Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC MOA Chugiak Senior center 2012-EE I C O C J P Investm Chugiak S Owner: The M Client: Alaska June 4, 2012 Project # CIR ment Gra Senior Ce Municipality of a Housing Fin RI-ANC-CAEC ade Ene enter f Anchorage nance Corpora C-51 ergy Au ation udit ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 2 of 73 Project # CIRI-ANC-CAEC-51 Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage Chugiak Senior Center 22424 North Birchwood Loop Rd Chugiak, AK 99567 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 CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 3 of 73 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 21 6. Interactive Effects of Projects 21 7. Loan Program 21 APPENDICES Appendix A: Photos 23 Appendix B: AkWarm-C Report 33 Appendix C: Equipment Schedules 44 Appendix D: Additional, Building-Specific EEM detail 52 Appendix E: Specifications supporting EEM’s 60 Appendix F: Benchmark Data 67 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 4 of 73 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 CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 5 of 73 1. Executive Summary Building Owner: Municipality of Anchorage 3640 East Tudor Anchorage, AK 99507 Building contact: Linda Hendrickson Executive Director, Chugiak Senior Citizens, Inc. (Lessor) 907-688-2679 office execdir@mtaonline.net 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 CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 6 of 73 The site visit to the subject building occurred on March 13th, 2012. This building houses an adult daycare, independent living apartments, assisted living apartments, administrative offices, various exercise and recreation rooms, a full commercial kitchen and a dining room and café. It has been constructed in stages over the last 35 years. What is now the north independent living apartments and administrative offices was the original building constructed in 1978. In 1981 the first of a number of kitchen and dining room modifications were made. In 1983 the south independent living apartments and the north service wings were added. In 1992 the assisted living apartments were added and in 1999 the adult day care was added south of the assisted living apartments. There is a $4.2 million renovation scheduled for this building in the next two years. This has been considered in the recommendations that follow. The interior and exterior of this building are in very good condition. Energy Consumption and Benchmark Data Benchmark utility data for 2009 and 2010 is summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below. Table 1   2009 2010    Consumption Cost Consumption Cost  Electricity ‐ kWh 655,457  $     86,657  625,022  $    67,587   Natural Gas ‐ CCF 55,479  $     57,831  56,510  $    56,867   Totals    $   144,488       $  124,454   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. Comparative values are shown in Table 2 below. Table 2 – 2009 & 2010 Average EUI and ECI    Subject  Building  Anchorage  Senior Center  Woodland Park Boys  & Girls Club  Continental US  average **  Energy Use Index  (EUI) ‐ kBTU/SF 98 164 108 89‐102  Energy Cost Index  (ECI) ‐ $/SF $1.70  $2.48  $1.65  ‐  ** Data retrieved from the US Energy Administration database, these figures are for “Places of Public Assembly”, the most relevant category tracked by the USEA. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 7 of 73 0 20406080100120140160 Subject Building Anchorage Senior Center Woodland Park Boys & Girls Club Natural Gas EUI Electrical EUI Evaluation of energy consumption & benchmark data As observed in Table 1 above, consumption of natural gas (NG) and electricity held fairly consistent through 2009 and 2010. Table 2 shows that the subject building’s energy use per square foot falls well below a very similar building, the Anchorage Senior Center, and is very close to the Woodland Park School, which is used as the Boys and Girls Club headquarters and recreation facility. Atypically, this building’s EUI falls within the average EUI for similar buildings in the continental US. Typically, Alaskan buildings have a much higher EUI – which is to be expected given the weather differences. A deeper analysis of the energy consumption of these three buildings follows: Chart 1 Chart 1 above shows the subject building’s gas and electrical EUI compared to the two other similar use buildings. Natural gas consumption: Neither of the other two comparison buildings is a residential facility. Given this, the subject building’s natural gas (NG) consumption should be substantially higher than the other two buildings – and it is actually lower. The auditor also audited the Anchorage Senior Center and concludes that the subject building’s HVAC system is better optimized and the Anchorage Senior Center’s use of NG is excessive, most likely due to incorrect control settings and/or component malfunctions. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 8 of 73 Electrical consumption: Based on Chart 1, the subject building’s electrical consumption falls between the other two buildings, and appears to be not otherwise noteworthy. Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures 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 (See Appendix D-3) 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). 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. Some of 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.) HEADBOLT HEATERS There are retrofit headbolt heater receptacles that replace standard duplex receptacles. They contain an integrated microprocessor and thermometer that cycles power on and off in response to the outside air temperature. Energy savings is ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 9 of 73 typically 50%. There are 19 headbolt heaters east of the subject building suitable for retrofit, but during the audit it appeared that only 3-4 were regularly in use. It is recommended to retrofit the most frequently used receptacles (e.g. those parking spots used 24/7 by Assisted living staff). For purposes of demonstration, the estimated costs and savings were calculated based on 4 receptacles used 12 hrs/day for 6 months/yr. See Appendix B-10. Headbolt Heater Control EEM: Estimated cost $ 1,000 Annual Savings $ 387 Payback 2.6 years B.) REFRIGERATION There are 63 apartment units in this building, presumably each has a refrigerator. Only two apartments were audited, both had ¾ sized units approximately 10-12 years old. At the EOL of each refrigerator, it should be replaced with an Energy Star version. See Appendix B-6 for detail. Additionally, there are large walk-in coolers and freezers in the kitchen of this building. They should be replaced with Energy Star versions during the upcoming kitchen remodel. Specific details on the cost and savings are not available, given the unknown nature of the upcoming renovation, but new Energy Star commercial walk-in coolers and freezers are known to be up to 50% more efficiency than 10-20 year old models, and can save between $300 and $500 per unit per year in energy costs. Refrigeration EEM: Estimated incremental cost for 63 Energy Star refrigerators $ 4,725 Annual savings $ 1,460 Payback 3.2 years C.) DESKTOP COMPUTERS Desktop PC’s consume between 150 and 250 watts when in use. Laptops consume between 50 and 100 watts when in use. It is recommended to replace the 33 desktop PC’s in use by staff with laptops at their EOL. Because of their low usage, it is not recommended to replace the desktop computers used by ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 10 of 73 residents. The incremental difference in cost is estimated to be $200. See Appendix B-23 for detail. Personal Computer EEM: Estimated cost $ 6,600 Annual savings $ 1,683 Payback 3.9 years D.) HVAC SYSTEM & PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR UPGRADES The following recommendations should be made in the order presented. It is recommended to replace the 5 HP motors in MAU-1 & MAU-2 with premium efficiency versions and Variable Frequency Drives (VFD’s). It is then recommended to (after MAU-1 is repaired) re- balance the kitchen exhaust hoods and MAU’s. See Appendix D-3 and D-5 for additional detail on VFD’s, and appendix B-7 for more detail on cost and savings. The savings below reflect implementation of these EEM’s in the order stated. HVAC VFD EEM: Estimated cost $ 22,990 Annual savings $ 5,146 Payback 4.5 years E.