and field capture with workflow management and daily checklists. Its customizable daily checklist system is the primary integration point for RCP data capture.
The Xcelerate daily checklist can be configured to include RCP data fields at each technician check-in: vehicle mileage logged, equipment runtime hours, materials consumed. This captures data points 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 as part of the existing technician workflow with no additional friction. At job close-out, waste and demolished materials fields complete the 12-point record.
The Xactimate Integration Opportunity
The Xactimate integration opportunity for RCP data.
Xactimate is the dominant estimating platform across the restoration industry. Its line-item scope database defines what was removed and replaced on virtually every insurance-backed restoration job in the US. This creates a unique RCP integration opportunity: Xactimate line items can be mapped to RCP material types automatically.
A partial Xactimate → RCP material type mapping:
Xactimate Category
RCP Material Type
Weight Proxy
DRY — Drywall remove and replace
drywall_standard
2.2 lbs/sqft (½” standard)
FLR — Carpet remove and replace
carpet
0.75 lbs/sqft
FLR — Vinyl / LVP remove and replace
lvp_flooring
1.2 lbs/sqft
INS — Insulation remove and replace
insulation_fiberglass
0.5 lbs/sqft (batt, 3.5″)
FRM — Framing remove and replace
lumber_framing
1.5 lbs/lf (2×4 stud)
A software vendor that implements this mapping can auto-populate RCP data points 9 and 10 directly from the Xactimate estimate on any job where an estimate exists — which is the majority of commercial losses. This is the single highest-leverage implementation step in the entire RCP software integration roadmap.
The API Call Structure for RCP Data Exchange
For platforms that want to push RCP data to a client-facing endpoint or ESG platform, the standard API pattern is:
For ESG platforms that receive RCP data from multiple contractors (Measurabl, Yardi Elevate, Deepki, Atrius), the recommended intake pattern is a webhook endpoint that accepts POST requests with RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON bodies, validates against the published schema, and maps emissions totals to the platform’s Scope 3 category data model.
RCP Compatibility Certification for Platforms
Software platforms that implement RCP compatibility will be listed on the RCP-compatible platforms registry (forthcoming at tygartmedia.com/rcp). To qualify:
Capture all 12 RCP data points (primary or proxy with documentation)
Produce valid RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON output that validates against the published schema
Label proxy-estimated data points in the data_quality section
Notify Tygart Media at rcp@tygartmedia.com with a sample output record
Compatibility certification is free. It is a recognition that the platform meets the RCP standard, not a paid endorsement.
The Restoration Carbon Protocol (RCP) is an open industry self-standard for calculating, documenting, and reporting Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions from restoration contractor work. It is the first framework purpose-built for the restoration industry to enable contractors to provide defensible, auditor-acceptable emissions data to commercial property managers, REITs, institutional investors, government agencies, and ESG reporting platforms.
This document is the complete RCP v1.0 specification. It supersedes and consolidates all individual RCP knowledge nodes published at tygartmedia.com/esg-restoration. This is the document you share with RIA, with software vendors, with ESG consultants, and with any organization that wants to understand, adopt, or build on the standard.
Version: RCP v1.0 Published: April 2026 Published by: Tygart Media — tygartmedia.com License: Open — free to use, implement, and build upon with attribution GHG Protocol alignment: Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard Emission factor vintage: EPA 2025 GHG Emission Factors Hub, EPA eGRID 2023, EPA WARM v16
Part I: Purpose and Scope
Part I — purpose and scope.
Why RCP Exists
Commercial property managers, REITs, hospital systems, and institutional facility owners face mandatory Scope 3 greenhouse gas disclosure requirements under California SB 253 (effective 2027 for Scope 3), the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), and growing pressure from GRESB, CDP, and institutional investors. Restoration contractor work — water damage, fire and smoke, mold remediation, asbestos and hazmat abatement, and biohazard cleanup — generates Scope 3 emissions that appear in the property manager’s inventory as Category 1 (purchased goods and services) and Category 4 (upstream transportation) emissions.
No standard existed for how restoration contractors should calculate, document, or report these emissions. Without a standard, each contractor produced different data in different formats, making it impossible for property managers to aggregate across their vendor base. The Restoration Carbon Protocol fills that gap.
What RCP Covers
RCP v1.0 defines the emissions calculation methodology, data capture requirements, reporting format, proxy estimation procedures, and emission factors for five core restoration job types:
Water damage restoration (IICRC S500)
Fire and smoke restoration (IICRC S700)
Mold remediation (IICRC S520)
Asbestos and hazmat abatement
Biohazard and trauma scene cleanup
RCP v1.0 covers the Scope 3 emissions generated on behalf of commercial clients. Contractor Scope 1 and 2 emissions (the contractor’s own buildings, fleet, and purchased energy) are a separate accounting obligation under the GHG Protocol and are not addressed by the RCP.
Part II: GHG Protocol Alignment
Scope 3 Categories Addressed
Restoration contractor work generates client-facing Scope 3 emissions primarily across four GHG Protocol categories:
GHG Protocol Category
What It Covers in Restoration Work
Included in RCP v1.0
Category 1 — Purchased Goods and Services
Consumable materials, chemicals, PPE, containment, equipment energy (when building-powered)
✅ Yes
Category 4 — Upstream Transportation
All vehicle trips to/from job site, equipment hauls, waste transport
✅ Yes
Category 5 — Waste Generated in Operations
Disposal of demolished materials, contaminated waste, PPE, wastewater
✅ Yes
Category 12 — End-of-Life Treatment
Embedded carbon in building materials removed and disposed of
✅ Yes
Category 7 — Employee Commuting
Technician commuting to contractor’s office
❌ No — contractor’s own Scope 3
Category 2 — Capital Goods
Embedded carbon in equipment (dehumidifiers, vehicles) manufactured
❌ No — contractor’s own Scope 3
Part III: The Five Emissions Calculation Domains
Part III — the five emissions calculation domains.
Every RCP calculation is organized into five domains. Each domain has a primary data source, a calculation method, and a set of proxy values for when primary data is unavailable.
Domain 1: Equipment Energy
Electricity consumed by contractor-deployed drying, filtration, and remediation equipment. Primary method: metered kWh. Proxy method: equipment wattage × runtime hours × proxy unit power draws.
National grid emission factor: 0.3499 kg CO₂e/kWh (EPA eGRID 2023 national average)
Use subregion-specific factor where available (EPA Power Profiler at epa.gov/egrid)
Proxy unit power draws: LGR dehumidifier 1.1 kWh/hr, air mover 0.25 kWh/hr, HEPA air scrubber 0.50 kWh/hr, desiccant dehumidifier 2.8 kWh/hr
Domain 2: Vehicle Transport
All fuel combustion from vehicles operated for job-related purposes. Primary method: fuel volume in gallons. Proxy method: miles × 1/mpg × emission factor.
Diesel (mobile combustion): 10.21 kg CO₂e/gallon (EPA 2025 EF Hub)
Gasoline (mobile combustion): 8.89 kg CO₂e/gallon (EPA 2025 EF Hub)
Proxy fleet mpg: diesel service van 20 mpg; gasoline pickup 18 mpg; diesel dump truck 8 mpg
Debris haul: 0.186 kg CO₂e/ton-mile truck freight (EPA 2025 EF Hub)
Domain 3: Consumable Materials
Embedded carbon in materials consumed during the job but not remaining in the structure: chemicals, PPE, containment materials. Primary method: purchase records by product. Proxy method: standard consumption rates by job type and crew size.
Antimicrobial treatments (default): 2.8 kg CO₂e/liter
Polyethylene containment sheeting: 0.22 kg CO₂e/meter
Disposable Tyvek suit: 1.8 kg CO₂e/unit
N95 respirator: 0.4 kg CO₂e/unit
Nitrile glove pair: 0.12 kg CO₂e/pair
Domain 4: Waste Disposal
Emissions from disposing of materials removed from the property. Primary method: disposal facility manifests by weight and disposal type. Proxy method: weight estimated from demolition scope or volume.
