BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs

April 24, 2015
BPT Project 15013
Building Performance Team Inc | 1631 Acacia Drive NW, Grand Rapids, MI 49504 1
Mr. William Erwin
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI
734 763-4157
wierwin@umich.edu
SUBJECT: RFQ F-040115-01-WE - Retro-commissioning of Medical Science Research Building III
Dear Mr. Erwin,
The University of Michigan is taking a thoughtful and holistic approach to managing both the
facility and its operating expenses. That puts you at the forefront of facility owners, and the
Building Performance Team (BPT) would be delighted to help you move forward to “triple bottom
line” success.
The Building Performance Team believes, and physics confirms, that the energy use of
equipment and systems within a facility is part of an eco-system; each component affects every
other component. Therefore, an all-inclusive analysis of energy usage needs to include the
consideration of the entire eco-system. Our ReCx approach includes:
1. Retro-commissioning (ReCx) is conducted with a combination of:
• site measurement and verification of operation
• detailed trend data analysis using tools such as PG&E/LBNL’s Universal Translator
• and the latest version of DOE’s EnergyPlus energy simulation software
2. After preparing the energy model, we will calibrate it to the actual consumption as recorded
by your electricity and condensate meters using IPMVP Option D methodology and
comprehensive actual weather data for your site’s zip code and billing period.
3. In addition to the energy calibration, BPT will account for the University of Michigan major
energy-impacting changes already planned, including installation of an electric chiller in MSRB
II that will provide chilled water to the MSRB III building. This will dramatically affect all
succeeding energy conservation efforts and their return on investment; as such, we will
model that change prior to evaluating the impact of new Energy Conservation Measures. We
believe that including this will give the university the best understanding of what is occurring
in MSRB III.
Once you have our calibrated and holistic energy model, you will be equipped to make
investments and, more importantly, you will have a foundation upon which to measure long-term
success. The BPT energy model can be easily updated with new ECMs and ongoing actual
weather to measure and verify whether the ECMs are having the expected benefit.
No one is better positioned to serve you than BPT. Our President, Jim Dirkes, has been awarded
certification as a Building Energy Modeling Professional by ASHRAE, joining an exclusive group of
certified BEMPs worldwide. He is also a recognized ASHRAE instructor for the ASHRAE/IBPSA
Building Energy Modeling workshop. BPT has been internationally recognized for our insights
into energy usage. Mr. Dirkes will also be serving on the Steering Committee for the upcoming
2015 ASHARE Energy Modeling Conference in Atlanta. In addition to our recent work, Mr. Dirkes
is familiar with Medical Science Research Building III, as he was part of the team that originally
commissioned it back in the early 1990s.

William Erwin – U of M
April 24, 2015
Proposal #15013
In accord with your request, BPT is pleased to submit this proposal for providing invaluable
insights, improvements, and planning information for your facility. We know that our deep
experience in building systems will produce data-driven, high-confidence, actionable strategies.
Implementing our plans for optimal energy efficiency will not only support the mission of the
Office of Campus Sustainability, it will also continue the proud Michigan tradition of being Leaders
and Best.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this proposal and we look forward to serving you
further on in this project.
Sincerely,
Matthew L Abid
Business Development Leader
matt@buildingperformanceteam.com
cc: File
Enclosures: Complete proposal

