Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC New Transit Maint 2012-EE I N O C J P Investm New Transi Owner: The M Client: Alaska June 28, 2012 Project # CIR ment Gra it Maintena Municipality of a Housing Fin 2 RI-ANC-CAEC ade Ene nce Buildin f Anchorage nance Corpora C-32 ergy Au ng ation udit ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 2 of 65 Project # CIRI-ANC-CAEC-32 Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage New Transit Maintenance Building (formerly called Sign Shop) 3701 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. Anchorage, AK 99507 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 NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 3 of 65 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 22 6. Interactive Effects of Projects 22 7. Loan Program 22 APPENDICES Appendix A: Photos 24 Appendix B: AkWarm-C Report 31 Appendix C: Equipment Schedules 37 Appendix D: Additional, Building-Specific EEM detail 45 Appendix E: Specifications supporting EEM’s 49 Appendix F: Benchmark Data 57 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 4 of 65 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 NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 5 of 65 1. Executive Summary Building Owner: Municipality of Anchorage 3640 East Tudor Anchorage, AK 99507 Building contact: John Huzey Manager Facility Maintenance 907-343-8312 office Huzeyjm@ci.anchorage.ak.us Alaska Housing Finance Corporation P.O. Box 10120 Anchorage, AK 99510-1020 Contact: Rebekah Luhrs Energy Specialist 907-330-8141 rluhrs@ahfc.us Guidance to the reader: The Executive Summary is designed to contain all the information the building owner/operator should need to determine how the subject building’s energy efficiency compares with other similar use buildings, which energy improvements should be implemented, approximately how much they will cost and their estimated annual savings. Sections 2 through 7 of this report and the Appendices, are back-up and provide much more detailed information should the owner/operator, or their staff, desire to investigate further. This audit was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment act (ARRA) funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State’s economy. The audit and this report are pre-requisites to access AHFC’s Retrofit Energy Assessment Loans (REAL) program, which is available to the building’s owner. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 6 of 65 The site visit to subject building occurred on December 7th, 2011. This building is called the New Transit Maintenance building, it was constructed adjacent to the existing Transit Maintenance Building (built in 1975), which subsequently become known as the Old Transit Maintenance building. It has also been called the Sign shop and the Paint Shop. This building was constructed in 1984 to house transit vehicle maintenance facilities. In 1987 the bus wash facility was added to the west side of this building, filling the open space between it and the Old Transit Maintenance building. In 1994 an oil interceptor was added, in 2002 underground storage tanks were upgraded and the bus wash bay was remodeled, in 2006 the compressors were replaced and in 2010 there was a comprehensive lighting upgrade. The interior of the TM building is in average condition, its exterior is in good condition, considering its age, although it appears to be due for painting. Energy Consumption and Benchmark Data This building uses natural gas provided by Enstar Natural Gas Co., and electricity provided by Chugach Electric Association, Inc. Benchmark utility data for 2009 and 2010 obtained by the auditor, is summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below and presented in detail in Appendix F. Table 1   2009 2010    Consumption Cost Consumption Cost  Electricity ‐ kWh 1,500,240  $  183,100  1,446,320  $  139,821   Natural Gas ‐ CCF 183,127  $  184,362  166,515  $  138,502   Totals    $  367,462       $  278,323   The electric service from this building also supply’s the “bull rail” with head bolt heaters in the north parking lot of the Public Works building directly east. There is a BTU meter on the north side of this building, which is presumably measuring the electricity used by the bull rail, but it appears that no one is recording, monitoring or billing for this usage. So, it is included in this audit. A benchmark measure of energy use relative to other similar function buildings in the area is the Energy Use Index (EUI), which takes the total annual energy used by the facility divided by the square footage area of the building, for a value expressed in terms of kBTU/SF. This number can then be compared to other buildings to see if it is average, higher or lower than similar buildings in the area. Likewise, the Energy Cost Index (ECI) is the cost of all energy used by the building expressed in $/SF of building area. The comparative values for the subject building are shown in Table 2 below. ENERG Ja   A u T c e s b fa C re b b th s A Y AUDITS nuary 24, 201   Energy Use  (EUI) ‐ kBTU Energy Cost  (ECI) ‐ $/ As observed nchanged w Through the onsumption nergy cons pace. Th roader exp alls in the m Chart 1 bel eduction in uildings (9 uildings ex his building pecifically p Appendix B. OF ALASK 12 Table 2 – Sub Buil Index  U/SF 20 Index  SF $2 d in Table while natur e modeling n of this bu sumption fo is building ploration, it mid-range o ow. What gas consu 9%-25% ra xperienced g’s usage e pertaining t . KA – 2009 & 20 bject  ding  Old T Maint e Bu 09 19 .99  $3 1 above, u al gas usag of this build uilding was or a munic uses 57 was deter of similar M t was disc umption fro ange of re a reductio effectively in to gas cons C NEW T 010 Averag Transit  tenanc ilding  N M 96  .33  sage betwe ge declined ding in AkW s high. A t cipal buildin BTU/hr pe rmined that Municipality covered in om 2009 to eduction), w n in gas u ncreased. sumption w Chart 1 TRANSIT M ge EUI and Northwood  Street  aintenance  Building  282  $3.70   een 2009 a d by 9%. Warm-C, th typical very ng is 35 BT er square f t the gas-o of Anchora Chart 1, is o 2010 is th which mea use (probab Subseque were investig MAINTENAN ECI Average  Mid‐West "Warehous & Storage 74  ‐  and 2010 w e auditor fe y rough rul TU/hr per foot of spa only EUI fo age (MOA) s that this he smalles ans that w bly from m ently, a num gated and a NCE BUILD Page 7 o t  se  e"  Average "Wareh e &  Storag 44 ‐  was essent elt that the e of thumb square foo ace. But u or this build buildings, building’s t for all sim while all o ilder weath mber of EE are include DING of 65 e US  ous e"  tially gas b for ot of upon ding see 9% milar other her), EM’s ed in ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 8 of 65 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 building management strategy, operations, maintenance and/or safety All the EEMs considered for this facility are detailed in the attached AkWarm-C Energy Audit Report in Appendix B and in Appendix D. Each EEM includes payback times, estimated installation costs and estimated energy savings. The summary EEM’s that follow are the only EEM’s that are recommended for this building. Others have been considered but are not deemed to be justified or cost effective. The recommended EEM’s were selected based on consideration from three perspectives: overall efficiency of building management, reduction in energy consumption and return on investment (ROI). 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.) DE-STRATIFICATION FANS In high bay spaces there is a typical temperature differential of 5F to 15F between the ceiling and the thermostat. De-strat fans typically save from 12%-23% in high-ceiling space-heating costs, depending on this temperature difference and the ceiling height, by moving the warm air down to the occupied space. It is recommended to add de-stratification fans to the main repair, paint, tire and north bus wash bays. See Appendix D-2 for more detail. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 9 of 65 De-Stratification Fan EEM: Estimated cost $12,000 Annual Savings $21,000 Payback 7 months B.) PERSONAL COMPUTERS AND LAPTOPS A desktop personal computer with a monitor consumes approximately 100-200 watts continually while in use. Laptop’s are designed to be much more energy efficient to make their batteries last as long as possible; they consumes approximately half this amount, even with a secondary monitor and full keyboard. Most office positions can utilize a laptop with no loss in efficiency. This building has 12 desktop PC’s in use. The difference in cost between a desktop and laptop is estimated to be $300. This EEM recommends replacing all PC’s at EOL with laptops and secondary monitors and keyboards as appropriate. See Appendix B-7 for detail. PC/Laptop EEM: Estimated cost $ 300 Annual Savings $ 432 Payback 8 months C.) SETBACK THERMOSTATS The control system for the offices is presumed to have temperature setbacks already programmed into its DDC system. The shops, bays and storage areas appear to be controlled by individual systems, independent of each other and the main DDC system. The main repair bay and bus wash bays are used 24/7, so setback’s are not justifiable. However it is recommended to install setback thermostats in the parts rooms, storage areas and paint bays, programmed to reduce room temperatures to 55F during unoccupied periods. This summary EEM combines the AkWarm-C retrofits detailed in Appendix B, items 3-5, 10 & 22. They reflect the incorporation of unoccupied setback temperatures of 55 deg F in appropriate spaces. Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s: Estimated cost $5,600 Annual Savings $7,657 Payback 9 months ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 10 of 65 D.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS In the interest of building management, it is recommended to complete the 2010 upgrade in all rooms and spaces – even though the paybacks on certain individual spaces are unjustifiably long. High Bay Lighting: The 250W high pressure sodium (HPS) lamps in the vehicle bay have been replaced with T5-54 watt lamps. This lighting upgrade does not usually, by itself, reduce energy consumption. In order for this kind of lighting upgrade to be cost effective, occupancy controls must be installed to take advantage the on/off capability of T5 lighting. Zoned occupancy controls are recommended and included in this summary EEM. Lighting Controls: Occupant controls 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. It is recommended to install motion sensing occupancy sensors in the existing duplex switch boxes of all offices, corridors and stairwells that have not been retrofitted. Dual technology sensors should be installed where obstacles may interfere with line-of-sight sensors, such as in lavatories, corridors, vehicle bays, and storage areas (The second technology in these sensors activates lighting based on sound) and Zoned occupancy controls should be installed in long corridors, large vehicle bays and large storage areas. Zoned controls are designed to activate and de-activate lighting by zone, by row or by fixture, based on the location of the occupant. See Appendix E for sample occupancy sensor that can activate a single or multiple fixtures. Occupancy sensors can reduce power consumption by 25-60%. Paybacks on occupancy sensors range from 1 to 3 years, depending on the light fixture consumption and occupancy of the room. This EEM combines appendix B, items 1, 2, 9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23 and 25-31. See these items for detailed cost estimates, savings and paybacks on the specific lighting retrofits recommended Combined Lighting and Lighting Control EEM’s: Estimated cost $13,316 Annual Savings $12,382 Payback 1.1 years E.) HOT WATER PRESSURE WASHERS The typical life of a gas fired hot water pressure washer is approximately 10 years. The two units in this building are at least that old. Today’s versions produce the same number of gallons per ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 11 of 65 minute using 15% natural gas. Additionally, maintenance costs start to increase as the units age. It is recommended to replace both units with new versions. See Appendix B-17 and D-4 for detail. Combined Pressure Washer EEM: Estimated cost $18, 000 Annual energy savings $ 2,835 Annual maintenance savings $ 1,500 Payback 4.2 years F.) MOTORS Generally, it is recommended that all motors 5HP or larger, operating for 1500 hours or longer at continuous speed, be replaced at EOL with premium efficiency motors. Typical payback for the incremental cost difference at EOL of a premium efficiency motor is 2-10 years, while the motor life is 20+ years. See table 4 in Appendix D-3 for complete motor listing and recommended premium upgrades at burnout. In this building, none of the motors surveyed are operating sufficient hours to justify replacement prior to burnout. Summarized Motor Replacement EEM: Estimated cost $ 7,850 Annual Savings $ 1,533 Payback 5.1 years G.) HVAC SYSTEM There is a pipe freezing problem in the small paint booth room. Personnel use RAU-3 to heat the space in sub-zero weather to prevent freezing. RAU-3 is interlocked with the paint booth exhaust fan, so much of the heat is immediately exhausted. It is recommended to either rectify the pipe freezing problem, add a heat trace, or if these options are not possible, as a last resort install a gas fired unit heater with a thermostat probe near the troublesome pipes. See Appendix B-6 for detail. The various HVAC systems in the Transit building are not well integrated from a building systems standpoint. This is understandable given the diversity of activities and functions the building houses. Heat is generated by a disconnected set of ERU’s, RAU’s, and gas fired radiators supplying the repair, paint, bus wash and tire bays and boilers supplying building hydronics. Notwithstanding the building’s diverse activities, it is recommended ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 12 of 65 to perform an overall, systems level engineering evaluation of the building’s HVAC as well as an HVAC controls audit. This would be folded into MOA’s 5-10 year facility strategy, presumed to already exist. Several HVAC components appear to be nearing EOL, including the ERU’s in the main repair bay the boilers and the AHU’s. HVAC System EEM’s: Estimated cost of engineering evaluation and HVAC adjustments: $15,000 Savings and Payback unknown Estimated cost to rectify pipe freeze, or install heat trace or unit heater $2,000 Annual Energy Savings $1,630 Annual Maintenance Savings $1,000 Payback 9 months H.) BUILDING SHELL INSULATION There are approximately 31,000 square feet of walls, per plans, that have only the sandwiched insulation provided by the 2” pre- formed structural metal panels. This results in a calculated, composite wall insulation value of R-5.5 Adding 4” of insulation (nominal R-13) to these walls results in composite R10.5 value and an estimated $5290 in annual savings. A maximum of $105,000 expense to install this insulation (whether fiberglass batt, rigid, foil backed foam, spray in, etc.) results in a 20 year payback. While this is a long payback, it should be considered based on the lifetime of the improvement. It is recommended to determine feasibility of making this improvement within a $105,000 budget. Appendix B-18 shows calculated savings. Building Shell Insulation EEM: Estimated cost for contractor feasibility “ballparks” $ 0 Budget for improvements $105,000 Annual Savings $ 5,290 Payback 20 years ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 13 of 65 The total estimated cost and estimated annual savings of the eight (A. through H.) summary EEM’s listed above. Table 3 Combined total of priority, high‐ROI,  strategically recommended EEM’s listed above:  Estimated total cost  $       179,066  Annual Savings  $         55,259  Simple payback  3.2 years  Does not include design or construction management costs In addition to EEMs, various Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) are recommended since they are policies or procedures that are followed by management and employees that require no capital outlay. Examples of recommended ECMs for this facility include: 1. Turning lights off when leaving a room that is not controlled by an occupancy sensor. 2. All man-doors, roll-up doors and windows should be properly maintained and adjusted to close and function properly. 3. Turn off computers, printers, faxes, etc. when leaving the office. 4. Close overhead doors immediately after entering the vehicle bay. The total of all 34 recommendations listed in Appendix’s B and D of this report, estimate to save $55,817/year, with an installed cost of $194,476. The combined payback on this investment is 3.5 years. This does not include design or construction management services, Some of the costs totaling $194,476 are incremental costs for higher efficiency replacements, so actual budgetary costs for unit replacements will be higher. See individual EEM’s for further detail. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 14 of 65 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 heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. The auditor may or may not identify system deficiencies if they exist. The auditor’s role is to identify areas of potential savings, many of which may require more detailed investigation and analysis by other qualified professionals. a. Audit Description and Methodology: Preliminary audit information was gathered in preparation for the site survey, including benchmark utility consumption data, floor and lighting plans, and equipment schedules where available. A site visit is then performed to inventory and evaluate the actual building condition, including: i. Building envelope (walls, doors, windows, etc) ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning iii. Lighting systems and controls iv. Building specific equipment v. Plumbing Systems b. Benchmark Utility Data Validation: Benchmark utility data provided through AHFC’s initial phase of their REAL program is validated, confirming that meter numbers on the subject building match the meters from which the energy consumption and cost data were collected. If the data is inaccurate or missing, new benchmark data is obtained. In the event that there are inconsistencies or gaps in the data, the existing data is evaluated and missing data points are interpolated. c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site visit and during the site visit is entered into AkWarm-C, an energy modeling software program developed specifically for AHFC to identify forecasted energy consumption. The forecasts can then be compared to actual energy consumption. AkWarm-C also has some pre-programmed EEM retrofit options that can be analyzed with projected energy savings based on occupancy schedules, utility rates, building construction type, building function, existing conditions, and climatic data uploaded to the program based on the zip code of the building. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on manufacturer’s cataloged information. Energy cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Installation costs include the labor and equipment required to implement an EEM retrofit, but design and construction management costs are excluded. Cost estimates are +/- 30% for this level of audit, and are derived from one or more of the following: Means Cost Data, industry publications, experience of the auditor, local contractors and/or equipment suppliers. Brown Electric, Haakensen Electric, Proctor Sales, Pioneer Door, ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 15 of 65 and J.P. Sheldon, all in Anchorage, were consulted for some of the lighting, boiler, overhead door and air handling (respectively) 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 breakeven cost divided by the initial installed cost. A simple life-time calculation is included in the AkWarm-C calculation for each EEM. The life-time for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the life-time of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total life-time multiplied by the yearly savings. d. Limitations of the Study: All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided, and may only act as an approximation. In some instances, several methods may achieve the identified savings. This report is not a design document. A design professional, licensed to practice in Alaska and in the appropriate discipline, who is following the recommendations, shall accept full responsibility and liability for the results. Budgetary estimates for engineering and design of these projects in not included in the cost estimate for each EEM recommendation, but these costs can be approximated at 15% of the cost of the work. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 16 of 65 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 NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 17 of 65 4. Building Description and Function: The site visit and survey of subject building occurred on December 7th, 2011. The ambient outside temperature was 29F. The west wall of this building has zero clearance with the east wall of the old transit maintenance building. Simplified building footprint: Main repair bay Bus wash and tire bays Paint bays The building consists of a number of high bay spaces, offices and shops on its first floor and offices and storage space on its second floor. The main repair bay includes approximately 40,000 square feet, the paint bays are approximately 7300 square feet, the machine and various other shops in the northeast corner of the building have approximately 10,000 square feet. There are approximately 11,000 square feet of offices and storage space on the second floor and about 4000 square feet on the first floor of offices, lockers and lavatories. The bus wash bay and tire shops were added in 1987, and added approximately 27,000 square feet of space and fill the gap between the old and new transit maintenance buildings. In total, the building consists of 107,846 square feet calculated from plans and verified with sample measurements on site. This building is constructed on a concrete slab poured on grade. The building structure consists of steel posts and CMU interior walls, metal trusses, beams and studs finished on the exterior with pre-formed, insulated metal panels (nominal R-10). Fiberglass batting is called for in specific areas of the plans to fill the spaces between steel 2x4 studs, and interior walls are either bare CMU, bare metal panels or finished with gypsum. Walls with batt and finished with gypsum have a calculated composite value of R-10.5, per AkWarm-C; walls left as unfinished metal pre-formed panels (most second floor walls excluding offices) have a calculated composite R-5.5 value. The roof is supported by steel joists and has a calculated R-42 insulation value. All windows are in very good condition, aluminum and double pane. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 18 of 65 Building details are as follows: a. HVAC: Heat is distributed in this building by a variety of systems. The offices have VAV boxes receiving heated ventilation air from air handlers (AHU’s) with hydronic coils, perimeter offices are also supplied via hydronic finned tube baseboards, shops and storage spaces are served by hydronic unit heaters. Heat is supplied via building hydronics by two cast iron, sectional boilers, one gas fired and the second utilizes a dual fuel burner. The second boiler fuel appears to be set up for oil and does not appear to be in use. (typically fuel oil is a backup fuel, in this case it also appears that the system was designed to utilize waste oil as well) Rooms with hydronic baseboards and VAV units have sensors proving temperature feedback to the DDC control system. Spaces with unit heaters have integral or zone, wall mounted thermostats controlling the fan and a fluid valve on the heater. Ventilation, Energy Recovery and Return Air units: Heat and ventilation is supplied to the high bay maintenance and repair shops, the paint bays and the bus wash bays via direct gas fired energy recovery units (ERU’s) and/or return air units (RAU’s). The bus wash bay is heated and ventilated primarily by two large, gas fired, ERU’s (ERU-6 & 7) located on a mezzanine against the east wall; one of the units (ERU-6) appears not to be in service. The Main repair bay is ventilated by two very large ERU’s (ERU-3 & 4) located centrally on a gantry against the ceiling. One of these units also appears to be non-functional. There is a third, small RAU-1 on the ceiling near the east wall of the main bay. The bus paint booth has a dedicated ERU-5 and RAU-2 interlocked with the paint booth exhaust fan (EF). The small paint booth has a dedicated RAU-3, also interlocked with its exhaust fan. These 3 units are located on the second floor over the paint booth bay. Over the last few years, RAU-3 has been used to heat the small, south paint booth area and prevent pipe freezing when outside temperatures are below 0F – a very inefficient solution to an insulation problem, as most of the heat is exhausted through the paint booth EF. See Appendix B-6 for EEM recommendation. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 19 of 65 Ventilation is supplied to the 43 office VAV boxes by AHU-2 and to the machine shop by AHU-1, both with hydronic heating coils. Radiant Heat: The bus wash area, in addition to heat provided by ERU’s, has an infra- red, gas fired, in-line burner, radiant heat tube system installed for supplementary heat. Controls: The building has a Siemens Apogee electronic control system with non-adjustable, sensor thermostats, presumably controlling the local VAV boxes and hydronic valves. The numerous unit and cabinet heaters are controlled by local, low voltage adjustable thermostats. b. Cooling System: Plan schedules identify a 20 Ton, air cooled condensing unit with a VAV option. It is not clear that this unit is still in use. It would presumably provide cooling to the offices through their VAV boxes. c. Snow Melt: Building plans show snow melt pads at man door aprons. It did not appear, judging from the snow conditions at door aprons during this audit, that this system was operable, d. Appliances: There are 2 Hotsy, gas fired hot water pressure washers in use in this facility. The larger of the two is a 657 MBH unit which consumes an estimated 1741 MMBTU ($13,900) of natural gas annually. Hotsy manufactures machines today reported to be 15% more efficient than the older units in these buildings. See Appendix D-4 for EEM recommendations. There are 2 older full size refrigerators located in the lunch break room and paint by office. They are recommended for replacement with Energy Star units at EOL in AKWarm-C, see Appendix B-12 for details. This building has 12 PC’s in use which appear to be replace- able at EOL with laptops and secondary monitors. e. Plumbing Fixtures: This building contains a total of (7) toilets, (3) urinals, (7) lavatory sinks and (5) showers. All fixtures are manually operated and appear to be post-1992, so consume 1.6 gpf (toilets) and 1 gpf (urinals) and 2.6 gpm (shower heads). See Appendix D-1 for EEM recommendations. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 20 of 65 f. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water is provided to showers and lavatories by an 80 gallon, direct gas fired State hot water heater located in the boiler room. g. Head Bolt Heaters: There are 4 duplex, GFI receptacles suitable for head bolt heaters on the outside of this building. They did not appear to be in use during this audit. Additionally, there is a sub-panel and BTU meter on the north side of the building which provides electrical power to a “bull rail” with head bolt heaters in the north parking lot of the adjacent Public Works building. Whether the BTU meter is being monitored and/or billed or not, it is recommended to replace the standard duplex receptacles with microprocessor controlled units per the EEM in Appendix B-21. h. Interior Lighting & Controls: This building had a comprehensive lighting upgrade completed in 2010. There are several fixtures still in need of an upgrade, and there are opportunities for further savings from the new lighting through the use of lighting controls. The high bay vehicle maintenance, paint and bus wash bays have been upgraded from HPS-250W lamps/fixtures to T5 lighting. These areas either utilize manual switching or digital, programmable switch timers. The timers are better than manual switches, but are over-ridden when activated manually and can be left on until their next programmed cycle, when the space is unoccupied. There is not a significant electrical savings by converting from HPS-250 lamps to T5’s, in fact there is often an increase in consumption. In order for this kind of lighting upgrade to provide savings, lighting controls must be installed to take advantage the on/off capability of T5 lighting. Zoned occupancy controls are recommended and included in the Appendix B EEM’s. Lighting Controls: Most of the building’s rooms have been retrofitted with motion sensing occupancy installed in the existing duplex switch boxes. There are no ceiling mounted, dual technology sensors or zoned occupancy controls installed. The complete building lighting upgrade should be completed by adding these three types of sensors where appropriate, in the rooms and spaces where manual switches or digital switch timers are still in use. See Appendix E for additional information on occupancy sensors. All exit signs in the building are either LED, unlit or self luminous ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 21 of 65 i. Exterior Lighting: Exterior lighting has been upgraded to LED wall packs. All appear to be controlled by photo- sensors. j. Building Shell: The building shell appears to be in good condition, although by today’s standards, it is under-insulated. Wall insulation is the 2” of insulation sandwiched inside the pre-formed exterior metal panels. Approximately 25% of the wall area (plan sections are inadequate to determine closer approximation) has secondary interior insulation consisting of 4” of fiberglass batting. Appendix B-18 investigates upgrading insulation. There are 11 exterior sectional overhead doors and 5 rubber, roll-up doors. All appear to have been replaced since 1984, and are in good condition. Most have automatic open/close capability which prevents doors left open inadvertently. Appendix B-29 investigated replacing the remaining sectional doors with rubber doors at EOL (not recommended). There are several roof leaks in the building (of which on-site personnel are very aware) which should be fixed. k. Motors: There is a large quantity and diversity of motors in use in this building. Generally, motors of 5 HP and greater should be looked at for replacement with premium efficiency motors. Appendix D-3 identifies possible efficiencies to be gained through motor replacements. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 22 of 65 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 (see Appendix F) were averaged then input into AKWarm-C. 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 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 $2.99/SF, the ECI for the building next door (the Old Transit Maintenance Building) $3.33, and the ECI for the Northwood Street Maintenance building, a third building in Anchorage with similar usage, is $3.70. The energy use index (EUI) is the total annual average electrical and heating energy consumption expressed in thousands of BTUs/SF. The average of the 2009 and 2010 EUI for this building is 209 kBTU/SF; the average 2009/2010 EUI for the Old Transit Maintenance building is 196 kBTU/SF and 282 kBTU/SF for the Northwood Street Maintenance Building. The average for Warehouse and Storage buildings (the closest building category tracked by the US Energy Information Administration, see www.eia.gov/emeu/efficiency/cbecstrends/cbecs_tables_list.htm) in the Mid- West US, the coldest region in the continental US, is 74 kBTU/SF. The US average is 44 kBTU/SF. 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. 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 are included in the lighting project analysis that is performed by AkWarm-C. 7. Loan Program: The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855, ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 23 of 65 “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 NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 24 of 65 Appendix A - Photos South bus fuel/wash bay entrance; note automatic door openers with “traffic lights”, retrofitted LED wall packs above doors and older sectional overhead door on left, newer rubber roll-up doors on right. Bus wash bays on left, wash water recovery and oil separation tanks on right, one of two ERU’s is above tanks ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 25 of 65 BTU meter on north side of building Existing digital timer’s controlling high bay lighting in bus wash and paint bays ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 26 of 65 Leaking roof – main repair bay Leaking roof, second floor office ceiling ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 27 of 65 Typical exterior walls without secondary insulation inside, R5.5. View on either side of overhead door and on right wall, is of the inside of the unfinished structural insulated pre-formed wall panels Main repair bay, looking north ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 28 of 65 Bus Paint Booth 16’x16’x60’ . ERU-3 control panel, difficult to tell if motor controller in “hand” position indicates 20HP motor is running 24/7 or burner is locked out! ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 29 of 65 Small paint booth room where freezing pipes occurr and RAU-3 is used to prevent freezup. Axle lifts have reached their EOL and are now locked out. This was one of the last times they were used. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 30 of 65 Aerial View of the subject building Old Transit Maintenance Building New Transit Maintenance Building (Subject Building) NORTH ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 33   January 15, 2012 Page 33   ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 1/17/2012 11:11 AM General Project Information  PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION  Building: New Transit Maintenance Building Auditor Company: Energy Audits of Alaska  Address: 3701 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr Ave Auditor  Name: James Fowler  City: Anchorage Auditor Address: P.O. Box 220215  Client Name: Mike Fleagle  Client Address: 3640 E. Tudor  Anchorage, AK 99507  Auditor Phone: (206) 954‐3614  Auditor FAX: (   )    ‐  Client Phone: (907) 343‐8248 Auditor Comment:   Client FAX:   Design Data  Building Area: 107,846 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space:  5,718,415  Btu/hour   with Distribution Losses:  6,069,546 Btu/hour   Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and  25% Safety Margin: 9,252,356 Btu/hour   Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,  if served.  Typical Occupancy: 31 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: Chugach Electric ‐ Commercial ‐ Sm Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas ‐ Commercial ‐  Lg  Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.115/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.697/ccf     Annual Energy Cost Estimate  Description Space  Heating  Space  Cooling  Water  Heating Lighting Refrige ration  Other  Electrical  Other  Natural  Gas  Loads **  Clothe s  Drying  Ventilati on Fans  Service  Fees Total Cost  Existing  Building  $147,147 $0 $2,920 $49,530 $292 $13,306 $26,534 $0 $65,511 $1,517 $306,756  With  Proposed  Retrofits  $119,823 $0 $2,946 $34,289 $157 $10,717 $15,978 $0 $65,511 $1,517 $250,939  SAVINGS $27,324 $0 ‐$26 $15,241 $134 $2,588 $10,556 $0 $0 $0 $55,817    ** Other Natural Gas Loads:  ‐Large Hotsy hot water pressure washer – see EEM Appendix D‐4  ‐Small Hotsy hot water pressure washer – see EEM Appendix D‐4  ‐RAU‐3 used as paint booth room heater to prevent water pipe freeze‐up in sub‐zero weather, see Item 6   ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 34   January 15, 2012 Page 34                     $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 Existing Retrofit Service Fees Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Cooking Annual Energy Costs by End Use ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 35   January 15, 2012 Page 35   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy & Maintenance Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Lighting: T5‐6lamp,  HO, high bay, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $6,845 Cost  included  in EEM’s  below  2 Lighting: T5‐4lamp,  three shift add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $1,240 Cost  included  in EEM’s  below  3 Setback Thermostat:  Paint Bay  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Paint Bay space.  $2,628 $1,000 33.44 0.4 4 Setback Thermostat:  Second Floor North  Storage Spaces ‐  typically unoccupied  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Second Floor North  Storage Spaces ‐ typically  unoccupied space.  $1,510 $600 32.02 0.4 5 Setback Thermostat:  Second Floor South  Storage and  Warehouse  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Second Floor South  Storage and Warehouse  space.  $2,794 $1,200 29.63 0.4 6 Pipe Freezing in  small paint booth in  sub‐zero weather  Increase insulation to  prevent pipe freezing;  If  this is not possible, add  gas‐fired unit heater to  small paint booth room to  avoid using RAU‐3 as  heating to prevent pipe  freezing.  $2,630 $2,000 17.1 .8 7 Other Electrical:  Personal Computers  Replace with 12 Laptop  $432 $300 9.15 0.7 8  Appe ndix  D‐2  De‐Stratification  Fans   Install (20) de‐stratification  fans in vehicle  maintenance and west  service bays.  $21,000 $12,000 8.7 .6 9 Lighting: T5‐4lamp,  two shift, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $1,631 $1,200 8.64 0.7 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 36   January 15, 2012 Page 36   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy & Maintenance Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 10 Setback Thermostat:  Machine Shop, Unit  rebuild,  Transmission Shop  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Machine Shop, Unit  rebuild, Transmission Shop  space.  $628 $1,200 6.66 1.9 11  Appe ndix  D‐3  Motor replacements Replace V‐1 Rupp furnace  and V‐5 exhaust fan  motors with premium  efficiency versions at EOL.  $1,533 $7,850 3.95 5.1 12 Lighting: T12‐1lamp Replace with FLUOR T5  45.2" F28T5 28W Standard  StdElectronic  $55 $100 3.85 1.8 13 Lighting: T5‐2lamp in  bus paint booth  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Clock Timer  or Other Scheduling  Control  $73 $150 3.10 2 14 Refrigeration:  Standard residential  type refrigerator  At EOL, replace with 2  Standard Refer  $65 $150 2.74 2.3 15 Lighting: T5‐2lamp,  three shift, typically  occupied, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $2,132 $5,000 2.71 2.3 16 Lighting: T12‐1lamp  96" already on OS  Replace with 2 FLUOR (2)  T5 45.2" F28T5 28W  Standard StdElectronic  $40 $300 1.89 7.5 17  appe ndix  D‐4  Hot water pressure  washers ‐ combined  Replace 2 units with new  versions, 15% more  efficient  $4,335 $18,000 1.57 4.2 18 Lighting: T12‐2lamp  stairwell lighting ‐  add OS  Replace with 2 FLUOR (2)  T5 45.2" F28T5 28W  Standard StdElectronic  $14 $300 1.33 21.8 19 Refrigeration:  Vending Machine  Add new Seasonal  Shutdown;  www.vendingmister.com  $44 $225 1.24 5.1 20 Lighting: T5‐1lamp,  three shift, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $89 $500 1.13 5.6 21 Above‐Grade Wall:  Walls ‐ 2" pre‐ formed insulated  metal panels only  Install additional insulation  (R‐13) in empty 2x4 cavity.  $5,290 $105,000 1.0 20 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 37   January 15, 2012 Page 37   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy & Maintenance Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 22 Setback Thermostat:  Parts room and Unit  storage  Implement a Heating  Temperature Unoccupied  Setback to 55.0 deg F for  the Parts room and Unit  storage space.  $97 $1,600 0.77 16.5 23 Lighting: T5‐2lamp,  single shift, typically  unoccupied, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $88 $750 0.75 8.5 24 Other Electrical:  Head Bolt Heaters in  north parking lot of  Public Works  building next door  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Other  Controls; www.iplc.com  $386 $4,000 0.61 10.4 25    Lighting: T5‐2lamp,  single shift, typically  occupied, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $65 $750 0.55 11.6 26 Lighting: T8‐2lamp,  special lighting  Replace with 4 FLUOR (2)  T5 45.2" F28T5 28W  Standard StdElectronic and  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $12 $801 0.48 66.4 27 Lighting: T5‐2lamp,  two shift, typically  occupied, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $63 $1,000 0.40 15.9 28 Lighting: T8‐1lamp,  paint bay mezzanine  Replace with 20 FLUOR T5  45.2" F28T5 28W Standard  StdElectronic and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $18 $1,850 0.40 104.2 29 Lighting: T5‐1lamp,  two shift, add OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $9 $150 0.39 16.4 30 Lighting:  Incandescent bulbs ‐  Elevator mechanical  Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL,  A Lamp 15W and Remove  Manual Switching and Add  new Occupancy Sensor  $5 $165 0.18 35 31 Lighting: CFL's, add  OS  Remove Manual Switching  and Add new Occupancy  Sensor  $3 $300 0.06 110.3 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA Appendix B Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  New Transit Maintenance Building Page 38   January 15, 2012 Page 38   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy & Maintenance Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 32 Garage Door:  Overhead doors ‐  sectional  Replace existing garage  door with R‐7, 2"  polyurethane core  replacement door.  $66 $26,033 0.06 393.5 Appe ndix  D‐1  Plumbing Fixtures:  (7) W.C., (7)  lavatories, (3)  urinals, (5) showers  Replace shower heads and  lavatory  fixtures with low  flow versions; replace  toilet and lavatory valves  with proximity sensing  on/off controls, replace  urinals with ultra‐low flow  and proximity sensing  controls  Appe ndix  D‐5  Heating pipe  insulation  Replace missing insulation  on all heat piping in  building     TOTAL $55,817 $194,476 3.5               ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 37 of 65 Appendix C – Equipment Schedules – Transit Building EQUIPMENT SCHEDULES  ‐ COMPILED FROM PLANS OR ON‐SITE  NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION, WHERE ACCESSIBLE (e = estimated)  AIR HANDLER SCHEDULE  SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL  FAN  CFM  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLTS/ PH REMARKS  AHU‐1  Trane TMZ‐41, 800 MBH  coil 21,000 15/460/3  Located in 218 mechanical room;  Serves machine shop, interlocked with  EF‐3  AHU‐2 Trane HAS, 460 MBH coil 2,100 7.5/460/3  Located in 218 mechanical room;  Serves offices, interlocked with EF‐6  AHU‐3 Trane 31E, 945 MBH coil 13,600 20/460/3    RAU‐1 Trane 6A, 270 MBH coil 2,500 1.5/460/3  Located main repair bay; Preheat coil  270 MBH   ST‐BF Humidifier 5000e 25Kw/460/3  located in 218 mechanical room; serves  machine shop  FURNACE/ERU/RAU SCHEDULE  ERU‐3 Trane PV‐20, direct gas  fired 2,000 MBH  20,200 20/460/3  Supply side; on "hand"; located in, and  serving main repair bay  20,200 20/460/3  Return side; on "hand"; located in, and  serving main repair bay  ERU‐4 Trane PV‐27, direct gas  fired 3,000 MBH  27,100 25/460/3  Supply side; on "hand"; located in, and  serving main repair bay  27,100 25/460/3  Return side; on "hand"; located in, and  serving main repair bay  ERU‐5 Trane PV‐4, direct gas  fired 500 MBH  4,000 5/460/3  Supply side; located on mezzanine above,  and serving paint bays  4,000 5/460/3  Return side; located on mezzanine above,  and serving paint bays  ERU‐6 Trane PV‐12, direct gas  fired 1,200 MBH  12,900 15/460/3  Supply side; Located in bus wash bay,  serves same; on time clock  12,900 15/460/3  Return side; Located in bus wash bay,  serves same; on time clock  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 38 of 65 ERU‐7  Trane PV‐12 or  equivalent, direct gas  fired 1,200 MBH  12,900 15/460/3  Data not in plans and nameplate not  accessible; Assume another equivalent to  ERU‐6; located on mezzanine above, and  serving bus wash bay; controlled by  analog timers  12,900 15/460/3  Data not in plans and nameplate not  accessible; Assume another equivalent to  ERU‐3; located on mezzanine above, and  serving bus wash bay; controlled by  analog timers  RAU‐2  Weather Rite MD224  HH, direct gas fired 3208  MBH 27,000 25/460/3 located on mezzanine above paint booth  RAU‐3  Weather Rite (assumed)  1,150 MBH 13,000 10/460/3  Nameplate not accessible, original plans  barely readable; assumed to be located in  small paint booth, interlocked with paint  booth exhaust fan EF‐13  EXHAUST FAN SCHEDULE  SYMB OL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLTS/ PH REMARKS  EF‐1 Trane 13N10 2540 1.5/460/3 tailpipe exhaust, main repair bay  EF‐2 Trane 15P11 3270 2/460/3 tailpipe exhaust, main repair bay  EF‐3 Trane 18‐FC 3980 2/460/3 located in 203 small unit storage room  EF‐3‐1 Trane 16M3 2300 1/460/3 per plans  EF‐3‐2 Trane 10F2 600 .17/115/1 per plans  EF‐3‐3 Trane 10F2 700 .17/115/1 per plans  EF‐3‐4 Trane 9F1 400 .17/115/1 per plans  EF‐4 Trane 18‐FC 3980 2/460/3  on "hand"; 202 mechanical room, serves  machine shop  EF‐5 Trane 16N12 2700 1.5/460/3 located in 203 small unit storage room  EF‐6 Trane 15N11 2850 1.5/460/3  located in boiler room 219, serves  offices  EF‐8 Trane 6DX 250 .05/115/1  Located in pump room, continuous  operation  EF‐9 Trane 6DX 250 .05/115/1  Located in pump room, continuous  operation  EF‐11 Trane 6DX 250 .05/115/1  located in paint storage room 143,  continuous operation  EF‐12 DeVilbiss Type JL, 4208‐1 22,000 10/460/3  located on mezzanine over paint bay;  interlocked with RAU‐2 and spray  solenoids; main evacuation fan for bus  paint booth  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 39 of 65 EF‐13 unknown 12,000 5/460/3e  Assumed to be located in paint bay  exhaust stack or rooftop; interlocked  with RAU‐3  EF‐14 Loren Cook Gemini 4‐10 30 25w/115/1 per plans  EF‐15 Trane 9G3 800 .25/115/1  located in boiler room 219, tstat  controlled  EF‐16 Trane 12M6 2000 1/460/3 per plans  EF‐17  Loren Cook 270‐CLV‐1  axial tube fan 7500 2/460/3 located in 203 small unit storage room  RF3‐1 Trane 22‐FC 10,900 5/460/3 per plans, serves offices  PUMP SCHEDULE   SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL GPM  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLTS/ PH REMARKS  not  visible Red Jacket P33R1 40 .3/208/1 Gasoline Pumps (per plans)  SP‐5 Paco 45‐15700 20 1/208/3 Sump pump (per plans)  SP‐6 Paco PIP 701 20 .3/120/1 Elevator pit sump pump (per plans)  SP‐1 Roper 3611GHBRV 50e 2/208/3 Waste oil pump  LP‐1 US Electrical 80e  5/460/3  85.5% sewage lift pump in wash bay   LP‐2 US Electrical 80e  5/460/3  85.5% sewage lift pump in wash bay   PP‐1 Lincoln   pneumatic Solvent  PP‐2 Lincoln   pneumatic Automatic Transmission fluid  PP‐3 Lincoln   pneumatic Engine Oil  PP‐5 Lincoln   pneumatic Chassis grease pump  PP‐6 Lincoln   pneumatic Gear Oil  PP‐11 Lincoln   pneumatic Windshield washer solution  CP‐1 Grundfos UPS 50‐80/2F 60e .6/460/3  Main glycol circulation ‐ zone 1; on  "hand"  CP‐2 Grundfos UMC65‐80 25e .5/115/1 Main glycol circulation ‐ zone 2  CP‐3 Grundfos UMC50‐80 19e .5/115/1 Main glycol circulation ‐ zone 3  no tag Grundfos UPS15‐42F 5e 85w/115/1  appears to be un‐used, assume for  waste oil delivery to boiler  CP‐4 Bell & Gossett NBF‐22 5e 92w/115/1 Domestic HW re‐circ pump          ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 40 of 65 BOILER SCHEDULE   SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL    MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLT S/PH REMARKS  B‐1 Burnham 4FW‐209  PowerFl ame  Burner  CR2‐G .75/480/1  3‐Pass, wet back, cast iron sectional  boiler, 2186 MBH input, 1749 MBH  output, 80% efficient, gas fired  B‐2 Burnham 4NW‐397A  Aux  controls  575w;  preheat  1730;  PowerFl ame  burner  C2‐WB 1/460/3  3‐Pass, wet back, cast iron sectional  boiler, 2700 MBH input, 2160 MBH  output, 80% efficient, gas fired (dual fuel)  AIR CONDITIONER SCHEDULE      Trane RAUB‐C204 ‐ 250  MBH    (2)  1/460/3  EER 10.3 condenser only; EER 8.2 with  blower (total system 27.2 Kw)  UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE  SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL  CFM  (e=est.)  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLT S/PH REMARKS  UH‐1  Trane Horizontal 18S ‐   3.5 MBH 280 .04/115/1 104 generator room, integral tstat  UH‐2  Trane Horizontal 38S ‐  19.1 MBH 544 .05/115/1  105 transmission testing room, integral  tstat  UH‐3  Trane Horizontal 38S ‐  19.1 MBH 544 .05/115/1    UH‐3‐1  Trane Horizontal 18S ‐   3.5 MBH 280 .04/115/1 106 compressor room, integral tstat  UH‐3‐2  Trane Horizontal 42S ‐   20 MBH 590 .04/115/1    UH‐3‐3  Trane Horizontal 100S ‐   62.5 MBH 1535 .1/115/1    UH‐4  Trane Horizontal 38S ‐  19.1 MBH 544 .05/115/1 120 Parts room, integral tstat  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 41 of 65 UH‐5  Trane Horizontal 38S ‐  19.1 MBH 544 .05/115/1 120 Parts room, integral tstat  UH‐6  Trane Vertical 64P ‐   34.2 MBH 989 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, wall tstat  UH‐7  Trane Vertical 64P ‐   34.2 MBH 989 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, wall tstat  UH‐8  Trane Vertical 64P ‐   34.2 MBH 989 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, wall tstat  UH‐9  Trane Horizontal 60S ‐   34.6 MBH 815 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, integral tstat  UH‐10  Trane Vertical 64P ‐   34.2 MBH 989 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, wall tstat  UH‐11  Trane Vertical 64P ‐   34.2 MBH 989 .05/115/1 216 Parts storage room, wall tstat  UH‐12  Trane GPNC‐003 23  MBH 440 .01/115/1 Located in wash bay  UH‐13  Trane GPNC‐003 23  MBH 440 .01/115/1 Located in wash bay  no tag  Unknown Vertical UH,  est 25 MBH 850e  .16/115/1 e  Located in Machine shop ‐ not on plans,  nameplate not accessible  no tag  Unknown Vertical UH,  est 25 MBH 850e  .16/115/1 e  Located in Machine shop ‐ not on plans,  nameplate not accessible  no tag  Unknown Vertical UH,  est 25 MBH 850e  .16/115/1 e  Located in Machine shop ‐ not on plans,  nameplate not accessible  no tag  Unknown Vertical UH,  est 25 MBH 850e  .16/115/1 e  Located in Machine shop ‐ not on plans,  nameplate not accessible  CH3‐1R  Natkin E460A002  16.2  MBH 200 .1/115/1e wall tstat  CH3‐1L  Natkin E460A002  16.2  MBH 200 .1/115/1e wall tstat  CH3‐2  Natkin E46A003  22  MBH 300 .1/115/1e wall tstat  HOT WATER GENERATOR SCHEDULE   SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL GALLONS  NUMBE R OF  ELEMEN TS ELEMENT SIZE  P‐18 State SBE80 500 E4 80 n/a  Direct gas fired water heater, 500 MBH  input          ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 42 of 65 RADIATION SCHEDULE   SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL Quantity  MBH of  each  unit    RP‐1  Roberts Gordon Model  BH‐175 gas fired IR, in‐ line tube heaters 3 burners 175  175 MBH max capacity, 82% thermal  efficiency, low voltage wall tstat  PLUMBING FIXTURES   SYMB OL FIXTURE GPF  QUANTIT Y REMARKS    W.C. 1.6 7 manually operated    Urinal 1 3 manually operated    Lavatory ‐ 7 manually operated    Showers  2.6  gpm‐e 3 manually operated    semi‐circular sink ‐ 2 foot bar activation  DE‐STRATIFICATION FAN  SYMB OL MFGR/MODEL  QUANTI TY  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLT S/PH REMARKS  DF‐1 Leading Edge 5600‐7 2  110w/277 /1 (2) located in wash bay  EQUIPMENT ‐ BUS WASH BAY ‐ 2 MACHINES  Tag or  Quanti ty (if  no tag) EQUIPMENT  Total  annual  operati ng  motor‐ hours**  MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLT S/PH REMARKS  2  Ross White Panel 1 ‐  chemical delivery pumps 940  6/208/3,  82%  Chemical delivery, detergent  transfer/delivery  WP‐1,  WP‐2  Ross White water  recovery tank pumps 940  25/460/3,  91.7% Wash water recycling tank main pumps  2  Ross White main pumps  ‐ Panel 2 940  5/460/3,  87.5% Wash and rinse pumps  SP‐1, Submersible sump 470 .5/208/1e Wash bay sump pumps  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 43 of 65 SP‐2 pumps  OS‐1 Oil separator pump 470  7.5/460/3 e oil/water separation system  10 Brush drive motors 2350  5/460/3,  87.5% Vibra‐Mop brush drive motors   Bus Wash Schedule:    One or the other wash line is used, not both same time    46 bus washes per day, 5 days per week    26 bus washes per day Saturday and Sunday    Each bus wash is approximately 2 minutes, motors only run during wash    Total of 14,100 washes per year (470 hrs of operation)  ** if there are 2 motors, and only one is in use at any time, operating‐motor hours will be 470; if 2  motors are in use, operating‐motor hours will be 940  MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT   QUAN TITY EQUIPMENT    MOTOR  DATA   HP/VOLTS/P H REMARKS  1  Berner Air Curtain  Model AFB   (4) 1/480/3  contains (4) 1 HP motors; 324 MBH HX coil  capacity  1  D.A. Matot, Inc. Model  111 "dumb waiter"   3/460/3 plus 345w control circuitry  1 Hotsy steam cleaner  5632B    15/460/3,  91%  657 MBH; located in bus steam cleaner  bay    .25/445/1 forced draft flue exhaust motor  1  Stertil Koni Lift ST‐4250‐ 10, 54,000 lb lift    (4)  7040w/220/3 4 motors used at once  4 Washtronics Transpo‐Lift     2/230/3 4 units used together, all locked out  11  LiftMaster (or equiv.)  exterior sectional  overhead door openers   .75/460/3e Exterior doors  5  TNR Industrial Rubber  Door openers   2/460/3 Exterior doors  8  Interior sectional  overhead door openers   .75/460/3e Interior doors  3 Metal cut off saws   .75/115/1e located in Paint Bays  2 300 Amp Arc Welders   20Kw/230/3e located in Paint Bays  1 255 Amp Arc welder   18Kw/230/3e located in Paint Bays  1 55 Amp Arc cutter   5Kw/230/3e located in Paint Bays  1 Nederman Weld exhaust     .5/115/1e located in Paint Bays  2  Stertil Koni ST‐1055,  12,000 lb lift   (2) 2/480/3 2 motors used at once  1 Powermatic belt sander   2/230/3e located in Paint Bays  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 44 of 65 1 Powermatic disc sander   2/230/3e located in Paint Bays  1  Baldor Pedestal Grinder  ‐ Large   2/208/3 located in Paint Bays  1  Baldor Pedestal Grinder  ‐ Small   .3/115/1 located in Paint Bays  1 Sumaca bent grinder   .5/115/1e located in Paint Bays  2 Delta Floor drill press   .5/115/1e located in Paint Bays  1 Sheet Metal Shear   10/460/3 located in Paint Bays  1  Tire Siping Machine ‐  drive motor   1/115/1 located in Tire bay  1  Tire Siping Machine ‐  siping motor   .5/115/1 located in Tire bay  1 Elevator   20/460/3e    1 Hotsy Steam Cleaner      5/460/3  350 MBH; NG fired; Located in Parts  cleaner room 111  1 Hydroblast Parts cleaner   10/480/3  Drive motor; Located in Parts cleaner  room 111    7680w/480/3 Heater  1 Empire Sandblaster,  DCM‐80A   1/115/1 Located in Brake Shop 102  1 Torit Air cleaner Model  84   3/208/3 Located in Brake Shop 102  1 Star Brake Drum Lathe   8/208/3e Located in Brake Shop 102  2 Weaver Hydraulic Unit  Model SP‐1838   7.5/460/3  (2) ECO Axle lifts, each serving 3 bays ‐ all  locked out 12/2/11  1 Powermatic floor drill  press   1/208/1, 77% located in machine shop 112  1 Hydraulic Press   5/208/3, 84% located in machine shop 112  1 Receiving Loading Dock  Hoist    7.5/208/3,  85% located in east bay receiving dock  2 Ingersoll Rand Nirvana  N50    50/460/3 Drive motor