Mixed C&D waste, landfill: 0.021 tCO₂e/short ton (EPA WARM v16)
Drywall/gypsum, landfill: 0.006 tCO₂e/short ton (EPA WARM v16)
Wood debris, landfill: 0.039 tCO₂e/short ton (EPA WARM v16)
Regulated hazmat, incineration: 0.42 tCO₂e/short ton (EPA AP-42)
Biohazardous waste, medical incineration: 0.88 tCO₂e/short ton (DEFRA 2024)
Domain 5: Demolished Materials
Embedded carbon in building materials removed from the structure as a result of restoration work. Primary method: demolition scope by material type and weight. Proxy method: sqft × standard weight/sqft by material type × emission factor.
Standard drywall (½”): 0.12 kg CO₂e/kg (production) — EPA WARM v16
Fiberglass insulation batts: 1.35 kg CO₂e/kg — EPA WARM v16
Carpet (nylon face): 5.40 kg CO₂e/kg — DEFRA 2024
LVP/vinyl flooring: 3.10 kg CO₂e/kg — DEFRA 2024
Dimensional lumber: 0.45 kg CO₂e/kg — EPA WARM v16
Part IV: The RCP 12-Point Data Capture Standard
Every RCP-compliant job record requires twelve data points captured at the time of the job. These are the minimum inputs needed to produce a defensible Scope 3 emissions calculation. Full definitions, good vs. poor capture examples, and calculation mapping for each data point are documented at: tygartmedia.com/12-data-points-restoration-job-scope-3/
#
Data Point
Capture Stage
GHG Category
1
Vehicle log (type, trips, miles, fuel)
Daily / GPS
Cat. 4
2
Waste transport log
Close-out
Cat. 4
3
Equipment power source (building or generator)
Setup
Cat. 1 / Cat. 4
4
Chemical treatments log (volume by type)
During / Close-out
Cat. 1
5
PPE consumption log
During / Close-out
Cat. 1
6
Containment materials log
Setup / Close-out
Cat. 1
7
Debris volume by waste category (weight)
Close-out / Manifest
Cat. 5
8
Disposal method and facility
Close-out
Cat. 5 factor selector
9
Demolished materials by type and weight
Demo scope / Close-out
Cat. 12
10
Replacement materials (if in contractor scope)
Close-out
Cat. 1
11
Job classification (type, category, class, sqft)
Initial assessment
Proxy rate selector
12
Job timeline (start date, completion date)
System-generated
Period assignment
Part V: Proxy Estimation Methodology
When primary data is unavailable — whether for historical jobs, field situations where documentation was incomplete, or data points that current job management systems don’t capture — the RCP authorizes proxy estimation. All proxy calculations must be labeled as estimated in the data quality section of the Job Carbon Report.
The hierarchy of calculation quality, from highest to lowest:
Primary data: Metered, weighed, or directly measured values from job records
Derived primary: Calculated from primary data using standard conversion factors (e.g., miles from GPS × mpg = gallons)
Proxy — job-specific: Estimated using job classification (type, category, class, sqft) with RCP standard rates
Proxy — national average: Used only when job classification is also unavailable. Lowest quality; flag prominently in data quality notes
Part VI: The RCP Job Carbon Report
Part VI — the RCP job carbon report.
The Job Carbon Report is the output document delivered to commercial clients. It is the vehicle by which contractor emissions data enters the client’s Scope 3 inventory. The report has two valid formats: document (PDF or structured text) and machine-readable (JSON per RCP-JCR-1.0 schema).
Wastewater treatment facility emissions from discharged extraction water (flagged for v2.0)
Subcontractor emissions not within the primary contractor’s scope of work
Part VIII: Per-Job-Type Calculation Guides
Each job type has a dedicated technical calculation guide with job-type-specific emission factors, worked examples, and proxy values. These are the source-of-record methodology documents for each restoration category:
U.S. EPA 2025 GHG Emission Factors Hub (January 2025 update)
U.S. EPA eGRID 2023 (published January 2025)
U.S. EPA Waste Reduction Model (WARM) v16
DEFRA UK Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors 2024
IPCC AR5 Global Warming Potentials (100-year)
Part X: Governance, Versioning, and Contribution
Governance Model
RCP v1.0 operates under a founder-steward governance model. Tygart Media, as the originating organization, maintains editorial control over the standard and is responsible for version releases, emission factor updates, and scope boundary decisions. This model is appropriate for an early-stage standard where consistency and speed of iteration matter more than distributed governance.
As the standard matures and industry adoption grows — particularly if RIA, IICRC, or another industry body formally endorses or houses the standard — governance may transition to a stewardship board model with representation from contractors, property managers, ESG consultants, and software vendors.
Versioning Policy
Version Type
When Issued
What Changes
Backwards Compatible?
Patch (v1.0.x)
Annually or when EPA updates emission factors
Emission factor updates only
Yes — same schema
Minor (v1.x)
When new fields or job types are added
Additive changes — new optional fields, new job type guides
Yes — existing records remain valid
Major (v2.0)
When scope boundaries change significantly
New required fields, scope expansions (e.g., wastewater treatment), LCA-based material factors
Migration path provided
How to Contribute
The RCP is an open standard. Contributions from contractors, software vendors, ESG consultants, property managers, and researchers are actively welcomed. The current contribution process:
Propose: Email rcp@tygartmedia.com with the proposed change, the technical rationale, and any supporting sources. Emission factor changes require a peer-reviewed or regulatory source.
Review: Tygart Media reviews within 30 days and responds with acceptance, modification request, or rejection with explanation.
Publish: Accepted contributions are credited by organization in the version release notes and reflected in the next patch or minor version.
Priority contribution areas for v1.1:
LCA-based emission factors for specific replacement material types
EV fleet proxy values (kWh/mile × grid factor)
Regional proxy rates for markets outside the continental US
Subcontractor emissions inclusion methodology
Wastewater treatment facility emission factors by treatment type
Open Source License
The RCP v1.0 specification, all calculation methodology, the RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON schema, and all associated proxy value tables are released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). You are free to use, share, adapt, and build commercial products on top of this standard with attribution to “Restoration Carbon Protocol v1.0, Tygart Media, tygartmedia.com.”
Part XI: Commercial Application and Regulatory Context
California SB 253
California SB 253 requires companies with California revenues over $1 billion to report Scope 3 emissions for their 2026 fiscal year by 2027. Commercial property managers and REITs in scope must collect contractor Scope 3 data across their vendor base. RCP-compliant Job Carbon Reports provide a standardized format for this data collection. Full context: tygartmedia.com/california-sb-253-2027-restoration-contractors/
GRESB
GRESB Real Estate Assessment submissions (due July annually) require Scope 3 data from property managers’ supply chains, including restoration contractors. RCP Job Carbon Reports in JSON format integrate with major ESG data management platforms (Measurabl, Deepki, Yardi Elevate, Atrius) that aggregate GRESB submissions. Full context: tygartmedia.com/restoration-work-gresb-cdp-disclosures/
CDP Supply Chain
CDP Supply Chain program participants request annual Scope 3 data from their contractors via standardized questionnaire. RCP portfolio-level data aggregation (sum of per-job records by client property) provides the input for CDP Supply Chain responses.
EU CSRD
The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive requires double-materiality ESG disclosure from large companies, including US-based organizations with EU operations or EU-listed investors. For restoration contractors serving CSRD-obligated property clients, the RCP data format provides the supply chain emissions input required under ESRS E1 (Climate) reporting standards.