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS The lighting in this building appears to have been replaced piece- meal, and is in great need of a consistency upgrade. There are 14 different types of fixtures requiring an inventory of 10 different lamps and bulbs. This creates a large bulb/lamp inventory, requires purchase of small amounts of sometimes difficult to procure bulbs and adds a significant labor requirement to simply change a light bulb. Energy Conservation & Consistency upgrade: It is recommended to survey the light fixtures and re-lamp the entire building with as few variations of bulbs and lamps as possible. This is not recommended as an energy efficiency measure, rather as a building operational efficiency measure (see list of ECM’s at end of this section) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 11 of 73 Lighting upgrade: At the next building re-lamp, or during the upcoming renovation (i.e. when the lamps were to be replaced anyway), it is recommended to replace all 32 watt T8 lamps with 28 watt lamps. It is also recommended to add occupancy sensors to all rooms, replace all halogen and incandescent bulbs with CFL bulbs and retrofit the few remaining T12 fixtures with magnetic ballasts with a kit similar to Leviton’s “Zipline” (see Appendix E) which inexpensively (a ballast change-out versus a fixture change-out) converts the fixture to T8 lamps and an instant start electronic ballast. It is recommended to replace all exterior high intensity discharge (HID) lighting (High Pressure Sodium, Mercury Vapor and Metal Halide) with LED fixtures. This EEM summarizes Appendix B-2 through 14, B-16 through 18, B-20 through 22, and B-24 through 31. See Appendix E for more information on occupancy sensors and energy saver 28 watt lamps. Combined Lighting Control EEM’s: Estimated cost $ 272,480 Annual Savings $ 36,151 Payback 7.5 years F.) SETBACK THERMOSTATS Recognizing that the occupants of this building are very sensitive to room temperature, it is still recommended to replace the low voltage thermostats in all common area rooms in the Assisted living and Senior Centers and all rooms in the Administration building with 7-day programmable digital models. Replacing the thermostats in the 63 apartments was evaluated but is not recommended, see Appendix D-3 for more detail. The long payback for this EEM is a result of the higher than normal night time set-back temperatures recommended and the long periods of occupancy of common area rooms. Appendices B-14, 15, 20 and 30 provide detail for this EEM. See Appendix E for samples of recommended thermostats. Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s: Estimated cost $ 11,300 Annual Savings $ 1,176 Payback 9.6 years ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 12 of 73 G.) AIR LEAKAGE AND DOOR REPLACEMENT On site personnel specifically requested to evaluate replacement of the two double entry doors on the west side of the dining room. The weather stripping is in very poor condition and the doors are warped, allowing a considerable amount of air infiltration. Replacement is recommended, although as is typical for EEM’s of this nature, the payback period is long. See Appendix B-47 Entry Door Replacement EEM: Estimated cost $ 7,380 Annual Savings $ 308 Payback 24 years H.) KITCHEN EQUIPMENT UPGRADE The auditor was informed that a $4.2 million renovation, which will included a kitchen remodel and upgrade, is about to be undertaken in the next two years. This is an opportunity to replace inefficient, older kitchen equipment with higher efficiency models. A more thorough consideration is provided in Appendix D-5, two examples are mentioned here. There are approximately 13 standing pilot lights on kitchen equipment, which consume an estimated $1,365/year. Some newer models have electronic ignition. The electric hot water heater dedicated to kitchen equipment should be replaced with a tank-less NG fired unit, which has an operating cost of 20% to 25% of the operating costs of an electric hot water heater. It is recommended that a qualified energy auditor be retained to work with the kitchen designer in selecting new kitchen equipment and developing an equipment implementation plan (i.e. what it to be purchased and when). Each piece of equipment should be evaluated based on these factors: - Its age and how close it is to EOL - Daily usage (this may require instrumenting individual pieces of equipment with BTU, gas flow and/or current recording devices for up to 30 days) - What high efficiency versions are available, their incremental cost above a straight-across replacement, their lifecycle cost (i.e. cost of purchase and cost of operating through its lifetime), resulting differences in energy savings and their payback ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 13 of 73 Kitchen equipment selection EEM: Estimated cost for energy auditor data logging & research (not included in Table 3 or Appendix B) $ 5,000 Annual Savings TBD Payback TBD A summary of the estimated cost totals and estimated annual savings totals of the eight (A. through H.) summary EEM’s listed above, is found in Table 3 below, and again at the end of Appendix B. Table 3 Combined total of recommended EEM’s  summarized above:  Estimated total cost $ 326,475  Annual Savings (including  maintenance savings) $   46,311  Simple payback     6.8 years  Does not include design or construction management costs In addition to EEM’s, various Energy Conservation Measures (ECM’s) are recommended. ECM’s are policies or procedures to be followed by management and employees that require no capital outlay. ECMs recommended for this facility include: 1. Turn 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 and utilize desk plug load management devices with integrated occupancy sensors such as the “Isole” power strip in Appendix E. 4. Re-configure building occupants and activities to group un- occupied offices (i.e. no tenant or staff using the space) or little used spaces, into the same HVAC zone so that zone’s energy consumption can be set back to minimal levels. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 14 of 73 5. A building is a living mini-ecosystem and its use changes. Re- evaluate building usage annually and confirm that building set points, zones, lighting levels, etc. are optimized for the current usage and occupancy. 6. Lamp consistency throughout a building improves operational efficiency and lamp replacement should be a scheduled, preventative maintenance activity. Re-lamp the entire building or entire usage zones (a zone of the building that has similar lighting usage, so lamps have roughly the same lifetime) as part of a scheduled preventative maintenance routine. This assures all lamps are the same color temperature (e.g. 2700K, 3000K, etc.) which enhances occupant comfort and working efficiency. It also minimizes expense because it is more cost effective to order large quantities of the same lamp, and more labor efficient to dedicate maintenance staff to a single re-lamp activity in a building zone, rather than replace individual lamps as they fail. 7. Replace HVAC filters regularly. Maintain optimal operation of all dampers, actuators, valves and other HVAC components. 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 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 15 of 73 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. Brown Electric, Proctor Sales, Pioneer Door, J.P. Sheldon and Refrigeration & Food Equipment, Inc, all in Anchorage, were consulted for some of the lighting, boiler, overhead door, air handling and commercial refrigeration retrofit and/or replacement costs. 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 annual savings multiplied by the lifetime of the improvement, divided by the initial installed cost. SIR’s greater than 1.0 indicate a positive lifetime ROI. The life-time for each EEM is entered into AkWarm-C; it is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. d. Limitations of the Study: All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided, and may only act as an approximation. Most input data such as building and equipment usage, occupancy hours and numbers, building ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 16 of 73 and HVAC operating hours, etc. was provided to the auditor by on site personnel. 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. 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. 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 CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 17 of 73 4. Building Description and Function: The site visit and survey of subject building occurred on March 13th, 2012. The ambient outside air (OSA) temperature was 7F and relative humidity (RH) was 12%. Inside air temperature was 74F. The north building which houses the senior center and administration wings, includes 43 independent living apartments, recreation and exercise rooms, administration and maintenance offices, kitchen and dining rooms. It is a two story structure, constructed on a 4” reinforced concrete slab using 2” x 6” wood stud walls supporting 12” TJI second floor and roof joists and a flat, EDPM membrane roof surface. Calculated (by AkWarm-C) wall insulation values are R-16.7, the roof insulation value is R-40.3. The south building houses the assisted living and adult day care wings. It includes 20 apartments, a lounge, small kitchen and office and a room for adult day care in the southeast corner. It is a single story structure, accessed by an enclosed breezeway from the second story of the main building. It is constructed on concrete masonry unit (CMU) foundation walls supporting 18” TJI joists, with 2” x 6” wood stud walls supporting wood scissor trusses and a 4:12 composition shingle roof. Wall insulation values, as calculated by AkWarm- C, are R-16.7, with an R-37.2 floor and R-36.9 roof. There is a large number of windows in this building, all appear to be double pane, aluminum frame and in very good condition. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 18 of 73 The auditor was informed that this building is scheduled for a $4.2 million renovation starting in 2013 which will include a kitchen remodel, dining room expansion and covered carport addition. Building details are as follows: a. HVAC Heating System: Space heating in this building is provided by (7) gas fired, 79-81% efficient cast iron sectional boilers. Heat distribution is through baseboard finned tube radiators in peripheral rooms, unit heaters (UH’s) in mechanical and maintenance rooms and cabinet unit heaters (CUH’s) in the vestibules. The assisted living and independent living wings are also supplied with heat via heating coils in several air handler units (AHU’s). Local wall thermostats provide valve control for the finned tube baseboard radiators in the residential units and fan control for UH’s and CUH’s. Controls: The control systems in the administration and Senior Center buildings utilize a retrofitted, timer based, low voltage Robertshaw electronic control system with a mixture of pneumatic and electronic actuators, while the HVAC system in the assisted living and adult day care facility has a Siemens Apogee direct digital control (DDC) system with electronic actuators. Ventilation: Ventilation and make up air is provided by (3) small AHU’s and (4) supply fans (SF’s) located in the mechanical rooms, (2) two gas fired, rooftop, horizontal furnaces providing make up air to the kitchen (MAU’s) and a number of exhaust fans. It is assumed that the operable windows in all rooms also provide ventilation as needed. The AHU’s are constant volume and damper controlled; their heating coils have 3-way valves presumably controlled by zone thermostats, which also control fan and blower activation. AHU-1, which supplies the adult day care rooms has a reheat coil. The MAU’s are interlocked to the (3) kitchen exhaust fans. MAU-1 is, and has been non-functional for a number of years according to on site personnel. There is no central air conditioning in the building. b. Appliances: There are numerous appliances in this facility. Each apartment has a ¾ sized residential refrigerator, a small range/oven and a microwave. The appliances in the well equipped commercial kitchen are listed in Appendix C. This building has 43 PC’s in use at various times of day. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 19 of 73 c. Plumbing Fixtures: This building contains a total of (67) 1.4 gallon per flush (gpf) and (4) 1.6 gpf toilets, 63 showers (estimated 2.6 gpm), 63 bathtubs and (74) lavatory sinks, all with manual valves. One lavatory faucet in an Administration wing toilet room is leaking approx. 90 gallons per day and should be repaired (see photo in Appendix A). See Appendix D-1 for plumbing related EEM recommendations. d. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water for sinks, showers and bathtubs is provided by (2) gas fired hot water heaters utilizing continuous hot water circulation and a small electric hot water heater located in and servicing the kitchen. e. Interior Lighting & Controls: As a result of the many renovations and additions to this building over 34 years, the lighting in this building is inconsistent and in need of an upgrade. Room lighting consists of a mixture of T12-40w fixtures with magnetic ballasts, T8-32w fixtures with electronic ballasts and incandescent and A-type CFL’s in the apartments. Hall and common area lighting consists of a mixture of multi-tube, plug-in CFL’s, A-type CFL’s, T12 and T8 fixtures, some U-tube T12 fixtures, and several 96” T12 fixtures. The only occupancy sensors in the building are located in a few of the toilet rooms. Appendix B details the recommendation of a full lighting upgrade. See Appendix E for additional information on occupancy sensors. All exit signs in the building are either LED or unlit, self luminous. The auditor was informed that incandescent bulbs are no longer purchased and are being phased out of use in this building. f. Exterior Lighting: Exterior light fixtures utilize high pressure sodium (HPS) lamps ranging from 70 to 400 watts and metal halide (MH) lamps ranging from 150 to 250 watts. The parking lot pole lights are presumed to use 400 watt HPS lamps. g. Building Shell: The building shell is described earlier; it appears to be in excellent condition inside and out. There is an issue on the roof; it appears that there is an inconsistency in roof insulation that is causing a local melt zone. The facility maintenance manager was made aware as he accompanied the auditor to the roof (see photo in Appendix A). h. Motors: There are 4 large (5 HP or larger) motors in use in this building. They are listed in Appendix C and were considered for replacement with premium efficiency motors, ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 20 of 73 two replacements were found to be justified now and one additional at EOL, see Appendix D-2. i. Kitchen: The commercial kitchen in this facility is used extensively, 8-10 hours per day, 7 days per week. Over 200 meals per day are prepared. According to plans, the kitchen was remodeled in 1984 and 1994; many of the appliances appear to be original equipment. There are an estimated 13 standing pilots which cost an estimated $1365/year. The steam tables, cold tables, walk-in cooler and freezer compressor and evaporators all have current versions which are more energy efficient. See Appendix D-5 for additional detail and recommendations prior to commencing the upcoming kitchen renovation. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 21 of 73 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 natural gas and electricity consumption were averaged then input into AKWarm-C. This monthly data is found in Appendix F. 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 $1.49/SF, the ECI for two very similar buildings, the Woodland Park School and the Spenard Recreation Center, are $1.65 and $2.90 respectively. The energy use index (EUI) is the total annual average electrical and heating energy consumption expressed in thousands of BTU/SF. The average of the 2009 and 2010 EUI for this building is 90 kBTU/SF; the average 2009/2010 EUI for the Woodland Park School is 108 kBTU/SF and 187 kBTU/SF for the Spenard Recreation Center. The average for “Places of Public Assembly” buildings across the US is 89-102 kBTU/SF as logged by the US Energy Information Administration. This source data can be viewed at: www.eia.gov/emeu/efficiency/cbecstrends/cbecs_tables_list.htm. 6. Interactive Effects of Projects: The AkWarm-C program calculates savings assuming that all recommended EEM are implemented in the order shown in Appendix B. Appendix D EEM’s are not included in the AkWarm-C model unless specifically indicated; in these cases, the EEM is included in the AkWarm-C calculations. If some EEMs are not implemented, savings for the remaining EEMs will be affected, in some cases positively, and in others, negatively. In general, all projects were evaluated sequentially so that energy savings associated with one EEM would not be attributed to another EEM as well. By modeling the recommended projects sequentially, the analysis accounts for interactive effects between the EEMs and does 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 resulting from reductions in building electrical consumption are included in the lighting 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 AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 22 of 73 “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 CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 23 of 73 Appendix A - Photos Main entry, looking Southwest Looking Southwest, east wing of Senior Center in foreground, east wing of Assisted Living in the distance ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 24 of 73 3 of the 4 headbolt heaters most used One of the 4 boiler rooms, 2 of the 7 boilers (this is in Assisted Living wing) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 25 of 73 Rooftop, looking south; exhaust hood fans and MAU’s visible. Snow melt area on rooftop, in transition between building sections over kitchen; indicates a roof insulation problem ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 26 of 73 Dining room, looking toward kitchen; note that the lights are off Coffee shop inside main entry ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 27 of 73 Second floor Administation Building, under skylight; note that the lights are off Leaking faucett in Admin wing toilet room ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 28 of 73 Typical Senior Center apartment Senior Center apartment kitchen and bathroom ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 29 of 73 Typical Assisted Living apartment Assisted Living kitchen and bathroom ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 30 of 73 Standing pilot lights on kitchen cooking