April 24, 2015
Proposal #15013
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Building Performance Team (BPT)
BPT is vitally interested in handling orders in a prompt, efficient, and businesslike manner to afford satisfaction to both
the Customer and BPT. In order to further this objective, BPT has established these terms and conditions of sale.
No addition to, deletion from, or modification of any of the provisions of these Terms and Conditions shall be binding
upon BPT unless made in writing and signed by an officer of BPT. Except for the written contract between BPT and the
Customer (the “Contract”), these Terms and Conditions are the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of
the agreement between BPT and the Customer. There are no agreements or verbal understandings outside of the
Contract and these Terms and Conditions.
No terms or conditions contained in any communication from Customer, whether those communications occurred prior to
or after the date of the Contract, shall apply to the dealings between BPT and Customer. Further, BPT’s failure to object
to any terms and conditions contained in any communication from Customer shall not be a waiver or result in an
amendment to the Contract or these Terms and Conditions.
A waiver by BPT of any default by the Customer or of any of these Terms and Conditions shall not be deemed to be a
continuing waiver or a waiver of any other default or of any other of these Terms and Conditions, but shall apply solely to
the instance to which the waiver is directed.
PAYMENT TERMS
Full payment of each invoice issued by BPT is due upon delivery of the invoice to Customer. All payments shall be made
in U.S. Dollars. Amounts due but not fully paid within 30 days of the invoice date will accrue interest at a rate equal to
2% above the prime rate published by the Wall Street Journal or at the highest rate permitted by law, if lower. BPT will
be entitled to suspend performance of its duties under the Contract if any invoices are overdue. BPT reserves the right to
require payment in advance of the providing of services under the Contract if it deems such advance payments to be
desirable in its sole discretion. Customer will reimburse BPT for all expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees,
incurred in the collection of any overdue balances or in enforcing BPT’s rights under the Contract or these Terms and
Conditions.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
The Contract and these Terms and Conditions shall be governed, construed, interpreted, and enforced in accordance with
the domestic laws of the State of Michigan, without giving effect to any choice of law or conflict of law provision or rule
(whether of the State of Michigan or any other jurisdiction) that would cause the application of the laws of any jurisdiction
other than the State of Michigan.
Any and all actions concerning any dispute arising under the Contract or these Terms and Conditions shall be filed and
maintained in a court of Kent County, Michigan or the federal district court for the Western District of Michigan, and in no
other court. The parties specifically consent and submit to the jurisdiction and venue of such state or federal court.
COMPLETION DATES APPROXIMATE
Completion dates are approximate only. BPT shall not be liable for any loss or expense (consequential or otherwise)
incurred by Customer if BPT fails to meet the specified completion schedule for any reason.
CHANGES AND DELAYS
If the Customer makes changes which result in delays or interruptions in the progress of work, or if information to be
furnished by the Customer is lacking or delayed, then the Customer will reimburse BPT for expenses incurred and allow
sufficient additional time for BPT to complete the work.
SITUATIONS OUTSIDE BPT’S CONTROL
BPT will not be liable to Customer for any delay or failure to perform that arises out from causes beyond BPT’s reasonable
control and not due to BPT’s own fault or negligence. BPT shall not be responsible for any failure to perform due to
unforeseen circumstances or to causes beyond its control. Without limitation, BPT is not liable for delay, damage, or loss
due to causes relating to acts of God, public enemy, actions by any domestic or foreign governmental authority (whether
valid or invalid), riots, wars, sabotage, acts of terrorism, labor problems (including lockouts, strikes, and slowdowns),
explosions, transportation, accident, fire, strike, civil or military authority, insurrection, or other causes beyond BPT’s
control, or any other losses due to late delivery or failure of any BPT work.

April 24, 2015
Proposal #15013
TERMINATION
Either the Customer or BPT may terminate the Contract upon written notice to the other party; provided that if the
Customer terminates the Contract it shall pay a termination charge determined solely by BPT, which shall include
payment for work performed prior to the termination date, according to BPT’s established prices, and all costs incurred
and committed for, both direct and indirect.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
In no event shall BPT be liable to Customer, or to any other entity or person, for any indirect, consequential, incidental,
special, punitive, or exemplary damages of whatsoever nature (including but not limited to loss of business, lost profits,
damage to goodwill or reputation, and/or degradation in value of brands, trademarks, trade names, service names, or
service marks), whether arising out of breach of contract, warranty, tort (including without limitation negligence, failure
to warn, or strict liability), contribution, indemnity, subrogation, or otherwise. In the event that Customer or any other
party claiming through Customer brings a claim against BPT whether for breach of contract, tort (including negligence),
or any other basis, BPT’s liability hereunder shall not exceed an amount equal to 25% of the fees timely paid by the
Customer to BPT pursuant to the terms of the Contract. Customer acknowledges and agrees that all designs and
specifications used in Customer’s project are its own, or those of parties other than BPT, and that BPT is not responsible
for defects in such designs or specifications. Customer further acknowledges and agrees that BPT has not guaranteed or
assured LEED or other certification for Customer’s projects.
OVERTIME
It is contemplated that all labor and services by BPT are to be performed during regular working hours on regular
business days. If for any reason the Customer requests BPT to furnish any such labor or services outside of BPT’s regular
working hours, overtime and other expenses occasioned thereby shall be paid by the Customer.
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
All information provided to the Customer as part of this Contract, including energy analysis input files, spreadsheets, and
calculation methodology are the property to BPT and the Customer agrees to keep all such proprietary information
confidential and to refrain from making such information public and from sharing such information with BPT’s
competitors. Customer hereby acknowledges that a violation by it of the terms of this paragraph would result in
irreparable harm to BPT and that damages would be an inadequate remedy. Customer, therefore, agrees that, in
addition to all other remedies available at law, BPT shall be entitled to equitable relief, including without limitation the
right to obtain an injunction to prevent a breach or contemplate a breach of the terms of this paragraph, without any
requirement that BPT post a bond as a condition of such relief.
INDEMNIFICATION
Customer agrees to indemnify and hold harmless BPT, its officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all
liabilities, damages, losses, costs, and expenses, including but not limited to actual attorney’s fees, arising out of or in
connection with
i. any of the services provided by BPT pursuant to the Contract,
ii. the enforcement of any of BPT’s rights in the event of a breach of the Contract or these Terms and Conditions
by the Customer, and
iii. any other loss to BPT related to Customer’s project of which BPT’s services are a part.
BUILDING PERFORMANCE TEAM, INC.
1631 Acacia Drive NW
Grand Rapids MI 49504
(616) 450 8653