Part XII: Software Integration
The RCP is designed to be implemented natively in restoration job management platforms. The 12 data points map directly to field types that existing platforms (PSA/Canam, Dash/Next Gear Solutions, Xcelerate, Encircle, Albiware) already capture or can capture with minimal custom field additions. The RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON schema provides the standard data exchange format for platform-to-platform and platform-to-ESG-tool data transfer.
For a call to restoration software vendors to adopt RCP: see the software integration guide (coming April 2026 at tygartmedia.com/esg-restoration).
Part XIII: Version History
Version
Date
Changes
RCP v1.0
April 2026
Initial publication. Five job types, 12-point data standard, RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON schema, proxy estimation methodology, emission factor reference table, full framework document.
All RCP v1.0 Knowledge Nodes
The following articles constitute the complete RCP v1.0 knowledge base. Each is a standalone reference document that can be read independently or cited as a component of this framework:
The Restoration Carbon Protocol v1.0 JSON Schema is the machine-readable definition of the RCP Job Carbon Report. It specifies every field name, data type, required status, and valid value for a complete RCP emissions record. This is the document software developers, ESG platform integrators, and restoration job management platforms use to implement RCP data capture and exchange.
This schema is released as an open standard. Any platform that produces RCP-compliant JSON output can be described as RCP-compatible. No license is required. Attribution to the Restoration Carbon Protocol is encouraged.
Schema version: RCP-JCR-1.0 Conforms to: JSON Schema Draft-07 (json-schema.org/draft-07) GHG Protocol alignment: Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard Emission factor vintage: EPA 2025, EPA WARM v16, EPA eGRID 2023
Schema Overview
RCP JSON schema overview.
The RCP Job Carbon Report JSON object has seven top-level sections that mirror the paper report format: job identification, emissions summary, transportation data, materials data, waste data, demolished materials, and data quality metadata. All sections except data_quality are required for a complete RCP record. Partial records (missing sections) are valid as draft records but must not be delivered to clients as final RCP disclosures.
Full Schema Definition
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
"$id": "https://tygartmedia.com/restoration-carbon-protocol-guide/",
"title": "RCP Job Carbon Report",
"description": "Restoration Carbon Protocol v1.0 — Per-Job Scope 3 Emissions Record",
"version": "1.0.0",
"type": "object",
"required": [
"schema_version",
"job_identification",
"emissions_summary",
"transportation",
"materials",
"waste",
"demolished_materials"
],
"properties": {
"schema_version": {
"type": "string",
"const": "RCP-JCR-1.0",
"description": "Schema version identifier. Must be 'RCP-JCR-1.0' for v1.0 records."
},
"generated_at": {
"type": "string",
"format": "date-time",
"description": "ISO 8601 timestamp of when this record was generated."
},
"job_identification": {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"contractor_name",
"job_id",
"client_name",
"property_address",
"job_type",
"damage_category",
"damage_class",
"affected_area_sqft",
"job_start_date",
"job_completion_date",
"reporting_standard",
"egrid_subregion"
],
"properties": {
"contractor_name": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Legal name of the restoration contractor performing the work."
},
"contractor_rcp_id": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Optional. RCP self-certification ID if contractor is RCP-certified."
},
"job_id": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Contractor's internal job identifier. Used to cross-reference with job management system."
},
"client_name": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Name of the property owner or manager receiving this report."
},
"property_address": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["street", "city", "state", "zip"],
"properties": {
"street": { "type": "string" },
"city": { "type": "string" },
"state": { "type": "string", "pattern": "^[A-Z]{2}$" },
"zip": { "type": "string", "pattern": "^[0-9]{5}(-[0-9]{4})?$" }
}
},
"job_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"water_damage",
"fire_smoke",
"mold_remediation",
"asbestos_hazmat",
"biohazard_trauma",
"combined"
],
"description": "Primary job type per RCP classification."
},
"damage_category": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["1", "2", "3", "N/A"],
"description": "IICRC S500 water damage category (1=clean, 2=gray, 3=black). Use N/A for non-water jobs."
},
"damage_class": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["1", "2", "3", "4", "N/A"],
"description": "IICRC S500 water damage class (1=minimal to 4=specialty drying). Use N/A for non-water jobs."
},
"affected_area_sqft": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total affected area in square feet."
},
"job_start_date": {
"type": "string",
"format": "date",
"description": "ISO 8601 date (YYYY-MM-DD) of job mobilization."
},
"job_completion_date": {
"type": "string",
"format": "date",
"description": "ISO 8601 date (YYYY-MM-DD) of job close-out."
},
"reporting_standard": {
"type": "string",
"const": "Restoration Carbon Protocol v1.0, GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain Standard",
"description": "Must match this exact string for RCP v1.0 compliance."
},
"egrid_subregion": {
"type": "string",
"description": "EPA eGRID subregion code for the job site ZIP code. Use 'US_AVG' if subregion unknown.",
"examples": ["WECC", "SRVC", "RFCW", "US_AVG"]
}
}
},
"emissions_summary": {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"total_job_emissions_tco2e",
"category_1_materials_tco2e",
"category_4_transportation_tco2e",
"category_5_waste_tco2e",
"category_12_demolished_materials_tco2e"
],
"properties": {
"total_job_emissions_tco2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total job Scope 3 emissions in metric tons CO2 equivalent (tCO2e). Sum of all categories."
},
"category_1_materials_tco2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "GHG Protocol Scope 3 Category 1 — Purchased Goods and Services. Embedded carbon in consumable materials."
},
"category_4_transportation_tco2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "GHG Protocol Scope 3 Category 4 — Upstream Transportation. All vehicle fuel combustion for job-related trips."
},
"category_5_waste_tco2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "GHG Protocol Scope 3 Category 5 — Waste Generated in Operations. Disposal of materials removed from the property."
},
"category_12_demolished_materials_tco2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "GHG Protocol Scope 3 Category 12 — End-of-Life Treatment. Embedded carbon in building materials removed and disposed."
},
"equipment_energy_kwh": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Optional. Total kWh consumed by contractor-deployed equipment. Included in Category 1 if equipment operates on building power; Category 4 if generator-powered."
}
}
},
"transportation": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["vehicle_trips", "calculation_method"],
"properties": {
"calculation_method": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["primary_fuel_volume", "proxy_mileage"],
"description": "'primary_fuel_volume' = actual gallons recorded. 'proxy_mileage' = miles x fleet average mpg x emission factor."
},
"vehicle_trips": {
"type": "array",
"minItems": 1,
"items": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["vehicle_type", "fuel_type", "round_trips", "round_trip_miles"],
"properties": {
"vehicle_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["light_truck", "service_van", "equipment_trailer", "dump_truck", "heavy_equipment", "other"],
"description": "Vehicle category."
},
"fuel_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["diesel", "gasoline", "electric", "hybrid"],
"description": "Primary fuel type."
},
"round_trips": {
"type": "integer",
"minimum": 1,
"description": "Number of complete round trips for this vehicle on this job."
},
"round_trip_miles": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Miles per round trip."
},
"fuel_consumed_gallons": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Optional. Actual fuel consumed in gallons. Preferred over proxy when available."
},
"emissions_kg_co2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Calculated emissions for this vehicle entry in kg CO2e."
},
"trip_purpose": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["response", "monitoring", "equipment_delivery", "equipment_pickup", "waste_haul", "crew_transport", "other"],
"description": "Primary purpose of these trips."
}
}
}
},
"total_vehicle_miles": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Sum of all vehicle-miles across all entries."
},
"total_emissions_kg_co2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total transportation emissions in kg CO2e."
}
}
},
"materials": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["calculation_method"],
"properties": {
"calculation_method": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["primary_purchase_records", "proxy_job_type_standard"],
"description": "'primary_purchase_records' = actual quantities from purchase records. 'proxy_job_type_standard' = RCP standard consumption rates by job type."
