Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
UTILITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
FEBRUARY 27, 2019 CENTRAL ENGINEERING
2020 Yonkers Road, Raleigh, NC 27699
Executive Summary:
Through legislation and now Governor Cooper’s Executive Order 80, we are charged with reducing our
utility intensity (energy use per gross square foot, and, water use per gross square foot) by 30% by 2015
and 40% by 2025 respectively. In FY 2016-2017 we were around 23% towards the new 40% goal. This
year we dropped to around 16% towards this goal. An unanticipated increase in utility usage and a
corresponding $5 million increase in spend occurred last FY. We are working to determine the cause of
the anomaly, but further analysis is required. Attaining the 40% goal is possible but there are challenges:
• Up to $120 million dollars in utility efficiency projects are required to reduce the intensity 40%
from the current 2003-20041 baseline based on last year’s utility usage. However, this is a
worthy investment as the return on investments (ROI) range from 10% to 20% and higher. Since
utility unit costs (e.g., $/kwh or $/kilowatt-hour) almost always increase over time, the ROI
could potentially be even higher.
• If we are granted adequate funds from the General Assembly to meet this target, staffing levels
are our next concern. As a point of reference, we have approximate 1/10 the Energy
Management staffing levels compared to NC State University. Because there are inadequate
resources, legislative support of our proposed legislation like House Bill 1292 can help us
address this issue2. Attaining this goal requires project execution. Energy Managers are
responsible for all facets of utility usage and project management is just one facet.
• One of our key partners in energy management is the Division of Adult Corrections (DAC). They
face their own challenges:
o Staffing levels are down because of full employment in the construction and
maintenance industry, and wages and compensation are part of the issue.
o Major safety and security projects are a key priority for the next two years which further
strain maintenance staff efforts.
o There are inadequate positions for the highly technical positions required.
To address these challenges:
• The National Guard has their own energy manager who is aggressively executing utility
efficiency projects.
• We are planning on creating utility efficiency liaisons in all our major divisions to ensure all
major divisions within NCDPS are actively engaged in our utility intensity reduction efforts.
1 Additional research is required to establish FY 2002-2003 usage and intensity as the baseline as required by Executive Order 80. 2 See Attachment A. HB 1292 allows universities -but not other state agencies - to use energy efficiency savings from completed projects for new energy efficiency projects. Utility budgets are maintained at “pre-energy efficiency project” funding levels.
• We have created a funding source by opting out3 of our high usage electrical accounts. In FY
2017-2018, over $300,000 in funding was available. By FY 2019-2020 this should increase to
over $1 million per year.
• We are attempting to hire additional temporary project managers using opt-out funds.
• We are streamlining data collection and creating a data analytics dashboard. This dashboard will
allow us to instantaneously analyze usage outliers and establish project priorities.
• We are focusing on quick payback and quickly executable projects such as the installation of
correctional institution perimeter lighting using in-house labor resources. These lights also
improve security – which is a critical matter for our customer.
• We were able to have these lights placed on state term contract which dramatically reduces our
procurement time and increases the number of projects we can complete annually.
• We are establishing building management system (BMS) guidelines and analytics to ensure all
future BMS projects are consistently and efficiently executed. The analytics will allow us to
quickly address control issues.
These efforts are having a meaningful impact on utility usage and greenhouse gas emissions. Ultimately,
success is dependent upon adequate legislative funding for projects and staffing. Again, the language we
have proposed in Attachment A can help address these issues. Creative outside-of-the-box solutions are
necessary to reach the 40% reduction goal in utility intensity.
3 All major utility companies charge a rider (a small fee) for energy efficiency and demand side management for every kilowatt-hour used. The Public Utility Commission allows customers with electrical accounts using 1 million kwh or greater to “opt-out” of this rider. We are using these and other credits to our electrical accounts to fund our energy efficiency projects.