Building Performance Team Experience
The Building Performance Team (BPT) provides “building performance”-related services, which
include almost any aspect of a building which affects the longevity, the cost of owning and
operation, or the people and processes that are performed within. Our activities are focused on
providing greater understanding for the building owner / manager. We have done this via
calibrated performance analyses and commissioning services since 2007. Below is a sampling
of our past projects.
• Major Furniture Manufacturer (2015, MI): The owner of this 220,000 sq. ft. facility
was concerned about the performance of its aging building, including the impact of the
manufacturing equipment. BPT is currently providing energy modeling and retro-
commissioning services for this company.
• Bonduelle (2015; Strathroy, ONT): This 50,000 sq. ft. frozen food and processing
facility was purchased and then converted to its present purpose . The owner was
convinced that the aging refrigeration equipment could be improved significantly but
wanted to verify the savings and document them for their utility incentive program. BPT
was contacted in part because of the specialized nature of modeling a refrigerated
facility. BPT is currently providing energy modeling and retro-commissioning services for
this company.
• IBEW local 58 (2014, Detroit, MI): This 30,000 sq. ft. office and assembly facility. The
initial scope of the project was to measure every piece of equipment, but it quickly
became evident that the equipment was in complete disrepair and in need of
replacement. This solution was best for our client in their goal to reach net zero, saving
time and money, while still gaining greater understanding of their energy profile. While
investigating the facility, BPT found opportunities that would cut electricity consumption
by a third, and reduce natural gas consumption by 90%. This would have an impact on
savings by as much as $25,000 annually on HVAC alone.
• St. Joseph Intermediate School District (2014, Centreville, MI) The school district
decided to renovate the Administration building (23,000 sq.ft.) and the Pathfinder
Center (24,000 sq. ft.). The renovations included a new ground-source heat pump HVAC
system for both facilities. The facilities include swimming, gymnasium, classroom and
office uses. It is seeking LEED Silver certification.
• Spartan Stores YMCA (2013, Grand Rapids, MI): This 100,000 sq. ft. community
center includes swimming, gymnasium, weight training and educational uses. It is
seeking LEED Silver certification. BPT performed the retro-commissioning of the facility,
including identifying issues with heating coils, boilers and heat recovery systems.
Savings were roughly $15,000/year.