},
"chemicals": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["product_type", "quantity_liters"],
"properties": {
"product_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["antimicrobial", "biocide", "encapsulant", "deodorizer", "wetting_agent", "other"]
},
"quantity_liters": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 },
"emission_factor_kg_co2e_per_liter": { "type": "number" },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
}
},
"ppe_disposable": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"tyvek_suits": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"glove_pairs": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"respirators_n95": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"respirators_p100_half_face": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"boot_covers_pairs": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
},
"containment_materials": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"poly_sheeting_meters": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 },
"zipper_doors_units": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"hepa_filters_replaced": { "type": "integer", "minimum": 0 },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
},
"replacement_materials": {
"type": "array",
"description": "Installed replacement building materials, if reconstruction is within contractor scope.",
"items": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["material_type", "quantity_kg"],
"properties": {
"material_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["drywall_standard", "drywall_moisture_resistant", "insulation_fiberglass", "insulation_mineral_wool", "lumber_framing", "carpet", "lvp_flooring", "tile_ceramic", "other"]
},
"quantity_kg": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 },
"emission_factor_kg_co2e_per_kg": { "type": "number" },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
}
},
"total_emissions_kg_co2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total materials emissions in kg CO2e. Sum of chemicals, PPE, containment, and replacement materials."
}
}
},
"waste": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["calculation_method", "waste_streams"],
"properties": {
"calculation_method": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["primary_manifest_weights", "proxy_volume_conversion"],
"description": "'primary_manifest_weights' = actual weights from disposal manifests. 'proxy_volume_conversion' = volume estimates converted to weight using RCP standard densities."
},
"waste_streams": {
"type": "array",
"minItems": 1,
"items": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["waste_type", "disposal_method", "quantity_short_tons"],
"properties": {
"waste_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["cd_debris_mixed", "drywall_gypsum", "wood_debris", "contaminated_water", "regulated_hazmat", "biohazardous_waste", "ppe_disposable", "other"]
},
"disposal_method": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["landfill", "recycling", "hazmat_incineration", "wastewater_municipal", "wastewater_licensed_facility", "other"]
},
"disposal_facility": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Optional. Name or identifier of disposal facility."
},
"quantity_short_tons": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Weight of waste in US short tons."
},
"haul_miles_one_way": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Optional. One-way distance to disposal facility in miles. Used to calculate haul transport emissions."
},
"emission_factor_tco2e_per_short_ton": { "type": "number" },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
}
},
"total_emissions_kg_co2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total waste disposal emissions in kg CO2e."
}
}
},
"demolished_materials": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["calculation_method"],
"properties": {
"calculation_method": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["primary_demolition_records", "proxy_affected_area"],
"description": "'primary_demolition_records' = actual weights from demolition scope. 'proxy_affected_area' = RCP standard weight-per-sqft by material type."
},
"materials_removed": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "object",
"required": ["material_type", "quantity_kg"],
"properties": {
"material_type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["drywall_standard", "drywall_moisture_resistant", "insulation_fiberglass", "insulation_mineral_wool", "lumber_framing", "carpet", "lvp_flooring", "tile_ceramic", "concrete", "other"]
},
"quantity_kg": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 },
"emission_factor_kg_co2e_per_kg": { "type": "number" },
"emissions_kg_co2e": { "type": "number", "minimum": 0 }
}
}
},
"total_emissions_kg_co2e": {
"type": "number",
"minimum": 0,
"description": "Total demolished materials emissions in kg CO2e."
}
}
},
"data_quality": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Optional but strongly recommended. Documents data sources and proxy usage for audit purposes.",
"properties": {
"preparer_name": { "type": "string" },
"preparer_date": { "type": "string", "format": "date" },
"primary_data_points": {
"type": "array",
"description": "List of data points captured from primary sources.",
"items": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"vehicle_mileage_gps",
"vehicle_mileage_odometer",
"fuel_consumed_recorded",
"equipment_kwh_metered",
"waste_weight_manifest",
"materials_purchase_records",
"demolition_scope_documented"
]
}
},
"proxy_data_points": {
"type": "array",
"description": "List of data points estimated using RCP proxy values.",
"items": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"vehicle_mileage_estimated",
"fuel_consumed_proxy_mpg",
"equipment_kwh_proxy_wattage",
"waste_weight_estimated",
"ppe_consumption_standard_rate",
"materials_proxy_sqft"
]
}
},
"notes": {
"type": "string",
"description": "Free-text field for data quality notes, exceptions, or unusual circumstances."
}
}
}
}
}
Minimal Valid Record Example
Minimal valid RCP record example.
The following is the smallest valid RCP-JCR-1.0 JSON object — all required fields populated, optional fields omitted. This represents a simple water damage job with proxy-based calculations:
All emission factors used in RCP-JCR-1.0 calculations are drawn from the RCP Emission Factor Reference Table. The authoritative source for each factor is documented there. The key factors for software implementations:
Grid electricity (US national average): 0.3499 kg CO₂e/kWh — EPA eGRID 2023
Diesel fuel (mobile combustion): 10.21 kg CO₂e/gallon — EPA 2025 EF Hub
Gasoline (mobile combustion): 8.89 kg CO₂e/gallon — EPA 2025 EF Hub
Drywall production: 0.12 kg CO₂e/kg — EPA WARM v16
Carpet (nylon): 5.40 kg CO₂e/kg — DEFRA 2024
Implementation Notes for Software Developers
Implementation notes for software developers.
Several implementation patterns are worth noting for platforms building RCP compatibility:
Field nullability: Optional fields should be omitted entirely when no data is available, not set to null or 0. A missing field is distinguishable from a zero-value field, which matters for audit purposes.
Calculation_method flags: The calculation_method field in each section is required because it tells the receiving system and verifier whether to trust the numbers at primary-data quality or proxy quality. ESG platforms that ingest RCP JSON should surface this distinction to their users.
Unit consistency: All emissions totals in emissions_summary are in metric tons CO₂e (tCO₂e). All emissions in sub-sections are in kilograms CO₂e (kg CO₂e). The conversion is 1 tCO₂e = 1,000 kg CO₂e. Software implementations should validate unit consistency at write time.
eGRID subregion codes: The canonical list of eGRID subregion codes is available from EPA at epa.gov/egrid. The US_AVG code is an RCP extension for cases where the subregion is unknown — it instructs consuming systems to apply the national average factor (0.3499 kg CO₂e/kWh).
Schema validation: Implementations should validate records against this schema before transmission. Invalid records — missing required fields, wrong data types, enum violations — must not be transmitted as final RCP disclosures.
Versioning and Backwards Compatibility
The schema_version field is used by consuming systems to identify which version of the RCP schema a record was produced under. RCP v2.0 will introduce a new schema version string and may add fields not present in v1.0. All v1.0 records remain valid and will be processed by systems that implement backwards compatibility for RCP-JCR-1.0. No fields will be removed between minor versions; only additions are permitted.
Will Tygart · Senior Advisory · Operator-grade intelligence
The RCP requires 12 data points per job. In practice, some of those data points will be unavailable — particularly for historical jobs being calculated retrospectively, or for field situations where documentation wasn’t captured as completely as the standard requires. The proxy estimation methodology provides documented substitution methods that produce defensible, auditor-acceptable estimates when primary data is missing.
Key principle: A documented estimate with a stated assumption is always preferable to a blank field in an RCP report. ESG auditors understand that emissions calculation involves uncertainty — what they require is transparency about where estimation was used and what the basis of that estimation was. Undocumented guesses are not acceptable. Documented proxies are.
Data Quality Tiers
RCP proxy estimation — data quality tiers.