and Fan motor; total package  68A at 460V   3.2/460/3  1 General Air Dryer,  Model G5‐400‐A4    2/460/3 Compressor and fan motors; located in  compressor room   (2) .17/460/3  2 Ingersoll Rand Nirvana  N50   50/480/3e Compressors  2 Paint Can shakers   .25/115/1 located in Paint Bays  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 45 of 65 Appendix D Additional, Building-Specific EEM details D-1: Plumbing fixtures: All urinals should be retrofitted or be replaced with ultra low flow models. Urinals, faucets and toilet fixtures should have proximity sensing on/off controls. This audit does not include water usage and AkWarm-C does not allow for the modeling of it, but a typical faucet retrofit will result in 30% water savings and will payback in less than 3 years. Ultra low flow urinals (1 pint to ½ gallon per flush) can save up to 66% of water used, and typically pay back within 3 years. These payback periods are reduced by 66% or more if the fixture is replaced at its EOL rather than while it’s still functioning. Then the cost used is the incremental difference in cost between an ultra-low-flow fixture and a straight across replacement with the same fixture. D-2: De-Stratification Fans: The high bay (28’ ceilings) areas of this building are approximately 75% of the total square footage and are estimated to consume approximately 80% of the total heating costs, or $120,000/year. Typically in a 28’ high bay space, a temperature differential between the ceiling and the thermostat will be 5F-15F. Installing the appropriate number and size de-strat fans in a high bay space with a 7.2F temperature differential (as a conservative example) and a 28’ ceiling, per the graphs below, yields a 18% energy savings. This results in an annual savings of $21,000. Estimated cost to install a de-strat fan is $600 each; assuming 20 fans are appropriate (number, location and size of fans must be determined by an engineer or fan vendor), total costs are $12,000 and payback is 7 months. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 46 of 65 D-3: Motor replacements: It is generally recommended that all motors, 5HP or larger, operating for 1500 hrs or longer at continuous speed, be replaced at EOL with premium efficiency motors. The payback on replacing an operating motor with a premium efficiency motor of the same size is longer than a typical motor life of 20 years, but this is heavily dependent on the annual usage. The payback on replacing a burnt-out motor with a premium efficiency motor is generally less than 10 years – again, depending on the usage. Motors in this building, 5HP and larger, are listed below, along with recommendations for replacement at burn-out for the cost effective instances. There are no instances in this building of cost effective motor replacement prior to burn out. Table 4 Motor use &  location HP/Volts/Ph   Existing  Efficiency  Premium  Efficiency  Estimated  annual  usage  (hrs)  Annual  Savings  Burn‐ out  payback  (yrs)  Replacement  payback  (yrs)  RECOMMENDED REPLACEMENT AT BURNOUT WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR  EF‐12 10/460/3 87.0% 91.70% 1600  $          62.65 3.2 19.2  RAU‐2 25/460/3 87.0% 93.60% 1600  $       215.49 3.7 11.1  AHU‐2  7.5/460/3 82.3% 91.70% 750  $          46.57 4.3 19.3  ERU‐3  supply 20/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $       109.02 4.6 17.4  return 20/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $       109.02 4.6 17.4  ERU‐6  supply  15/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $          81.77 4.9 17.1  return 15/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $          81.77 4.9 17.1  ERU‐7  supply 15/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $          81.77 4.9 17.1  return 15/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1500  $          81.77 4.9 17.1  ERU‐4  supply 25/460/3 e88.5% 93.60% 1500  $       153.46 5.2 15.6  return 25/460/3 e88.5% 93.60% 1500  $       153.46 5.2 15.6  RAU‐3 10/460/3 e87.0% 91.70% 984  $          38.58 5.2 31.1  RF3‐1 5/460/3 e85.5% 89.50% 1500  $          26.06 5.8 23  Hotsy 5632  Pressure  Washer 15/460/3 91.0% 93.00% 2650  $          62.44 6.4 22.4  AHU‐3 20/460/3 e88.5% 93.00% 1000  $          72.68 6.9 26.1  Oil  Separator  Pump 7.5/460/3e e82.3 91.70% 470  $          29.18 6.9 30.8  AHU‐1  15/460/3 88.5% 93.00% 1000  $                55 7.3 25.7  HydroBlast  Parts  cleaner 10/480/3 85.5% 91.70% 520  $          27.33 7.3 43.9  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 47 of 65 Ross White  (2 motors) 6/208/3 82.0% 89.50% 470  $          23.35 8.6 38.5  Receiving  Loading  dock motor 7.5/208/3 85.0% 91.70% 520  $          22.28 9 40.4  NOT RECOMMENDED  LP‐1 5/460/3 85.5% 89.50% 470  $            8.16 18.4 73.5  LP‐2 5/460/3 85.5% 89.50% 470  $            8.16 18.4 73.5  Hydraulic  Press drive  motor 5/208/3 84.0% 89.50% 260  $            6.32 23.7 94.9  ERU‐5  supply 5/460/3 e88.5% 89.5% 1600  $            6.29 23.8 95.3  return 5/460/3 e88.5% 89.5% 1600  $            6.29 23.8 95.3  RF‐13 5/460/3e e88.5% 89.50% 984  $            4.13 36.3 145.3  Ross White  (2 motors) 5/460/3 87.5% 89.50% 470  $            3.99 37.6 150.4  Ross White  Vibra‐Mop  drive  motors (10  motors) 5/460/3 87.5% 89.50% 470  $            3.99 37.6 150.4  Sheet  metal shear 10/460/3e e85.5% 91.70% 100  $            5.26 38.1 228.3  Ross White  Tanks (2  motors) 25/460/3 91.7% 93.60% 470  $          17.29 46.3 138.8  Brake  Drum lathe  drive motor 8/208/3e e82.0% 91.70% 50  $            3.22 62.2 279  Elevator  drive 20/460/3e e88.5% 93.00% 25  $            1.82 275.2 1045  Weaver  Hydraulic  lift motor  (No longer  in use) 7.5/460/3 not in use 91.70%             Compresso r motors (2  motors) 50/480/3 assumed premium             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  AHU/ERU/RAU fan motor operating hrs assumed to be 25% of working shift hours   Ross White is the Bus Wash machine  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 48 of 65 D-4: Upgrade Hot Water Pressure Washers: The Hotsy 5632 gas fired hot water pressure washer in the steam clean bay is estimated to be in use 52.5 hrs/week, 50 weeks/year. At 657,000 BTU/hr, its annual consumption is 1741 MMBTU. The smaller, 350,000 BTU/hr unit in the parts cleaner room is estimated to be in use 36 hrs/week, consuming 630 MMBTU annually. Together, these machines consume an estimated $18,900/year of natural gas – nearly 10% of the entire building’s usage. A European pressure washer manufacturer (Karcher, who also owns the 2 largest US manufacturers, Hotsy and Landa) has developed a “down draft double pass” burner system reported to be twice as efficient as Hotsy or Landa burners, but the machine is only set up for 50Hz operation and is not available in the US. That said, today’s systems are still 15% more efficient than the units in this building, and the 2 units in this building are at, or nearing the end of their 10 year life. It is recommended to replace both units now with a new, higher efficiency versions. Estimated costs, savings and paybacks are: Large unit cost $11,000 Annual energy savings $ 2,098 Annual maintenance costs $ 1,000 Payback 3.6 years Small unit cost $ 7,000 Annual energy savings $ 737 Annual maintenance costs $ 500 Payback 5.6 years D-5: Install heating pipe insulation: Even in conditioned spaces, heat delivery pipes should be insulated. This becomes more important after set-back thermostats are installed, as reduction in room temperatures create additional load on the boiler when piping is un-insulated. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 49 of 65 Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s Duplex Head Bolt Heater Controls ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 50 of 65 Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s Vending machine energy savings device “Vending Miser” ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 51 of 65 Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s Lighting Controls Occupant controls 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. 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. 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 3 years, depending on the light fixture consumption and occupancy of the room. A sample high bay occupancy sensor (which could be used for zone lighting control) specification follows. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 52 of 65 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 53 of 65 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 54 of 65 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 55 of 65 Appendix E - Specifications supporting EEM’s De-Stratification Fans There are various sizes, qualities and configurations of de-stratification fans. The three companies below cover the range of options available. The EEM in this report uses costs in the mid-range of these options. Marley Engineered Products, “Leading Edge” fans. Smaller, higher speed, shorter lifetime, relatively inexpsensive. Web: http://www.marleymep.com/en/leading-edge/products/ventilation/ceiling-fans/heavy-duty- commercial-ceiling-fans.aspx ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 56 of 65 Appendix E - Specifications supporting EEM’s De-Stratification Fans “Big Ass Fan Company” – large slow speed, heavy duty, 10+ year life, can be outfitted with variable speed and tstat. www.bigassfans.com “Air Pear” – quiet, aesthetically un-obtrusive, relatively inexpensive. ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 57 of 65 Appendix F – Benchmark Data REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form  PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION  Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date  MOA Municipal  Government/Subdivision  01/12/12  Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage  Transit Maintenance Other 107,846  Building Type Community Population Year Built  Mixed 261,500 9999  Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip  3701 Dr. Martin Luther  King Dr (originally 3650 E  Tudor Rd) Bldg D Anchorage 99517  Buiding Size Input (sf) = 107,846 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 183,127.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 184,362 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh) 1,500,240 2009 Electric Cost ($) 183,100 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 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 58 of 65 2009 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Steam Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2009 Steam Cost ($) 0.00 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 23,433,019 2009 Total Energy Cost ($) 367,462 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 169.8 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 47.5 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 217.3 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 1.71 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 1.70 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 3.41 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 166,515.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 138,502 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 59 of 65 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh) 1,446,320 2010 Electric Cost ($) 139,821 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Oil Cost ($) 0 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($) 0 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Coal Cost ($) 0 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Wood Cost ($) 0 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($) 0 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms) 0.00 2010 Steam Cost ($) 0 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 21,587,790 2010 Total Energy Cost ($) 278,323 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 154.4 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 45.8 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf) 200.2 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 1.28 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf) 1.30 ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 60 of 65 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 0.00 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 2.58 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's Appendix F – Benchmark Tables and Graphs Natural Gas Btus/CCF =100,000 Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (CCF) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Natural Gas Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($) Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jan‐09 1/6/2009 2/5/2009 33 36007 36007   $36,153  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Feb‐09 2/6/2009 3/5/2009 33 26464 26464   $26,588  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Mar‐09 3/6/2009 4/2/2009 28 21402 21402   $21,515  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Apr‐09 4/3/2009 5/7/2009 32 20421 20421   $20,531  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 May‐09 5/8/2009 6/4/2009 28 10636 10636   $10,724  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jun‐09 6/5/2009 7/6/2009 33 7722 7722   $7,804  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jul‐09 7/7/2009 8/6/2009 30 4105 4105   $4,183  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Aug‐09 8/7/2009 9/4/2009 32 3614 3614   $3,689  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Sep‐09 9/5/2009 10/6/2009 29 4463 4463   $4,541  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Oct‐09 10/7/2009 11/5/2009 28 8675 8675   $8,766  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Nov‐09 11/6/2009 12/3/2009 30 15411 15411   $15,523  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Dec‐09 12/4/2009 1/7/2010 31 24207 24207   $24,345  $0.00                           Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jan‐10 1/8/2010 2/4/2010 32 23422 23422   $19,441  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Feb‐10 2/5/2010 3/4/2010 28 22630 22630   $18,786  $0.00    ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 62 of 65 Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Mar‐10 3/5/2010 4/8/2010 31 20011 20011   $16,620  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Apr‐10 4/9/2010 5/6/2010 32 15002 15002   $12,592  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 May‐10 5/7/2010 6/3/2010 27 9001 9001   $7,583  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jun‐10 6/4/2010 7/8/2010 33 6766 6766   $5,717  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Jul‐10 7/9/2010 8/5/2010 29 4072 4072   $3,468  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Aug‐10 8/6/2010 9/2/2010 34 5201 5201   $4,522  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Sep‐10 9/3/2010 10/7/2010 30 5688 5688   $4,912  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Oct‐10 10/8/2010 11/4/2010 29 9586 9586   $8,030  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Nov‐10 11/5/2010 12/2/2010 28 13987 13987   $11,551  $0.00   Enstar NGC 9945‐17024/144554 Dec‐10 12/3/2010 1/2/2011 31 31149 31149   $25,280  $0.00     Jan ‐09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 183,127 183,127 0.00 $184,362    $0    Jan ‐10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 166,515 166,515 0.00 $138,502    $0  Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg: $0.00 Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0.00  ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 63 of 65 Electricity Btus/kWh =3,413 Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Total Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($) CEA 1‐17996952 Jan‐09 12/8/2008 1/7/2009 30 130720 4461.4736   $18,177 $0.14   CEA 1‐17996952 Feb‐09 1/7/2009 2/6/2009 30 131120 4475.1256   $18,179 $0.14   CEA 1‐17996952 Mar‐09 2/6/2009 3/10/2009 32 136800 4668.984   $18,847 $0.14   CEA 1‐17996952 Apr‐09 3/10/2009 4/8/2009 29 125840 4294.9192   $16,395 $0.13   CEA 1‐17996952 May‐09 4/8/2009 5/8/2009 30 127840 4363.1792   $16,576 $0.13   CEA 1‐17996952 Jun‐09 5/8/2009 6/8/2009 31 122000 4163.86   $15,705 $0.13   CEA 1‐17996952 Jul‐09 6/8/2009 7/8/2009 30 112400 3836.212   $12,511 $0.11   CEA 1‐17996952 Aug‐09 7/8/2009 8/6/2009 29 110320 3765.2216   $12,368 $0.11   CEA 1‐17996952 Sep‐09 8/6/2009 9/4/2009 29 108960 3718.8048   $12,299 $0.11   CEA 1‐17996952 Oct‐09 9/4/2009 10/6/2009 32 127520 4352.2576   $13,487 $0.11   CEA 1‐17996952 Nov‐09 10/6/2009 11/5/2009 30 128800 4395.944   $13,748 $0.11   CEA 1‐17996952 Dec‐09 11/5/2009 12/7/2009 32 137920 4707.2096   $14,808 $0.11                           CEA 1‐17996952 Jan‐10 12/7/2009 1/5/2010 29 124560 4251.2328   $11,966 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Feb‐10 1/5/2010 2/5/2010 31 136480 4658.0624   $12,972 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Mar‐10 2/5/2010 3/9/2010 32 137040 4677.1752   $12,919 $0.09    ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE BUILDING January 24, 2012 Page 64 of 65 CEA 1‐17996952 Apr‐10 3/9/2010 4/8/2010 30 131760 4496.9688   $13,277 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 May‐10 4/8/2010 5/10/2010 32 130560 4456.0128   $12,918 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Jun‐10 5/10/2010 6/9/2010 30 111920 3819.8296   $11,391 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Jul‐10 6/9/2010 7/9/2010 30 112320 3833.4816   $10,778 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Aug‐10 7/9/2010 8/9/2010 31 122480 4180.2424   $11,735 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Sep‐10 8/9/2010 9/8/2010 30 114080 3893.5504   $10,936 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Oct‐10 9/8/2010 10/7/2010 29 98720 3369.3136   $9,631 $0.10   CEA 1‐17996952 Nov‐10 10/7/2010 11/8/2010 32 111280 3797.9864   $10,423 $0.09   CEA 1‐17996952 Dec‐10 11/8/2010 12/8/2010 30 115120 3929.0456   $10,875 $0.09   Feb ‐09 to Jan ‐10 total: 1500240 51203.1912 0.00 $183,100   $0 Feb ‐10 to Jan ‐11 total: 1446320 49362.9016 0.00 $139,821   $0 Feb ‐ 09 to Jan ‐ 10 avg: $0.12 Feb ‐ 10 to Jan ‐ 11 avg: $0.10  $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 Jan‐09 Apr‐09 Jul‐09 Oct‐09 Jan‐10 Apr‐10 Jul‐10 Oct‐10 Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Transit Maintenance ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) $0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000 $20,000 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000 Jan‐09 Mar‐09May‐09 Jul‐09 Sep‐09 Nov‐09 Jan‐10 Mar‐10May‐10 Jul‐10 Sep‐10 Nov‐10 Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr) Transit Maintenance ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kWh) Electric Cost ($)