• Holiday Inn Express (2012, Grand Rapids, MI): This 80,000 sq. ft. hotel property was
concerned about the performance of its aging building and equipment. BPT’s retro-
commissioning activity reconciled actual and calculated energy use to within 5%
annually and an R-squared correlation greater than 88%, while proposing improvements
that would reduce their energy use by over 16% and increase reliability.
• Felt Estate (2010, Holland, MI): The 15,000 sq. ft. Felt Estate was awarded LEED-EB
Gold certification and is the former summer home of Dorland Felt, inventor of an early
mechanical calculator. The facility was exceptionally advanced for its time (1920s), using
cork wall insulation, a fire sprinkler system and wave-powered water pumps. After a
complete restoration, it now uses a VRF HVAC system augmented by a separate gas /
DX system for the Ballroom. BPT helped to identify the impact of its 60 year old steam
boiler on rental income and operating expense – and set the stage for a major upgrade
to a high-performance VRF HVAC system.
• Rosherville Office Renovation (2010, Johannesburg, South Africa): A major
renovation was planned for this 3 story, 250,000 square foot, former lab and office
building. The developer wanted to make the HVAC system selection with reliable
information about projected energy use. BPT teamed with a Johannesburg company to
prepare energy assessments of four different HVAC system types that guided decision-
making for the new HVAC system.
• Ferris State University Rock Café (2009; Big Rapids, MI): This project involved a
complete renovation of the campus central kitchen and a major dining hall on a very
compressed schedule. Commissioning services were provided for over a dozen kitchen
exhaust / makeup air units, plus steam – water heat exchangers and central VAV air
handlers.
• Campau Square Plaza (2009; Grand Rapids, MI): This ~25 year old, 12 story, LEED
EB Gold, Class A office building utilizes VAV air distribution provided by 13 air handlers
with self-contained DX cooling, hot water heating and waterside economizer. BPT
provided an extensive review of current operations and energy systems. We found to
our delight that the building deserved an outstanding Energy Star rating of 87 with its
fairly low cost, simple HVAC system due solely to the long-term efforts of its very
dedicated building manager.

1631 Acacia Dr NW
Grand Rapids, MI
49504
616 450 8653
FACILITY
ENERGY
ASSESSMENT
a a
October,
2014
1358 Abbott Detroit, MI 48226

Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................ 3
Facility Description............................................................................................................. 5
Utility Summary ................................................................................................................. 5
Benchmarking.................................................................................................................... 8
Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Overview..................................................................... 9
Detailed ECM Information..................................................................................................11
Appendix 1: Energy Analysis Methodology...........................................................................14

Executive Summary
Overview
The Building Performance Team performed an energy assessment at 1358 Abbott, Detroit, MI
in order to assess the potential for cost-effective Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs), with
special focus on the impact of building infiltration and insulation. Currently the 30,168 square
foot office building consumes an average of 330,000 kWh of electricity and roughly 21,000
Therms of natural gas per year for a total annual energy expenditure of about $52,000 per
year. The facility has an annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 106 kBtu/square foot.
Regarding Energy Measurements
In the initial onset of this project, we fully planned on measuring energy loads in the building.
During the course of our walkthrough and investigation, through talking with individuals onsite
and evaluating current equipment, it was determined that existing systems were candidates for
complete replacement. Rather than focusing our efforts toward making improvements to a
system that would be difficult to make more efficient (especially the system currently serving
the office area), we felt it was in our client’s best interest to focus on giving them a clear
understanding of the benfits they would gain from a new, state of the art heating and cooling
system. We feel that what is presented in this report will reflect this.
If IBEW believes that they can learn from a more detailed evaluation of the old and inefficient
system in order to make improvements to it, we will do so.
Infiltration
After studying the effects of infiltration on IBEW local union No. 58 building, it was determined
that infiltration has little effect on the overall energy consumption of the building. To determine
how infiltration would impact the building, a model was constructed and calibrated to match the
actual energy consumption of the building, by implementing a year’s worth of energy bills and
using actual weather data for that period. Once the model was calibrated, infiltration rates
were adjusted and predicted energy consumption in electricity and natural gas were recorded.
The percentage difference (drift) from the calibrated model consumption is represented in the
tables below with its corresponding infiltration rate. The calibrated model reflected that current
infiltration rates were around .5 air changes per hour, hence 0% drift. Results showed that
there was very little drift, if any, meaning infiltration had very little impact on overall energy
consumption.

Infiltration Rate vs. Predicted Energy Consumption
Infiltration Rate
(Air changes per
hour)
Drift From Calibrated
Gas Consumption
Drift From Calibrated
Electric Consumption
.1 -2% -1%
.3 -1% -1%
.5 0% 0%
.7 2% 0%
1 4% 0%
Insulation
Much like the infiltration study, once the model was calibrated, insulation values were improved
as an ECM to determine effectiveness and savings potential. Insulation with an R-value of 11
was added to the roof, which currently stands at R-10, for a total of R-21. For the walls, which
currently have no insulation, an R-value of 28 was added to all exterior walls of the building.
This resulted in savings as reflected in the ECMs of this report.
Energy Savings Opportunities
Out of the thousands of ECMs that might be considered, we chose 4 as candidates for
implementation because they represent a “big picture” view of practical improvements which
could be implemented to improve operation. If all ECMs are implemented, the facility can
expect to reduce electricity consumption by 32% and natural gas consumption by 87%. This
would produce an annual operational savings on the order of 106,086 kWh and 18,168 Therms
for a combined $24,730 of utility and O&M expenditure reduction. The following table depicts
expected savings figures for this facility:
Description Savings
Total Annual Savings $24,730
Annual Electricity Savings 106,086 kWh
Annual Natural Gas Savings 18,168 Therms
Total CO2e Reduction 225 tons
Total Energy Reduction 68.1%

