Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC Dempey Anderson Arena 2012-EE I D O C J P Investm Dempsey Owner: The M Client: Alaska June 28, 2012 Project # CIR ment Gra Anderson Municipality of a Housing Fin 2 RI-ANC-CAEC ade Ene n Ice Aren f Anchorage nance Corpora C-31 ergy Au na ation udit ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 2 of 77 Project # CIRI-ANC-CAEC-31 Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena 1741 West Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99509 Audit performed by: Energy Audits of Alaska P.O. Box 220215 Anchorage, AK 98522 Contact: Jim Fowler, PE, CEA#1705 Jim@jim-fowler.com 206.954.3614 Prime Contractor: Central Alaska Engineering Company 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna, AK 99699 Contact: Jerry Herring, PE, CEA #1484 AKEngineers@starband.net 907.260.5311 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 2 of 77 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 5 2. Audit and Analysis Background 14 3. Acknowledgements 16 4. Building Description & Function 17 5. Historic Energy Consumption 20 6. Interactive Effects of Projects 21 7. Loan Program 21 APPENDICES Appendix A: Photos 22 Appendix B: AkWarm-C Report 31 Appendix C: Equipment Schedules 37 Appendix D: Additional, Building-Specific EEM detail 41 Appendix E: Specifications supporting EEM’s 52 Appendix F: VFD Energy Savings Report Excerpts 58 Appendix G: Benchmark Data 66 Appendix H: Vendor Proposals 73 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 3 of 77 REPORT DISCLAIMERS This audit was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, managed by the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings and approximate the costs to implement the recommendations. Any modifications or changes made to a building to realize the savings must be designed and implemented by licensed, experienced professionals in their fields. Lighting recommendations should all be first analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statute as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. Energy Audits of Alaska, LLC and Central Alaska Engineering Company bear no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Payback periods may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, and installation costs of recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs), or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, EEMs are typically interactive, so implementation of one EEM may impact the cost savings from another EEM. Neither the auditor, Central Alaska Engineering Company, AHFC, or any other party involved in preparation of this report accepts liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to meet the forecasted payback periods. This audit meets the criteria of an Investment Grade Audit (IGA) per the Association of Energy Engineers definition, and is valid for one year. The life of the IGA may be extended on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the AHFC. IGA’s are the property of the State, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the Alaska Energy Data Inventory (ARIS), or other state and/or public information system. AkWarm-C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by AHFC. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-EE0000095. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 4 of 77 1. Executive Summary Building Owner: Municipality of Anchorage 3640 East Tudor Anchorage, AK 99507 Building contact: John Huzey Manager Facility Maintenance 907-343-8312 office Huzeyjm@ci.anchorage.ak.us Alaska Housing Finance Corporation P.O. Box 10120 Anchorage, AK 99510-1020 Contact: Rebekah Luhrs Energy Specialist 907-330-8141 rluhrs@ahfc.us Guidance to the reader: The Executive Summary is designed to contain all the information the building owner/operator should need to determine how the subject building’s energy efficiency compares with other similar use buildings, which energy improvements should be implemented, approximately how much they will cost and their estimated annual savings. Sections 2 through 7 of this report and the Appendices, are back-up and provide much more detailed information should the owner/operator, or their staff, desire to investigate further. This audit was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment act (ARRA) funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State’s economy. The audit and this report are pre-requisites to access AHFC’s Retrofit Energy Assessment Loans (REAL) program, which is available to the building’s owner. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 6 of 77 The site visit to subject building occurred on December 5th, 2011. This building houses two hockey rinks, changing and locker rooms, mechanical rooms and an office. The west rink was constructed in 1983, the east rink in 1998. Other than a dehumidification replacement in the west rink in 2004, there have been no significant upgrades or renovations of the building. The interior and exterior of this building are in good condition. Energy Consumption and Benchmark Data This building uses natural gas provided by Enstar Natural Gas Co., and electricity provided by Municipal Light and Power (MLP). Benchmark utility data and billing history for 2009 and 2010 obtained by the auditor, is summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below and presented in detail, by month, in Appendix G. Table 1   2009 2010    Consumption Cost Consumption Cost  Electricity ‐ kWh 2,008,200  $  197,731  1,831,680  $  196,964   Natural Gas ‐ CCF 140,326  $  142,281  121,789  $  104,523   Totals    $  340,012       $  301,487   A benchmark measure of energy use relative to other similar function buildings in the area is the Energy Use Index (EUI), which takes the total annual energy used by the facility divided by the square footage area of the building, for a value expressed in terms of kBTU/SF. This number can then be compared to other buildings to see if it is average, higher or lower than similar buildings in the area. Likewise, the Energy Cost Index (ECI) is the cost of all energy used by the building expressed in $/SF of building area. The comparative values for the subject building are shown in Table 2 below. Table 2 – 2009 & 2010 Average EUI and ECI   Subject Building Sullivan Arena Ben Boeke Arena  Energy Use Index (EUI) ‐ kBTU/SF 333 149 171  Energy Cost Index (ECI) ‐ $/SF $5.44  $2.65  $3.48   As observed in Table 2 above, the energy consumption of this building, when compared with similar use buildings in Anchorage, is excessive. This required further investigation. A deeper analysis shows that this building has excessive consumption of electricity when compared with both the Sullivan and Ben Boeke ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 7 of 77 arenas, and excessive consumption of natural gas when compared to the Sullivan arena. See Chart 1 below. *Ben Boeke benchmark data shows no gas consumption for last 5 months of 2010, so last 5 months of 2009 were used again in 2010 The auditor has surveyed both this building and the Sullivan arena, but has not had access to the Ben Boeke arena. Consequently, explanations for the excessive consumption compared with the Sullivan arena are listed below, but explanations for the higher electrical consumption compared to the Boeke arena can only be speculated upon. Listed below, in the order of the auditor’s estimate of impact on energy consumption, the reasons for the subject buildings high consumption compared to the Sullivan arena follow. The EEM’s in this report will address items 2, 4 & 5 below, the other items are strictly operational and cannot be rectified by energy efficiency measures. 1.) OCCUPANCY AND USAGE – The subject building is fully occupied and both rinks are in use for an average of 10 hours per day for 11 months/year, while the Sullivan’s full occupancy (i.e. events) averages 2 hours per day for 12 months/year. The Sullivan’s offices are occupied an average of 9 hours/day on weekdays, but they make up less than 10% of the buildings square footage. 2.) HVAC CONTROLS - The subject building’s main air handler for the East building was observed to be using 100% OSA. See Appendix A photos. The HVAC control system in this newer wing of the building utilizes DDC controls, and the building operator is not familiar enough with the control system to adjust the HVAC operations. He does manage the pneumatic controls in the older, west wing of the building, and the OSA louvers were observed there, to be operating with a more typical 33% OSA. The excessive 100% OSA setting is the primary contributor to the high natural gas consumption and a 0 50 100 150 200 250 Subject Building Sullivan Arena Ben Boeke Arena* Natural Gas EUI Electrical EUI ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 8 of 77 significant contributor to electrical consumption, as both the supply and return fan motors were operating continuously. OSA temperature measured during the audit was 28F, while supply temperature on the hot side of the heating coil was only 68F, so it is questionable whether the conditioned air temperature in the arena was even reaching the thermometer set points – hence the continuous operation. 3.) TWO RINKS - Subject building has two ice rinks frozen for 11 months per year, Sullivan has one rink frozen for 7 months per year. 4.) DEHUMIDIFICATION - The Sullivan arena does not have dehumidification, the building operator utilizes outside air (OSA) to maintain low humidity levels, while the subject building uses four dehumidification units, two of which are mechanical and two are desiccant type, using gas fired reactivation heating. None of the four units utilize heat recovery and the reactivation air is 100% OSA. Furthermore, the building operator in the Sullivan arena manually controls the (10) air handler units (AHU’s) based on observed OSA temperature, OS and inside humidity levels (essentially, calculating dew point temperature) and building usage, while the settings in subject buildings are independent of usage or occupancy. The relative humidity (RH) levels in the subject building were far below (31% and 39%) where they needed to be (78%) to prevent condensation and ice fog. 5.) CHILLING - The Sullivan uses ground well water for its single chiller cooling, while the subject building utilizes a bank of (12) 1.5 HP fans for each of its two refrigeration units. Various Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) have been analyzed for this building to determine if they would provide energy savings with reasonably good payback periods. EEMs are recommended for reasons including: 1.) they have a reasonably good payback period 2.) for code compliance 3.) end of life (EOL) replacement 4.) reasons pertaining to efficient building management strategy, operations, maintenance and/or safety All the EEMs considered for this facility are detailed in the attached AkWarm-C Energy Audit Report in Appendix B and in Appendix D. Each EEM includes payback times, estimated installation costs and estimated energy savings. The summary EEM’s that follow are the only EEM’s that are recommended for this building. Others have been considered but are not deemed to be justified or cost effective. The recommended EEM’s were selected based on consideration from three perspectives: overall efficiency of building management, reduction in energy consumption and return on investment (ROI). ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 9 of 77 Efficient building management dictates, as an example: that all lights be upgraded, that lamp inventory variations be minimized and that all appropriate rooms have similar occupancy controls and setback thermostats - despite the fact that a single or several rooms may have an unjustifiably long payback on their individual lighting or controls upgrade. The summary EEM’s below contain individual EEM’s that are grouped by type (i.e. all relevant lighting upgrades are summed and listed as a single upgrade, all thermostat setback retrofits are grouped together and listed as a single upgrade, etc.). They are prioritized as a group, with the highest ROI (shortest payback) listed first. Table 3 at the end of this section summarizes these EEM’s and Appendix B (the AkWarm-C detailed report) and Appendix D provide additional detail pertaining to each individual recommendation. A.) ROOM TEMPERATURE SETBACK THERMOSTATS The temperature in the rink rooms in the west and east wings appear to be controlled by the pneumatic and DDC systems, while the changing rooms, mechanical rooms and lobby are controlled by local thermostats. It is recommended to install setback thermostats in all of the changing rooms, offices, and lobby, and incorporate set back night time temperatures into the control systems for the rink rooms, to reduce room temperatures to 45F during unoccupied periods. This summary EEM combines the AkWarm-C retrofits detailed in Appendix B-1 & B-11. Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s: Estimated cost (Part of the cost of this EEM is included in correcting/adding DDC controls per paragraph C below) $ 3,000 Annual Savings $ 13,796 Payback 3 months B.) REPLACE HUMIDISTATS WITH DEW POINT SENSORS Dehumidifiers that respond to a humidistat measuring relative humidity (RH) remove much more moisture from the air than is necessary to prevent condensation and ice fog. A dew point sensor (DPS) manages the dehumidifier based on the parameter that causes condensation – the dew point. It is recommended to replace the humidistats with DPS’s. This EEM is a summary of Appendix B items 2, 3, 4, 5 & 8. Replace humidistats with DPS’s: Estimated cost $ 3,000 Annual savings $ 4,940 Payback 8 months ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 10 of 77 C.) HVAC & HVAC CONTROLS The HVAC controls in this building (particularly the Barber Colman DDC controls in the east wing) appear to have incorrect settings. It was observed during the audit survey that the AHU-1 OSA dampers were 100% open, while the RA dampers were closed (and the RA fan running). This, coupled with the excessive gas consumption of this building, leads the auditor to recommend, as a start, performing a retro-commissioning of the building’s HVAC system. This would include a condition evaluation of HVAC components, system and controls, and adjusting system outputs to meet efficiency goals and building codes as well as current occupancy and usage requirements. As a second step, it is recommended to add a full DDC control system to the building, which would include HVAC, ice refrigeration, dew point sensing and dehumidification controls. It is also recommended to add variable frequency drives (VFD’s) to the fan motors in AHU-1, AHU-2, SF-1, RF-1, RE-1 and RE-2. See Appendix B-6, D-3 and D-5B for additional detail: HVAC controls EEM summary: Total Estimated costs $ 66,787 Total Annual savings $ 65,096 Payback (assuming new DDC system) 1 year D.) VENDING MACHINES Vending machines typically run regardless of usage and occupancy. There is a device which, when retro-fitted to an existing vending machine, cycles the compressor and machine lights based on usage patterns and proximity sensors. This “Vending Miser” typically saves 46% in energy consumption while still maintaining cold beverages. See Appendix B-5 and www.vendingmiser.com. Vending Machine EEM: Estimated cost (for 2 machines) $500 Annual Savings $297 Payback 1.7 years E.) REFRIGERATION WASTE HEAT FOR OSA PRE-HEAT Despite the fact that waste heat from the ice refrigeration compressors is already being used for snow melt and sub-floor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 11 of 77 (earth) heat, there is still substantial compressor waste heat that can be utilized to reduce energy consumption. Additional waste heat can be reclaimed to pre-heat incoming OSA by installing deep heating coils circulating glycol, in front of the existing heating coils. This is estimated to reduce building heating costs by approximately 30%-40%. Pre-Heat OSA using waste heat: Estimated cost $48,500 Annual Savings $18,799 Payback 2.6 years F.) COMPRESSOR WASTE HEAT FOR DHW PRE-HEAT It is estimated that 300,000 BTU of additional refrigeration compressor waste heat can be used to pre-heat water used for showers and Zamboni ice-resurfacing by adding (3) 120 gallon, double walled heat reclaim tanks served by a glycol heat loop from the compressors. See Appendix D-6A for details and Appendix H for vendor proposal. Estimated cost $36,500 Annual Savings $10,809 Payback 3.4 years G.) ICE REFRIGERATION Two EEM’s are recommended to reduce ice refrigeration consumption. Radiant energy is emitted by the ceiling in proportion to the ceiling’s emissivity, and has a significant effect on the heat load on the ice (radiant heat can accounts for as much as 35% of the heat load on an ice sheet). A higher emissivity results in a higher heat load on the ice, and therefore a higher refrigeration load. The ceiling over the east rink is painted a light, nearly white color, and has an estimated emissivity of .90 while the ceiling over the west rink is a dark brick-red color and has an estimated emissivity of .91. Two EEM’s were evaluated in Appendix D-4. Product specifications supporting both EEM’s are found in Appendix E. The estimated costs and savings of the recommended EEM is included below. The second energy savings can be obtained by adding VFD’s to the compressor motors. See Appendix D-3 and Appendix B-10 for detail. Both the ceiling emissivity and VFD EEM’s are summed below. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 12 of 77 Recommended EEM: Install Low-e ceiling curtain & VFD’s Estimated cost (See Appendix H) $161,600 Annual Savings $ 42,236 Payback 3.8 years H.) MOTORS Generally, paybacks justify that all motors 5HP or larger, operating for 1500 hours per year, or more, at continuous speed, should be replaced at EOL with premium efficiency motors. Paybacks will justify that motors 5HP or larger operating for 5000 hours per year or longer, be replaced with premium efficiency motors immediately. See table 4 in Appendix D-2 for complete, large-motor listing and recommended premium upgrades. In this building, four of the motors surveyed are operating sufficient hours to justify immediate replacement and 6 motors should be replaced at EOL with premium efficiency versions. Motors recommended to be replaced now: Estimated cost $ 5,300 Annual Savings $ 1,015 Payback 5.2 years Motors recommended to be replaced at EOL: Estimated cost $ 1,600 Annual Savings $ 620 Payback 2.6 years I.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS It is recommended to upgrade the T12, magnetic ballast, florescent lighting in the west building to T8-28 watt lamps with electronic ballasts. It is also recommended that at the next building re-lamp, change all the T8-32 watt lamps in the east building to T8-28 watt energy savers, which will result in a 12% energy savings with a $3 incremental additional lamp cost. It is also recommended to add occupancy sensors to all team changing rooms, locker rooms, mechanical rooms and storage rooms. Upgrading the metal halide rink lighting to T5-HO fixtures was considered but is not recommended. The difference in energy consumption is not significantly different; the savings from this kind ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 13 of 77 of lighting change results from the use of occupancy sensors to turn off the T5 lighting during periods of non-use. The high use of this building combined with the building operator’s judicious use of the rink lights renders the EEM unjustifiable. See Appendix B-13 & 14 for details, and Appendix E for more information on occupancy sensors. Combined Lighting Control EEM’s: Estimated cost $19,950 Annual Savings $ 2,905 Payback 6.9 years Table 3 summarizes the estimated cost totals and estimated annual savings totals of the nine (A. through I.) summary EEM’s listed above. Table 3 Combined total of priority, high‐ROI,  strategically recommended EEM’s listed above:  Estimated total cost   $   345,137          Annual Savings   $   158,893          Simple payback     2.2  years  Does not include design or construction management costs In addition to EEMs, various Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) are recommended since they are policies or procedures that are followed by management and employees that require no capital outlay. Examples of recommended ECMs for this facility include: 1. Turning lights off when leaving a room that is not controlled by an occupancy sensor. 2. All man-doors, roll-up doors and windows should be properly maintained and adjusted to close and function properly. 3. Turn off computers, printers, faxes, etc. when leaving the office. The total of all 19 recommendations listed in Appendix’s B and D of this report, estimate to save $160,952/year, with an installed cost of $374,317. The combined payback on this investment is 2.3 years. This does not include design or construction management services, Some of the costs totaling $374,317 are incremental costs for higher efficiency replacements, so actual budgetary costs for unit replacements will be higher. See individual EEM’s for further detail. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 14 of 77 2. Audit and Analysis Background Program Description: This audit included services to identify, develop, and evaluate energy efficiency measures for the subject building. The scope of this project included evaluating the building shell, lighting, hot water generation and HVAC equipment. The auditor may or may not identify system deficiencies if they exist. The auditor’s role is to identify areas of potential savings, many of which may require more detailed investigation and analysis by other qualified professionals. a. Audit Description and Methodology: Preliminary audit information was gathered in preparation for the site survey, including benchmark utility consumption data, floor and lighting plans, and equipment schedules where available. A site visit is then performed to inventory and evaluate the actual building condition, including: i. Building envelope (walls, doors, windows, etc) ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning iii. Lighting systems and controls iv. Building specific equipment v. Plumbing Systems b. Benchmark Utility Data Validation: Benchmark utility data provided through AHFC’s initial phase of their REAL program is validated, confirming that meter numbers on the subject building match the meters from which the energy consumption and cost data were collected. If the data is inaccurate or missing, new benchmark data is obtained. In the event that there are inconsistencies or gaps in the data, the existing data is evaluated and missing data points are interpolated. c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site visit and during the site visit is entered into AkWarm-C, an energy modeling software program developed specifically for AHFC to identify forecasted energy consumption. The forecasts can then be compared to actual energy consumption. AkWarm-C also has some pre-programmed EEM retrofit options that can be analyzed with projected energy savings based on occupancy schedules, utility rates, building construction type, building function, existing conditions, and climatic data uploaded to the program based on the zip code of the building. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on manufacturer’s cataloged information. Energy cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Installation costs include the labor and equipment required to implement an EEM retrofit, but design and construction management costs are excluded. Cost estimates are +/- 30% for this level of audit, and are derived from one or more of the following: Means Cost Data, industry publications, experience of the auditor, local contractors and/or equipment suppliers. Mechanical Solutions, Inc, Yaskawa America Drives, and J.P. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 15 of 77 Sheldon, all in Anchorage, were consulted for some of the VFD controls, dehumidification, boiler, air handling retrofit and/or replacement costs. Accent Refrigeration Systems provided expertise, calculations and cost estimates for upgrading the building’s refrigeration and dehumidification systems. Maintenance savings are calculated, where applicable, and are added to the energy savings for each EEM. The costs and savings are considered and a simple payback period and ROI is calculated. The simple payback period is based on the number of years that it takes for the savings to pay back the net installation cost (Net Installation costs divided by Net Savings.) In cases where the EEM recommends replacement at EOL, the incremental cost difference between the standard equipment in place, and the higher efficiency equipment being recommended is used as the cost basis for payback calculation. The SIR found in the AkWarm-C report is the Savings to Investment Ratio, defined as the breakeven cost divided by the initial installed cost. A simple life-time calculation is included in the AkWarm-C calculation for each EEM. The life-time for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the life-time of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total life-time multiplied by the yearly savings. d. Limitations of the Study: All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided, and may only act as an approximation. In some instances, several methods may achieve the identified savings. This report is not a design document. A design professional, licensed to practice in Alaska and in the appropriate discipline, who is following the recommendations, shall accept full responsibility and liability for the results. Budgetary estimates for engineering and design of these projects in not included in the cost estimate for each EEM recommendation, but these costs can be approximated at 15% of the cost of the work. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 16 of 77 3. Acknowledgements: We wish to acknowledge the help of numerous individuals who have contributed information that was used to prepare this report, including: a. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (Grantor): AHFC provided the grant funds, contracting agreements, guidelines, and technical direction for providing the audits. AHFC reviewed and approved the final short list of buildings to be audited based on the recommendation of the Technical Service Provider (TSP). b. The Municipality of Anchorage (Owner): MOA provided a review and brief history of the benchmarked buildings, building selection criteria, building plans, equipment specifications, building entry and coordination with on-site personnel. c. Central Alaska Engineering Company (Benchmark TSP): CAEC oversaw the compilation of electrical and natural gas consumption data through their subcontractor, Energy Audits of Alaska, LLC. CAEC also entered that data into the statewide building database, called the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS). CAEC was awarded the auditing contract for this MOA building. d. Accent Refrigeration Systems: Special thanks to Accent Refrigeration Systems, located in Victoria, BC, Canada for applying their expertise in ice arena refrigeration and heat recovery to this project. After visiting the subject building, they analyzed the current systems and presented a series of recommendations found in Appendix H. e. Energy Audits of Alaska (energy auditor): This firm has been selected to provide audits under this contract. The firm has two mechanical engineers, certified as energy auditors and/or professional engineers and has also received additional training from CAEC and other TSP’s to acquire further specific information regarding audit requirements and potential EEM applications. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 17 of 77 4. Building Description and Function: The site visit and survey of subject building occurred on December 6th, 2011. The ambient outside temperature was 30F. The building has one story consisting of the two 85’ x 200’ ice rinks, team changing rooms, showers and locker rooms, two ice re-surfacing machine (ZAM) garages, mechanical rooms and an office. The east half of the building, built in 1983 contains just over 29,000 square feet; the west wing of the building has approximately the same square footage and was constructed in 1998, the building total is 58,958 square feet. The entire building is constructed on a reinforced concrete slab on grade, 4” thick, with 2’ of rigid foam perimeter insulation. The building’s primary structure consists of un-insulated 8” concrete masonry units (CMU’s) supporting steel trusses supporting purloins, metal roof decking and a membrane over R-30 rigid foam insulation. The “shed” sections on the south side of the building and between the buildings are constructed of 6” steel studs 16” oc with R-19 fiberglass batts for insulation and R-20 rigid foam roof insulation. Siding and roofing of the “shed” sections are metal. Inside CMU walls are painted but otherwise unfinished; inside “shed” walls are finished with gypsum. There are very few windows in this building, those that exist are in average condition, have aluminum frames and double pane glass. Building details are as follows: a. HVAC Heating System: Space heating in this building is provided by two 30-year old, 2320 MBH, 80% efficient cast iron sectional, gas fired boilers in the west wing and two 15-year old, 2656 MBH, 87% efficient, gas fired cast iron sectional boilers in the east wing. Heat distribution is through unit heaters in the changing rooms and lockers, and hydronic coil- supplied air handler units (AHU’s) serving the main rink areas, office and lunch area. Unit heaters have local, adjustable (although may are locked inside plastic wall cases) wall-thermostats which control the unit’s fan. Glycol is “running wild” (i.e. no fluid control valve) in all unit heaters. The AHU’s are constant volume, damper controlled; their heating coils have 3-way valves presumably controlled by zone thermostats, which also control fan and blower activation. The control system in the older, west wing is a pneumatic system while in the east wing it is controlled by a Barber Colman DDC system utilizing electric actuators. Ventilation: Ventilation and make up air is provided by five air handlers (AHU’s) and 11 exhaust, return and supply fans, ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 18 of 77 several utilizing heating coils. There appears to be some dysfunction in the DDC control system in the east wing. It was observed (see photos in Appendix A) that the 25,000 CFM, AHU-1 in the east wing was running with OSA dampers 100% open and return air dampers 100% closed, while the supply and return air fan motors were running continuously. This is a contributor to the excessive consumption of natural gas in this facility. b. Ice Refrigeration and waste heat: Refrigeration units are located in compressor rooms in the east and west wings, they are dedicated to their adjacent rink. The older, west wing utilizes a 1984 Holmsten direct refrigeration package with R22 refrigerant pumped under the ice. Waste heat is captured with an R22 loop through a shell and tube heat exchanger over glycol, to provide subfloor and snow pit heat The newer, east rink utilizes a 1998 Vilter 350 compressor and R22 refrigerant in a shell and tube heat exchanger over glycol for indirect ice refrigeration. Compressor waste heat is circulated through a second, glycol over glycol shell and tube heat exchanger to provide subfloor and snow pit heat. Both refrigeration systems use outside, 12-fan evaporators. The east evaporator is located outside the southeast corner of the building, the west evaporator is rooftop. The east evaporator has a 12’ tall loop in its piping which creates large suction pressures and difficulties with the return refrigerant. c. Dehumidification: Dehumidification is provided in the west wing by two Munter A5G, desiccant systems, installed in 2004, using 100 MBH gas fired, modulating burners as the re- activation heat source and 100% OSA for re-activation. Re- activation air is exhausted with no heat recovery, while heated (approximately 30F higher sensible temperature) dehumidified air is exhausted back into the building. Process control is via head pressure sensing and operating hours are assumed to be controlled by a local humidistat. Dehumidification in the east wing is provided by two Dumont Iceline DI-1800 compressor systems installed in 1998. The Dumont system blowers run continuously, with the compressors cycling on approximately 50% of the time. It is assumed that RH is used to cycle the compressor. It exhausts chilled air into the building without re-heat. d. Appliances: There is one residential type refrigerator in this building and two refrigerated vending machines. The refrigerator is recommended for replacement with Energy ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 19 of 77 Star units at EOL. A “VendingMiser” is recommended for the vending machines. See Appendix B-9 for details. This building has 1 PC in use; it is generally recommended to replace desktop PC’s with laptops at EOL. e. Zamboni Ice Resurfacing Machines: There are two Zamboni ice re-surfacing machines (ZAM’s), one dedicated to each rink. Both appear to be in good condition. Each uses 160 gallons of hot water per re-surface plus 50-100 gallons of hot water for cleanup. f. Plumbing Fixtures: This building contains a total of (15) toilets, (9) urinals, (14) lavatory sinks and (14) showers. All fixtures are manually operated and appear to be post-1992, so consume 3 gpf (toilets) and 1 gpf (urinals) and 2.6 gpm (shower heads). See Appendix D-1 for EEM recommendations. g. Domestic Hot Water: Domestic hot water (DHW) usage in this building is very hight. DHW is not only used for showers and lavatories but also for ice maintenance and ZAM cleanup. Between showers, lavatories and ZAM ice maintenance, over 9400 gallons/day of hot water are used. There are two gas fired hot water heaters on the premises, the older one is an 80 gallon State unit, approximately 80% efficient, the new one is a 100 gallon Bradford White, approximately 95%-98% efficient. h. Interior Lighting & Controls: This west wing of this building has not had a lighting upgrade since it was built. It has T12 lamps with magnetic ballasts in rooms. The 1998 east wing has T8 lamps and electronic ballasts. Both rinks use metal halide pendants to illuminate the rinks. Additionally there are mercury vapor “night lights” in the west wing for use during janitorial service, and recessed-can metal halide lights in the interior lobby. Rink lighting in the east wing is very consistent at 25-28 foot candles while lighting in the west wing is spotty, ranging from 83-190 depending on location. Lighting Controls: There are no occupancy sensors in the building. All room and office lights are manually activated by a normal wall switch or a “T-key” wall switch. Arena and lobby lighting is controlled by a manual switch panel in the office. Appendix B details completion of a full lighting upgrade. See Appendix E for additional information on occupancy sensors. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 20 of 77 Exit signs in the west wing are self illuminating, non-electric. In the east wing, they are LED. Exit signs, light fixtures and anything else within “puck range” takes a beating in this building; hockey pucks can fly in all directions and constant maintenance is required. i. Exterior Lighting: Exterior lights include wall packs on the building and pole lights in the parking lot, they are all high pressure sodium (HPS) and controlled by photo sensors. j. Building Shell: The building shell was described earlier; it appears to be in good condition, inside and out. The front entry doors allow a significant amount of air infiltration – they do not close tightly and should be either repaired or replaced. Additionally, there is no arctic entry in this building, so during periods of occupancy there is a large heat loss through door openings. Overhead doors appear to be original, and are nearing their EOL. k. Motors: There are 16 large (5 HP or larger) motors in use in this building, the highest power-consuming units being (4) 100 HP compressor motors. The compressor motors are premium efficiency with a 93% rating. All 16 are listed and considered for replacement with premium efficiency motors in Appendix D-2. 5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled within the AkWarm-C program. The program typically analyzes twelve months of data. Two year’s worth of HWS energy (BTU”s) and electricity consumption were averaged then input into AKWarm-C. This monthly data is found in Appendix G. Energy consumption was analyzed using two factors: the Energy Cost Index (ECI) and the Energy Use Index (EUI). The energy cost index takes the annual costs of natural gas and electrical energy over the surveyed period of time (two years) divided by the square footage of the building. The ECI for this building is $5.44/SF, the ECI’s for two similar buildings, the Ben Boeke arena and Sullivan arena, are $3.48/SF, and $2.65/SF, respectively. The energy use index (EUI) is the total annual average electrical and natural gas energy consumption expressed in thousands of BTUs/SF. The average of the 2009 and 2010 EUI for this building is 333 kBTU/SF; the average 2009/2010 EUI for the Ben Boeke arena is 171 kBTU/SF and 149 kBTU/SF for the Sullivan arena. The average for “Places of public assembly” (which is the closest building category, Ice arenas are not tracked) across the US varies from 89 to 102 kBTU/SF as logged by the US Energy Information Administration. This source data can be viewed at: http://www.eia.gov/emeu/efficiency/cbecstrends/cbecs_tables_list.htm ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 21 of 77 6. Interactive Effects of Projects: The AkWarm-C program calculates savings assuming that all recommended EEM that are modeled, are implemented in the order shown in Appendix B. Some of the EEM’s listed in Appendix B noted as “see Appendix D” are not modeled in AkWarm-C model due to limitations in AkWarm-C’s capability. Therefore the savings calculated by AkWarm-C do not take them into consideration, and visa versa. Furthermore, if the EEM’s calculated by AkWarm-C are implemented out of order, savings for the remaining EEMs will be affected, in some cases positively, and in others, negatively. As a result of these anomalies, the overall building savings on the first page of Appendix B may be over or understated. In general, all projects were evaluated sequentially so that energy savings associated with one EEM would not be attributed to another EEM as well. Best efforts are made to model the recommended projects sequentially, so as to best account for the interactive effects between the EEMs and not “double count” savings. Interior lighting, plug loads, facility equipment, and occupants generate heat within the building. When the building is in cooling mode, these contribute to the overall cooling demands of the building; therefore lighting efficiency improvements will reduce cooling requirements on air conditioned buildings. Conversely, lighting efficiency improvements are anticipated to increase heating requirements slightly. Heating penalties are included in the lighting project analysis that is performed by AkWarm-C. 7. Loan Program: The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855, “Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund). The AEERLF will provide loans for energy efficiency retrofits to public facilities via the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loan System (REAL). As defined in 15 AAC 155.605, the program may finance energy efficiency improvements to buildings owned by: a. Regional educational attendance areas; b. Municipal governments, including political subdivisions of municipal governments; c. The University of Alaska; d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or e. The State of Alaska Native corporations, tribal entities, and subsidiaries of the federal government are not eligible for loans under this program. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 22 of 77 Appendix A - Photos Main entry, looking North; note lack of arctic entry. Despite recessed entry doors, occupants complain of wind blowing doors open and high infiltration when closed. “Shed” sections to the left and right of entry built out from CMU walls. Condenser cooling fan bank for East rink, located outside southeast corner of building ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 23 of 77 East rink, note dark ceiling resulting in high emissivity and poor light reflectance; (45) 1000 watt Metal Halide fixtures produce an inconsistent 83-190 ft candle of lighting at playing surface East rink, note light colored ceiling resulting in higher light reflectance and lower emissivity, (41) double fixture 400 watt metal halide lamps produce a consistent 25-28 ft candle lighting at playing surface ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 24 of 77 1998 Dumont compressor-type dehumidifier in east arena, one of two 2004 Munters desiccant-type dehumidifier in west arena, one of two ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 25 of 77 East wing Zamboni ice re-surfacing machine (ZAM) dumping a load of snow into the snow pit West wing Zamboni ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 26 of 77 Puck’s end up everywhere Puck damage, former LED exit sign ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 27 of 77 . 1984 direct Ice refrigeration unit in west wing West wing compressor waste heat exchanger, R22 over glycol for sub-floor heat and snow pit melting ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 28 of 77 1998 Indirect ice refrigeration unit in east wing, one of two units Glycol over glycol heat exchanger in east wing, utilizing compressor waste heat for sub-floor heating and snow pit melting ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 29 of 77 AHU-1 in east wing, running with OSA dampers (upper left) fully open and return air dampers closed – this system is controlled by the Barber Colman DDC. Pneumatic control system in west wing – OSA controls set at 25% ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 30 of 77 Aerial View of the subject building Rooftop condenser cooling 1984 West wing 1998 East wing NORTH Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 31   ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 2/24/2012 3:52 PM General Project Information  PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION  Building: Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Auditor Company: Energy Audits of Alaska  Address: 1741 West Northern Lights Blvd Auditor  Name: James Fowler  City: Anchorage Auditor Address: P.O. Box 220215  Anchorage, AK 99522 Client Name: Everett Williamson  Client Address: 1741 West Northern Lights Blvd  Anchorage, AK 99509  Auditor Phone: (206) 954‐3614  Auditor FAX: (   )    ‐  Client Phone: (907) 277‐7571 Auditor Comment:   Client FAX:   Design Data  Building Area: 58,958 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space:  3,949,809  Btu/hour   with Distribution Losses:  4,388,677 Btu/hour   Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and  25% Safety Margin: 6,690,056 Btu/hour   Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,  if served.  Typical Occupancy: 62 people  Design Indoor Temperature: 60.4 deg F (building average)  Actual City: Anchorage Design Outdoor Temperature: ‐18 deg F  Weather/Fuel City: Anchorage Heating Degree Days: 10,816 deg F‐days     Utility Information  Electric Utility: Anchorage ML&P ‐ Commercial ‐ Lg Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas ‐ Commercial ‐  Lg  Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.105/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.797/ccf     Annual Energy Cost Estimate  Description Space  Heating  Space  Cooling  Water  Heating Lighting Refriger ation  Other  Electrical  Dehumidifi cation and  Ice  Sublimatio n  Ventilation  Fans  Service  Fees Total Cost  Existing  Building  $101,206 $0 $29,143 $40,416 $54,263 $45,621 $7,563 $25,642 $1,842 $305,695  With  Proposed  Retrofits  $17,305 $0 $18,372 $36,266 $15,436 $38,110 $5,313 $12,099 $1,842 $144,743  SAVINGS $83,901 $0 $10,771 $4,150 $38,827 $7,511 $2,250 $13,542 $0 ** $160,952      ** See note on last page of this Appendix regarding how Interactive EEM’s affect this total.    Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 32                     Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 33   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Setback Thermostat:  Arenas  Implement a Heating Temperature  Unoccupied Setback to 45.0 deg F  for the Arenas space.  $13,065 Cost of this  EEM is  included in  Appendix  D5‐B)  2 Dehumidification –  West – Compressor  (See Appendix D5‐A for  summary of all  Dehumidification EEM’s  listed here)  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Other Controls  $1,557 Included in  #8 below  3 Dehumidification – East  – process fan  (See Appendix D5‐A for  summary of all  Dehumidification EEM’s  listed here)  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Other Controls  $621 Included in  #8 below  4 Dehumidification –  West – blower fan  (See Appendix D5‐A for  summary of all  Dehumidification EEM’s  listed here)  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Other Controls  $1,087 Included in  #8 below  5 Dehumidification – East  – reactivation fan  (See Appendix D5‐A for  summary of all  Dehumidification EEM’s  listed here)  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Other Controls  $189 Included in  #8 below  Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 34   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 6 Ventilation Retro‐commission the building  HVAC to adjust flows, settings for  dampers, OSA, RA, SA  etc.  Reduce  OSA to minimum levels to meet  code and occupancy comfort ‐  estimated to be 10% since there is  dehumidification in the building;  OSA is only required for air quality  and comfort.  Estimated cost  $15,000.    Add VFD's to S‐1 SF, AHU‐1 SF,  AHU‐2 SF, RE‐1 RF, RE‐2 RF and RF‐ 1 RF for 65% reduction in  consumption based on assumed  duty cycle.  Cost estimated at @  $24,287.  See Appendix D‐3 for  detail.  $53,678 $39,287 17.27 0.7 7 Refrigeration:  Residential type  refrigerator  Replace with Energy Saver model at  EOL  $186 $75 15.63 0.4 8 Dehumidification –  Natural gas burner  (See Appendix D5‐A for  summary of all  Dehumidification EEM’s  listed here)  Replace humidistats with (2) Dew  Point Sensors (DPS) estimated cost  $1500 each, save estimated 80%  consumption; connect Dumont  blower to DPS so it is not  constantly running.  $1,703  (this figure  is gas  savings  only;  electrical  savings are  above) $3,000 7.33 1.8 9 Refrigeration: Drink  vending machines  Add (2) VendingMiser $297 $500 3.73 1.7 **  10   Ice Refrigeration Install low‐e ceiling curtain to  reduce radiant energy and  refrigeration load, cost $80,000,  savings $26,361; Add VFD’s to (4)  compressor motors, estimated cost  $80,700, further saving $18,875  $42,236 $161,600 3.07 3.8 11 Setback Thermostat:  Rooms, corridors and  office  Implement a Heating Temperature  Unoccupied Setback to 50.0 deg F  for the Rooms, corridors and office  space.  $731 $3,000 3.15 4.1 Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 35   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 12 HVAC And DHW Replace B‐1E at EOL with (1) 88%  efficient 1900 MBH boiler at an  incremental cost of $0 (budgetary  cost of $40,000) since this is  current efficiency unit.  Replace B‐ 2E with (3) 94% efficient, 550 MBH,  condensing boilers (budgetary  estimate $18,000 ea + $15,000  piping and plumbing) at an  incremental cost of $30,000  ($15,000 incremental for the  boilers and $15,000 for piping and  plumbing required) over straight  across replacement.  Life of 1900  MBH cast iron sectional boiler is 30  years, life of 550 MBH condensing  boilers is 12‐15 years.  $655 $30,000 2.20 45.8 13 Lighting: T8‐2lamp, add  OS  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $1,050 $3,150 2.07 3 14 Lighting: T12‐2lamp,  magnetic ballast, add OS  Replace with 74 FLUOR (2) T8 4'  F32T8 28W Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $1,855 $16,800 0.68 9.1 The following EEM’s were calculated outside of AkWarm‐C and may not consider the  interactive affect of any other EEM’s above, unless specifically stated otherwise.  They are  not in order of priority or savings. See  Appe ndix  D‐1  Plumbing Fixtures: (15)  W.C., (14) lavatory sinks,  (9) urinals, (14) showers  Replace shower heads and lavatory   fixtures with low flow versions;  replace toilet and lavatory valves  with proximity sensing on/off  controls, replace urinals with ultra‐ low flow and proximity sensing  controls  See  Appe ndix  D‐2  Motor replacements Replace3 motors with premium  efficiency motors now, replace 3  motors with premium efficiency  motors at EOL; see Table 4  Appendix D‐3 for details.  $1,015 $5,300 3.8 5.2 Appendix B – AkWarm-C Detailed Report of all EEM’s considered in AkWarm-C   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Page 36   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) *  See  Appe ndix  D‐5B  HVAC Controls Replace current DDC controls in  East wing and add DDC controls in  West wing.  $11,418 $27,500 6.2 2.4 *  See  Appe ndix  D‐6A  DHW Pre‐Heating using  Refrigeration waste heat  Add (3) 120 gallon double walled  heat reclaim tanks to pre‐heat  water for ice re‐surfacing and  showers  $10,809 $36,500 5.9 3.4 *  See  Appe ndix  D‐6B  OSA  Pre‐Heating using  Refrigeration waste heat  Add deep heating coils in OSA  plenum to preheat incoming air  before boiler‐supplied coils  $18,799 $48,500 7.7 2.6 TOTAL $160,952 $374,317 2.3     *   From Accent Refrigeration Systems  ** From Custom Ice, Inc.          ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 37 of 77 Appendix C – Equipment Schedules ALL SCHEDULES COMPILED FROM ON‐SITE NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION WHERE  ACCESSIBLE, OR FROM PLANS  AIR HANDLER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL FAN CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  S‐1W Trane 35C, 907 MBH 21,000 15/460/3  Supply side, located in west  mechanical room  RE‐1W 21,000 15/460/3  Return side, located in west  mechanical rooms  S‐2W Trane 12A, 92.8 MBH 5,730 3/460/3  Supply side, located in west  mechanical room  RE‐2W 2,550 5/460/3  Return side, located in west  mechanical room  AHU‐1E Pace A33, 2848 MBH 25,000 20/460/3  located in east mechanical  room  AHU‐2E Pace A18, 335 MBH 6,870 5/460/3  located in east mechanical  room  AHU‐3E Pace SCF 79A, 859 MBH 900 .5/120/1  located in east compressor  room  EXHAUST FAN SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  EF‐3W Trane 19‐Q 2700 5/460/3 Mech room 104  EF‐4W Trane 3 800 .3/460/3 room 122  Ef‐5W Trane 3 500 .5/460/3 garage 102  EF‐6W Trane 3 1000 1.25/460/3 garage 101  EF‐7W Penn 181T 2100 .5/460/3 Mech room 104  EF‐8W Penn Zephyr Z10 500 .125/120/1 room 103  none (12) fans 1000e 1.5/460/3  refrigeration cooling fans ‐  rooftop, serving west  compressor  RF‐1E Greenheck TAB‐42 23000 7.5/480/3 Mech room 112  RF‐2E Greenheck TAB‐20 4940 1.5/480/3 Mech room 112  EF‐1E Penn ZBS‐TD 160 77w/120/1 Toilet 105  EF‐2E Penn Z12H‐TDA 1310 855w/120/1 Toilet 108  EF‐3E Penn 102‐TDA 1000 810w/120/1 Compressor 114  EF‐4E Penn SX145BC 2850 .75/480/3 Compressor 114  EF‐5E Penn Z10H‐RA 500 390w/120/1 Garage 115  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 38 of 77 VF‐1E Greenheck 2100 .33/120/1 Mech room 112  none (12) fans 1000e 1.5/460/3  outside, east side of bldg,  serving east compressor  E‐7E unknown 400 .5/120/1e east mechanical room exhaust  PUMP SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GPM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  PMP‐1W Taco 4334 270  5/460/3,  85.5%  Main glycol circ pump ‐ west  wing  P‐2B Taco 4334 270  5/460/3,  85.5%  Main glycol circ pump ‐ west  wing  PMP‐3W Taco 007‐8 4 .04/120/1 DHW circ pump  PMP‐4W Taco 007‐8 4 .04/120/1 DHW circ pump  CP‐1E Bell & Gossett 80 271  3/480/3,  82.3%  Main glycol circ pump ‐ east  wing  CP‐2E Bell & Gossett 80 271  3/480/3,  82.3%  Main glycol circ pump ‐ east  wing  CP‐3E Bell & Gossett SLC‐30 150 85w/120/1 DWH circ pump  CP‐4E Grundfos UPS15‐42 140 .04/120/1 DWH circ pump  none Grundfos Boss 210A  20 .33/120/1 west snow pit sump pump  none A.O. Smith 20e .5/115/1 east snow pit sump pump  glycol  pump#1 B&G 1510 400e 20/208/3 west glycol pump #1  glycol  pump#2 B&G 1510 400e 20/208/3 west glycol pump #2  none Paco 50 1/208/3 snow pit circ pump ‐ west  none B&G 1510 150 3/208/3 "subfloor heat", west rink (off)  none Paco PIP 141B/Dayton 60e 2/208/3 "subsoil pump 1" ‐ east  none Paco PIP 136B‐GE 30e 1/208/3 snow pit circ pump ‐ east  BOILER SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL    BURNER  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  B‐1W Weil McLain  1086   1.5/460/3  gas fired, 2320 MBU input,  2040 MBH output, 80%  efficient, cast iron sectional  boiler  B‐2W Weil McLain  1086   1.5/460/3  gas fired, 2320 MBU input,  2040 MBH output, 80%  efficient, cast iron sectional  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 39 of 77 boiler  B‐1E Burnham V1111   1.5/460/3  gas fired, 2656 MBU input,  2154 MBH gross output, 1873  MBH Net IBR, 87% efficient,  cast iron sectional boiler  B‐2E Burnham V1111   1.5/460/3  gas fired, 2656 MBU input,  2154 MBH gross output, 1873  MBH Net IBR, 87% efficient,  cast iron sectional boiler  UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  CUH‐7  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 19.9  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located main lobby entrance,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐8  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 19.9  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located main lobby entrance,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐1  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 12.8  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east changing room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐2  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 12.8  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east changing room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐3  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 12.8  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east changing room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐4  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 12.8  MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east changing room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐5 Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 7.2 MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east locker room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐6 Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 7.2 MBH 180/230 .07/115/1  located in east locker room,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  CUH‐9  Sterling RC‐1200‐02 or equiv, 19.9  MBH 180/230 .1/115/1  located main lobby entrance,  wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐1 Sterling HS‐118A or equiv, 14.5 MBH 420 9w/115/1  located in east mechanical  rooms, wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐2 Sterling HS‐118A or equiv, 14.5 MBH 420 9w/115/1  located in east mechanical  rooms, wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐3 Sterling HS‐118A or equiv, 9 MBH 420 9w/115/1  located in east mechanical  rooms, wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐4 Sterling HS‐118A or equiv, 9 MBH 420 9w/115/1  located in east mechanical  rooms, wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐5 Sterling HS‐108A or equiv, 4.5 MBH 420 9w/115/1  located in east mechanical  rooms, wall tstat, 2‐spd fan  UH‐1W (2) Trane 42‐5, 20 MBH 391 .05/115/1  2 units, located in west  mechanical rooms, wall tstat  UH‐2W (2) Trane 62‐5, 30 MBH 815 .05/115/1  2 units, located in west  mechanical rooms, wall tstat  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 40 of 77 CUH‐1W (3) Trane E‐03 300 .03/115/1  3 units located in west lockers  & office  CUH‐2W (7) Trane E‐02  200 .017/115/1  7 units located in west changing  rooms and lounge area  HOT WATER GENERATOR SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GALLONS  NUMBER OF  ELEMENTS ELEMENT SIZE  HWH‐1E State SBF80, 725 MBH 80   gas fired, forced draft  HW‐1W Bradford White EF;‐100T; 399 MBH 100 n/a gas fired, electronic ignition  PLUMBING FIXTURES   SYMBOL FIXTURE GPF QUANTITY REMARKS    W.C. 3+ 15 manually operated    Urinal 1 9 manually operated    Lavatory ‐ 14 manually operated    Showers 2.6 gpm 14 manually operated  DEHUMIDIFIERS  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  DH‐1E Dumont IceLine DI‐1800, refrigeration  type  2 7.5/460/3 Compressor   2 3/460/3 Blower motor  DH‐1W  Munters Drycool A5G, dessicant type,  process capability 26lb/hr water @  2510BTU/lb water; max 100 MBH 2 2/460/3 Process fan  2 1/460/3 Re‐activation fan  EQUIPMENT   SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Nevco Scoreboard 2 600w/120/1 Scoreboards    Controls compressor 1 .5/208/3      Ice refrigeration compressor ‐ west 1 system (2) 100/460/3 Holmsten model 135    Ice refrigeration compressor ‐ east 2 100/460/3 York/Vilter VMC 350ES ‐ 2 units    West cooling "tower" 12 1.5/460/3 fan bank, rooftop    East cooling "tower" 10 1.5/460/3  fan bank (one fan continuously  on ‐ nonfunctioning relay)  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 41 of 77 Appendix D Additional, Building-Specific EEM details WITH THE EXCEPTION OF D-1, THESE EEM’S ARE INTERACTIVE AND DO NOT TAKE EACH OTHER INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN SAVINGS ARE CALCULATED, SO THEY CANNOT BE ADDED CUMULATIVELY. FURTHERMORE, INDIVIDUAL EEM SAVINGS WILL BE REDUCED (OR INCREASED) DEPENDING ON WHICH EEM’S ARE SELECTED AND IN WHAT ORDER THEY ARE IMPLEMENTED. D-1: Plumbing fixtures: All urinals should be retrofitted or be replaced with ultra low flow models. Urinals and faucets should have proximity sensing on/off controls. Manually flushed toilets should be retrofitted with dual flush valves (see below). This audit does not include water usage and AkWarm-C does not allow for the modeling of it, but a typical faucet retrofit will result in 30% water savings and will payback in less than 3 years. Ultra low flow urinals (1 pint to ½ gallon per flush) can save up to 66% of water used, and typically pay back within 3 years. Dual flush toilet valves will typically pay back within 1-3 years, depending on usage. These payback periods are reduced by 66% or more if the fixture is replaced at its EOL rather than while it’s still functioning. For an EOL replacement, the cost used is the incremental difference in cost between an ultra-low-flow fixture and a straight across replacement with the same fixture. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 42 of 77 D-2: Motor replacements: It is generally recommended that all motors, 5HP or larger, operating for 1500 hrs per year, or more, at continuous speed, be replaced at EOL with premium efficiency motors. Motors operating for 5000 hours per year, or more, can be replaced with premium efficiency motors prior to burn out, with a justifiable payback. Motors in this building, 5HP and larger, are listed below, along with recommendations for cost effective replacement at burn-out and for immediate replacement. There are four instances in this building of cost effective motor replacement with premium efficiency motors, prior to burn out. Table 4 Motor use &  location (5  HP or larger)  HP/Volts/P h   Existing  Efficienc y  Premium  Efficiency  Estimate d annual  usage  (hrs)  Annual  Savings  Burn‐out  payback in  years/cost  Replaceme nt payback  in  years/cost  Operating  assumptions  RECOMMENDED TO REPLACE NOW WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR (Less Than 7 year  payback)  PMP‐1W  circ pump 5/460/3 85.50% 89.50% 8760  $152.18 1/$150 3.9/$600  runs  continuousl y   S‐1 supply  fan motor 15/460/3 87.50% 93.00% 4360  $293.81 1.4/$400 4.8/$1400  running 19  hrs/day, 6  mos/yr and  10 hrs/day 3  additional  mos/yr  RE‐1 return  air fan  motor 15/460/3 87.50% 93.00% 4360  $293.81 1.4/$400 4.8/$1400  running 19  hrs/day, 6  mos/yr and  10 hrs/day 3  additional  mos/yr  P‐1W glycol 20/208/3 91.0% 93.00% 8760  $275.20 1.8/$500 6.9/$1900  runs  continuousl y   RECOMMENDED TO REPLACE AT BURNOUT WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR  E‐3 fan  motor 5/460/3 e85.5% 89.50% 4380  $ 76.09  2/$150 7.9/$600  assume  running 1/2  time  RE‐2W  return air  fan motor 15/460/3 e87.5% 93.00% 2570  $173.19 2.3/$400 8.1/$1400  running on  reduced  schedule  RF‐1E return  air fan  motor 7.5/480/3 88.50% 91.70% 4360  $  85.70 2.3/$200 10.5/$900  running 19  hrs/day, 6  mos/yr and  10 hrs/day 3  additional  mos/yr  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 43 of 77 Dehumidifie r  compressor  motor DH‐ 1E 7.5/460/3 e88.5% 91.70% 4380  $  86.10 2.3/$200  10.5/$120 0  runs 1/2  time  AHU‐1E  supply fan  motor 20/480/3 91.0% 93.60% 4360  $176.92 2.8/$500  10.7/$190 0  running 19  hrs/day, 6  mos/yr and  10 hrs/day 3  additional  mos/yr  AHU‐2E  supply fan  motor 5/480/3 87.5% 89.50% 2570  $  21.81 6.9/$150 27.5/$600  running on  reduced  schedule  PMP‐2W  circ pump 5/460/3 85.50% 89.50% 0  backup pump to PMP‐1W      P‐2W glycol 20/208/3 91.0% 93.00% 0  backup pump to P‐1W      ALREADY PREMIUM EFFICIENCY  Ice Rink  Compressor  motor ‐  West  100/460/ 3 93.00%  assumed  to be  premium  efficienc y 3660          runs  continuousl y 6 months  except 1  month  when no ice  Ice Rink  Compressor  motor ‐  West  100/460/ 3 93.00%  assumed  to be  premium  efficienc y 6954          runs same  as #1 plus  18 hrs/day  the other 6  months  Ice Rink  Compressor  motor ‐ East  100/460/ 3 94.10%  assumed  to be  premium  efficienc y 3660          runs  continuousl y 6 months  except 1  month  when no ice  Ice Rink  Compressor  motor ‐ East  100/460/ 3 94.10%  assumed  to be  premium  efficienc y 6954          runs same  as #1 plus  18 hrs/day  the other 6  months  Efficiency ratings at Full Load, per nameplate  e = estimated because nameplate not accessible or information not on nameplate  Payback figures based on power consumption at 66% of full load  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 44 of 77 D-3: Variable Frequency Drives (VFD’s) on AHU fan and Compressor motors (included in Appendix B items 6 & 10): If outfitted with a VFD with a programmable input device (PID) which responds to a process parameter such as duct pressure for an AHU or suction or discharge pressure on a compressor, a motor has the capability to only produce enough power to meet the demand. There is tremendous savings potential resulting from the relationship between motor load required and resulting fluid or air flow (Affinity Laws). As an example, if 100% of the air flow requires 100% motor’s horsepower, the Affinity laws state that 70% of air (or fluid) flow requires only 34% of the horsepower. Fan motors and pumps are sized for the worst case load scenario, and consequently need only be operating at 30%-70% of their full load, 90% of the time. VFD’s are recommended for larger, 3-phase motors that are under varying load and duty cycles, such as air handlers and reciprocating compressor motors. The motors summarized in table 5 below, are recommended to be retro-fitted with VFD’s. These motors were evaluated using software called, “Energy Predictor”, provided by Yaskawa, a manufacturer of VFD’s; excerpts from the detailed software reports are found in Appendix F. The percentage of savings were predicted using the Yaskawa software, and then input into AkWarm-C as a reduction in power consumption. The AHU savings are included in the EEM in Appendix B-2, the compressor savings are included in the EEM’s in Appendix B-10. It is important to note that these savings are over-stated because they are based solely on the reduction in electrical consumption resulting from the motor speed reduction. When a fan or compressor motor speed is reduced, GPM or CFM is also reduced, so the motor will have to operate at slightly higher load and speed to maintain building parameters, which will erode a small percentage of the electrical savings. Neither the Yaskawa software or the AkWarm-C software has the capability to calculate this iterative condition. Table 5 Summarized cost and savings from addition of VFD’s to AHU fan motors and refrigeration compressor motors * Predicted by Yaskawa software outside of AkWarm, and therefore does not consider any other EEM’s ** Assumes VFD’s are installed after Low-e curtain has been installed and those savings are already recognized; this figure is derived from AkWarm-C calculations by running the software twice – once with the 52% reduction predicted by Yaksawa’s software, and then again without the reduction. Estimated cost Annual Savings Payback  Air Handlers:  AHU‐1E, ‐2E, ‐3E, RF‐1E,  S‐1W, RE‐1W, RE‐2W $24,287 $13,138 * 1.9 years  Compressors: C‐1E, ‐2E, C‐1W, ‐2W $80,700 $18,875 ** 4.3 years  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 45 of 77 D-4: Radiant energy emission from ceiling (included in Appendix B item 10): The radiant energy emitted by the ceiling is proportional to the ceiling’s emissivity, and has a significant effect on the heat load on the ice. It can be as much as 33% of the entire heat load on the ice (see chart below). A higher emissivity results in a higher heat load on the ice, and therefore a higher refrigeration load. The primary energy savings that results from a lower ceiling emissivity is a reduction of up to 20% of the refrigeration required. Secondary results include higher light reflectance, which results in better light distribution and should allow a reduction in lighting levels and subsequent reduction in lighting heat load on the ice. Chart 2 The ceiling over the east rink is painted a light, nearly white color, and has an estimated emissivity of .90 while the ceiling over the west rink is a dark brick-red ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 46 of 77 color and has an estimated emissivity of .91. Two EEM’s were evaluated here, product specifications supporting each option are found in Appendix E. It is estimated that the refrigeration load for a 1” thick ice sheet is 30-40 BTU/hr per square foot, and 30-40% of that is required to overcome radiated ceiling energy (ASHRAE Chapter 44, Refrigeration, Table 2). Assuming a conservative 36 BTU/hr refrigeration load and an EER for the refrigeration system of 10, and operating hours (FLEH) of 4380/yr, each rink requires 257,444 KWh of refrigeration annually (not considering glycol and refrigerant circulation pumps or piping losses). Option 1 considered but not recommended – Paint ceilings with a low-e paint. With properties similar to low-e window coatings, low-e paint would reduce the emissivity of the ceiling from .9 to approximately .25. This results in a calculated 57% reduction in radiated energy and a 23% refrigeration energy savings. Additional details are found in Table 6 below. Option 2 – recommended – Install a low-e “ceiling curtain” suspended from the ceiling. The curtain in Appendix E has an emissivity of .03. The reduction from the current painted ceiling’s .9 emissivity results in a 94% reduction in radiated energy and a 37% refrigeration energy savings. Additional detail is in Table 6 below. Table 6    Estimated  Annual Load  (KWh)  Estimated  Annual Energy  Cost  Annual  Savings  Estimated  cost installed   Payback  (yrs)  Current ‐ Total  Estimated Refrigeration  load and cost 514,888 $  69,510 ‐  ‐  ‐  Calculated Radiant Heat load from ceiling    Current ceiling (e = .9) 211,378 $  28,536 ‐  ‐  ‐    Low‐e Paint (e = .25) 90,928 $  12,275  $     14,322*  $    80,000  5.6    Low‐e Curtain (e = .03) 13,402 $    1,809  $     23,187*  $    80,900  3.5  * calculated by AkWarm using percentage reduction derived from side calculations; assumes curtain is installed before VFD’s are added to refrigeration compressors ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 47 of 77 D-5: HVAC, DEHUMIDIFICATION AND REFRIGERATION HEAT RECOVERY: In an ice arena, building heating, ventilation, ice refrigeration, sub-floor heating and de- humidification are integrally related and significant efficiencies can be obtained if they are evaluated together. This is best performed during the building design stage, not as a series of retrofits. This audit integrates these building systems as well as possible, given the reality of a retrofit environment. The following EEM’s are presented as sub-paragraphs under D-6 due to the integral relationship they have with each other. Again, the savings may be overstated, depending on which EEM’s and in what order they are implemented. D-5A: De-humidification (Included in Appendix B items 2,3,4,5 & 8): Condensation inside a building causes seriously detrimental effects on many components of the building and resulting mold and/mildew is detrimental to the health of its occupants. Condensation occurs when the air temperature decreases sufficiently that it can no longer hold its moisture in suspension. The term “dew point” refers to the temperature at which the air can no longer hold, and therefore starts to deposit its moisture. Dew point depends on a number of factors, but primarily on the moisture content of the air, called “relative humidity” (RH) and the temperature. There are two ways to avoid condensation in an ice arena. 