equipment Salon; note 6-lamp T12 fixture ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 31 of 73 Exercise Room, again with 6-lamp T12 fixture; note room unoccupied and lights are off Southwest Dining room entry do ors in need of replacement ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 32 of 73 Aerial View of the Chugiak Senior Center Administration wing Senior Main Entry Center (independent living) Assisted Living Wing NORTH Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 33   ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 6/4/2012 10:46 AM General Project Information  PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION  Building: Chugiak Senior Center Auditor Company: Energy Audits of Alaska  Address: 22424 N. Birchwood Loop Rd Auditor  Name: James Fowler  City: Chugiak Auditor Address: 5935 Pioneer Park Pl    Langley, WA 98260  Client Name: Linda Hendrickson, Ray Johnson  Client Address: 22424 N Birchwood Loop Rd  Chugiak, AK 88567  Auditor Phone: (206) 954‐3614  Auditor FAX: (   )    ‐  Client Phone: (907) 688‐2679 Auditor Comment:   Client FAX:   Design Data  Building Area: 79,311 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space:  880,707  Btu/hour   with Distribution Losses:  978,563 Btu/hour   Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and  25% Safety Margin: 1,491,712 Btu/hour   Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,  if served.  Typical Occupancy: 121 people  Design Indoor Temperature: 69.7 deg F (building average)  Actual City: Chugiak Design Outdoor Temperature: ‐16.5 deg F  Weather/Fuel City: Chugiak Heating Degree Days:  deg F‐days     Utility Information  Electric Utility: Matanuska Electric Assn. ‐ Commercial ‐  Lg  Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas ‐ Commercial ‐  Lg  Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.133/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.810/ccf     Annual Energy Cost Estimate  Description Space  Heating  Space  Cooling  Water  Heating Lighting Refrige ration  Other  Electric al  Cooking Clothes  Drying  Ventilatio n Fans  Service  Fees Total Cost  Existing  Building  $32,070 $0 $15,351 $55,500 $5,396 $7,156 $8,950 $271 $5,288 $1,473 $131,454  With  Proposed  Retrofits  $33,706 $0 $11,884 $22,999 $3,842 $4,681 $8,952 $271 $5,350 $1,473 $93,158  SAVINGS ‐$1,637 $0 $3,467 $32,501 $1,554 $2,475 ‐$2 $0 ‐$63 $0 $38,296    Negative savings indicates that there is a higher energy consumption in this area resulting from incorporation  of an EEM in another area.  For example, a reduction in lighting power consumption results in less heat  radiated to the room and therefore requires more heat output from the boilers.   Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 34                     $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 Existing Retrofit Service Fees Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Cooking Clothes Drying Annual Energy Costs by End Use Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 35   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: Incandescent,  OS not needed  Replace with 9 FLUOR CFL,  A Lamp 15W  $229 $135 10.45 0.6 2 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  Incandescent, OS not  needed  Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL,  A Lamp 15W  $30 $30 6.26 1 3 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐150, Soffit  Replace with 16 FLUOR  CFL, Spiral 42 W  $948 + $80 Maint.  Savings $1,040 6.12 1.1 4 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  Incandescent Flood,  Soffit  Replace with 9 LED 17W  Module StdElectronic  $163 + $5 Maint.  Savings $585 4.20 3.6 5 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Apt:  Incandescent, add  OS  Replace with 430 FLUOR  CFL, A Lamp 15W  $3,857 $6,450 3.69 1.7 6 Refrigeration ‐  Power Retrofit:  Apartment  Refrigerators  Replace with 60 Energy  Star units at EOL, at  incremental cost of $75 ea  $1,460 $4,725 3.57 3.2 7  (also  inclu des  Appe ndix  D‐4)  HVAC And DHW Replace Rheem hot water  heater with 95%  condensing HWH @  $15,000, assume $200/yr  maint. savings.  Assume  MAU‐1 is functional and in  use during kitchen  operating hours, add VFD's  to both MAU‐1 & MAU‐2  @ $6,790 cost, reduction  in electrical consumption  of 69% per Yaskawa  Energy Predictor software,  see Appendix D‐4  (assumed 2 motors have  been upgraded to  premium efficiency per  Appendix D‐2)  $4,733 + $200 Maint.  Savings $21,790 3.45 4.6 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 36   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 8 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Kitchen: T8‐ 2lamp, OS added to  circuit under  previous EEM  At next building re‐lamp,  or during upcoming  renovation, replace (5) T8‐ 32 watt lamps with 5  FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic  $16 $30 3.29 1.9 9 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐2lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 6 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with Instant  StdElectronic  $164 + $60 Maint.  Savings $720 2.62 4.4 10 Other Electrical ‐  Controls Retrofit:  Head Bolt Heaters  Improve Manual Switching $387 $1,000 2.39 2.6 11 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T8‐3lamp, add  OS  * At next building re‐lamp,  or during upcoming  renovation, replace (46)  T8‐32 watt lamps with 46  FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $681 $1,814 2.32 2.7 12 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: AL Office  and Common Area:  T12‐4lamp, add OS  ** Replace with 10 FLUOR  (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Saver lamps  and Leviton “Zipline” kit  with Instant StdElectronic  and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new  Occupancy Sensor  $641 + $100 Maint.  Savings $2,800 2.22 4.4 13 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐4lamp,  add OS  Replace with 35 FLUOR (4)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $2,239 + $350 Maint.  Savings $10,600 1.87 4.7 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 37   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 14 Setback Thermostat:  Administration, staff  and maintenance  offices  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Administration, staff  and maintenance offices  space.  $639 $4,800 1.71 7.5 15 Setback Thermostat:  Enclosed Walkway  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 60.0 deg F for  the Enclosed Walkway  space.  $25 $200 1.58 8.2 16 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Common  Area: CFL‐2lamp,  plug‐in, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $50 $200 1.55 4 17 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐2lamp, U‐ type, OS added to  circuit under  previous EEM  Replace with 17 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $464 + $170 Maint.  Savings $3,740 1.42 8.1 18 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐2lamp, OS  not needed  Replace with 3 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $82 + $30 Maint.  Savings $660 1.42 8.1 19 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: AL Office  and Common Area:  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 325 FLUOR  (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Saver lamps  and Leviton “Zipline” kit  with Instant StdElectronic  and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new  Occupancy Sensor  $9,051 + $3,250 Maint.  Savings $74,500 1.39 8.2 20 Setback Thermostat:  Adult Day Care  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 60.0 deg F for  the Adult Day Care space.  $158 $1,500 1.36 9.5 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 38   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 21 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐6lamp, add OS  Replace with 18 FLUOR (6)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver  lamps and (2)  Leviton “Zipline” kits with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $925 + $180 Maint.  Savings $7,380 1.26 8 22 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐6lamp,  add OS  Replace with 8 FLUOR (6)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and (2)  Leviton “Zipline” kits with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $710 + $80 Maint.  Savings $5,530 1.19 7.8 23 Other Electrical ‐  Power Retrofit:  Desktop Computers  used by staff  Replace at EOL with 33  Laptops  $1,683 $6,600 1.17 3.9 24 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐4lamp, add OS  Replace with 20 FLUOR (4)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $723 + $200 Maint.  Savings $6,600 1.07 9.1 25 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐6lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 8 FLUOR (6)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $596 + $80 Maint.  Savings $5,280 1.07 8.9 26 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐400, Parking lot  poles  Replace with 6 LED 150W  Module StdElectronic  $765 + $300 Maint.  Savings $12,000 1.05 15.7 27 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐1, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 10 FLUOR T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $159 + $100 Maint.  