Main Report:
GS 143-64 requires a reduction in utility intensity of 30%4 by 2015. Executive Order 805 requires an
additional 10% reduction by 2025. These acts provide NCDPS the opportunity to invest in projects that
provide a great return on investment, keeps rising utility costs in check, and has the additional positive
impact of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As noted in our USI report dated 2016-2017 our usage
intensity has trended downward resulting in a water intensity reduction of 23% and energy intensity
reduction of 22%. A significant upward trend in utility intensity occurred in 2017-2018 which has
bumped our reductions down to 18% and 13% respectively (Graphs 1 and 2)6.
Graph 1: Historic Energy Usage Intensity
4 Session Law 2008-203/Senate Bill 1946: Intensity is the energy and water use per square foot. 5 Governor Roy Cooper dated October 29, 2018. 6 Assumptions must be made regarding data collection. These are listed in Attachment C.
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
NCDPS Energy Usage IntensityBTU/GSF
FY 2003-2004 Baseline
BTU/GSF 30% Bench-mark 40% Benchmark
Graph 2: Historic Water Usage Intensity
Several questions warrant addressing:
• What challenges prevented us in reaching the original 30% goal? The primary reasons can be
traced to:
o Insufficient legislative funding. Attaining a 30% let alone a 40% reduction will require an
investment of approximately $120 million dollars over six years, or $20 million a year.
The return on investment (ROI) is still very good – from 10 to 20% and higher.
-
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
NCDPS Water Usage IntensityKGal/GSF
FY 2003-2004 Baseline
KGAL/GSF 30% Bench-mark 40% Benchmark
o Insufficient staffing. We have a $54 million utility spend managed by only one person.
Project management, though critical to actual intensity reductions, is only one of his
many responsibilities7. To put into perspective, we have approximately 1/10th the
staffing as NC State University.
o Antiquated utility data collection. Approximately 20% of our time is spent managing the
data (the data manages us – not us the data). This reduces the time for executing
projects.
o Lack of a data analytics tool. Having the necessary tools allow us to quickly pinpoint
priorities and address outlier issues.
• What are the causes for the upward trend in usage intensity? The division driving the utility
spend is, by far, the Division of Adult Correction (DAC) at 90% (Graph 3) (this is up from 85% in
FY 2016-2017). Further analysis shows our DAC utility spend is driven first by water & sewer
(44%) and then electricity (37%) (Graph 4)8. From this and field experience we can surmise:
Graph 3: Utility Spend by Division
7 Some of the responsibilities include data management, data analyses, usage outlier analyses and site visits, yearly rate analyses for electricity and natural gas, billing errors, energy design guideline development, energy audits, retro-commissioning, relationship building, researching funding opportunities, project reviews for energy efficiency… 8 Water, Sewer and Storm Water are all billed together. They are thus treated as one utility.
48963639.25, 90%
82909.69, 0%
1071825.72, 2%
4424300.83, 8%
113382.84, 0%
NCDPS Total SpendBy Division
FY 2017-2018
A DIV: Adult Correction
ABC Commission/ALE
B DIV: Juvenile Justice
D DIV: LawEnforcement
SBI
Graph 4: DOC Spend by Utility
o Water leaks are an issue. Many of our correctional facilities are over 20 years old and
have aging water infrastructures. A series of major water leaks have occurred recently in
our water distribution systems which are difficult to locate and expensive to repair. As
an example, hard to locate leaks at Nash CI have resulted in approximately 8.9 million
gallons of water loss at cost of over $75,000 over a nine-month period.
o One of our key partners necessary to assist us in energy management is the Division of
Adult Corrections (DAC) which faces their own challenges:
▪ Staffing levels are down because of full employment in the construction and
maintenance industry, and wages and compensation are part of the issue.
▪ Major safety and security projects are a key priority for the next two years,
further straining maintenance efforts.
▪ There are inadequate positions for the highly technical positions required such
as high-performance maintenance and managing building management systems
(BMS).
Despite these challenges, our department is moving aggressively to reduce our utility intensity:
• To create funding sources:
o We continue opting-out of our large electrical account Energy Efficiency (EE) and
Demand Side Management (DSM) programs for our large use accounts. These funds
are being used to for energy efficient projects:
▪ FY 2017-2018 resulted in $300,000 in funds and executed projects.