Facility Description
Building Description
IBEW Local 58 is a 1 story building, located at 1358 Abbott Detroit, MI. Originally constructed in
1962, with alterations to various parts of the office area in 2001, the building now comprises
roughly 30,000 square feet. The walls are masonry facade on steel frame construction, with a
built up roof. The building is a multi-use facility incorporating office spaces and public assembly
spaces.
Heating and cooling are taken care of by an assortment of chillers, rooftop units, and a multi-
zone unit. All are fairly aged, and are due for replacement.
Lighting is comprised of an assortment of T-12 and T-8 fixtures, along with some miscellaneous
CFL lighting.
Utility Summary
Utility Information
Utility Meter # Rate Notes
Electric 8827757 15 $0.1115/kWh This does not include static monthly charges.
Natural Gas 8900230 15 $0.71294/ccf This does not include static monthly charges.
Reported Utility Data (Aug 2013 - Aug 2014)
Utility Usage $/unit Total Cost
Electricity 337,200 kWh $0.11 $37,598
Natural Gas 26,108 Therms $0.71 $18,089
Monthly Energy Expenditure
The following chart depicts monthly energy expenditure at the facility for the time period Aug
2013 to Aug 2014. The stacked profile indicates how each utility impacts the monthly energy
bill, while the annual profile sheds light on any seasonal variations. A flat annual profile may
indicate potential opportunities for reduction in non-seasonal loads, while a highly seasonal
profile can indicate areas for improvement with the heating and cooling systems.

Total Annual Energy Use by System
This pie chart shows the end-use breakdown of total energy use by system. The largest three
consumers of energy are heating, miscellaneous, and lighting which represent approximately
90% of total annual energy consumption.
Current Annual Energy Use by System
Total Consumption = 3,200 MMBtu

Benchmarking
ENERGY STAR
Currently, this facility is not eligible to receive an ENERGY STAR rating.
In place of ENERGY STAR, the graphic below represents the Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of the
facility in the modeled baseline and post-retrofit conditions. EUI is a benchmark calculated by
converting all the site energy consumption of the facility to kBtu and then dividing by square
feet. Relative performance to peer buildings in the national building stock is indicated by
position in the red-green gradient shown below. Criteria for the relative performance is based
on methodology established by ASHRAE Standard 100.
The current EUI for the IBEW 58 building is 106 kBtu/square foot, as shown in the graphic
below. If all the energy conservation measures outlined in this report are implemented, the
expected EUI is 34 kBtu/square foot.

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Overview
Identified Energy Conservation Measures
The following table highlights ECM opportunities identified during the Audit.
ECM
#
Recommended Energy
Conservation Measure
Electricity Savings
(kWh)
Natural Gas
Savings
(Therms)
Total
Yearly
Savings
($)
1
Reduce plug loads through
controls and increased
awareness targeting
printers, copiers, fax
machines, coffee makers,
etc.
7,419 -20 $812
2
Add insulation to roof and
exterior walls
6,039 10,409 $8,066
3
Major lighting & HVAC
upgrades
91,868 5,786 $14,352
4 Replace Windows 760 1,992 $1,500
Sum Total: 106,086 18,168 $24,730

Total Annual Energy Spend by System
After the above ECMs are implemented, the IBEW 58 will realize significant cost benefits due to
decreased energy consumption and operations and maintenance expenditure. The three end-
uses with the largest energy reduction potential from these ECMs are heating, cooling, and
lighting.
Equivalent Carbon Footprint Reduction
Implementing the proposed energy conservation measures will reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by 449,925 pounds of carbon dioxide per year, equivalent to removing 40 cars
from the road or reforesting 43 acres of trees.