Savings $2,100 1.04 13.2 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 39   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 28 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: AL Office  and Common Area:  T12‐1lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 6 FLUOR T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $96 + $60 Maint.  Savings $1,260 1.04 13.2 29 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Storage:  T12‐2lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 4 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic  $17 + $40 Maint.  Savings $480 1.00 29 30 Setback Thermostat:  Lobby's, day rooms,  activity rooms,  dining room  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 60.0 deg F for  the Lobby's, day rooms,  activity rooms, dining  room space.  $354 $4,800 0.95 13.6 31 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Apts: T12‐ 4lamp, add OS  Replace with 20 FLUOR (4)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $853 + $200 Maint.  Savings $8,800 0.92 10.3 32 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐2lamp, U‐ type, add OS  Replace with 2 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Instant StdElectronic  and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new  Occupancy Sensor  $62 + $20 Maint.  Savings $640 0.89 10.3 33 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐250, Wall pack  *** Replace with 10 LED  80W Module StdElectronic  $871 + $500 Maint.  Savings $20,000 0.81 23 34 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐2lamp, U‐type,  add OS  Replace with 6 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $108 + $60 Maint.  Savings $1,720 0.75 15.9 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 40   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 35 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 60 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $1,079 + $600 Maint.  Savings $17,650 0.73 16.4 36 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 11 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $198 + $110 Maint.  Savings $3,420 0.69 17.3 37 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Storage:  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 21 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $232 + $210 Maint.  Savings $5,420 0.69 23.4 38 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit:  Offices/Maint Shops:  T12‐1lamp, add OS  Replace with 9 FLUOR T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $95 + $90 Maint.  Savings $2,340 0.61 24.5 39 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  HPS‐150, Wall pack  Replace with 16 LED 50W  Module StdElectronic  $821 + $800 Maint.  Savings $32,000 0.60 39 40 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Kitchen:  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with FLUOR (2) T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $22 + $10 Maint.  Savings $420 0.59 18.9 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 41   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 41 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Apts: CFL‐ 1lamp, plug‐in, add  OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $378 $4,000 0.58 10.6 42 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐2lamp,  add OS  Replace with 2 FLUOR (2)  T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $60 + $20 Maint.  Savings $1,040 0.54 17.3 43 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Storage: T8‐ 2lamp, add OS  At next building re‐lamp,  or during upcoming  renovation, replace (3) T8‐ 32 watt lamps with 3  FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $19 $218 0.52 11.7 44 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T12‐1lamp,  add OS  Replace with 6 FLUOR T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $107 + $60 Maint.  Savings $2,460 0.52 23.1 45 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Kitchen: T8‐ 3lamp, add OS  At next building re‐lamp,  or during upcoming  renovation, replace (18)  T8‐32 watt lamps with 18  FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $113 $1,362 0.51 12.1 Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 42   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 46 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Storage:  T12‐1lamp, add OS  Replace with 5 FLUOR T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐ Saver Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with  Instant StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $31 + $50 Maint.  Savings $1,450 0.43 46.5 47 Air Tightening: Two  sets of double  exterior doors on  west wall of dining  room  Perform air sealing to  reduce air leakage by 4000  cfm at 75 Pascals.  $308 $7,380 0.37 24 48 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: AL Office  and Common Area:  CFL‐2lamp, plug‐in,  add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $103 $2,000 0.32 19.4 49 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: T8‐2lamp, add  OS  At next building re‐lamp,  or during upcoming  renovation, replace (1) T8‐ 32 watt lamps with FLUOR  (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W  Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $10 $206 0.29 21.2 50 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Common  Area: CFL‐1lamp,  plug‐in, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $260 $6,200 0.26 23.9 51 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Apt:  Incandescent, add  OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $308 $17,200 0.11 55.8 The following EEM’s were calculated outside of AkWarm‐C and may not consider the  interactive affect of any other EEM’ above, unless specifically stated otherwise.  They are  not in order of priority or savings, relative to the EEM’s above. Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Chugiak Senior Center Page 43   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) Appe ndix  D‐1  Plumbing Fixtures:  (71) W.C., (74)  lavatories, (63)  showers and (63)  bathtubs  Replace shower heads and  lavatory  fixtures with low  flow versions; replace   lavatory valves with  proximity sensing on/off  controls, retrofit  residential toilet valves  with dual flush valves,  replace urinals with ultra‐ low flow and proximity  sensing controls  Appe ndix  D‐2  Motor replacements Replace 2 motors with  premium efficiency motors  now, replace 1 motor with  premium efficiency motors  at EOL; see Table 4  Appendix D‐2 for details.  $213 $1,200 3.5 5.6 Appe ndix  D‐5  Energy efficiency  upgrades in Kitchen  Remodel    See appendix D‐5  for additional  detail        TOTAL $38,296 + $8,015 Maint. Savings $326,475 1.28 8.5   Sample translations of the nomenclature used above: * (item 11) During the next building re-lamp or during the upcoming renovation (i.e. when the lamps were to be replaced anyway, so the cost is the incremental difference between a 32 watt and 28 watt lamp, estimated to be $3 ea), replace the (46) T8-32 watt lamps with T8-28 watt “energy saver” lamps; the fixture has a standard electronic ballast; also replace the existing manual switches with the appropriate number and type of occupancy sensors. Occupancy sensors cost from $200 -$300 ea installed. ** (item 12) Replace the (10) existing sets of T12, 2-lamp “tombstone” end caps and magnetic ballast with (10) sets of T8 end caps and instant start ballasts using a kit such as Leviton “Zipline” (estimated cost $200/kit installed); replace T12-40 watt lamps with T8-28 watt energy saver lamps (estimated cost $10/lamp). Replace the manual switches with the appropriate number and type of occupancy sensors. There is an anticipated savings of $10/fixture/year as no maintenance should be required for 7-10 years after the fixture upgrade. *** (item 33) Replace existing (10) exterior MH 250watt wall packs with (10) 80 watt LED wall packs with standard electronic ballast. Wall pack is a type of exterior light fixture.       ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  AkWarmCalc Ver  2.2.0.3, Energy Lib 5/18/2012    ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 44 of 73 Appendix C – Equipment Schedules ALL SCHEDULES COMPILED FROM PLANS OR ON‐SITE NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION,  WHERE ACCESSIBLE     e= estimated   COOLING AND HEATING ROOFTOP UNIT SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL FAN CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  SF‐1 Pace SCF‐37 A 360 .17/115/1 located in Boiler room #5;  serves Sr Center  SF‐2 Pace SCF‐79A 780 .25/115/1 located in Boiler room #3  & #4; serves Sr Center  SF‐2A  Pace SCF‐79A  780 .25/115/1  located in Boiler room #5;  serves Admininstation  building  SF‐2B  Pace SCF‐79A  780 .25/115/1  located in generator  room, with B‐1 & B‐2,  serves admin building  MUA‐1  (RTU) Rupp CFA‐18  6400 5/200/3; 85%  700 MBH, gas fired, not  operational; interlocked  to EH‐2  MAU‐2  (RTU) King DFOC 118A HRS e6400 5/200/3; 81.6 530 MBH, gas fired;  interlocked to EH‐1  AHU‐1  Pace SCF‐114A  2600 2/120/1  located in boiler room B‐ 6 & B‐7, serves Assisted  living  AHU‐1A  Springfield HQ‐45‐AHU‐3300  3300 2/208/3; 84%  located in boiler room B‐ 6 & B‐7, serves assisted  living  AHU‐2  Pace SCF‐114A  2000 .75/120/1  located in boiler room B‐ 6 & B‐7, serves Assisted  living; ventilation only, no  RA; not used in summer  months  BOILER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL    MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  B‐1 Weil McLain PFG‐6   12A/120/1  305 MBH input, 247 MBH  output, 81% efficient, gas  fired, cast iron sectional  boilers (circa 2010);  serves Admin bldg  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 45 of 73 B‐2 Weil McLain PFG‐6   12A/120/1  305 MBH input, 247 MBH  output, 81% efficient, gas  fired, cast iron sectional  boilers (circa 2010);  serves Admin bldg  B‐3 Weil McLain PFG‐8   12A/120/1  427 MBH input, 346 MBH  output, 81% efficiency,  gas fired, cast iron  sectional boiler  (circa  2006); serves Sr Center  B‐4 Weil McLain PFG‐8   12A/120/1  427 MBH input, 346 MBH  output, 81% efficiency,  gas fired, cast iron  sectional boiler  (circa  2006); serves Sr Center  B‐5 Burnham 8098W      528 MBH input, 422 MBH  output, 80% efficient, gas  fired, cast iron sectional  boiler (nearing EOL ‐ circa  1983); serves Assisted  living   B‐6 Weil McLain 588  5A/120/1  controls .75/230/1  1357 MBH input, 1084  MBH output, 80%  efficient, gas fired, cast  iron sectional boilers  (circa 1999); serves  Assisted living  B‐7 Weil McLain 588  5A/120/1  controls .75/230/1  1357 MBH input, 1084  MBH output, 80%  efficient, gas fired, cast  iron sectional boilers  (circa 1999)  EXHAUST FAN SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  EH‐1 Trane FA95B3217       4640  3/230/3;  81.5%  rooftop EF; interlocked  with MAU‐2  EH‐2 Trane FUBA24500A3 3850 2/230/3  rooftop EF; interlocked  with MAU‐1 (not  operating)  EH‐3 60" hood in kitchen; no access to motor     appears not in use  EF‐3 Nutone 8832 80 e85W/115/1    EF‐4 Nutone 8810 70 e85W/115/1    EF‐X1 unknown 300 e.17/115/1  plug in; used in kitchen,  runs continuously  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 46 of 73 EF‐X2 unknown 1200 e250/115/1  appears not in use, but  on "auto"  EF‐X3 unknown 170 e85W/115/1  exhaust fan in janitorial;  on switch  EF‐X4 no nameplate 25 .01/115/1  located in compressor  room  EF‐X5  Toilet room exhaust fans e100 e85W/115/1  1 each in 63 apartments  plus 10 more in toilet  rooms  DESTRATIFICATION FAN SCHEDULE  QUANTITY MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  2 Leading Edge or equivalent 150 e60W115/1 Assisted living lounge  43 Hunter fan/light or equivalent 150 250W/115/1  Every Sr. Center  apartment  1 Leading Edge or equivalent 150 e60W115/1 Administration skylight  PUMP SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GPM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  PMP‐2 Grundfos UPS 65‐160 54 1.5/208/3  located in Boiler room #3  & #4; serves Sr. Center  PMP‐2A Grundfos UPS 65‐160 54 1.5/208/3 alternate  PMP‐X Grundfos UP 25‐64 SF e5 180W/115/1  DHW re‐circ pump, runs  continuously  PMP‐X1 Grundfos UP 10‐16 e5 .23A/115/1  DHW re‐circ pump, on  timer but runs  continuously  PMP‐X2 Grundfos UP 43‐75 e15 215W/115/1  boiler glycol assist pump,  B‐5  PMP‐1 Grundfos UPS 50‐160 54 1.5/208/3  located in Boiler room B‐ 1 & B‐2, serves Admin  bldg  PMP‐2 Grundfos UPS 50‐160 54 1.5/208/3 alternate  PMP‐3 Grundfos UMC 65‐80 e40 540W/208/3  located in boiler room B‐ 5 & B‐6, serves Assisted  living apartments; on  "hand"  PMP‐4 Grundfos UMC 65‐80 e40 485W/208/3 alternate, also on "hand"  PMP‐5 Grundfos UMC 50‐80 e30 310W/208/3  supplies AHU‐2 coil, not  used in summer; on  "hand"  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 47 of 73 CP‐1 Grundfos UPS 30‐80 e25 280W/208/3  Located in B‐6 & B‐7  boiler room; supplies  coils in AHU‐1  UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  UH‐1 Modine HS18 S01 315 .04/115/1  located in Boiler room #3  & #4 in Sr Center  UH‐2 Modine HS18 S01 315 .04/115/1  located in B‐5 boiler  room in Sr. Center  UH‐3 Trane UHSA038 815 .05/115/1  located in generator  room  UH‐4 Dunham Bush e815 e.17/115/1  located in B‐6 & B‐7  boiler room  UH‐5 Sterling H8‐388; 26.1 MBH 550 .02/115/1  located in B‐6 & B‐7  boiler room  UH‐6 Trane UHSA 038 815 .05/115/1 located in shop  UH‐7 Trane UHSA 038 815 .05/115/1 located in shop garage  UH‐8 Trane UHSA 038 815 .05/115/1 located in ceramics studio             CUH‐1 Trane B12 AO 02; 7.5 MBH e105 e.1/115/1  Vestibule, main entry  ("pegged" at 90F)  CUH‐2 Trane B12 AO 02; 7.5 MBH e105 e.1/115/1  Vestibule, SW entry Sr  Center  CUH‐3 Trane N46A002; 19 MBH e800 e.1/115/1  Vestibule, SE entry Sr  Center  CUH‐4 Dunham Bush; e19 MBH e800 e.1/115/1  North stairway, Admin  building  CUH‐5 eTrane N46A002; 19 MBH e800 e.1/115/1  Vestibule, N entry Admin  building  CUH‐6 Dunham Bush 92K108; e19 MBH e800 .035/115/1  Breezeway to Assisted  living  CUH‐7 Dunham Bush 92K108; e19 MBH e800 .035/115/1  Outer Vestibule, SE  Assisted living  CUH‐8 Dunham Bush 92K108; e19 MBH e800 .035/115/1  inner Vestibule, SE  Assisted living  CUH‐9 Dunham Bush 92K108; e19 MBH e800 .035/115/1  SW vestibule, Assisted  living          ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 48 of 73 HOT WATER HEATER SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GALLONS  NUMBER OF  ELEMENTS ELEMENT SIZE  HWH‐1 PVI 40N 250A‐G 250 2A/115/1  gas fired, 399 MBH input,  479 gph recovery; 120 F  set point  HWH‐2 Rheem URNG1207G00608 100 .3A/120/1  gas fired, 200 MBH input,  194 gph recovery; 2.1%  standby loss; 125 F set  point; serves kitchen and  apartments  HWH‐3 Rheem VG 0303209945 30 2  4500 watts each, serves  Kitchen dishwasher; used  all day long  PLUMBING FIXTURES   SYMBOL FIXTURE GPF QUANTITY REMARKS    W.C. 1.6 4 manually operated    W.C. 1.4 67 manually operated    Lavatory ‐ 74 manually operated   Showers  e63 manually operated   Bathtubs  e63 manually operated        EQUIPMENT SCHEDULES  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Clothes Washer 12    1 new; each used 4  hrs/day all week    Clothes Dryer 13    gas; 4 new; each used 4  hrs/day all week    Salon (commercial) Hair Dryer 4 760w each used 7.5 hrs/wk  plug load Dayton HVAC compressor 1 1.5/115/1  backup controls  compressor, located in  Boiler room #3 & #4 in Sr.  Center    Elevator #1 1 20/208/3  nameplate not accessible;  used 292 hrs/yr (6x/hr, 7  days/wk)    Elevator #2 1 15/208/3; 75%  used 146 hrs/yr (3x/hr, 7  days/wk)  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 49 of 73   Fessler Compressor 1 5/208/3;e75% HVAC controls    PC's 43 200W/115/1    KITCHEN EQUIPMENT  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Dishwasher Model AF‐3D 1 1.5/115/1  5 minute cycle,  commercial   plug load Dishwasher ‐ Whirlpool 1   resiential type  plug load Large Hobart Mixer H600 1 2.2Kw/230/1 used 1 hr/month    Vulcan Steamer 1 300w/120/1  125 MBH, gas fired, used  all day long  plug load Hobart Slicer 2912 1 .5/120/1 30 min per month use    GROEN Pot Heater TDP/7 1 10.8Kw/208/1 used 6 hrs/wk    Wolf grill 1    assume 80,000 BTY, runs  3 hrs/day, standing pilot     Wolf Gas Stove; 8 burner; standing  pilot 1    assume 40,000  BTU/burner, runs 4  burners, 6 hrs/day;  standing pilot    Wolf single burner, gas fired 1    assume 40,000 BTU, runs  3 hrs/day    Vulcan Convection Oven 1 .5/115/1  assume 300 MBH, used 4  hrs/day  plug load Kitchen Maid 1        Delfield Refrigeration Table 1    not in use, used as  serving table only    American Range Deep Fryer 1    assume 150 MBH, used 9  hrs/wk    Imperial Grill 1    gas w/standing pilot; runs  1x/month    Delfield Hot Serve Table V14160‐32 1 4Kw/208/1  runs 4.5 hrs/day, 7  days/wk  plug load Delfield Cold Serve Table V18660‐P32 1 920E/115/1      Scotsman Ice Maker CME256AS‐1D 1 1460W/115/1    plug load Duke Heat Table 1 2Kw/120/1 not in use  plug load Duke Cooling Table 1 690w/115/1 lunch only     Kalt Walk‐in Refrigerator 1 .04/115/1  Russel evaporator AL‐26‐ 92; temp 38F  686W/208/3 Copeland Compressor     Kalt Walk‐in Freezer 1 .06/115/1  Russel evaporator AL‐35‐ 96; temp 2F  1414W/208/3 Copelametic Compressor              PLUG LOAD SUMMARY  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 50 of 73 SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Coffee Machine ‐ NesCafe 3 5760w      Large Printer 3 1200w      Personal Printer 12 85w      Flat Panel TV 5 450w      Milk Dispenser 1        Microwave 50 1000w      Drink Dispenser ‐ Cornelius 2 750w      Ice Cream Machine ‐ SaniServe 1        Cash Register 3        Commercial Espresso Machine 1        Air Purifier 2        Popcorn Machine 1      Fan 7        Soup Hot Pot 1        Large Microwave 1 1200w      Toaster 5        Treadmill 2 1440w      Dewalt Charger 2        Scale 1        Organ 1        Vending Machine 2        MagniSite 1        Liftmaster OH door openers 2 .33/115/1      Dayton Hoist 1 e.25/115/1    LIGHTING SCHEDULE  FIXTURE TYPE DESCRIPTION LAMPS MOUNTING  NUMBER WATTS TYPE HEIGHT Wall pack HPS ‐ Exterior, magnetic ballast 1 150 surface 20'  Recess can Metal Halide ‐ interior, magnetic