▪ FY 2018-2019 will result in approximately $1 million in funds and projects.
66583.34, 0%
18004736.39, 37%
1597235, 3%
5183837.14, 11%209680.25, 0%2258455, 5%
11699163.69, 24%
143611.27, 0%9800337.17, 20%
NCDPS Spend by UtilityDivision of Adult Corrections
FY 2017-2018
BOD
Electric
Fuel Oil
Gas
Outdoor Light
Propane
Sewer
Stormwater
Water
Sewer
Water
Stormwater
▪ FY 2019-2020 and thereafter we anticipate an additional $200k in funds and
projects will be available.
o We have recommended legislative language9 (Attachment A) that will:
▪ Create a reserve fund for all credits received via our Opt-Out program and utility
savings realized from our projects.
▪ Allows us to hire staff to manage our utility efficiency projects.
▪ Ensure budgets are maintained at pre-utility efficiency project levels and
account for known rate increases.
• To address staffing:
o Efforts are underway to fill a vacant project manager position. Their immediate priority
will be energy efficiency projects. We are also advertising for a temporary project
manager funded from Opt-Out receipts. Keep in mind that full time staff have a higher
level of commitment and ultimately develop a better understanding of the complexities
of our operation – and therefore solutions.
o We are planning on creating utility efficiency liaisons in all our major divisions to ensure
all divisions are actively engaged in our utility intensity reduction efforts.
• To address utility data collection, we are:
o Recommending all state cabinet agencies use a single utility management database
(UMD) solution that is already currently available to all state agencies.
o Recommending all non-utility company energy expenditures (propane, fuel oil, diesel
and gasoline) be processed through this single UMD solution.
o Working to implement the above recommendation in-house by July 2019.
o Developing a data analytics solution to allow instant analysis of utility trends and
patterns.
• To accelerate project execution, utility intensity reductions and thus carbon emissions:
o We are focusing on energy related projects at our DAC sites - specifically electricity as it
is our largest energy spend:
▪ Our top priority is outside perimeter fence/area LED lighting. Lighting solutions
and fixture selections for all sites will be in hand no later than June 2020.
Currently, lighting solutions/fixtures selections are in place for thirteen sites.
The Thousand Cell facilities are top energy users and funding /installation for all
six sites will be completed by FY 19-20. With lighting solutions/fixture selections
in hand, all other sites can replace fixtures as they fail. These fixtures are now
on state term contract as of October of 2018 allowing us to quickly select and
procures fixtures. The majority of the Opt-Out funds will be used to execute
these projects.
▪ Interior LED lighting is our next priority. A consultant will be hired by July 2019
to assist in the installation of interior lighting fixtures and research rebate
9 The Universities have Session Law 2010-196 (HB 1292) which allows them to use their opt-out credits and energy savings for projects in the upcoming year and does not reduce utility budget levels based on the utility saving projects.
options. In the interim, sites are being funded on a first come first served basis
for complete interior retrofits. We will consider a performance contract (PC)10
for the installation of interior LED retrofits/replacements if staffing can be
funded to manage this program.
▪ Simultaneously, we are developing a program to address our Building
Management Systems (BMS). Guidelines (specifications, graphics, data
analytics) will be completed by July 2019 and will be used for all future BMS
installations. Retro-commissioning using these guidelines will be performed
starting with our NORESCO performance contracting (PC) sites (Harnett CI,
NCCIW and Nash CI). A data analytics platform will be installed at Central
Engineering to ensure BMS systems are being properly managed and utilized to
maximize comfort while using and reducing energy consumption.
▪ Our next step will be addressing High Performance Maintenance (HPM) which
can deliver up to 25% energy and equipment life cycle cost savings. We will
start by performing a survey no later than July 2019 that will allow us to create a
guide developing a comprehensive program for all sites by July 2020.
o Current water related projects are focused on water infrastructure leaks. Lessons
learned from these current projects will be used to streamline leak detection and water
leak correction. We have requested funding for two water management systems11 at
Caledonia and Alexander CI. We will consider PC if staffing can be funded to manage the
program.
