Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC MOA Fairview Old New 2012-EE I F c O C J P Investm Fairview C combined Owner: The M Client: Alaska June 21, 2012 Project # CIR ment Gra Communit d Municipality of a Housing Fin 2 RI-ANC-CAEC ade Ene ty Recrea f Anchorage nance Corpora C-48/54 ergy Au ation Cent ation udit ter; Old annd New BBuildings ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER June 21, 2012 Page 2 of 68 Project # CIRI-ANC-CAEC-48/54 Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage Fairview Community Recreation Center, old and new buildings combined 1121 E 10th Ave Anchorage, AK 99501 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 FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER June 21, 2012 Page 3 of 68 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary 5 2. Audit and Analysis Background 16 3. Acknowledgements 18 4. Building Description & Function 19 5. Historic Energy Consumption 21 6. Interactive Effects of Projects 21 7. Loan Program 22 APPENDICES Appendix A: Photos 23 Appendix B: AkWarm-C Report 29 Appendix C: Equipment Schedules 36 Appendix D: Additional, Building-Specific EEM detail 41 Appendix E: Specifications supporting EEM’s 49 Appendix F: Benchmark Data 57 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER June 21, 2012 Page 4 of 68 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 FAIRVIEW COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER June 21, 2012 Page 5 of 68 1. Executive Summary Building Owner: Municipality of Anchorage 3640 East Tudor Anchorage, AK 99507 Building contact: Teri Desy Supervisor desytw@muni.org 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 SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 6 of 68 The site visit to this building occurred on April 23rd, 2012. The Fairview Community Recreation Center consists of two buildings joined by an enclosed walkway. The newer building is a two story structure with a basement. It houses a gymnasium, locker rooms, showers and storage on its basement floor, a commercial kitchen, several offices, a multi-purpose room and main lobby on its ground floor and an arts and crafts room, a dance studio, weight room, and mechanical and fan room on its second floor. The older building is a two story structure with no basement. It also houses a gymnasium, locker rooms, showers and a multipurpose room on its first floor and several offices, and a game and mechanical room on its second floor. The old building was constructed in 1973. A second story was added in 1985. The new building was constructed in 1984. No other major modifications are known to have been made. Among other considerations before commencing this report, the energy consumption of each building was examined individually (see Chart 1) to determine if there was a reason to audit and/or model each building separately. It was determined that there was not a good reason to separate them and they were treated operationally as one facility, so they were combined for the purposes of this audit. Energy Consumption and Benchmark Data Combined 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 409,056  $     39,909  403,448  $    43,006   Natural Gas ‐ Therms 34,618  $     35,838  33,142  $    30,247   Totals    $     75,747       $    73,253   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. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 7 of 68 0 50 100 150 200 Combined Buildings Fairview Old Building Fairview New Building Natural Gas EUI Electrical EUI Table 2 – 2009 & 2010 Average EUI and ECI    Fairview Recreation  Center (Combined  Buildings)  Mt. View  Recreation  Center  Spenard  Recreation  Center  Continental  US Average** Energy Use Index (EUI)  ‐ kBTU/SF 169 90 193 89‐102  Energy Cost Index (ECI)  ‐ $/SF $2.64 $1.49  $2.99   ‐  ** Data retrieved from the US Energy Administration database, these figures are for “Places of Public Assembly”, the most relevant category tracked by the USEA. Evaluation of energy consumption & benchmark data As observed in Table 1 above, consumption of natural gas (NG) and electricity decreased slightly, but held fairly consistent through 2009 and 2010. Table 2 shows that the subject building’s energy use per square foot falls between two very similar-use buildings, the Mt. View and Spenard Recreation Centers. As is typical for Alaskan buildings, a comparison to similar buildings in the continental US shows Alaska buildings have a significantly higher EUI – which is to be expected given the weather differences. The two Fairview building’s individual energy consumption per square foot, is shown in Chart 1 below: Chart 1 The individual consumptions are exactly what would be expected from an old, more poorly insulated building with a forced air furnace; that is, higher NG ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 8 of 68 consumption than the newer, more efficient , boiler and hydronics-heated building. Its lower occupancy and usage (than the new building) explains the slightly lower electrical consumption. An energy consumption comparison between two similar-use buildings – the Spenard and Mt. View Rec Centers, and the combined Fairview buildings follows: Chart 2 Chart 2 shows the subject building’s gas and electrical EUI compared to the two other similar use buildings. All three have a combination of offices, gymnasiums, game, craft and multi-purpose rooms; all three have similar operating hours, although their occupancy and use rates vary quite a bit. Having audited all three of these buildings, the auditor’s conclusions, based on Chart 2, follow: Natural gas consumption: The Spenard Rec Center’s NG consumption is an outlier – it is believed that there are HVAC controls problems that are contributing to the excessive NG usage – see that audit report for additional details. The Mt. View building does not utilize boilers and hydronic heating; instead, heat is provided by (12) gas fired, rooftop furnaces serving (12) building zones, and thermostats are setback at night and furnaces turned off when the zone is un-occupied. These are believed to be the reasons for its lower NG consumption. Electrical consumption: Based on Chart 2, the subject building’s electrical consumption is higher than both of the other buildings. The auditor attributes this to two factors: 0 50 100 150 200 Fairview Recreation Center (Combined Buildings) Mt. View Recreation Center Spenard Recreation Center Natural Gas EUI Electrical EUI ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 9 of 68 - The lighting in the subject building is almost entirely T12 fixtures with magnetic ballasts while both of the other buildings (prior to the lighting upgrade in the Spenard building) utilize recessed plug-in CFL’s and T8 fixtures with magnetic ballasts. - The HOA switch (see photos in Appendix A) on AHU-1 is on “hand”, which means that the 20 HP fan motor is running 24/7/365. It is not known if this was the case during the 2009/2010 benchmark period, if it was, then this is another contributor to the excessive electrical consumption. The recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM’s) that follow in this report, identify ways to bring the subject building’s NG and electric EUI’s closer to the Mt. View building. Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures Various EEM’s have been analyzed for this building to determine if they would provide energy savings with reasonably good payback periods and to address the issues mentioned directly above. EEM’s 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 The EEM’s considered for this facility are detailed in the attached AkWarm-C Detail 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-2) 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 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 10 of 68 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 5 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.) SAUNA CONTROLS The two sauna’s in this building are on when the building is operating, which is 70 hours per week; they are estimated to be consuming electricity for 66% of that time, which is 32,918 KWh, or $3,950 annually in electricity. It is recommended to install a temporary occupancy sensor (see Appendix E) to determine the highest usage periods, then either add a 7-day timer to the sauna controls, or lock them and have management turn the units on and off at appropriate times of the day. For purposes of estimating savings, it is assumed that usage can be reduced by an additional 33% with little disruption, thereby saving $1,720/year. See Appendix B-3. Sauna Control EEM: Estimated cost $ 1,000 Annual Savings $ 1,720 Payback 7 months B.) REFRIGERATION & REFRIGERATED VENDING MACHINES There are two refrigerated beverage vending machines, two freezers and a residential type refrigerator in this building. It is recommended to replace the two freezers and refrigerator at their EOL with Energy Star versions and to add a VendingMiser (see www.vendingmiser.com) to each refrigerated beverage vending machine. These EEM’s are found in Appendix B-3, 6, 7 & 11. Combined refrigeration EEM’s: Estimated cost (incremental difference for the two freezers & refrigerator, plus two VendingMisers) $ 825 Annual Savings $ 457 Payback 1.8 years ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 11 of 68 C.) SETBACK THERMOSTATS It is recommended to replace all of the existing low voltage adjustable thermostats with 7-day digital programmable thermostats. All thermostats should be programed with night time and unoccupied setback temperatures of 55F. Appendices B-2, 18 and 31 provide detail for this EEM. Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s: Estimated cost (excluding the CO2 sensing thermostats in “E” below) $ 12,500 Annual Savings $ 3,970 Payback 3.2 years D.) MOTOR REPLACEMENT WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY Of the five motors in this facility that are 5 HP or larger, only one (the 5 HP motor in AHU-2) had a nameplate that was accessible to identify NEMA rated efficiencies. (see Appendix C for motor schedule). Based on the age of AHU-1, an assumed NEMA efficiency rating of 91% was used for the calculations in Table 4 in Appendix D-3. Based on this, both of the motors in AHU-1 and AHU-2 are recommended to be replaced at their EOL (burnout) with premium efficiency motors. See Appendix D-3. Motor replacement EEM: Estimated cost (incremental difference for premium versus standard) $ 650 Annual Savings $ 186 Payback 3.5 years E.) HVAC SYSTEM, SETBACK THERMOSTATS, CARBON DIOXIDE SENSING & VARIABLE FREQENCY DRIVES (VFD’s) Boilers: Condensing boilers have thermal efficiencies of 94%, and can be modulated down to 20% as heat loads are reduced. Additionally, multiple boilers can be connected in series and modulated to stay within their optimum operating ranges. It is recommended to ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 12 of 68 replace the existing boilers at their EOL, with high efficiency condensing boilers. Because condensing boilers are not yet available in the large sizes of the current boilers, four are required to replace the two existing boilers. Additional plumbing and piping costs are included in the estimated costs. See Appendix B-15. VFD’s: It is recommended to add VFD’s to the 5 HP and 20 HP motors in AHU-1 and AHU-2. See Appendix D-4 for additional detail on the energy efficiencies resulting from the use of VFD’s. See Appendix B-9. CO2 Sensing Thermostats: The air handlers are currently controlled by timers. It is recommended to replace (3) appropriate thermostats in the building with 7-day programmable versions that have CO2 sensing capability, and control the building ventilation based on CO2 levels rather than on a time schedule. The cost for these thermostats and sensors is estimated to be $2000 each, installed. The annual savings was calculated by reducing the OSA in AkWarm-C by 20%. See Appendix B-9 for detail and Appendix E for sample specifications for this type of thermostat and sensor. HVAC combined EEM’s: Estimated cost $ 58,182 Annual savings $ 11,686 Payback 5 years F.) DESKTOP COMPUTERS Desktop PC’s consume between 200 and 300 watts when in use. Laptops consume between 50 and 100 watts when in use. It is recommended to replace the 7 desktop PC’s with laptops at their EOL. The incremental difference in cost is estimated to be $200 each and although the payback is approaching the life expectancy of a laptop, the recommendation is still made. See Appendix B-19. Personal Computer EEM: Estimated cost $ 1,401 Annual savings $ 321 Payback 4.4 years ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 13 of 68 G.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS With very few exceptions, the lighting fixtures and controls in this building have not been upgraded. It is recommended to perform a complete building upgrade, despite the relatively long (9.1 year) payback. If the extended payback period is unacceptable, an alternate recommendation would be to forgo upgrading any lighting in the old building, as its occupancy is considerably less than the new building (and consequently paybacks are longer since the lights are not used as much), this alternative is shown in Table 4 below: Table 4    Estimated  Cost  Annual  Savings  Payback  (years)  Implementation of all EEM's $142,040 $15,501 9.1  Without upgrading any of the old  building lighting and small  storage spaces (occupancy  sensors)      $106,999        $12,336 8.7      The full building upgrade recommendation includes the following: Energy Saver lamps: At the next building re-lamp, it is recommended to replace all 32 watt T8 lamps with 28 watt energy saver lamps. There is a 2.9% reduction in light output but a 12% reduction in energy consumption. Typically the 2.9% reduction is not noticeable and the sample room light levels measured all had adequate light levels. Occupancy Sensors: It is recommended to add occupancy sensors to all rooms. Occupancy sensors cannot be used with the existing metal halide (MH) lighting HID fixtures: There are high pressure sodium (HPS) and MH exterior fixtures and MH interior fixtures which should be replaced with LED’s outside and T5 high bay lighting inside. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 14 of 68 This EEM summarizes Appendix B-4, B-7 through 9, B12 & 13, B- 15, B-17 & 18, B-20 through 30 and B-32 through 34. See Appendix E for more information on occupancy sensors, and energy saver 28 watt lamps. Combined Lighting and Lighting Control EEM’s: Estimated cost $ 142,040 Annual Savings $ 15,501 Payback 9.1 years A summary of the estimated cost totals and estimated annual savings totals of the summary EEM’s listed above, is found in Table 5 below, and again at the end of Appendix B. Table 5 Combined total of recommended EEM’s  summarized above:  Estimated total cost $  216,598  Annual Savings (including  maintenance savings) $    33,841  Simple payback     6.7 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 a desk plug load management device similar to the one in Appendix E to turn off ancillary desk equipment (other than the computer itself) when the occupant leaves the desk. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 15 of 68 4. Re-configure building occupants and activities to group un- occupied offices (i.e. no guest, 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. 5. Continual re-commissioning: A building is a living mini-ecosystem and its use changes. Re-evaluate building usage regularly and confirm that building set points, zones, lighting levels, etc. are optimized for the current usage and occupancy. 6. 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. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 16 of 68 2. Audit and Analysis Background Program Description: This audit included services to identify, develop, and evaluate energy efficiency measures for the subject building. The scope of this project included evaluating the building shell, lighting, hot water generation and HVAC equipment. The auditor may or may not identify system deficiencies if they exist. The auditor’s role is to identify areas of potential savings, many of which may require more detailed investigation and analysis by other qualified professionals. a. Audit Description and Methodology: Preliminary audit information was gathered in preparation for the site survey, including benchmark utility consumption data, floor and lighting plans, and equipment schedules where available. A site visit is then performed to inventory and evaluate the actual building condition, including: i. Building envelope (walls, doors, windows, etc) ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning iii. Lighting systems and controls iv. Building specific equipment v. Plumbing Systems b. Benchmark Utility Data Validation: Benchmark utility data provided through AHFC’s initial phase of their REAL program is validated, confirming that meter numbers on the subject building match the meters from which the energy consumption and cost data were collected. If the data is inaccurate or missing, new benchmark data is obtained. In the event that there are inconsistencies or gaps in the data, the existing data is evaluated and missing data points are interpolated. c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site visit and during the site visit is entered into AkWarm-C, an energy modeling software program developed specifically for AHFC to identify forecasted energy consumption. The forecasts can then be compared to actual energy consumption. AkWarm-C also has some pre-programmed EEM retrofit options that can be analyzed with projected energy savings based on occupancy schedules, utility rates, building construction type, building function, existing conditions, and climatic data uploaded to the program based on the zip code of the building. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on manufacturer’s cataloged information. Energy cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Installation costs include the labor and equipment required to implement an EEM retrofit, but design and construction management costs are excluded. Cost estimates are +/- 30% for this level of audit, and are derived from one or more of the following: Means Cost Data, industry publications, experience of the auditor, local contractors and/or equipment ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 17 of 68 suppliers. Brown Electric and ESI Lighting (www.esilighting.com) were consulted for some of the lighting and lighting controls 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 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. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 18 of 68 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 SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 19 of 68 4. Building Description and Function: The site visit and survey of subject building occurred on April 23rd, 2012. This facility consists of two buildings joined by an enclosed walkway. The older, smaller building is a two story structure totaling 5,838 square feet, as calculated from plans. The first floor consists of a 1,920 square foot gymnasium. The balance of the building’s 3,918 square feet include a multipurpose room, games room, and various offices and storage rooms. The newer, larger building is a two story structure with a basement, totaling 22,364 square feet, including the enclosed walkway connecting the buildings. The basement of the new building includes a 6,966 square foot gymnasium, locker rooms, showers and storage. The 6,063 square foot ground floor has a multipurpose room, offices a small commercial kitchen and toilet rooms. The 6,029 square foot second story has dance, arts & crafts, exercise and mechanical rooms. The facility has a high occupancy throughput, averaging 500-600 people per day, with an estimated average stay of 1.5 hours. The old building is constructed on a 4” concrete slab, poured on grade. Its first floor walls are 8” concrete masonry units (CMU’s), covered on the exterior with 1-1/2” of rigid insulation, sheathing and wood siding. Second story walls are 2”x6” wood studs and R-21 batt. Interior CMU walls are painted, while the stud walls and ceilings are finished with gypsum. The roof is supported by fabricated trusses, has 4” of rigid insulation covered with up to 3-1/2” of Fesco Board (insulated panels) and a membrane roof. Composite insulation value, as calculated by AkWarm-C is R-34.3. Windows are double pane glass in wood frames, and are in poor condition, especially the walkway windows. The new building is also constructed on a 4” slab poured on grade. The basement walls are cast concrete of varying thickness. The gymnasium walls above the basement level are 2”x8” or 2”x12” wood studs with R-25 or R-30 batt, while the balance of the building’s walls are 2”x6” wood studs and R-19 batt. The roof is supported by wood trusses, has 4” of rigid insulation and a membrane. It’s composite insulation value is R-23.2. All interior walls are finished with gypsum. Windows are double pane glass in aluminum frames and are in good condition. Overall, the building is in average to below average condition. Building details are as follows: a. Heating, Cooling, Ventilation and Controls: Heat is provided in the new building by two cast iron, 80% efficient, gas fired boilers - apparently original equipment, and therefore approaching their EOL. The building is supplied with heat by hydronic baseboard radiant heaters, unit and cabinet unit heaters, AHU coils and terminal re-heat coils. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 20 of 68 Heat is provide in the old building by a gas fired, forced air furnace. In both buildings, heat and terminal re-heat is controlled by local, low voltage, adjustable thermostats. The AHU’s are controlled by timers as well as the local thermostats. Actuators and sensors are a combination of pneumatic and electronic. Ventilation is provided in the new building by two constant volume AHU’s and three constant volume supply fans, all with heating coils. There is no ventilation in the old building other than the forced air furnace. There is no cooling in either building. b. Appliances: There are two refrigerated beverage vending machines, a small chest and larger upright freezer, a commercial reach-in refrigerator and a residential type refrigerator. There are two 4-burner, commercial gas range/oven combinations with standing pilot lights on the burners and a gas fired grill/oven. There is a commercial dishwasher and several other food preparation appliances. There are two electric saunas with 1-hour timers in use in the locker rooms. This building has 7 PC’s in use at various times of day. c. Plumbing Fixtures: This building contains a total of (16) toilets, (7) stainless steel urinals, (11) lavatory sinks and (12) showers. All have manual valves except (7) of the lavatory faucets. The toilets consume 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf), the urinals are estimated to consume 1.5 gpf. See Appendix D-1 for EEM recommendations. d. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water for sinks, showers and the kitchen is provided by three indirect, 80 gallon hot water generators. There is an additional electric, hot water booster located in the kitchen, serving the dishwasher. e. Interior Lighting & Controls: As previously mentioned, the lighting in these buildings has not been upgraded. Room lighting in both buildings generally consists of T12-40W fixtures with a mixture of magnetic and electronic ballasts and CFL or mixed CFL & incandescent bulbs in recessed can lighting, while the gym lighting in both buildings are MH surface mounted or pendant fixtures. There are no occupancy sensors in the building. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 21 of 68 Appendix B details the recommendation of completion of the lighting upgrade. f. Exterior Lighting: Exterior lighting consists of MH wall packs, pole lights and soffit lights. g. Building Shell: The building shell is described earlier; it appears to be in average to below average condition inside and outside. h. Motors: There are 5 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. The two elevator motors have insufficient operating hours to justify replacement; see Appendix D-3. 5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled within the AkWarm-C program. The program typically analyzes twelve months of data. Two years’ 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 $2.64/SF, the ECI for two very similar buildings, the Spenard Rec Center and the Mt. View Rec Center, are $2.99 and $1.49 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 169 kBTU/SF; the average 2009/2010 EUI for the Spenard Rec Center is 193 kBTU/SF and 90 kBTU/SF for the Mt. View 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 referred to in the Appendix B EEM as “see also Appendix D-X”; 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. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 22 of 68 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 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 SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 23 of 68 Appendix A - Photos The new building is at left, enclosed walkway in the center and old building at right Some exterior repairs needed ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 24 of 68 New building gymnasium Existing sauna controls ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 25 of 68 New building dance studio New building weight room ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 26 of 68 Enclosed walkway between buildings; note poor condition of south (right side) facing windows Old building gymnasium ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 27 of 68 Old building, second floor game room OSA dampers in old building, 100% open with furnace running and building un- occupied ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 28 of 68 Aerial View of the Fairview Community Recreation Center Fairview New, Constructed in 1880 Fairview Old, Constructed in 1973 NORTH Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 29   ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 6/22/2012 7:39 PM General Project Information  PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION  Building: Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and  New Combined)  Auditor Company: Energy Audits of Alaska  Address: 1121 E 10th Ave Auditor  Name: James Fowler  City: Anchorage Auditor Address: P.O. Box 220215  Anchorage, AK 99522 Client Name: Teri Desy  Client Address: 1121 E 10th Ave  Anchorage, AK 99501  Auditor Phone: (206) 954‐3614  Auditor FAX:   Client Phone: (907) 343‐4297 Auditor Comment:   Client FAX:   Design Data  Building Area: 28,202 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space:  932,609  Btu/hour   with Distribution Losses:  1,065,247 Btu/hour   Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and  25% Safety Margin: 1,623,851 Btu/hour   Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,  if served.  Typical Occupancy: 70 people  Design Indoor Temperature: 70 deg F (building average)  Actual City: Anchorage Design Outdoor Temperature: ‐18 deg F  Weather/Fuel City: Anchorage Heating Degree Days: 10,816 deg F‐days     Utility Information  Electric Utility: Anchorage ML&P ‐ Commercial ‐ Lg Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas ‐ Commercial ‐  Lg  Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.108/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.825/ccf     Annual Energy Cost Estimate  Description Space  Heating  Space  Cooling  Water  Heating Lighting Refriger ation  Other  Electrical Cooking Ventilatio n Fans  Service  Fees Total Cost  Existing  Building  $17,505 $0 $12,732 $17,918 $1,284 $14,574 $508 $5,685 $1,842 $72,049  With  Proposed  Retrofits  $10,160 $0 $11,053 $6,328 $805 $12,175 $508 $2,727 $1,842 $45,599  SAVINGS $7,345 $0 $1,679 $11,590 $479 $2,399 $0 $2,958 $0 $26,450 *    *  Does not include Maintenance Savings  Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 30   $0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 Floor Wall/Door Window Ceiling Air Existing Retrofit Annual Space Heating Cost by Component                   $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 Existing Retrofit Natural Gas Electricity Annual Energy Costs by Fuel Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 31   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  CFL 1lamp, OS added  to circuit under  previous EEM  Replace with 11 FLUOR CFL, Plug‐in  18W Quad Tube StdElectronic and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $22 $1 137.38 0 2 Setback Thermostat:  Common Areas  Implement a Heating Temperature  Unoccupied Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Common Areas space.  $3,809 $4,250 11.56 1.1 3 Refrigeration ‐  Power Retrofit:  Upright Freezer  Replace with Energy Star version at  EOL, @ incremental cost of $75  $74 $75 11.32 1 4 Other Electrical ‐  Controls Retrofit:  Saunas  Add 7‐day timer or otherwise limit  operating hours  $1,720 $1,000 10.61 0.6 5 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  Incandescent, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 26 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp  15W and Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy Sensor  $460 $391 7.25 0.9 6 Refrigeration ‐  Power Retrofit:  Chest Freezer  Replace with Energy Star version at  EOL @ incremental cost of $75  $42 $75 6.40 1.8 7 Refrigeration ‐  Power Retrofit: Full  size refrigerator  Replace with Energy Star version at  EOL, @ incremental cost of $75  $42 $75 6.40 1.8 8 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐100, Soffit  Replace with 8 LED 34W Module  StdElectronic  $227 + $80  Maint.  Savings $600 6.04 2.6 Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 32   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 9 Ventilation Install Variable Frequency Drives  (VFD's) on 20HP AHU‐1, 5HP AHU‐2  and 5HP F‐3 fan motors.  Yaskawa  software predicts 69% reduction in  energy use, this was used in AkWarm  to find annual savings.  This calculation  assumes the 84.1% efficient 5‐HP  motor in AHU‐2 has been replaced  with a premium effiiciency version.   Replace (3) thermostats in new  building with 7‐day programmable  digital thermostats with CO2 sensing  capability to control AHU‐1 & AHU‐2  ventilation @ $2000 ea; Annual savings  estimated by reducing OSA by 20% in  AkWarm‐C.  $7,075 $17,182 5.10 2.4 10 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  MH‐100, add OS  Replace with 15 LED 34W Module  StdElectronic and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $479 + $150  Maint.  Savings $1,525 4.30 3.2 11 Refrigeration ‐  Controls Retrofit:  Refrigerated  Beverage Vending  Machines  Add VendingMiser  (www.vendingmiserstore.com)  $299 $600 4.16 2 12 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Maint and  Storage:  Incandescent, add  OS  Replace with 6 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp  15W  $36 $90 2.48 2.5 13 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  Gymnasium, MH‐ 400, add OS  Replace with 15 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2"  F54W/T5 HO Standard (2)  StdElectronic and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $1,281 + $1,600  Maint.  Savings $19,200 1.77 15 14 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐4lamp, add OS  **  Replace with 17 FLUOR (4) T8 4'  F32T8 28W Energy‐Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic   and Remove Manual Switching and  Add new Occupancy Sensor  $780 + $170  Maint.  Savings $4,680 1.70 6 Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 33   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 15 HVAC And DHW At the EOL of the existing (2) boilers,  replace them with (4) condensing  boilers such as the Weil McLain Ultra  750 MBH unit.  