The RCP uses three data quality tiers, consistent with GHG Protocol Scope 3 guidance:
Tier
Description
Audit Acceptability
Tier 1 — Primary measured data
Actual measurements from job records: GPS mileage, disposal facility receipts with weights, materials purchase orders by job
Highest — preferred for all data points
Tier 2 — Primary estimated data
Calculated from documented job parameters using RCP proxy methods: affected area × consumption rate, crew size × duration × unit rate
Acceptable — must document calculation method and basis
Tier 3 — Spend-based / invoice-based proxy
Dollar amount × industry average emission factor — the fallback of last resort
Lowest — use only when no job-specific data is available; flag prominently in data quality notes
Proxy method: Use Google Maps or equivalent mapping tool to calculate round-trip distance from your facility (or prior job address for multi-stop days) to the job site. Multiply by the number of crew trips documented in time records or invoices. This is a Tier 2 estimate.
Default proxy (Tier 3, last resort): Industry average mobilization distance for restoration contractors is 22 miles one-way (44 miles round trip). Apply this default only when no address or routing information is available. Note as Tier 3 estimate in data quality section.
Data Point 2 — Waste Transport Mileage
Primary source: Waste manifests and hauler receipts (these typically include origin and destination).
Proxy method: Use the distance from the job site to the nearest licensed disposal facility of the appropriate type (standard C&D landfill, licensed ACM facility, medical waste facility). Use online waste facility directories (EPA RCRA Info for hazmat, state environmental agency databases for C&D landfills) to identify the nearest appropriate facility.
Default proxies by facility type (Tier 3): Standard C&D landfill: 18 miles. Licensed ACM facility: 60 miles. Licensed PCB incineration: 150 miles. Medical waste facility: 55 miles.
Data Point 3 — Equipment Power Source
Primary source: Job documentation noting whether equipment ran on building power or contractor generator; generator fuel logs.
Proxy method: Default assumption is building electrical supply unless your company policy or the job type (remote location, building power unavailable) indicates otherwise. Note the assumption explicitly. If generator use is suspected but not documented, use the following generator fuel proxy: standard drying equipment setup (3 dehumidifiers + 6 air movers) consuming approximately 2.5 gallons of diesel per 8-hour shift × number of drying days × 10.21 kg CO2e per gallon diesel.
Data Points 4–5 — Chemical Treatments and PPE Consumption
Application rate proxies by job type and surface type:
Job Type / Surface
Antimicrobial Rate
Tyvek Suits per Tech per Day
Glove Pairs per Tech per Day
N95/P100 per Tech per Day
Cat 1 water — porous surfaces
0.008 L/sq ft
0.5
2
0.5
Cat 2 water — porous surfaces
0.015 L/sq ft
1.0
3
1.0
Cat 3 water — porous surfaces
0.025 L/sq ft (×2 applications)
2.0
5
2.0
Mold Condition 3 — first application
0.020 L/sq ft
2.0
4
1.5
Mold Condition 3 — second application
0.015 L/sq ft
2.0
4
1.5
Fire — smoke cleaning (chemical sponge + cleaner)
1 sponge per 50 sq ft + 0.010 L/sq ft cleaner
1.5
4
1.5
Hazmat abatement (Level C, standard exit protocol)
N/A (wetting agent: 0.003 L/sq ft ACM)
3.0 (full replacement each exit)
6
2 pairs OV/P100
Biohazard Level C
0.025 L/sq ft × 2 applications
3.0 (full replacement each exit)
6
2 pairs OV/P100
Biohazard Level B (decomposition)
0.025 L/sq ft × 2 applications
3.0 Level B full-suit (replace each exit)
6
Supplied air — 0 disposable
Data Point 6 — Containment Materials
Proxy method: Standard containment for a single affected room (standard ceiling height 8–10 ft): perimeter of affected area (linear feet) × ceiling height × 1.2 (overlap factor) = m² of poly sheeting. For compartmentalized commercial spaces, add 20 m² per additional doorway or penetration point.
Zipper doors: 1 per entry/exit point, typically 2 per contained area (entry + equipment pass-through).
Data Points 7–8 — Waste Volume and Disposal
Volume proxy: Use weight estimation proxies from the RCP Emission Factor Reference Table (drywall at 2.5 lbs/sq ft, carpet at 3.0 lbs/sq ft, etc.) applied to the demolished area documented in job scope records.
Disposal method proxy: If disposal facility type is unknown, apply default based on material type: standard C&D for non-contaminated demolition debris, regulated C&D or hazmat for contaminated materials (see Table 3 in the Emission Factor Reference).
Data Points 9–10 — Demolished and Installed Materials
Proxy method: Calculate from demolition scope records (affected area by room, material type documented in scope of work or Xactimate/Symbility estimate). Weight estimation proxies apply as above. For installed materials in reconstruction phase, use square footage from scope-of-work documentation and apply standard weight proxies.
Documenting Proxy Use in Your RCP Report
Documenting proxy use in your RCP report.
Every proxy estimate must be documented in the data quality section of the per-job carbon report. The format for documenting a proxy is: [Data point name]: [Tier 2 or 3 estimate]. [Brief description of proxy method]. [Source of proxy rate or assumption].
Example: “Vehicle mileage: Tier 2 estimate. Round-trip distance calculated using Google Maps from company facility to job site address (44 miles RT × 4 crew trips). Crew trip count from job invoices. Source: RCP proxy method P-4-1.”
Example: “PPE consumption: Tier 2 estimate. Cat 3 water damage standard consumption rate applied (2.0 Tyvek/tech/day, 5 glove pairs/tech/day) per RCP Table A-5. Actual PPE not tracked separately on this job.”
Can a per-job carbon report with all Tier 2 estimates be used in GRESB reporting?
Yes. GRESB accepts primary data at various quality levels, including documented estimates. A Tier 2 estimate is primary data (not spend-based estimation) and is acceptable. The data quality notation in the RCP report demonstrates that you have applied documented methodology rather than guessing, which is what auditors need to see.
What is the margin of error typical for Tier 2 proxy estimates?
Typical uncertainty range for Tier 2 RCP estimates is ±20–35% relative to primary measured data. This compares favorably to spend-based estimation (Tier 3), which typically has ±50–100% uncertainty for restoration work due to the high variability of job type, scope, and emission profile at equivalent invoice amounts.
Should you disclose the uncertainty range in the per-job carbon report?
The RCP does not require quantified uncertainty ranges in the per-job report, but noting that Tier 2 estimates were used in the data quality section effectively communicates to auditors that the figure carries inherent estimation uncertainty. For clients whose ESG consultants or auditors specifically request uncertainty ranges, use the guidance values above (±20–35% for Tier 2).
Will Tygart · Senior Advisory · Operator-grade intelligence
This reference table consolidates all emission factors used in Restoration Carbon Protocol calculations. It is the lookup document you use when completing a per-job carbon report — every factor needed for Categories 1, 4, 5, and 12 across all five job types is in this table, with source citations for audit purposes.
Version: RCP v1.0 | Factor vintage: EPA 2024, DEFRA 2024, EPA WARM v16 | Units: All values in kg CO2e unless noted as tCO2e
When disposal receipts are not available, use these weight proxies to estimate demolished material tonnage:
Material
Weight per sq ft (installed, dry)
Notes
1/2″ gypsum drywall
2.5 lbs
Use dry weight, not post-water-damage wet weight
5/8″ gypsum drywall (Type X)
3.1 lbs
Common in commercial construction
Carpet + pad (residential)
3.0 lbs
Including pad and tack strips
Carpet + pad (commercial, glue-down)
2.2 lbs
Heavier carpet, no pad
LVP / vinyl plank flooring
2.8 lbs
Including underlayment
Ceramic tile (floor, 3/8″)
4.5 lbs
Including thin-set mortar
Acoustic ceiling tiles (2’×2′ standard)
1.8 lbs
Mineral fiber type
Fiberglass batt insulation (3.5″ R-13)
0.5 lbs
Per sq ft of coverage area
Dimensional lumber 2×4 wall framing (per linear foot of wall)
4.0 lbs
Assumes 16″ OC framing in 8-ft walls
Non-friable ACM floor tile (9″×9″)
4.0 lbs
Including mastic adhesive
How often will this reference table be updated?