1.) Keep the inside air warm enough to hold its moisture by exhausting it regularly as it saturates with water, and replacing it with dryer, outside air, or 2.) lower the moisture content by removing enough moisture from the inside air so the dew point is kept below the room air temperature. Since there are dehumidifiers in this building, the RH, OSA percentage and air temperature can all be controlled to minimize energy consumption. This is not occurring currently. The following recommendations were considered. Item 1 is recommended, while items 2 through 5 are not economically justified for energy savings, if item 1 is incorporated; but they should still be considered from a maintenance standpoint. 1.) It is appears that the (4) dehumidifiers in the building are controlled by humidistat’s. These should be replaced with “dew point sensors” (DPS). RH varies with temperature while a DPS directly monitors and controls air moisture content based on the parameter which causes condensation and ice fog – the dew point. While a humidistat will activate a dehumidifier when the air temperature decreases because the RH is increasing, a DPS will not activate it until the dew point setting is reached. Estimated cost is $1500 ea for (2) units installed, savings is shown in table 7 below. A sample DPS specification is found in Appendix E. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 48 of 77 Table 7 SAVINGS ACHIEVED BY USING DEW  POINT SENSOR CONTROL OF  DEHUMIDIFICATION RATHER THAN  RH   Measured  Air  Temperatu re (F)  Measure d RH (%)  allowable  RH at 53F,  to  maintain  50F dew  point  Assuming OSA  RH is 60%, no  dehumidificatio n is required 9  months per  year, savings ($)  calculated by  AkWarm‐C   West Rink (Munters desiccant  system) 53 31 78  $      4,940 * East Rink (Dumont compressor  system) 52 39 79  * See AkWarm-C report in Appendix B, this figure is a summary of items 2, 3, 4, 5 & 8 as calculated by AkWarm-C. Dew Point Sensor EEM D-5A (included in EEM Appendix B-10): Estimated cost $ 3,000 Annual savings $ 4,940 Payback 8 months Incorporation of this EEM reduces the annual cost of dehumidification significantly. The following EEM’s were also considered, but as a result of the large reduction in dehumidification costs from the DPS, they are not economically justified. They are offered for reference and maintenance purposes. 2.) Replace the desiccant wheels in the two Munter’s dehumidifiers, they have an 8- 10 year life with normal use (they have high usage in this building) so are past their life expectancy. New wheels will be 10-20% more effective, reducing gas consumption and fan motor use by the same amount. Estimated costs are $3000 each for (2) wheels. 3.) The shaft seals in the Munters unit are rated at 25,000 hours. It is estimated that the units run 50% of the time, so have exceeded this duty cycle, which means that air is probably leaking past the seals, reducing efficiency. A similar maintenance review of the Dumont compressor units should be undertaken. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 49 of 77 4.) Pre-heating the re-activation air with a glycol heating coil (either supplied by waste or boiler heat) should be considered if any heat piping modifications are to be made in the future. As a standalone EEM, this is not currently justifiable. 5.) The blower motor in the Dumont unit should be controlled by the DPS along with the condenser motor; this would prevent the blower motor from running continuously as it does now. No cost estimate or savings is provided for this recommendation, it should be incorporated with item #1 above. D-5B: HVAC Controls – as previously mentioned, the DDC HVAC control system in this building is not operating properly. Three factors support the auditor’s conclusion: the AHU-1 OSA dampers (controlled by the DDC Barber Colman system) were 100% open, RA dampers 100% closed, the supply and return fans running full throttle. Secondly, the natural gas (heating) EUI of this building is excessively high compared to similar use buildings. Third, in order to reconcile the AkWarm-C model’s predicted gas usage with the actual usage, 100% OSA had to be used for AHU-1 and AHU-2 (and AHU-2 was not operating during the audit). Here is a summary table demonstrating the impact of HVAC Controls corrections for AHU-1 and AHU-2, i.e. bringing them to 10% OSA. This data was obtained by running AkWarm-C with current OSA settings per 2009/2010 consumption and again with 10% OSA settings. Table 8 AHU‐1 and AHU‐2  With excessive  OSA per  2009/2010  consumption  levels  with 10%  OSA Annual Savings  Space Heating costs          Gas  $            101,206    $     49,161        Electric (supply and return fans running                    30% less time)  $             25,647    $     17,953      TOTAL  $           126,853    $     67,114    $      59,739 *           Natural Gas consumption (CCF)                130,7476           64,824 53,996 ccf  * This annual savings figure does not agree with Appendix B-6 because it does not take EEM’s B-1 through B-5 into account – it is used for illustrative purposes here, savings per B-6 are more accurate ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 50 of 77 ROOM AND ICE TEMPERATURE SETBACKS Courtesy of Accent Refrigeration (Appendix H), some rules of thumb: - For every 1F increase in ice temperature, there is roughly a 10% reduction in refrigeration costs - For every 2F reduction in room temperature, there is roughly a 10% reduction in ice refrigeration costs. - Ice refrigeration costs typically are 60% of the entire building’s utility costs (when including circulation pumps, piping losses, dehumidification, etc.) Appendices B-1 and B-11 show the savings and payback of utilizing nighttime setback temperatures of 45F for the ice rink room and 50F for the changing rooms and offices, as calculated by AkWarm-C. It is assumed that this capability is contained in the East rink’s DDC control system and not in the West rink’s pneumatic control system. AkWarm-C does not have the capability to calculate savings associated with night time ice temperature setbacks, but using the rule of thumb above, it is estimated that a DDC control system that could implement night time ice temperature set back’s increasing the ice temperature by 2F from 11:00PM until 7:00AM would save 5%, or $3500/year in refrigeration costs. A DDC control system that included HVAC, ice refrigeration parameters and air humidity is recommended for the entire building. It is not clear that the existing Barber Colman DDC system in the East rink has this capability. Such a system is proposed by Accent Refrigeration (Appendix H); the proposed system would achieve the following: - Vary ice temperature based on occupancy and type of use - Vary room temperature based on occupancy - Vary humidity and OSA based on dew point and room temperature (accounted for in Appendix D-3, so not counted again in these savings) - Vary compressor motor load based on compressor discharge pressure and ice temperature Summary EEM D-5B: Add and/or replace existing DDC control system with new one with capability to manage ice temperatures and room temperatures and humidity based on occupancy, schedule and season Estimated cost $27,500 Annual Savings (estimated 10% savings after incorporation of all other EEM’s –use AkWarm’s “with proposed retrofits” costs for space heating, ventilation fans, refrigeration ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 51 of 77 and other electrical) $11,418 Payback 2.4 years D-6: REFRIGERATION HEAT RECOVERY: See Accent Refrigeration report in Appendix H. Currently, waste heat from the compressors in each wing is utilized for sub-floor heating and snow pit melting. Theoretically, if the refrigerant cooling tower fans are operating at all, excess refrigeration heat is being wasted (and they are operating). A number of uses of refrigeration waste heat were considered including: DHW pre-heat (which is recommended in D-6A below) OSA pre-heat (which is recommended in D-6B below) Energy recovery dehumidification by sub-cooling existing refrigeration (not recommended due to high initial cost and reduced dehumidification requirement if D-6A is implemented) D-6A: Domestic Hot Water pre-heating It is estimated that 300,000 BTU of waste heat can be utilized to reduce the DHW load in the building. The two gas fired hot water heaters use approximately 3656 MMBTU/yr to supply hot water for showers and ice-resurfacing. (9442 gallons/day) It is recommended to install a pre-heat system using compressor waste heat circulated through (3) 120 gallon, double walled heat reclaim tanks. Waste heat DHW EEM: Estimated cost, including piping $ 36,500 Annual Savings (39% reduction in boiler heat load required for DHW) $ 10,809 Payback: 3.4 years D-6B: OSA pre-heat It is recommended to add deep coils to the existing OSA plenums in S-2 and AHU-1, the main air handlers. The coils would utilize refrigeration waste heat from each rink, and are estimated to increase the OSA supply temperature to the existing boiler- supplied heating coils to 50F-60F (depending on the OSA temperature) and reduce heat load on the boilers by up to 40%. Waste heat OSA pre-heat EEM: Estimated cost, including piping: $ 48,500 Annual Savings (40% of AkWarm-C’s “with proposed Retrofits” space heating costs) $ 18,799 Payback: 2.6 years ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 52 of 77 Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s Lighting Controls Occupancy sensors sense the presence of occupants, turn the lights on at a pre- determined level, and then turn the lights off after a programmed time period of no occupancy. Line of sight, motion sensing occupancy sensors can be installed in existing duplex switch boxes, as well as on ceilings. Dual technology sensors are typically ceiling mounted in rooms, lavatories, corridors, vehicle bays and storage areas where obstacles may interfere with line-of-sight sensors. The second technology in these sensors activates lighting based on sound or changes in position, and work even when a person is fully obscured by an obstacle. Zoned occupancy controls are typically recommended for long corridors, large vehicle bays and large storage areas with multiple switches and lighting zones. Zoned controls are designed to activate and de-activate lighting by zone, by row, or even by fixture, based on the location of the occupant. Occupancy sensors can reduce power consumption by 25-60%. Paybacks on occupancy sensors range from 1 to 5 years, depending on the light fixture consumption and occupancy of the room. Lighting Management Systems (LMS) today have the capability to manage lighting based on a wide variety of parameters including building usage, daylight conditions and occupancy. They are retro-fittable, and can be stand alone or integrated into a building’s HVAC DDC control system. Additionally, they can be easily re-configured as a building’s usage or occupancy pattern changes. Sample LMS systems and a sample high bay occupancy sensor (which could be used for zone lighting control) follow. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 53 of 77 Appendix E Lighting Controls ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 54 of 77 Appendix E Lighting Controls ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 55 of 77 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 56 of 77 Appendix E Dew Point Sensor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 57 of 77 Appendix E Dew Point Sensor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 58 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – AHU’s ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 59 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – AHU’s ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 60 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – AHU’s ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 61 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – AHU’s ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 62 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – AHU’s ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 63 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – Compressors ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 64 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – Compressors ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 65 of 77 Appendix F VFD Energy Savings report excerpts – Compressors ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 66 of 77 Appendix G – Benchmark Data $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Jan‐09 Apr‐09 Jul‐09 Oct‐09 Jan‐10 Apr‐10 Jul‐10 Oct‐10 Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena ‐NG Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost  ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 Jan‐09 Apr‐09 Jul‐09 Oct‐09 Jan‐10 Apr‐10 Jul‐10 Oct‐10 Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kWh) Electric Cost ($) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 67 of 77 Appendix G – Benchmark Data REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form  PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION  Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date MOA Municipal Government/Subdivision 11/08/11 Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage  Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena Other 58,958 Building Type Community Population Year Built Mixed 261,500 9999 Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip  1741 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage 99516  Buiding Size Input (sf) = 58,958 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 140,326.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 142,281 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh) 2,008,200 2009 Electric Cost ($) 197,731 2009 Oil Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Oil Cost ($) 0 2009 Propane Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Propane Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Coal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Coal Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Wood Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Wood Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost ($) 0.00 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 68 of 77 2009 Steam Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Steam Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 20,886,587 2009 Total Energy Cost ($) 340,012 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 238.0 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 116.3 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 354.3 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 2.41 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 3.35 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 5.77 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 121,789.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 104,523 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh) 1,831,680 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 69 of 77 2010 Electric Cost ($) 196,964 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Oil Cost ($) 0 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($) 0 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Coal Cost ($) 0 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Wood Cost ($) 0 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($) 0 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Steam Cost ($) 0 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 18,430,424 2010 Total Energy Cost ($) 301,487 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 206.6 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 106.0 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 312.6 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 1.77 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 3.34 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 70 of 77 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 5.11 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's Natur al Gas Btus/CC F = 100,000 Provide r  Custo mer #  Mo nth  Start  Date  End  Date Billing Days  Consumpt ion (CCF)  Consumptio n (Therms)  Dema nd Use  Natural  Gas Cost  ($)  Unit Cost  ($/Therm)  Demand  Cost ($)  Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jan‐ 09  12/5/ 2008  1/8/2 009 34 15685 15685   $15,849  $1.01    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Feb ‐09  1/8/2 009  2/6/2 009 29 16636 16636   $16,802  $1.01    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Mar ‐09  2/6/2 009  3/5/2 009 27 17550 17550   $17,718  $1.01    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Apr ‐09  3/5/2 009  4/7/2 009 33 19169 19169   $19,341  $1.01    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Ma y‐ 09  4/7/2 009  5/6/2 009 29 11807 11807     $11,962  $1.01    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jun‐ 09  5/6/2 009  6/8/2 009 33 8341 8341   $8,489  $1.02    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jul‐ 09  6/8/2 009  7/8/2 009 30 5591 5591   $5,737  $1.03    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Aug ‐09  7/8/2 009  8/6/2 009 29 4890 4890   $5,088  $1.04    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Sep ‐09  8/6/2 009  9/8/2 009 33 6976 6976   $7,126  $1.02    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Oct ‐09  9/8/2 009  10/7/ 2009 29 7498 7498   $7,650  $1.02    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Nov ‐09  10/7/ 2009  11/5/ 2009 29 10068 10068   $10,227  $1.02    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Dec ‐09  11/5/ 2009  12/4/ 2009 29 16115 16115   $16,292  $1.01                             ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 71 of 77 Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jan‐ 10  12/4/ 2010  1/7/2 010 34 16402 16402   $13,697  $0.84    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Feb ‐10  1/7/2 010  2/5/2 010 29 16057 16057   $13,412  $0.84    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Mar ‐10  2/5/2 010  3/8/2 010 31 12018 12018   $10,072  $0.84    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Apr ‐10  3/8/2 010  4/7/2 010 30 10974 10974   $9,297  $0.85    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Ma y‐ 10  4/7/2 010  5/6/2 010 29 8308 8308     $7,073  $0.85    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jun‐ 10  5/6/2 010  6/4/2 010 29 6118 6118   $5,309  $0.87    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Jul‐ 10  6/4/2 010  7/6/2 010 32 5461 5461   $4,745  $0.87    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Aug ‐10  7/6/2 010  8/6/2 010 31 4621 4621   $4,465  $0.97    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Sep ‐10  8/6/2 010  9/7/2 010 32 6316 6316   $5,819  $0.92    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Oct ‐10  9/7/2 010  10/7/ 2010 30 9542 9542   $8,412  $0.88    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Nov ‐10  10/7/ 2010  11/3/ 2010 27 9604 9604   $8,405  $0.88    Enstar  NGC  Comb ined  Dec ‐10  11/3/ 2010  12/7/ 2010 34 16368 16368   $13,817  $0.84       Jan ‐09 to  Dec ‐ 09  total:  140,326 140,326 0  $142,281    $0      Jan ‐10 to  Dec ‐ 10  total:  121,789 121,789 0  $104,523    $0   Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09  avg: $1.02  Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10  avg: $0.87  Elect ricity Btus/kW h = 3,413 Provid er  Custo mer #  Mo nth  Start  Date  End  Date Billing Days  Consumpti on (kWh)  Consumptio n (Therms)  Dema nd Use  Total  Electric  Cost ($)  Unit Cost  ($/kWh)  Demand  Cost ($)  ML&P  45005 885  Jan‐ 09  12/12 /2008  1/13/ 2009 32 162960 5561.8248 360.72 $13,807 $0.08  $4,274.5 3  ML&P  45005 885  Feb ‐09  1/13/ 2009  2/17/ 2009 35 212520 7253.3076 400.32 $17,145 $0.08  $4,743.7 9  ML&P  45005 885  Mar ‐09  2/17/ 2009  3/16/ 2009 27 158760 5418.4788 391.68 $14,111 $0.08  $4,641.4 1  ML&P  45005 885  Apr ‐09  3/16/ 2009  4/15/ 2009 30 165600 5651.928 395.88 $16,911 $0.08  $4,691.1 8  ML&P  45005 885  Ma y‐ 09  4/15/ 2009  5/15/ 2010 30 137520 4693.5576 393.12 $14,830 $0.08  $4,658.4 7  ML&P  45005 885  Jun‐ 09  5/15/ 2009  6/15/ 2009 31 120840 4124.2692 327.74 $12,822 $0.08  $3,883.7 7  ML&P  45005 885  Jul‐ 09  6/15/ 2009  7/16/ 2009 31 134880 4603.4544 327.74 $14,122 $0.08  $3,883.7 7  ML&P  45005 885  Aug ‐09  7/16/ 2009  8/17/ 2009 32 185760 6339.9888 466.20 $19,611 $0.08  $5,524.4 7  ML&P  45005 885  Sep ‐09  8/17/ 2009  9/16/ 2009 30 186480 6364.5624 437.16 $19,314 $0.08  $5,180.3 5  ML&P  45005 885  Oct ‐09  9/16/ 2009  10/15 /2009 29 182880 6241.6944 372.96 $18,554 $0.08  $4,419.5 8  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 72 of 77 ML&P  45005 885  Nov ‐09  10/15 /2009  11/17 /2009 33 199800 6819.174 390.84 $19,855 $0.08  $4,631.4 5  ML&P  45005 885  Dec ‐09  11/17 /2009  12/15 /2009 28 160200 5467.626 372.96 $16,649 $0.08  $4,419.5 8                           ML&P  45005 885  Jan‐ 10  12/15 /2009  1/14/ 2010 30 159240 5434.8612 372.96 $15,144 $0.08  $4,419.5 8  ML&P  45005 885  Feb ‐10  1/14/ 2010  2/12/ 2010 29 170520 5819.8476 385.08 $16,040 $0.08  $4,563.2 0  ML&P  45005 885  Mar ‐10  2/12/ 2010  3/16/ 2010 32 188040 6417.8052 389.88 $17,264 $0.08  $4,620.0 8  ML&P  45005 885  Apr ‐10  3/16/ 2010  4/15/ 2010 30 137040 4677.1752 372.96 $16,187 $0.08  $4,419.5 8  ML&P  45005 885  Ma y‐ 10  4/15/ 2010  5/14/ 2010 29 110760 3780.2388 375.96 $13,993 $0.08  $4,455.1 3  ML&P  45005 885  Jun‐ 10  5/14/ 2010  6/15/ 2010 32 113160 3862.1508 372.96 $14,591 $0.08  $4,598.6 0  ML&P  45005 885  Jul‐ 10  6/15/ 2010  7/15/ 2010 30 99360 3391.1568 372.96 $12,417 $0.08  $4,598.6 0  ML&P  45005 885  Aug ‐10  7/15/ 2010  8/16/ 2010 32 163560 5582.3028 396.24 $17,555 $0.08  $4,885.6 4  ML&P  45005 885  Sep ‐10  8/16/ 2010  9/15/ 2010 30 174600 5959.098 407.16 $18,581 $0.08  $5,020.2 8  ML&P  45005 885  Oct ‐10  9/15/ 2010  10/14 /2010 29 174120 5942.7156 406.32 $19,013 $0.08  $5,009.9 3  ML&P  45005 885  Nov ‐10  10/14 /2010  11/15 /2010 32 187920 6413.7096 397.32 $19,800 $0.08  $4,898.9 6  ML&P  45005 885  Dec ‐10  11/15 /2010  12/14 /2010 29 153360 5234.1768 341.16 $16,379 $0.08  $4,206.5 0     Jan ‐09 to  Dec ‐ 09  total:  2008200 68539.866 4637.3 28 $197,731   $54,952     Jan ‐10 to  Dec ‐ 10  total:  1831680 62515.2384 4590.9 6 $196,964   $55,696  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09  avg: $0.08  Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10  avg: $0.08  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 73 of 77 Appendix H - Vendor Proposals Accent Refrigeration – DDC controls, compressor heat recovery to pre-heat DHW & OSA ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 74 of 77 Appendix H - Vendor Proposals ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 75 of 77 Appendix H - Vendor Proposals ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 76 of 77 Appendix H - Vendor Proposals ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA DEMPSEY ANDERSON ICE ARENA June 28, 2012 Page 77 of 77 Appendix H - Vendor Proposals Custom Ice, Inc – Low-e Ceiling Curtain Proposal