The incremental cost  difference for the boilers is estimated  to be $16,000 and installation and  piping another $25,000.  $2,611 + $2,000  Maint.  Savings $41,000 1.40 15.7 16 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐2lamp, U‐type,  OS added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 13 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8  30W U‐Tube Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $281 + $130  Maint.  Savings $2,601 1.33 9.2 17 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  T12‐4lamp, add OS  Replace with 6 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic  and  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $234 + $60  Maint.  Savings $1,840 1.22 7.9 18 Setback Thermostat:  Office Areas  Implement a Heating Temperature  Unoccupied Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Office Areas space.  $65 $750 1.12 11.5 19 Other Electrical ‐  Combined Retrofit:  Desktop Computers  Replace with 7 Laptop at EOL @  incremental cost of $200 ea and  Improve Manual Switching  $321 $1,401 1.05 4.4 20 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  Gymnasium, MH‐ 400, add OS  Replace with 13 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2"  F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic  and Remove Manual Switching and  Add new Occupancy Sensor  $808 + $750  Maint.  Savings $17,600 1.04 21.8 21 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 40 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver Instant  StdElectronic and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $769 + $400  Maint.  Savings $10,200 0.96 13.3 22 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐1lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 11 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic  $147 + $110  Maint.  Savings $2,311 0.94 15.7 Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 34   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 23 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐2lamp, add OS  Replace with 66 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic  and  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $1,505 + $660  Maint.  Savings $18,320 0.91 12.2 24 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐3lamp, add OS  Replace with 27 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $865 $6,810 0.78 7.9 25 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  T12‐2lamp, OS  added to circuit  under previous EEM  Replace with 5 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver with 5 FLUOR (2) T8  4' F32T8 28W Energy‐Saver lamps and  Leviton “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic   and Remove Manual Switching and  Add new Occupancy Sensor  $49 + $50  Maint.  Savings $1,101 0.75 22.7 26 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐250, Wall Pack  Replace with 12 LED 80W Module  StdElectronic  $876 + $600  Maint.  Savings $24,000 0.73 27.4 27 Lighting ‐ Power  Retrofit: Exterior:  MH‐400, Pole Light  Replace with 9 LED 150W Module  StdElectronic  $992 + $45  Maint.  Savings $18,000 0.68 18.1 28 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (New Building)  T12‐1lamp, add OS  Replace with 14 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver lamps and Leviton  “Zipline” kit with StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $184 + $140  Maint.  Savings $4,140 0.60 22.5 29 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Maint and  Storage: T12‐2lamp,  add OS  Replace with 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8  28W Energy‐Saver Instant Saver lamps  and Leviton “Zipline” kit with  StdElectronic  and Remove Manual  Switching and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $256 + $240  Maint.  Savings $7,080 0.54 27.6 30 Lighting ‐ Combined  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  CFL plug‐in, plug‐in,  add OS  Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) CFL, Plug‐in  18W Quad Tube StdElectronic and  Improve Manual Switching  $2 + $20  Maint.  Savings $500 0.28 213.3 Appendix B – Detailed AkWarm-C report   Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  Fairview Community Recreation Center (Old and New  Combined) Page 35   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 31 Setback Thermostat:  Mechanical and  Storage Areas  Implement a Heating Temperature  Unoccupied Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Mechanical and Storage Areas  space.  $96 $4,750 0.26 49.6 32 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Common  Area: (Old Building)  CFL 1lamp, 15w,  plug‐in, add OS  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $19 $1,000 0.12 52.1 33 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Maint and  Storage: CFL 1lamp,  18w, plug‐in, add OS  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $16 $1,600 0.06 102.1 34 Lighting ‐ Controls  Retrofit: Maint and  Storage:  Incandescent, add  OS  Remove Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $7 $1,200 0.04 162.5 THE FOLLOWING EEM’S WERE CALCULATED OUTSIDE OF AkWARM-C. Savings will affect and be affected by the EEM’s listed above, depending on their order of implementation. See  Appe ndix  D‐1  Plumbing Fixtures:  (17) 1.6 gpf W.C., (7)  urinals, (11) manual  valve lavatories, (6)  lavatories with  timers, (5) urinals,  (16) showers with  timers  Replace all WC valves with 2‐stage  valves; retrofit urinal valves with  proximity sensing on/off controls,  replace urinals with ultra‐low flow and  proximity sensing controls; retrofit  manual lav faucets with proximity  sensing or timer valves  See  Appe ndix  D‐3  Motor replacements At their EOL, replace the 5 HP motor in  AHU‐2 and the 20 HP motor in AHU‐1  with premium efficiency motors  $186 $650 5.7 3.5 TOTAL $26,450 + $7,205 Maint. Savings $215,948 1.68 8.2   Sample translation of the nomenclature used above: ** (item 13) Remove the existing T12 lamps, end pieces and ballast from the T12 fixture and replace with new end pieces with an integrated instant start electronic ballast (this “Zipline” kit is sold by Leviton) and new T8-28 watt energy saver lamps; the labor is the same as a ballast change, total cost installed is estimated to be $200/fixture plus $10 per lamp; also replace the existing manual switches with the appropriate number and type of occupancy sensors. Occupancy sensors cost from $200 -$300 ea installed. AkWarmCalc Ver  2.2.0.3, Energy Lib 5/18/2012  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 36 of 68 Appendix C – Equipment Schedules ALL SCHEDULES COMPILED FROM PLANS OR ON‐SITE NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION, WHERE  ACCESSIBLE     e= estimated   AIR HANDLERS AND FANS WITH HEATING COILS (new building) & FURNACE (old building)  SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL FAN CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  AHU‐1  Pace A24‐F; 810 MBH coil  17,350 20/208/3  RA dampers closed,  OSA dampers 100%  open; HOA switch on  “hand”  AHU‐2  Brod & McClung Pace A‐16 FC; 800 MBH  7000 5/208/3; 84.1%  HOA switch "off"; OSA  dampers closed, RA  dampers open  F‐2 Pace SCF; 25 MBH 500 .25/120/1 Vestibule reheat  F‐4 Pace SCF; 696 MBH  1155 .5/120/1 basement  F‐5 Pace SCF 63BME; 455 MBH 817 .25/120/1    Furnace  Lennox G16QS‐100‐1; 100 MBH  e1800 .75/150/1 blower  OSA damper 100%  open; serves old  building  EXHAUST FAN SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  F‐1 Pace SCF 79BMI 1100 .5/120/1 boiler room exhaust  F‐3 Pace U‐16F 2715 5/230/3;? fan room  F‐6 Penn Breezway FB‐244 4000 1/208/3 fan room  F‐7 unknown 4000 1/208/3 Fan Room  F‐8 unknown 4000 1/208/3 relief fan  F‐9 Penn Domex LB24 3200 .5/120/1  rooftop ‐ kiln exhaust;  switch was on, kilns  were off (manual  switch)  F‐10 Penn FUME‐X 14B 1875 .5/120/1  rooftop ‐ kitchen  exhaust   UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  CUH‐1 Airtherm C‐30 230 .03/120/1 V214, C214  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 37 of 68 CUH‐2 Airtherm C‐30 230 .03/120/1 Stair 1  CUH‐3 Airtherm C‐30 230 .03/120/1 Stair 2  UH‐1 Airtherm HRW‐27 315 .04/120/1 Storage 210  UH‐2 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Mech room 114  UH‐3 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Mech room 114  UH‐4 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Mech room 113  UH‐5 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Storage 304  UH‐6 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Fan Room  UH‐7 Airtherm HRW‐58 815 .05/120/1 Fan room  BOILER SCHEDULE  SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL    MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  B‐1 Weil McLain H‐886    1.5/230/3; 79%  burner motor  gas fired, cast iron  sectional, 1974 MBH  input, 1600 MBH  output  B‐2 Weil McLain H‐886    1.5/230/3; 79%  burner motor  gas fired, cast iron  sectional, 1974 MBH  input, 1600 MBH  output  PUMP SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GPM  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS  SP‐1, SP‐2 HYDR‐O‐MATOC S4L 125 2/208/3 sump pumps  CP‐1 Grundfos UPC 50‐160 96 770w/208/3  Main glycol circulation  to AHU‐1 & HWG's  CP‐2 Grundfos UPC 50‐160 96 1030W/208/3 alternate  CP‐3 Grundfos UMC 50‐80 47 475w/208/3  Glycol circulation to  AHU‐2 & UH's  CP‐4 Grundfos UPC 50‐160 96 1030W/208/3  Glycol circulation to  "rest of building"  CP‐4A Grundfos UPC 50‐160 96 1030W/208/3 alternate  CP‐5 Grundfos UP 26‐99 e5 245w/115/1 HWG circulator  CP‐6 Grundfos UP 26‐99 e5 245w/115/1 HWG circulator  CP‐7 Grundfos UP 26‐99 e5 245w/115/1 HWG circulator         ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 38 of 68 HOT WATER HEATER SCHEDULE   SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GALLONS  NUMBER OF  ELEMENTS ELEMENT SIZE  HGW‐1 SuperStor SS‐80DW 80 n/a  indirect hot water  generator  HWG‐2 SuperStor SS‐80DW 80 n/a  indirect hot water  generator  HWG‐3 SuperStor SS‐80DW 80 n/a  indirect hot water  generator  HWH‐1 unknown; presumed 80 MBH e80 n/a  presumed to be gas  fired; no access & plans  not current  PLUMBING FIXTURES   SYMBOL FIXTURE GPF QUANTITY REMARKS    W.C. 1.6 16/1  manually operated, 1  not in use    Urinal 1.5 7 manually operated    Lavatory ‐ 4/1  manually operated, 1  not in use    Lavatory low flow 2 with proximity sensor    Lavatory ‐ 5 with timer valve    Utility Sink ‐ 2      Shower 2.6 12          EQUIPMENT SCHEDULES  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Sauna ‐ Oy Saunatec Ltd (1714‐60‐17) 2 8Kw/208/3      Kiln ‐ Skutt Automatic Kiln (KM‐1027‐3) 2 11.5Kw/208/1  used 1x every 3‐4  months for 8‐10 hrs    Otis Elevator ‐ new building 1 e20/460/3  15 second up cycle,  used 6x/hr during open  hours    Elevator ‐ old building 1 unknown rarely used    HVAC Controls Compressor 2 motors 1.5/115/1; 84%  1 motor ran 4 of every  10 minutes during audit  PLUG LOAD SUMMARY  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    Coffee Machine 3 450w    ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 39 of 68   Large Printer 1 1200w      Personal Printer 3 85w      Large TV 2 450w      Vending Machine 1        Microwave 2        Large Coffee 1 4585w      Cash Register 1        Phone Backbone 1        Video Camera Monitor 1        Toaster Oven 1        Scoreboard 2      Fan 1        Hand Dryer ‐ World Dryer Corp. (B‐2) 2 2288w      Treadmill 3   1 Lifestyler, 2 Precor    Eliptical 2   1 Nordic, 1 Startrac    Stationary Bike 2   1 Precor, 1 Startrac    Small TV 3        Arcade Game ‐ ATARI  1      KITCHEN SCHEDULE (used 2 hours Monday thru Friday for dinner meal, serves approx 60 meals/day)  SYMBOL FIXTURE QUANTITY  MOTOR DATA   HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS    8 Burner Range/Oven ‐ U.S. Range 1   gas w/8 standing pilots    Garbage Disposal ‐ Hobart  1 3.9Kw/240/3  same as Spenard Rec  Center Kitchen    Dishwasher ‐ Stero 1 1/208/3  ` Electric Water Heater ‐ Hatco (CC‐15) 1 15Kw/208/3    Electric Water Heater ‐ Hatco (3CS‐9BM) 1 9Kw/208/1    Ice Machine ‐ Manitowoc (R‐404A) 1 805w/115/1    Upright Freezer 1        Small Full‐Size Refrigerator 1      LIGHTING SCHEDULE  FIXTURE TYPE DESCRIPTION LAMPS MOUNTING  NUMBER WATTS TYPE HEIGHT  Recess can Metal Halide ‐ Exterior, magnetic ballast 1 100 soffit ceiling  Wall pack Metal Halide ‐ Exterior, magnetic ballast 1 250 surface 10'  Pole Light Metal Halide ‐ Exterior, magnetic ballast 1 400 surface 20'  T5‐2 Florescent, T5 plug‐in U tube, electronic ballast 2 54 recess ceiling  T12‐1 Florescent T12, mangentic ballast 1 40 surface ceiling  T12‐2 Florescent T12, mangentic ballast 2 40 surface ceiling  T12‐2 Florescent T12, U‐type, mangentic ballast 2 40 surface ceiling  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 40 of 68 T12‐3 Florescent T12, mangentic ballast 3 40 surface ceiling  T12‐4 Florescent T12, mangentic ballast 4 40 surface ceiling  wall pack Halogen; interior 1 250 surface 7'  Recess can CFL, electronic ballast 1 18 recess ceiling  Recess can CFL, electronic ballast 1 15 recess ceiling  Incandescent floor, table and desk lamps 1 60 surface 4'  Pendant Metal Halide ‐ interior, magnetic ballast 1 100 hanging 28'  Pendant Metal Halide ‐ interior, magnetic ballast 1 400 hanging 28'  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)  AHU‐1 20/208/3  no rating on  nameplate,  assume 91% 93.00% 3640 $114.35 4.4/$500  16.6/$1900   AHU‐2 5/208/3 84.1% 89.50% 3640 $71.52 2.1/$150  8.4/$600   F‐3 5/208/3 assume 87% 89.50% 1820 $11.78 12.7/$150  50.9/$600   Elevator 1  (new bldg) e20/460/3 not accessible 93.00% 78  Insufficient operating hours Elevator 2  (old building) e20/460/3 not accessible 93.00% 2  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 SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 41 of 68 Appendix D Additional, Building-Specific EEM details Appendix D-1: Plumbing fixtures: The urinals and toilets in this building are not standard commercial versions, therefore retrofit hardware that can be installed without altering plumbing may not be available. Given this, it is normally recommended to replace all urinals with ultra low flow models. The lavatory faucets and urinals should be retrofitted with proximity sensing on/off controls. All toilets in this building have manual valves, they should have 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. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 42 of 68 Appendix D-2: Additional EEM’S considered but not recommended De-Stratification Fans: There was insufficient temperature difference between the 6’ level and the gymnasium ceiling, so there would be little or no advantage resulting from the installation of de-stratification fans. Boiler replacement now, with higher efficiency models: AkWarm-C calculates an annual savings of $2,596 by replacing the two existing boilers with four, 94% efficient, modulating, condensing boilers (the largest size is 750 MBH, this building would need four boilers of this size). Estimated cost to replace the two boilers now is $110,000, so the payback is 35 years and the life of a condensing boiler is only 15-20 years – therefore this is not recommended. However, replacement of the existing boilers at their EOL with condensing boilers is recommended. This is presented in Appendix B-15 and includes an anticipated maintenance savings of $2000/year. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 43 of 68 Appendix D-3: Premium Efficiency Motor upgrades It is generally recommended that all standard efficiency 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 at burn out, there are no instances of cost effective replacement prior to burnout. Table 4 – Large Motor Listing 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)  RECOMMENDED TO REPLACE WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY AT BURNOUT (EOL)  AHU‐1 20/208/3  no rating on  nameplate,  assume 91% 93.00% 3640 $114.35 4.4/$500  16.6/$1900   AHU‐2 5/208/3 84.1% 89.50% 3640 $71.52 2.1/$150  8.4/$600   NOT RECOMMENDED TO BE REPLACED WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTORS  F‐3 5/208/3 assume 87% 89.50% 1820 $11.78 12.7/$150  50.9/$600   Elevator 1  (new bldg) e20/460/3 not accessible 93.00% 78  Insufficient operating hours Elevator 2  (old building) e20/460/3 not accessible 93.00% 2  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 SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 44 of 68 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 AHU-2 and F-3 and the 20 HP fan motor in AHU-1, all in the new building, are recommended to be retro-fitted with VFD’s. These motor loads and energy 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 the 5 HP motor in AHU-2 had been replaced with premium efficiency versions, per Appendix D-3 above, before the addition of VFD’s – although there is not a very significant difference in savings with the older, standard efficiency motor. A 69% reduction in electrical consumption is predicted by the Yaskawa software for each of these motors; this figure were input into AkWarm-C as a reduction in power consumption in the ventilation section; the resulting savings are included in Appendix B-10. 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 may 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 Yaskawa reports follow: ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 45 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 46 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 47 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 48 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 49 of 68 Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s VendingMiser ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 50 of 68 Appendix E – Desk plug load management device ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 51 of 68 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. Daylight sensors can dim a light based on the level of ambient light in a room. Daylight sensors can be switch, ceiling, wall or fixture mounted and can control a row of fixtures, an entire room, or a single fixture. Occupancy and daylight sensors can reduce power consumption by 25-60%. Paybacks on 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. Timers, occupancy and daylight sensing can be integrated. Additionally, they can be easily re-configured as a building’s usage or occupancy pattern changes. Sample products recommended in this report, in order of the cut-sheets that follow: - Fixture mounted occupancy sensor suitable for high bay lighting, can control individual fixtures or a row or bank of fixtures. Typical product cost $60 ea. - T8-28 watt energy saver lamp; this lamp, when replacing a standard T8- 32 watt lamp, reduces light output by 2.9% (which is not noticeable in most environments) and saves 12% in energy consumption. They are compatible with most existing instant start and programmed start electronic T8 ballasts. Typical product cost $150/case of 40 lamps. - Temporary occupancy sensing data logger. Typically used to determine possible savings resulting from the addition of occupancy sensors, also can be used for logging any room occupancy. Typical product cost $300 each. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 52 of 68 Appendix E – Lighting Controls Zone control occupancy sensor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 53 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 54 of 68 Appendix E – Lighting/occupancy logger can also be used to track sauna usage ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 55 of 68 Appendix E – 7-day programmable digital thermostat with occupancy scheduling ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 56 of 68 Appendix E – 7-day programmable digital thermostat with Carbon Dioxide sensing capability and compatible CO2 sensor ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 57 of 68 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 58 of 68 Appendix F1 – Consumption Graphs for Fairview New $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Fairview Rec Center ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Fairview Rec Center (New) ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kWh) Electric Cost ($) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 59 of 68 Appendix F2 – Consumption Graphs for Fairview Old $0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Fairview Rec Center (old) ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas  Cost ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Fairview Rec Center (old) ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kWh) Electric Cost ($) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 60 of 68 Fairview Rec Centers Building Size Input (sf) = 22,364 5,838 28,202 Fairview New Fairview Old Combined  2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 27,984.00 6,634.00 34,618.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 28,841 6,997 35,838 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh) 349,200 59,856 409,056 2009 Electric Cost ($) 33,260 6,649 39,909 2009 Oil Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Oil Cost ($) 0 0 0 2009 Propane Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Propane Cost ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Coal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Coal Cost ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Wood Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Wood Cost ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost ($) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 3,990,220 867,689 4,857,908 2009 Total Energy Cost ($) 62,101 13,646 75,747 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 125.1 113.6 122.8 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 53.3 35.0 49.5 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 178.4 148.6 172.3 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 61 of 68 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 1.29 1.20 1.27 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 1.49 1.14 1.42 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 2.78 2.34 2.69 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 27,101.00 6,041.00 33,142.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 24,517 5,730 30,247 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh) 340,160 63,288 403,448 2010 Electric Cost ($) 35,519 7,487 43,006 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Oil Cost ($) 0 0 0 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($) 0 0 0 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Coal Cost ($) 0 0 0 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Wood Cost ($) 0 0 0 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($) 0 0 0 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 3,871,066 820,102 4,691,168 2010 Total Energy Cost ($) 60,036 13,217 73,253 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 121.2 103.5 117.5 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 51.9 37.0 48.8 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 62 of 68 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf)0.0 0.0 0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 173.1 140.5 166.3 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 1.10 0.98 1.07 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 1.59 1.28 1.52 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 0.00 0.00 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 2.68 2.26 2.60 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 63 of 68 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form  PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION  Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date (mm/dd/yyyy) MOA Municipal  Government/Subdivision  04/23/11  Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Fairview Rec Center (new)   22,364  Building Type Community Population Year Built    261,500 Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip  1121 E 10th Ave Anchorage 99501  Contact Person  First Name Last  Name Middle Name Email Phone Cindy  Liggett     343‐4599 Mailing Address City State Zip         Primary  Operating  Hours  Monday‐ Friday  Saturday Sunday Holidays                   Average # of  Occupants  During  Operating  Hours                     ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 64 of 68 Fairview Rec Center New Natural Gas Btus/CCF =100,000 Month Start Date End Date Billing Days  Consumption  (CCF)  Natural Gas  Cost ($)  Unit Cost  ($/Therm)  Jan‐09   1/15/2009 31 4945 $5,020  $1.02  Feb‐09 1/15/2009 2/12/2009 32 3344 $3,416  $1.02  Mar‐09 2/12/2009 3/12/2009 27 2978 $3,049  $1.02  Apr‐09 3/12/2009 4/16/2009 31 2566 $2,636  $1.03  May‐09 4/16/2009 5/14/2009 29 1670 $1,738  $1.04  Jun‐09 5/14/2009 6/11/2009 33 1427 $1,494  $1.05  Jul‐09 6/11/2009 7/16/2009 30 1347 $1,430  $1.06  Aug‐09 7/16/2009 8/13/2009 32 1134 $1,202  $1.06  Sep‐09 8/13/2009 9/17/2009 31 1306 $1,374  $1.05  Oct‐09 9/17/2009 10/15/2009 31 1922 $1,992  $1.04  Nov‐09 10/15/2009 11/12/2009 28 2172 $2,243  $1.03  Dec‐09 11/12/2009 12/10/2009 29 3173 $3,247  $1.02                 Jan‐10 12/10/2009 1/14/2010 34 3611 $3,052  $0.85  Feb‐10 1/14/2010 2/11/2010 30 3599 $3,042  $0.85  Mar‐10 2/11/2010 3/11/2010 28 2733 $2,325  $0.85  Apr‐10 3/11/2010 4/15/2010 33 2878 $2,471  $0.86  May‐10 4/15/2010 5/13/2010 28 1761 $1,538  $0.87  Jun‐10 5/13/2010 6/11/2010 29 1272 $1,130  $0.89  Jul‐10 6/11/2010 7/15/2010 31 1390 $1,228  $0.88  Aug‐10 7/15/2010 8/12/2010 32 1174 $1,300  $1.11  Sep‐10 8/12/2010 9/16/2010 30 1441 $1,527  $1.06  Oct‐10 9/16/2010 10/14/2010 32 1771 $1,793  $1.01  Nov‐10 10/14/2010 11/11/2010 28 2188 $2,124  $0.97  Dec‐10 11/11/2010 12/9/2010 30 3283 $2,987  $0.91  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 27,984 $28,841     Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 27,101 $24,517      Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $1.04   Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.93  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 65 of 68 Electricity Btus/kWh =3,413 Month Start Date End Date Billing Days  Consumption  (kWh)  Total Electric  Cost ($)  Unit Cost  ($/kWh)  Jan‐09   1/10/2009 31 33040 $2,768 $0.08  Feb‐09 1/10/2009 2/11/2009 32 33920 $2,746 $0.08  Mar‐09 2/11/2009 3/11/2009 28 27440 $2,372 $0.09  Apr‐09 3/11/2009 4/10/2009 30 28160 $2,860 $0.10  May‐09 4/10/2009 5/12/2009 32 28720 $2,867 $0.10  Jun‐09 5/12/2009 6/10/2009 29 25920 $2,735 $0.11  Jul‐09 6/10/2009 7/13/2009 33 29360 $2,973 $0.10  Aug‐09 7/13/2009 8/12/2009 30 27280 $1,818 $0.07  Sep‐09 8/12/2009 9/11/2009 30 29360 $3,076 $0.10  Oct‐09 9/11/2009 10/12/2009 31 29200 $3,057 $0.10  Nov‐09 10/12/2009 11/12/2009 31 30400 $3,156 $0.10  Dec‐09 11/12/2009 12/10/2009 28 26400 $2,832 $0.11                 Jan‐10 12/10/2009 1/11/2010 32 32000 $2,962 $0.09  Feb‐10 1/11/2010 2/9/2010 29 28800 $2,755 $0.10  Mar‐10 2/9/2010 3/11/2010 30 29280 $2,708 $0.09  Apr‐10 3/11/2010 4/12/2010 32 30640 $3,365 $0.11  May‐10 4/12/2010 5/11/2010 29 26560 $2,991 $0.11  Jun‐10 5/11/2010 6/10/2010 30 24560 $2,952 $0.12  Jul‐10 6/10/2010 7/12/2010 32 28160 $2,871 $0.10  Aug‐10 7/12/2010 8/11/2010 30 27760 $2,903 $0.10  Sep‐10 8/11/2010 9/10/2010 30 27840 $2,852 $0.10  Oct‐10 9/10/2010 10/11/2010 31 28240 $3,018 $0.11  Nov‐10 10/11/2010 11/9/2010 29 28000 $3,039 $0.11  Dec‐10 11/9/2010 12/9/2010 30 28320 $3,103 $0.11  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 349200 $33,260    Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 340160 $35,519     Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $0.10   Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.10  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 66 of 68 Appendix F2 – Detailed Benchmark Data for Fairview Old REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form  PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION  Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date (mm/dd/yyyy)  MOA Municipal  Government/Subdivision  04/24/12  Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage  Fairview Rec Center (Old)   5,838  Building Type Community Population Year Built    261,500    Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip  1217 E 10th St Anchorage 99501  Contact Person  First Name Last Name Middle Name Email Phone             Mailing Address City State Zip               Primary  Operating Hours  Monday‐ Friday  Saturday Sunday Holidays                   Average # of  Occupants During  Operating Hours                    ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 67 of 68 Fairview Rec Center Old Natural Gas Btus/CCF = 100,000 Month Start Date End Date Billing Days  Consumption  (CCF)  Natural Gas  Cost ($)  Unit Cost  ($/Therm)  Jan‐09   1/15/2009 31 1366 $1,422  $1.04  Feb‐09 1/15/2009 2/12/2009 32 934 $976  $1.04  Mar‐09 2/12/2009 3/12/2009 27 872 $912  $1.05  Apr‐09 3/12/2009 4/16/2009 31 715 $750  $1.05  May‐09 4/16/2009 5/14/2009 29 354 $377  $1.06  Jun‐09 5/14/2009 6/11/2009 33 140 $157  $1.12  Jul‐09 56/11/09 7/16/2009 30 84 $102  $1.21  Aug‐09 7/16/2009 8/13/2009 32 81 $96  $1.19  Sep‐09 8/13/2009 9/17/2009 31 142 $159  $1.12  Oct‐09 9/17/2009 10/15/2009 31 424 $450  $1.06  Nov‐09 10/15/2009 11/12/2009 28 609 $641  $1.05  Dec‐09 11/12/2009 12/10/2009 29 913 $955  $1.05                 Jan‐10 12/10/2009 1/14/2010 34 1061 $922  $0.87  Feb‐10 1/14/2010 2/11/2010 30 992 $863  $0.87  Mar‐10 2/11/2010 3/11/2010 28 722 $631  $0.87  Apr‐10 3/11/2010 4/15/2010 33 749 $662  $0.88  May‐10 4/15/2010 5/13/2010 28 357 $322  $0.90  Jun‐10 5/13/2010 6/11/2010 29 116 $113  $0.97  Jul‐10 6/11/2010 7/15/2010 31 118 $115  $0.97  Aug‐10 7/15/2010 8/12/2010 32 88 $180  $2.05  Sep‐10 8/12/2010 9/16/2010 30 85 $181  $2.13  Oct‐10 9/16/2010 10/14/2010 32 353 $396  $1.12  Nov‐10 10/14/2010 11/11/2010 28 528 $537  $1.02  Dec‐10 11/11/2010 12/9/2010 30 872 $808  $0.93  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 6,634 $6,997     Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 6,041 $5,730      Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $1.09   Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $1.13  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SPENARD RECREATION CENTER June 17, 2012 Page 68 of 68 Electricity Btus/kWh =3,413 Month Start Date End Date Billing Days  Consumption  (kWh)  Electric  Cost ($)  Unit Cost  ($/kWh)  Jan‐09   1/10/2009 31 6338 $626 $0.10  Feb‐09 1/10/2009 2/11/2009 32 6754 $667 $0.10  Mar‐09 2/11/2009 3/11/2009 28 5215 $518 $0.10  Apr‐09 3/11/2009 4/10/2009 30 5820 $665 $0.11  May‐09 4/10/2009 5/12/2009 32 4572 $525 $0.11  Jun‐09 5/12/2009 6/10/2009 29 3301 $383 $0.12  Jul‐09 6/10/2009 7/13/2009 33 4197 $492 $0.12  Aug‐09 7/13/2009 8/12/2009 30 3719 $437 $0.12  Sep‐09 8/12/2009 9/11/2009 30 3997 $470 $0.12  Oct‐09 9/11/2009 10/12/2009 31 4822 $566 $0.12  Nov‐09 10/12/2009 11/12/2009 31 5571 $651 $0.12  Dec‐09 11/12/2009 12/10/2009 28 5550 $649 $0.12                 Jan‐10 12/10/2009 1/11/2010 32 6709 $721 $0.11  Feb‐10 1/11/2010 2/9/2010 29 5833 $629 $0.11  Mar‐10 2/9/2010 3/11/2010 30 5904 $637 $0.11  Apr‐10 3/11/2010 4/12/2010 32 5581 $705 $0.13  May‐10 4/12/2010 5/11/2010 29 4462 $566 $0.13  Jun‐10 5/11/2010 6/10/2010 30 3400 $447 $0.13  Jul‐10 6/10/2010 7/12/2010 32 4063 $486 $0.12  Aug‐10 7/12/2010 8/12/2010 31 4988 $594 $0.12  Sep‐10 8/12/2010 9/10/2010 29 5301 $631 $0.12  Oct‐10 9/10/2010 10/11/2010 31 5377 $654 $0.12  Nov‐10 10/11/2010 11/9/2010 29 5851 $710 $0.12  Dec‐10 11/9/2010 12/9/2010 30 5819 $707 $0.12  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 59856 $6,649    Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 63288 $7,487     Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $0.11   Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.12