The RCP emission factor reference table will be updated annually following the release of updated EPA WARM, EPA Mobile Combustion, and DEFRA databases. Version numbers are included in the table header — always cite the version used in your per-job carbon report data quality notes.
What if I need an emission factor for a material not in this table?
First check EPA WARM v16 directly (available free at epa.gov/warm). Second, check the EPA EEIO database for the relevant industry sector. Third, check DEFRA’s Conversion Factors for Company Reporting. If none of these sources contain the specific material, use the closest proxy category and document the substitution in your data quality notes.
Are these factors suitable for use in EU CSRD reporting?
EPA and EPA WARM factors are US-specific but are accepted in most international ESG frameworks when accompanied by clear source citation. For EU CSRD reporting specifically, DEFRA factors (UK) or OECD emission factors may be preferred by auditors for non-US operations. The RCP will publish a DEFRA-specific factor table in a future supplement for EU-applicable reporting contexts.
Table 6: Refrigerant GWP Values — IPCC AR6 Update
The Global Warming Potential values for refrigerants used in restoration drying equipment have been updated under IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021). AR6 GWP-100 values are 14–18% higher than AR5 for the HFCs commonly found in LGR dehumidifiers. RCP v1.0 uses AR6 values for refrigerant-related calculations. The EPA AIM Act continues to use AR4 values for regulatory compliance; UNFCCC/Paris reporting uses AR5. When delivering data to clients, disclose which GWP vintage was used.
Table 7: EPA eGRID 2023 — Subregional Emission Factors for Major Restoration Markets
The national average grid factor (0.3497 kg CO₂e/kWh, eGRID 2023) used as the RCP default understates or overstates electricity emissions significantly depending on where equipment is operated. Using location-specific subregion factors improves data quality for clients in GRESB, SBTi, and CSRD reporting contexts.
Use the subregion factor for the state/metro where the job was performed, not where the contractor’s facility is located.
eGRID Subregion
Primary coverage
kg CO₂e/kWh
vs. RCP default (0.3499)
NYUP
Upstate New York
0.1101
-68.5%
CAMX
California / Western US
0.1950
-44.3%
NEWE
New England
0.2464
-29.6%
ERCT
Texas (ERCOT)
0.3341
-4.5%
US Average
National default (RCP v1.0)
0.3497
Baseline
FRCC
Florida
0.3560
+1.7%
SRSO
Southeast (excluding FL)
0.3837
+9.7%
NYCW
NYC and Westchester
0.3927
+12.2%
Source: EPA eGRID2023 Summary Tables Rev 2 (published March 2025). Full subregion table available at epa.gov/egrid. A California restoration contractor using the national average overstates electricity emissions by 44%; a Florida contractor understates by 1.7%. The difference is largest for multi-week jobs with sustained equipment energy consumption.
Table 8: PPE and Consumables — LCA-Sourced Per-Unit Emission Factors
The EPA EEIO proxies in Table 2 are sector-level estimates. The following values are sourced from published lifecycle assessments and Environmental Product Declarations for specific product types. Use these in place of the EEIO values where the product type matches.
Item
Unit
kg CO₂e
Source
vs. EEIO proxy
Nitrile glove (3.5g, size M)
Each
0.0277
Top Glove LCA 2024, SATRA-verified
-82% vs. EEIO pair proxy
Nitrile glove pair
Pair
0.0554
Top Glove LCA 2024
-82% vs. current 0.3 EEIO
N95 respirator (disposable)
Each
0.05
Springer Env. Chem. Letters 2022
-88% vs. current 0.4 EEIO
DuPont Tyvek 400 coverall (180g HDPE)
Each
0.40–0.63
Estimated: 180g × 2.2–3.5 kg CO₂e/kg HDPE
-47–65% vs. current 1.2 EEIO
LVP/LVT flooring (Shaw EcoWorx)
m²
5.2
Shaw Contract EcoWorx Resilient EPD 2023
Consistent with WARM v16 plastics
Ceramic tile (standard)
kg
0.78
ICE Database v3.0 (University of Bath)
More granular than WARM v16 inert
Ready-mix concrete (30 MPa)
kg
0.13
ICE Database v3.0
132 kg CO₂e/m³
Polyethylene LDPE sheeting
kg
1.793
DEFRA 2024 (closed-loop recycling scenario)
Use as proxy for virgin LDPE sheeting
H₂O₂ antimicrobial (active ingredient)
kg active
1.33
ACS Omega 2025 (anthraquinone process)
Lower than EEIO chemical proxy
Note on Tyvek: DuPont has not published an independent lifecycle assessment for standard Tyvek 400 coveralls. The value above is estimated from HDPE production emission factors. DuPont has commissioned an LCA for Tyvek 500 Xpert BioCircle (a recycled-content variant) claiming 58% reduction versus standard Tyvek, which implies a quantified baseline exists internally. The RCP will update this value if DuPont publishes the underlying LCA data.
Note on nylon carpet (DEFRA 2024): The DEFRA 2024 value of 5.40 kg CO₂e/kg for nylon carpet should be verified against the actual DEFRA 2024 full spreadsheet to confirm whether this represents virgin nylon production or a closed-loop recycling scenario. DEFRA 2024 uses AR5 GWP values throughout.
Factor Vintage and GWP Basis: Version Disclosure
RCP v1.0 uses the following factor vintages:
Electricity: EPA eGRID 2023 (published March 2025)
Mobile combustion / vehicle fuels: EPA 2025 Emission Factors Hub
GWP basis: AR6 GWP-100 for refrigerants; AR5 GWP-100 for all other gases (consistent with EPA GHG Inventory basis)
When factors are updated in patch releases, the factor vintage table updates accordingly. All RCP Job Carbon Reports should reference the schema_version field (RCP-JCR-1.0) which implicitly references the factor table version used at calculation time. For year-over-year comparisons, use the same factor vintage across both years unless a major correction justifies restating prior-year figures.
Will Tygart · Senior Advisory · Operator-grade intelligence
Biohazard and trauma scene cleanup is the fifth core restoration job type covered under the Restoration Carbon Protocol. Its Scope 3 emissions profile is distinct from the other four categories in one critical way: virtually all waste generated is classified as regulated medical or biohazardous waste, triggering disposal emission factors that are 3–5× higher than standard C&D waste. Combined with intensive PPE requirements and specialized treatment chemicals, biohazard cleanup generates significant emissions from a relatively small affected area.
Job Classification
Biohazard / trauma cleanup — job classification for Scope 3.
Job Type
Primary Waste Classification
Dominant Emission Category
Typical Range per Scene
Unattended death / decomposition
Regulated medical waste + affected porous materials
Regulated medical waste, minimal structure affected
Cat 5 dominant
0.3–1.2 tCO2e
Crime scene with structural damage
Regulated medical waste + C&D debris
Cat 5 + Cat 12
1.0–4.0 tCO2e
Sharps/drug paraphernalia scenes
Sharps waste (regulated) + affected surfaces
Cat 5 (sharps disposal) dominant
0.4–1.5 tCO2e
Hoarding remediation with biohazard component
Mixed solid waste + biohazard materials
Cat 4 (volume transport) + Cat 5
1.5–6.0 tCO2e
Category 4: Transportation
Vehicle Type
kg CO2e per mile
Use
Biohazard response vehicle (dedicated, sealed)
0.503–1.084
Crew and initial materials transport (van or truck)
Medical waste hauler (regulated)
2.80
Regulated biohazardous waste to licensed medical waste facility
Dump truck (standard C&D, non-biohazard portion)
2.25 loaded
Non-regulated demolition debris for hoarding jobs
Medical waste facility distance: Licensed medical waste treatment facilities (autoclaves, incinerators) are less common than standard landfills. Average distance from job site to licensed biohazard disposal facility is 40–80 miles in most US markets. Use actual manifest distances; apply 60 miles as default where manifests are unavailable.