Detailed ECM Information
ECM Calculations/Methodology
The building asset data collected during the ASHRAE energy audit was used to develop an
8,760 hourly energy model of the building. Inferences were made about the unknown building
characteristics using data from tens of thousands of prior audits. The energy model was
calibrated to actual energy use utilizing local weather data from the same time period as the
actual utility bills.
The calibrated 8,760 hourly energy model was then run against an extensive Energy
Conservation Measure (ECM) database with localized costs and optimization algorithms to
determine the most life cycle cost-effective package of ECMs for this particular building.
Thousands of measures were considered for this building and all interactive effects between the
building systems were explicitly modeled and considered when the optimal packages of ECMs
were created. Custom energy conservation measures were considered and included where
relevant based on knowledge of the building gained from the energy audit. A summary of these
findings follows.
ECM-1
Reduce plug loads through controls and increased awareness targeting printers,
copiers, fax machines, coffee makers, etc.
Description Savings
Total Annual Savings $812
Annual Natural Gas Savings -20 Therms
Total Energy Reduction <1%

ECM-2
Add insulation to roof and exterior walls: Add insulation to roof with an R-value of
21 (roughly 4 inches of insulation). Add insulation to exterior walls with an r-value
of 28 (roughly 5.5 inches of insulation).
Description Savings
Total Energy Reduction 33%
ECM-3
Major lighting & HVAC upgrades: Remove and replace all HVAC, lights, and reduce
infiltration. Boiler efficiency increased to 95% condensing boilers. Chiller COP
increased to 4.0 simulating high efficiency chiller system. All zone heating
equipment changed to VAV, along with demand ventilation controls (CO2 sensors).
Lighting load reduced to simulate LED retrofitting. Infiltration reduced to .1 air
changes per hour to simulate better building construction and pressure control.
Description Savings

ECM-4
Replace Windows: Replace windows with triple pane, super low-e, gas filled
windows with thermal breaks to reduce thermal transmission and building energy
loss.
Description Savings
Annual Electricity Savings 760 kWh

Appendix 1: Energy Analysis Methodology
Approach
The general approach is to collect building asset data inputs to develop an 8,760 hourly energy
model of the building, calibrate that model to actual energy use, and then utilize the calibrated
model to estimate energy consumption and identify cost-effective energy conservation
measures using localized weather data.
Inputs & Inferences
Retroficiency's AEA is designed to work with as little or as much information about the building
as is available. Utilizing minimal inputs and data from tens of thousands of prior audits, the
system builds accurate "inferences" about the energy subsystems of the building. These
inferences can always be adjusted and modified based upon the user's knowledge of the
building, or as more information becomes available. These inferences are used to run an 8,760
hourly energy model and allow for an iterative yet efficient process of refinement and tuning to
rapidly align the energy model with actual energy consumption patterns.
Tuning
The tuning process compares modeled energy consumption with actual utility bills, and allows
the user to make changes to inputs and inferences to better align modeled consumption with
historical consumption - providing a transparent view of the accuracy of the modeled output.
During the tuning process, the model utilizes local weather data from the same time period as
the actual utility bills. AEA's sophisticated analysis tools help guide the user to the right answer
in a streamlined manner allowing an accurate energy model of the building to be built in a
fraction of the time it takes today with traditional methods.
Results
AEA combines the tuned 8,760 hourly energy model with an extensive Energy Conservation
Measure (ECM) database with localized costs and optimization algorithms to determine the most
life cycle cost-effective package of ECMs for a given building. Thousands of measures are
automatically considered on each building in minutes, and all interactive effects between the
building systems are explicitly modeled and considered when creating the optimal packages of
ECMs. In addition to the automatically generated ECM packages, the user can view and select
from additional ECM recommendations and/or create custom ECMs to further refine the ECM
portfolio.
Retroficiency's AEA software allows the user to view recommended ECM packages that
correspond to their business objectives. The user is able to view the projected impact of
implementing the selected ECM package on various metrics including Energy Intensity, Energy
Cost, CO2 emissions, etc.

Energy Model Correlation to Actual Bills
The following graphs represent the correlation between monthly billed utility data and modeled
energy consumption. A graph for each utility used in the facility is represented below. The
"Actual" trend line represents the actual amount of energy consumed in units per month based
on the utility bills provided. The "Predicted" trend line represents the energy consumption
predicted by the model.
Actual Electricity vs. Predicted
Actual Natural Gas vs. Predicted

Energy Model Correlation to Actual Bills: After ECM implementations
energy consumption after implementation of suggested ECM’s. A graph for each utility used in
the facility is represented below.