ballast 1 150 recess soffit  Pole Light Pole mounted, HPS, Exterior 1 100 Pole 30'  Sconce CFL, Exterior 1 18 wall 7'  Sconce Incandescent, Exterior 1 60 wall 7'  T8‐2 Florescent, T8 lamps, electronic ballast 2 32 surface ceiling  T8‐3 Florescent, T8 lamps, electronic ballast 3 32 surface ceiling  T12‐1 Florescent, T12 lamps, magnetic ballast 1 40 surface ceiling  T12‐2 Florescent, T12 lamps, magnetic ballast 2 40 surface ceiling  T12‐2 Florescent, T12 lamps, 96" length, magnetic ballast 2 40 surface ceiling  T12‐2 Florescent, T12, U‐type lamps, electronic ballast 2 40 recess ceiling  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 51 of 73 T12‐4 Florescent T12, magnetic ballast 4 40 surface ceiling  T12‐6 Florescent T12, magnetic ballast 6 40 recess ceiling  Recess can CFL, plug‐in, electronic ballast 2 32 pendant ceiling  Recess can CFL, electronic ballast 2 18 recess ceiling  Recess can CFL,  electronic ballast 1 13 recess ceiling  Incandescent floor, table and desk lamps 1 60 surface 4'  Pendant Metal Halide ‐ interior, magnetic ballast 1 50 hanging 8'  LARGE MOTOR SCHEDULE  Motor use  & location  (5 HP or  larger) HP/Volts/Ph   Existing  Efficiency  Premium  Efficiency Estimated  annual  usage  (hrs)  Annual  Savings Burn‐out  payback  (yrs/cost)  Replacement  payback  (yrs/cost)  REPLACE WITH PREMIUM EFFIECINCY MOTOR NOW  MAU‐1 (not  currently  functional) 5/230/3 81.6% 89.50% 3832 $137.76 1.1/$150 4.4/$600  MAU‐2 5/230/3 85.0% 89.50% 3832 $  75.33  2/$150    8/$600   REPLACE WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR AT EOL  Utility and  Controls  Compressor  (Fessler)  5/208/3 75.0% 89.50% 520 $ 37.33  4/$150 16.1/$600  NOT CONSIDERED FOR REPLACEMENT  Submersible  Hydraulic  Elevator #2  Pump   15/208/3 e91% 93.00% 146   Insufficient operating hours to consider  replacement now; all new 3 phase  motors are required to be premium  efficiency so they will be upgraded at  EOL  Elevator  motor #1 20/208/3 e91% 93.00% 292  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  Hydraulic elevator motors only used in "up" mode  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 52 of 73 Appendix D Additional, Building-Specific EEM details Appendix D-1: Plumbing fixtures: Any urinals should be retrofitted or be replaced with ultra low flow models. The lavatory faucets and urinals should be retrofitted with proximity sensing on/off controls. All toilets in this building are 1.4 or 1.6 gallons per flush with manual valves, they 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 ultra low flow urinal (1 pint to ½ gallon per flush) can save up to 66% of water used, and typically pays back within 3 years, depending on usage. 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 or valve 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. www.dualflushpro.com ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 53 of 73 Appendix D-2: Premium Efficiency Motor upgrades 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 two instances in this building of cost effective motor replacement with premium efficiency motors, prior to burn out. This EEM is also included in Appendix B-7. Table 4 – Large Motor Listing Motor use  & location  (5 HP or  larger) HP/Volts/Ph   Existing  Efficiency  Premium  Efficiency  Estimated  annual  usage  (hrs)  Annual  Savings  Burn‐out  payback  (yrs/cost)  Replacement  payback  (yrs/cost)  REPLACE WITH PREMIUM EFFIECINCY MOTOR NOW  MAU‐1 (not  currently  functional) 5/230/3 81.6% 89.50% 3832 $ 137.76 1.1/$150 4.4/$600  MAU‐2 5/230/3 85.0% 89.50% 3832 $   75.33  2/$150    8/$600   REPLACE WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR AT EOL  Utility and  Controls  Compressor  (Fessler)  5/208/3 75.0% 89.50% 520 $  37.33  4/$150 16.1/$600  NOT CONSIDERED FOR REPLACEMENT  Submersible  Hydraulic  Elevator #2  Pump   15/208/3 e91% 93.00% 146   Insufficient operating hours to consider  replacement now; all new 3 phase  motors are required to be premium  efficiency so they will be upgraded at  EOL  Elevator  motor #1 20/208/3 e91% 93.00% 292  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  Hydraulic elevator motors only used in "up" mode  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 54 of 73 Appendix D-3: Additional EEM’S considered but not recommended Replacement of 7 boilers with 94% efficient condensing boilers at estimated cost of $250,000, annual savings calculated by AkWarm-C was approximately $4,200. Condensing boilers have a 15-20 year life, versus a cast iron sectional boiler with a 30-35 year life, so the SIR is .25 and the simple payback is 44 years for the group – hence replacement now is not recommended. However, replacement with 94% condensing boilers at the current boiler’s EOL is recommended. Installation of occupancy sensor set-back thermostats in independent living and assisted living apartments: The auditor was informed that the building residents typically like very warm rooms and area adverse to night time temperature setbacks. Despite this, an analysis was performed to understand the cost and savings that would result from night time and unoccupied setbacks. Retrofitting the thermostats in the 63 apartments with occupancy sensing, programmable thermostats similar to the samples shown in Appendix E was considered and the savings calculated through AkWarm-C. The thermostats chosen sense a door opening, deduce when an occupant is in the room (even when sleeping) and then activate the thermostat to allow the temperature to reach its set point. They are also programmable for various set points on a 7-day schedule. The estimated cost per installed thermostat was $600, for a total $37,800 building cost, the annual savings were calculated to be $1,495; the simple payback period of 25 years was deemed to be too long to justify the EEM, especially considering the resident’s concerns. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 55 of 73 Appendix D-4: Variable Frequency Drives (VFD’s) If outfitted with a VFD and a programmable input device (PID) which responds to a process parameter such as duct pressure or temperature for an AHU or suction or discharge pressure on a pump, 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. By necessity, fan motors and pumps have to be sized for the worst case load scenario, but under normal operating conditions (80-90% of the time), need only be operating at 30%-70% of their full load. VFD’s are recommended for larger, 3-phase motors that are under varying load and duty cycles, such as air handlers, glycol circulation pumps and reciprocating compressor motors. The 5 HP fan motors in MAU-2 and MAU-2 in this building are recommended to be retro- fitted with VFD’s. These motor loads and consumption were evaluated using software called, “Energy Predictor”, provided by Yaskawa, a manufacturer of VFD’s; excerpts from the detailed software reports are found below. It was assumed that these two motors had been replaced with premium efficiency versions, per Appendix D-2 above, before the addition of VFD’s. A 69% reduction in electrical consumption is predicted by the Yaskawa software for these fan motors; these figure were input into AkWarm-C as a reduction in power consumption in the heating section; the resulting savings are included in Appendix B-7. Note that the percentage reduction in consumption predicted by the Yaskawa software was used in AkWarm-C, rather than the actual KWh reduction energy reduction. Overstated savings: It is important to note that if other EEM’s are also incorporated, these savings will be 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. The Yaksawa reports follow: ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 56 of 73 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 57 of 73 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 58 of 73 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 59 of 73 Appendix D-5: Commercial kitchen remodel considerations Before new kitchen equipment is finalized, an energy auditor should be retained to work with the kitchen designer to specify equipment with the lowest life cycle cost (which includes purchase and lifetime operating costs). This analysis may require that certain existing equipment be instrumented and data recorded for its actual usage and consumption over a 30 day period. Using this recorded data and after performing adequate research, a thorough evaluation of the most current kitchen equipment efficiencies compared to existing equipment efficiencies can be made, and the trade-offs on the incremental cost & savings for each piece of equipment can be calculated. At a minimum, the following areas/appliances/technologies should be evaluated before the scheduled kitchen remodel is undertaken. NG cooking equipment: The NG consuming cooking appliances in the kitchen are estimated (by AkWarm-C) to consume 5987 ccf/yr, or $5,628 in NG operating costs. In addition to operating costs, there are an estimated 13 standing pilot lights on the Wolf 8-burner cooktop, the 4-burner grill and the single burner Wolf pot heater. This type of pilot light uses approximately 1500 BTU/hr. Total annual NG consumption