Regulated medical waste (soft tissue, bodily fluids, porous materials)
Autoclave + landfill
0.55
EPA medical waste incineration / autoclave factors
Regulated medical waste — high pathogen risk
High-temperature incineration
0.85
EPA hazardous waste incineration factors
Sharps waste (needles, glass)
Sharps autoclave or incineration
0.65
EPA medical waste — sharps category
Contaminated porous building materials (drywall, carpet, subfloor)
Licensed medical waste landfill or standard landfill (jurisdiction-dependent)
0.38–0.55
Apply higher factor when facility requires medical waste classification
Non-biohazard C&D debris (hoarding, structural)
Standard landfill
0.16
EPA WARM v16 — standard C&D
Spent PPE (biohazard-contaminated)
Licensed medical waste facility
0.55
Same as regulated medical waste stream
Jurisdiction note on porous material classification: Whether mold-contaminated porous building materials from biohazard scenes must be disposed of as regulated medical waste (vs. standard C&D waste) varies by state and local regulation. Check with your licensed waste hauler for the applicable classification in your jurisdiction. Apply the higher emission factor (0.55) in conservative calculations or when disposal classification is uncertain.
Category 12: Demolished Building Materials
Biohazard scenes frequently require demolition of affected porous materials — flooring, subfloor, drywall — that absorbed biological contamination and cannot be cleaned to restoration standards. When these materials are classified as regulated medical waste at removal, their disposal emissions are captured in Category 5 (same as ACM materials in hazmat abatement). When they are classified as standard C&D waste at the jurisdiction level, use Category 12 EPA WARM factors (same as water damage demolition materials).
Apply Category 12 factors to demolished materials only when they flow to standard C&D landfill rather than medical waste disposal. When in doubt, apply medical waste disposal factors and capture in Category 5.
Worked Example: Unattended Death, Single Apartment Unit
Worked example: unattended death, single apartment unit.
Job profile: Unattended death in a 650 sq ft apartment, discovered after 10 days. Affected area: 400 sq ft (bedroom and hallway). Scope: removal of all porous materials in affected area (carpet, subfloor, drywall to 24″ height), disinfection of all surfaces, odor treatment. Duration: 2 days. Crew: 2 technicians in Level B PPE. Facility: 15 miles from job site. Licensed medical waste facility: 58 miles from job site.
Category 4 — Transportation
Crew vehicle: 1 van × 30 mi RT × 3 trips = 90 mi × 0.503 = 45 kg Medical waste hauler: 1 × 116 mi RT × 2.80 = 325 kg Category 4 total: 370 kg = 0.37 tCO2e
Category 1 — Materials
Hospital-grade disinfectant (400 sq ft × 0.025 L/sq ft × 2 applications): 20 L × 2.8 = 56 kg Enzyme treatment: 8 L × 1.6 = 13 kg Ozone generator: 2 day-units × 0.40 = 1 kg Level B PPE (2 workers × 2 days × 3 exits/day = 12 kit replacements): 12 × 4.2 = 50 kg Biohazard bags (20 bags): 20 × 0.65 = 13 kg Poly sheeting (floor protection + containment): 80 m² × 0.55 = 44 kg Category 1 total: 177 kg = 0.18 tCO2e
Category 5 — Waste
Regulated medical waste (soft materials, porous materials, PPE): estimated 0.6 tons × 0.55 = 0.33 tCO2e Non-hazard debris (drywall, not in medical waste stream): 0.25 tons × 0.16 = 0.04 tCO2e Category 5 total: 0.37 tCO2e
Is biohazard cleanup typically covered by commercial property insurance?
Yes — biohazard cleanup at commercial properties is typically covered under property insurance. The emissions data from an RCP biohazard calculation should be provided to the commercial property manager for their Scope 3 inventory in the same format as other restoration job types.
How do you handle hoarding remediation with both biohazard and standard C&D waste streams?
Split the waste into its classified streams: regulated biohazardous material (apply medical waste disposal factors), standard C&D debris (apply WARM factors), and any hazardous materials encountered (apply hazmat factors). Document each stream separately in the Category 5 breakdown. The mixed nature of hoarding jobs makes them the most complex biohazard calculation scenario.
Does the RCP apply to crime scenes where law enforcement is involved?
Yes. The RCP calculation is based on the remediation contractor’s scope of work regardless of the cause of the biohazard condition. The emissions calculation is performed after the scene is released to the contractor and is based on the actual materials used, waste generated, and transportation involved in the cleanup — independent of the legal context of the event.
Disposal Method Differentiation: Autoclave vs. Incineration Creates a 5–10× Emission Difference
The biohazard guide currently uses a single disposal factor of 0.88 tCO₂e per short ton for all regulated medical/biohazardous waste. This figure is methodologically sound as a default, but the actual emission factor depends entirely on which treatment pathway your waste hauler uses. The difference is not marginal — it is 5 to 10 times.
The following lifecycle emission data comes from a peer-reviewed GHG Comparison Assessment conducted by Carbon Action Consultants (2022, reviewed by Dr. Tahsin Choudhury) commissioned by Envetec, covering 72 metric tonnes of biohazardous waste across treatment pathways:
Treatment Pathway
tCO₂e per metric tonne
vs. Direct Incineration
Onsite disinfection and shredding (where permitted)
Source: Envetec GHG Comparison Assessment, 2022. Validation: UK NHS hospital waste study (Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020) measured high-temperature incineration at 1,074 kg CO₂e per tonne (0.97 tCO₂e/short ton), consistent with the incineration-pathway figure above.
The current RCP default of 0.88 tCO₂e/short ton (equivalent to approximately 0.97 tCO₂e/metric tonne) reflects the dual-treatment or incineration-dominant pathway. It is a conservative and defensible default. However, for contractors whose waste haulers use autoclave-only treatment, the actual figure may be nearly half the default.
How to document: Ask your regulated waste hauler which treatment method they use. Record the answer in the data_quality.notes field of your RCP Job Carbon Report. If the hauler uses autoclave-only, apply 0.46 tCO₂e/metric tonne (0.42 tCO₂e/short ton) and flag it as hauler-confirmed primary data. If unknown, apply the default 0.88 tCO₂e/short ton and flag as proxy.
Autoclave Energy Intensity
For contractors or facilities operating onsite autoclave treatment, the energy intensity data is available from peer-reviewed hospital operations research. A study published in PubMed (PMID 27075773), tracking 304 days and 2,173 autoclave cycles, measured:
Energy intensity: 1.9 kWh per kg of waste sterilized
Water consumption: 58 liters per kg of waste
At the national grid emission factor (0.3499 kg CO₂e/kWh), autoclave treatment of one short ton (907 kg) of biohazardous waste consumes approximately 1,723 kWh of electricity, generating 603 kg CO₂e from energy alone — consistent with the peer-reviewed lifecycle figure of 0.46 tCO₂e/tonne when hauling and residual landfill are included.
Odor Neutralization Chemistry: What Has Emission Data and What Doesn’t
Trauma and biohazard cleanup frequently involves odor neutralization as a final step after biological contamination is removed. The emission factors for these chemicals are poorly documented.
Peracetic acid (PAA) is the best-documented odor treatment and disinfectant in restoration applications. The Envetec lifecycle study assigns 0.61 kg CO₂e per kg of PAA active ingredient, making it one of the lower-footprint chemical treatments available. PAA breaks down rapidly to acetic acid and water — no persistent residue, no downstream emission concerns.