1631 Acacia Dr NW
Grand Rapids, MI
49504
616 450 8653
FACILITY
ENERGY
ASSESSMENT
a a
December,
2012
(updated
2/18/13)
302 Pearl Grand Rapids, MI 49504

Table Of Contents
Executive Summary...........................................................................................................21
Introduction .....................................................................................................................22
Facility Description............................................................................................................23
Utility Summary ................................................................................................................26
Benchmarking...................................................................................................................28
Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Overview....................................................................29
“Time-of-replacement” (ToR) Measures ...........................................................................29
Low Cost / No Cost Measures .........................................................................................29
Capital Measures ...........................................................................................................30
Appendix 2: Building Floor Plan(s) ......................................................................................45
Appendix 3: Inventory of Major HVAC Equipment ................................................................46
Appendix 4: Energy Use History .........................................................................................47

Executive Summary
Overview
The Building Performance Team performed an energy assessment at 302 Pearl Grand Rapids,
MI in order to assess the potential for cost effective Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs).
Currently the 88,240 square foot hotel building consumes 1,424,732 kWh of electricity, 1,219
MMBtu of central hot water, 71,285 therms of natural gas, and 38,076 ton hours of central
chilled water per year for a total annual energy expenditure of $181,442 per year. The facility
has an annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 136 kBtu/square foot and an Energy Star Score of
53.
Out of the hundreds of ECMs considered, 14 rose to the surface as candidates for
implementation. If all ECMs are implemented, the facility can expect to reduce electricity
consumption by 24%, central hot water consumption by 14%, and natural gas consumption by
16%. This would produce an annual operational savings on the order of 345,210 kWh, 167
MMBtu, 11,707 therms, and -379 ton hours for a combined $46,392 of utility and O&M
expenditure reduction. The full implementation cost of these projects is estimated at $829,342,
yielding a simple payback of 17.9 years. The following table depicts expected savings figures for
this facility:
Note that the Installed Cost for each ECM does not include and utility rebates or other
incentives. These should be investigated carefully for ECMs which are attractive to you.
Description Cost / Savings / Payback
Installed Cost $829,342
Estimated Utility Incentives $0
Payback Period 17.9 Years
Annual Central Hot Water Savings 167 MMBtu
Annual Natural Gas Savings 11,707 therms
Annual Central Chilled Water Savings 379 ton hours

Introduction
Energy auditors from the Building Performance Team conducted an ASHRAE Level "1+" energy
audit during December 2012 at the Holiday Inn Downtown facility located in Grand Rapids, MI.
The auditor was James V Dirkes II, PE, who was accompanied onsite by Mr. Craig Bilski, Chief
Engineer.
The audited building systems included envelope, lighting, cooling, heating, domestic hot water,
swimming pool and restaurant operation.
We compared the model's predictions against actual energy use and corrected the model until
they matched very closely. Corrections were based on varying the values of uncertain
information within acceptable ranges and occasionally re-measuring when we thought that it
was appropriate. The final results show that our predictions match your energy bills within 5%
for the entire year and have an R2 correlation of 88%!
This means that we can both be confident that we truly understand the building and that our
savings estimates will be realistic.
The scope of this audit adheres to the guidelines developed by the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) for a Level 2 audit with the exception
that most costs have not yet been formally estimated. As described in ASHRAE's Procedures for
Commercial Building Energy Audits, a Level 2 "Energy Survey and Analysis" will identify and
provide the savings and cost analyses of all practical energy efficiency measures that meet the
owner's/operator's constraints and economic criteria, along with the proposed changes to
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) procedures.
A Level 2 audit includes a more detailed survey than a Level 1. Utility analysis is performed
based on historical energy bills which may cover consumption data as well as peak demand. It
may also provide a listing of potential capital-intensive improvements that require more
thorough data collection and engineering analysis. Cost and savings analysis is performed for
each measure recommended for implementation. This level of analysis should provide adequate
information for the owner/operator to act upon recommendations for most buildings and for
most measures.
This audit can best be considered as a "big picture" guide for ways to update and improve the
Holiday Inn's overall performance. Several Energy Conservation Measures (ECM) that were
considered as independent of each other (e.g., Heating and Domestic Hot Water boiler
replacement) will benefit from consideration of implementing both at the same time. Others,
such as window replacement, have a poor energy-only ROI, but may involve "soft" benefits
such as improved appearance or guest comfort.
As you move forward with improvements to this property, plan to refine the results and
recommendations for many of the ECMs by expanding the scope of this audit to a full Level II
or III audit. This will minimize many of the design and cost uncertainties and also leverage
your benefits by combining synergistic ECMs.