by each pilot light is 13.1 MMBTU or $105/yr; these 13 pilot lights total 170 MMBTU, or $1,365/year. All of this equipment should have electronic ignition. New Wolf commercial gas cooktop products are not offered with electronic ignition and they do not sell a retrofit kit. Garland commercial products, on the other hand, are sold with electronic ignition. Consider operational changes to eliminate the single-burner Wolf pot heater and the electric Groen pot heater. If it can’t be eliminated, the Groen electric pot heater should be replaced with a gas fired unit. It is not clear whether the American deep fryer has electronic ignition or a standing pilot; if the latter it true, it should be replaced with a product with electronic ignition. Refrigeration: The Kalt walk-in cooler and freezer, which uses Copeland compressors and Russell evaporators should be replaced with new, higher efficiency models. Older Kalt “boxes” (i.e. the freezer enclosure) were typically wood framed with insulation values form R-10 to R-20, newer “boxes” can be as high as R-30 to R-40. New compressors and evaporators can be as much as 50% more efficient than 10-20 year old versions. The Delfield cold and hot serve tables should also be evaluated against high efficiency versions. Exhaust hoods and make up air: It is assumed that this system will be re-designed by a qualified HVAC engineer as part of the renovation. All 3 phase motors should be premium efficiency and the system should utilize variable air volume (VAV) controlled by sensors in the exhaust hoods. The exhaust system should be re-balanced with VAV on the MAU. Replacement of the rooftop MAU with a higher efficiency furnace should be considered. Energy recovery from the kitchen exhaust air should also be considered. Hot Water: the electric hot water heater (HWH) dedicated to the kitchen dishwasher should be replaced with a tank-less, NG fired hot water heater. On a per BTU basis in Anchorage, the cost of NG is 20% of the cost of electricity, and although an electric HWH has a higher water heating efficiency (nearly 100%) than a small tank-less gas fired unit (approximately 80%-90%), there is still a cost savings approaching 400% for the gas fired unit. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 60 of 73 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, alarm or other control systems. Additionally, they can be easily re-configured as a building’s usage or occupancy pattern changes. Sample LMS systems and occupancy sensors follow. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 61 of 73 Appendix E – Lighting Controls Attaches directly to florescent light fixture ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 62 of 73 Appendix E – Lighting Controls Switch mounted occupancy sensor with daylight sensing ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 63 of 73 Appendix E – 7-Day Programmable digital thermostat with occupancy sensing, wireless receiver and door sensor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 64 of 73 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 65 of 73 Appendix E – Desk Plug Load Management Device ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 66 of 73 Appendix E – Headbolt Heater controls ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 67 of 73 $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Chugiak Senior Center ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Chugiak Senior Center ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kWh) Electric Cost ($) Appendix F – Benchmark Data ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 68 of 73 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form  PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION  Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date (mm/dd/yyyy) MOA Municipal  Government/Subdivision  03/21/12  Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Chugiak Senior Center   79,311  Building Type Community Population Year Built       Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip  22424 Birchwood Loop Rd Chugiak 99567‐6476  Contact Person  First Name Last  Name Middle Name Email Phone Brian O'Fallon     343‐4687 Mailing Address City State Zip         Primary  Operating  Hours  Monday‐ Friday  Saturday Sunday Holidays                   Average # of  Occupants  During  Operating  Hours                     ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 69 of 73 Buiding Size Input (sf) = 79,311 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 55,479.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 57,831 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh) 655,457 2009 Electric Cost ($) 86,657 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 ($) 0.00 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 7,784,975 2009 Total Energy Cost ($) 144,488 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 70.0 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 28.2 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 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 98.2 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 0.73 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 1.09 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 70 of 73 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 ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 1.82 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 56,510.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 50,867 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh) 625,022 2010 Electric Cost ($) 67,587 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 ($) 0 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 7,784,200 2010 Total Energy Cost ($) 118,454 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 71.3 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 26.9 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 71 of 73 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 98.1 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 0.64 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 0.85 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 ($/sf) 0.00 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 1.49 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 72 of 73 Natural Gas Btus/CCF =100,000 Month Start Date Consumption (CCF) Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm)  Jan‐09   5812 5812 $5,890  $0.00  Feb‐09 1/1/2009 5812 5812 $5,890  $1.01  Mar‐09 2/5/2009 6814 6814 $6,757  $0.99  Apr‐09 3/5/2009 5466 5466 $5,606  $1.03  May‐09 4/2/2009 4480 4480 $4,618  $1.03  Jun‐09 5/7/2009 3636 3636 $3,772  $1.04  Jul‐09 6/11/2009 2731 2731 $2,867  $1.05  Aug‐09 7/9/2011 2989 2989 $3,127  $1.05  Sep‐09 8/13/2009 2847 2847 $2,984  $1.05  Oct‐09 9/10/2009 3382 3382 $3,520  $1.04  Nov‐09 10/8/2009 5131 5131 $6,275  $1.22  Dec‐09 11/12/2009 6379 6379 $6,526  $1.02               Jan‐10 12/10/2009 7220 7220 $6,101  $0.85  Feb‐10 1/14/2010 7362 7362 $6,219  $0.84  Mar‐10 2/11/2010 5507 5507 $4,684  $0.85  Apr‐10 3/11/2010 5592 5592 $4,804  $0.86  May‐10 4/15/2010 4508 4508 $3,899  $0.86  Jun‐10 5/13/2010 3025 3025 $2,669  $0.88  Jul‐10 6/10/2010 2716 2716 $2,403  $0.88  Aug‐10 7/15/2010 2556 2556 $2,767  $1.08  Sep‐10 8/12/2010 3017 3017 $3,148  $1.04  Oct‐10 9/9/2010 3501 3501 $3,523  $1.01  Nov‐10 10/14/2010 4624 4624 $4,422  $0.96  Dec‐10 11/11/2010 6882 6882 $6,228  $0.90  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 55,479 55,479 $57,831     Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 56,510 56,510 $50,867     Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $0.96  Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.92  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA CHUGIAK SENIOR CENTER June 4, 2012 Page 73 of 73 Month  Consumption  (kWh)  Consumption (Therms) Total Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh)  Jan‐09 59783 2040.39379 $7,904  $0.13  Feb‐09 56637 1933.02081 $7,488  $0.13  Mar‐09 55064 1879.33432 $7,280  $0.13  Apr‐09 53490 1825.6137 $7,072  $0.13  May‐09 51918 1771.96134 $6,864  $0.13  Jun‐09 51130 1745.0669 $6,760  $0.13  Jul‐09 51328 1751.82464 $6,786  $0.13  Aug‐09 51918 1771.96134 $6,864  $0.13  Sep‐09 52704 1798.78752 $6,968  $0.13  Oct‐09 55064 1879.33432 $7,280  $0.13  Nov‐09 57424 1959.88112 $7,591  $0.13  Dec‐09 58997 2013.56761 $7,800  $0.13             Jan‐10 56809 1938.89117 $6,143  $0.11  Feb‐10 53871 1838.61723 $5,825  $0.11  Mar‐10 52372 1787.45636 $5,663  $0.11  Apr‐10 50872 1736.26136 $5,501  $0.11  May‐10 50434 1721.31242 $5,454  $0.11  Jun‐10 49684 1695.71492 $5,373  $0.11  Jul‐10 49435 1687.21655 $5,346  $0.11  Aug‐10 49747 1697.86511 $5,379  $0.11  Sep‐10 50059 1708.51367 $5,413  $0.11  Oct‐10 51934 1772.50742 $5,616  $0.11  Nov‐10 54184 1849.29992 $5,859  $0.11  Dec‐10 55621 1898.34473 $6,015  $0.11  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:    655457        22370.74741 $86,657    Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 625022 21332.00086 $67,587    Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $0.13  Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.11