The National Guard has their own energy manager who is aggressively addressing utility efficiency at
their sites. Their efforts include hiring additional energy management staff, LED interior and exterior
lighting, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) test and balance.
A representative list of our projects is provided as Attachment B. Upon completion of these projects,
the overall energy intensity should drop by 1%.
Our efforts are having a meaningful impact on utility usage and a reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions. Ultimately, success is dependent upon adequate funding and staffing.
-End-
10 An extremely important note: Performance contracting is considered a means to fund utility efficiency projects,
quickly identify the most promising projects (with the highest ROI), and quickly execute the projects. It is assumed
third party verification will ensure project quality control and ensure the guaranteed savings occur. This is a
misunderstanding. In-house professional staffing with experience in PC is required to negotiate and manage the
11 Water management systems are used for Correctional Institutions to limit the number of toilet flushes and water usage in (primarily) individual cells. Reductions of up to 50% are common. However, the systems are costly (typically $1 million to $2 million per site), and utilities have increased our water rates to offset the reduced demand (Harnett CI).
North Carolina Department of Public Safety We have read the Strategic Energy & Water Management Plan for my organization, I am aware of the reductions required in G.S. 143-64.12(a) and Governor Cooper’s Executive Order #80. We support reducing the utility intensities requirement for our organization.
Implemented March 1, 2018
Name Division/ Dept
Title Signature Date
Paul E. Braese, PE, LEED AP
Central Engineering Energy Manager
Matt Dobson, CEM, PMP, LEED AP
National Guard Energy Manager
Robert Gron, PE Central Engineering Deputy Director
Jeffrey T. O’Briant, PE, Central Engineering Director
Mike Hall, CEM, PEM Adult Correction and Juvenile Justice
Assistant Director of Facilities Management
Douglas Holbrook Department of Public Safety Deputy Secretary/Chief Financial Officer
Erik A. Hooks Department of Public Safety Secretary
Attachment A
Proposed Language For Retaining Energy Savings for State Agencies:
1/22/2019
GS 143-64.17N Utility Savings Investments
(a) “Utility Reserve Account” means an account established by a State Agency as defined in
G.S. 143-64.11(7) for the sole purpose of funding approved Utility Savings Projects and
for personnel directly engaged in these energy efficiency efforts. The Utility Reserve
Account is established as a non-reverting special revenue account. Accordingly, revenue
in the Fund at the end of a fiscal year does not revert. All credits or receipts collected by
the agency pursuant to this subsection shall be remitted to the State Treasurer to be
deposited and held in this Account. Funds credited to that agency through energy and
water saving initiatives, by opting out of utility company energy efficiency (EE) and
demand-side management (DSM) programs, utility rebate credits/checks, enrollment in
DSM programs, and renewable energy and energy efficiency requirements (EE)
(collectively, the DSM/EE Programs) shall be deposited into the account.
(b) The Director of the Budget under the authority set forth in G.S. 143C-6-2 shall not
decrease the recommended continuation budget requirements for utilities for State
Agencies by the amount of energy savings realized from implemented energy
conservation measures, utility rate credits, and savings in excess of the guaranteed
savings achieved through a guaranteed energy savings contract. Utility budgets shall also
reflect known utility rate increases.
(b) The account shall be used to:
(1) Provide funds to maintain the efficiency of the measures installed.
(2) Provide funds for additional energy efficiency projects for the State Agency
(3) Employ personnel to directly engage in energy efficiency and/or continued utility
cost reduction efforts.
(c) State Agencies shall submit annual reports on completed energy efficiency projects and
use of funds authorized pursuant to this section as required under G.S. 143-64.17H
(d) This bill shall be retroactive to FY 2017-2018.