Chlorine dioxide (ClO₂) is the dominant chemistry for trauma scene odor elimination. Products using sodium chlorite activated with citric acid (Biocide Systems Room Shocker, ProKure1) are self-generating chemistry requiring no electricity for treatment delivery. No published production emission factor exists for ClO₂ generator products specifically. The RCP treats ClO₂ odor treatment as a data gap. Apply the EPA EEIO chemical manufacturing proxy (2.8 kg CO₂e/kg of active chemical) and flag as estimated.
Enzyme-based neutralizers similarly lack published LCA data. Treat as a data gap and apply the EEIO proxy.
ATP Testing: Emissions-Negligible but Methodologically Required
ATP bioluminescence testing (ANSI/IICRC S540 requires minimum two rounds per scene — pre-remediation and clearance) is a consumable source. Hygiena UltraSnap ATP swabs weigh approximately 5–10g each (polypropylene housing, pre-moistened fiber tip, luciferin/luciferase reagent). Estimated carbon footprint: 20–50g CO₂e per swab using generic small medical plastic device lifecycle data. A typical trauma scene requiring 10–30 swabs generates 0.2–1.5 kg CO₂e from ATP testing.
This is below 0.1% of total job emissions on all but the smallest trauma scene jobs. ATP testing is documented here for methodological completeness — include it in Category 1 if your job tracking captures swab consumption, but it is acceptable to omit and note the exclusion as immaterial in the data_quality section.
Sources and References — Biohazard Technical Additions
Will Tygart · Senior Advisory · Operator-grade intelligence
The Restoration Golf League was designed as a B2B networking vehicle — a way for independent restoration contractors to build relationships with commercial property managers, insurance adjusters, and facility directors in an environment that creates genuine connection rather than transactional vendor-client dynamics.
The ESG conversation creates an opportunity to extend what the RGL does — not by adding another agenda item to golf networking events, but by positioning the RGL network as the restoration industry’s first ESG-capable contractor coalition. A group of independent operators who share a commitment to structured emissions reporting and who collectively represent a preferred vendor base for commercial clients with Scope 3 obligations.
What a Network Does That Individuals Can’t
What a network does that individuals can’t.
An individual restoration contractor who adopts RCP is a data point. A network of 50 RCP-certified restoration contractors across multiple markets is a standard. The distinction matters to commercial property managers who operate nationally — they need consistent data from vendor bases across multiple regions, not ad-hoc reporting from individual contractors who each implement differently.
When a national REIT’s sustainability team is looking for RCP-compliant restoration vendors in six markets simultaneously, a network of contractors who share a common standard, a common report format, and a common data delivery commitment is a procurement solution, not a patchwork of individual vendor relationships to manage. The RGL becomes a vendor category rather than a collection of individual vendors.
The RGL ESG Proposition to Commercial Clients
The RGL ESG proposition to commercial clients.
Straightforward: every RGL member contractor provides RCP-format per-job carbon data. When you hire an RGL contractor, you receive structured Scope 3 emissions data for your GRESB, CDP, and SB 253 disclosures. You don’t need to evaluate each contractor’s ESG capability individually — RGL membership in an RCP-adopting network is the credential. This is a market-facing advantage the RGL can offer today.
How to Advance RCP Through the RGL Network
How to advance RCP through the RGL network.
Present the RCP framework at the next RGL event. Invite member contractors to commit to a 60-day RCP implementation pilot. Collect the five pilot jobs required for self-certification from willing members. Then publish the pilot results — aggregate emissions data from the pilot cohort — as the first empirical data set for the restoration industry’s Scope 3 baseline.
That aggregate baseline — even from a small pilot cohort of 10–20 contractors — would be the first published data on restoration industry Scope 3 emissions. It would immediately become the reference data cited by property managers, ESG consultants, and eventually trade associations trying to understand what restoration work actually emits. First-mover advantage in publishing that data is significant and durable.
The Longer View
Commercial real estate’s appetite for ESG-credentialed vendor networks is growing. As SB 253 deadlines approach and GRESB supply chain requirements tighten, property managers will actively seek vendor networks that reduce their ESG data collection burden. A restoration contractor network offering consistent RCP reporting across multiple markets is exactly what large commercial property management companies will pay a premium for — in the form of preferred vendor status, longer contract terms, and the relationship stability that comes from being a supply chain ESG partner rather than a transactional service vendor.
The RGL’s golf format builds the relationships. RCP adoption builds the credential. Together, they create a network that commercial clients can point to when their investors and auditors ask about supply chain ESG engagement in property restoration.
Does RGL membership automatically confer RCP certification?
Not currently. RCP certification requires completing the self-certification checklist, which is separate from RGL membership. The goal is for RCP certification to become a condition of active RGL membership in markets where commercial real estate is a significant client category.
How can a commercial property manager find RGL member contractors in their market?
Contact the Restoration Golf League directly. As the network grows and ESG positioning develops, a public directory of RCP-certified RGL members by market will be the most efficient way for commercial clients to identify ESG-capable restoration vendors in their service areas.
Can restoration contractors outside the RGL adopt RCP?
Absolutely. RCP is an open standard available to any restoration contractor regardless of RGL membership. The RGL pilot cohort is one pathway to RCP adoption — not a prerequisite for using the framework.
Will Tygart · Senior Advisory · Operator-grade intelligence
The restoration industry is developing two parallel knowledge infrastructure plays simultaneously, and they are more complementary than they might appear at first.
KnowHow — the AI-powered operational knowledge platform — solves the internal problem: capturing what your best people know, making it accessible to every team member, and ensuring institutional knowledge doesn’t walk out the door when someone leaves. It makes your operational playbook consistent, scalable, and resilient to turnover.
The Restoration Carbon Protocol solves the external problem: structuring your operational data — specifically the emissions data generated by your work — in a format that commercial clients can use in their ESG disclosures. It makes your environmental footprint visible, consistent, and credible to institutional clients who need it for their own reporting obligations.
Where the Two Stacks Connect
The connection point is job documentation. KnowHow helps your crew follow consistent protocols — which means the data generated during a job (materials used, waste generated, work performed) is more consistent and reliably captured. That consistency directly benefits RCP data quality. When crews follow a KnowHow-documented protocol for Category 3 water damage mitigation, the resulting data consistency makes the RCP calculation for that job more reliable.
In the other direction: RCP creates external accountability for the quality of your internal processes. When you’re producing per-job carbon reports for commercial clients that may be reviewed by ESG auditors, the incentive to maintain rigorous job documentation increases. External reporting requirements are one of the most effective drivers of internal data discipline.
The Two-Layer Architecture
Layer 1 — Internal (KnowHow): Operational SOPs, job protocols, training materials, quality standards. Purpose: consistent execution, scalable training, knowledge retention. Audience: your team. Knowledge stays inside your organization.
Neither layer replaces the other. A contractor with excellent internal processes (Layer 1) but no external reporting capability (Layer 2) has a good operation that commercial clients can’t verify. A contractor with RCP reporting capability (Layer 2) but inconsistent internal processes (Layer 1) has credibility problems — the external reports may not reflect consistent underlying reality. The competitive position that’s hard to replicate is both layers, built deliberately, operating together.
Does KnowHow integration with RCP require a technical connection between the platforms?
Not currently. The integration is conceptual — KnowHow documents the protocols, crews follow them, and resulting data consistency benefits RCP calculations. Future integration could include RCP data capture fields within KnowHow’s job documentation workflows.
Which should a contractor implement first?
Either order works. If internal processes are inconsistent, KnowHow first — consistent processes make RCP data more reliable. If processes are consistent but no external reporting capability exists, RCP first — the commercial client relationship benefit is more immediately visible. Both are worth pursuing regardless of order.
Are there other knowledge platforms comparable to KnowHow?
General knowledge management platforms (Notion, Confluence, Process Street) can serve the same internal documentation purpose with more configuration effort. The RCP is compatible with any internal knowledge management approach — it’s agnostic to which platform captures and delivers your operational SOPs.