Division FY Site Projected CostProjected Kwh
Saved
Projected Mbtus Saved
Proj. Reduction Overall Electrical Usage (%)
Estimated Yearly
Savings $Description
National Guard FY 2018‐2019RC & FMS Lenoir
$145,000 311,254 1,062 NA NA Lighting upgrade to LED
interior and exterior at RC &
National Guard FY 2018‐2019CSMS
$125,000 172,919 590 NA NA Lighting upgrade to LED, also installation of high velocity
National Guard FY 2018‐2019Salisbury
$650,000 87,925 300 NA NA Install generator for AASF site to support AASF emergency
National Guard FY 2018‐2019 JFHQ $135,000 351,700 1,200 NA NA Lighting upgrade to LED
National Guard Fy 2019‐2020RC and FMS Facilities
$120,000 249,121 850 NA NA Duke Energy Small Business Energy Savers Program:
National Guard Fy 2019‐2020 JFHQ $280,000 468,933 1,600 NA NA HVAC test & balance, Space National Guard Fy 2019‐2020 Multiple National Guard Sites $600,000 NA 300 NA NA Utility Usage Monitoring National Guard Fy 2019‐2020 Multiple National Guard Sites $350,000 263,775 900 NA NA Air compressor system
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Bertie CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 5% 38,153$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Caswell CC 47,178$ 121,363 414 8% 8,653$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Tabor CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 4% 34,543$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Alexander CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 4% 25,584$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Pender CI 126723 402,933 1,375 12% 28,841$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Franklin CC 61600 177,600 606 11% 12,718$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Dan River PWF 44,497$ 29,948 102 2% 2,238$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Orange CC 8,050$ 21,462 73 2% 1,635$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Lanesboro CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 5% 32,897$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Neuse CI 119,186$ 598,000 2,040 31% 44,632$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Nash CI 164,527$ 312,258 1,065 5% 27,011$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Mountain View CI 58,190$ 153,212 523 4% 10,858$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Maury CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 4% 29,013$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Scotland CI 156,054$ 415,422 1,417 4% 28,478$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections Fy 2019‐2020 Warren CI 110,109$ 136,766 467 3% 9,958$ Exterior LED Lighting Retrofits
Adult Corrections FY 2018‐2019 Foothills CI 47,979$ 265,200 905 17,344$ Interior LED Lighting Retrofits
Attachment B: Utility Saving Projects, NCDPS and National Guard 2018-2019 & 2019-2020
Attachment C
Data Limitations:
1) The February 1st, 2019 “Comprehensive Program to Mange Energy, Water and Other Utility use for State Agencies and State Institutions of Higher Learning” used NCDPS data with a 2003-2004 baseline as earlier data has not yet been reviewed. This report uses the same data as the 2002-2003 cannot be verified at this time.
2) It is very important to keep the following in mind: a. In FY2003-2004 the only department was was the Department of Corrections.
Juvenile Justice, State Highway Patrol, SBI, National Guard, Emergency Management and ALE (formerly ABC) have all become what is now the Department of Public Safety. Most of these divisions moved over around 2012, some around 2014. Trying to obtain data back to FY2002-2003 – let alone FY 2002-2003 may prove to be difficult if not impossible.
b. The worst case scenario is to use FY 2003-2004 data which came from a third party consultant and therefore may be the most reliable data we have.
c. Gross square footages are difficult to attain on a year by year basis. We are still determining the most accurate way to obtain current as well as historic data. A simple example is our Thousand Cell Facilities. They are leased buildings. Yet, we cannot keep these from our baseline nor from our current portfolio as we operate and maintain these buildings. The square footages of these sites do not show up on the State Property’s square footage data.
d. Propane and Fuel Oil are commodities – not utility companies. Blanket purchase orders are entered and actual fuel purchases are then debited from these totals. Therefore, we must extract data from our antiquated NCAS (North Carolina Accounting System) to obtain this information. It must be carefully vetted as much information. For example, purchases could e for propane forklifts or for generators and not the buildings. Thousands of entries must be analyzed to the best of our ability. This is why these transactions should be processed through Capturis, our utility database resource.
e. So, all data is a best educated guess based on our current understanding of the data, and how the data was entered.