Location
Holiday Inn Downtown Grand Rapids, 302 Pearl, Grand Rapids, MI 49504
Holiday Inn Downtown is 8 stories, with 25 guest rooms per floor, a pool, restaurant, laundry
and meeting rooms and is located at 302 Pearl Grand Rapids, MI. Originally constructed in
1987, the building now comprises about 87,000 square feet. The walls are masonry facade on
masonry frame construction, with a built up roof. The building is a single-use facility
incorporating hotel spaces.
Occupancy and Schedule
Occupancy of the hotel averages around 70%, with supporting spaces such as the pool and
restaurant open about 100 hours each week.
The schedule is constant throughout the year, however occupancy generally dips somewhat in
the winter months and during the weekends.
Renovations and Additions
This facility expanded the restaurant (now Pearl Street Grill) in 2003 and has conducted several
renovations since its original construction. The renovations have been primarily for the
restaurant and conference spaces.
Building Envelope
The walls are primarily an exterior insulation ("Dryvit") facade on masonry frame construction,
with built-up roofing.
Windows are aluminum frames with double pane glazing and are operable. (Operation is
restricted.)
Lighting System
Other than the restaurant, lighting in the facility is either T8 fluorescent or CFL, a result of
extensive retrofit in the last few years.
Common area rest rooms use occupancy sensors.
Cooling System
Guest Rooms have PTACS with a TelkoNet Building Management System.
The remainder of the building uses chilled water from 2 air-cooled condensing units that feed
shell & tube heat exchangers. The heat exchangers have water pumped through them to
various chilled water coils.
Heating System

Guest Rooms have PTACS with electric heating coils and a TelkoNet Building Management
System.
Most of the first floor except the Pool and Restaurant have fan coils fed by boiler (and chiller).
The Restaurant has a separate RTU (gas-fired & DX cooling) and electric baseboard.
The Kitchen also has a natural gas, direct-fired Makeup air unit (heating only) for cooking hood
exhaust.
The pool has a a natural gas, direct-fired space heater and separate heaters for the pool and
the spa water.
Domestic Hot Water System
Domestic hot water is generated by 2 boilers at 140F and stored in two storage tanks one at
110F, the other at 140F. 110F water is distributed to guest and other bathrooms, 140F water is
used by the Laundry.
The Kitchen uses an electric booster heater to provide 140F for dishwashing.
Ventilation System
Guest room Outdoor Air is delivered via the PTACS.
The 1st floor, except for the pool and Kitchen hood, receives outdoor air from a heating-only
dedicated outdoor air fan coil (DOAS) which uses hot water from the boiler.
Kitchen makeup air is from a heating-only MUA (direct-fired).
Pool OA is from a heating-only MUA (direct-fired).
Electrical Distribution
Electrical loads are met with a 208V / 3Ph / 60Hz distribution system that includes 120V / 1Ph /
60Hz lighting.
Special Loads
Cooking areas are comprised of a "front of house" kitchen which prepares most restaurant
meals and a "back of house" kitchen which is less used and provides primarily conference /
meeting room food preparation.
Each of these spaces contain normal cooking and cooler / freezer equipment for this size
facility.
Current Concerns
Comfort problems now exist in the Administrative offices and Lobby.
The offices have experienced several minor modifications over the years, but their basic layout
is the same as the original building. It is very likely that re-balancing the airflows will improve
the comfort, but it may also be helpful to provide a separate damper and thermostat for the
interior offices.
The Lobby has automatic doors which, with frequent opening in cold weather, cause the Lobby
to become cold. This problem has probably been present from the beginning, but can be
improved by a check and re-balancing if needed as well as consideration for providing additional
outdoor air to make the Lobby a "positive pressure zone" which will resist infiltration.

Finally, kitchen / cooking smells regularly spread to the Lobby and other common areas on the
first floor. This is not desirable and is probably caused by improper makeup air / exhaust air
balance at the cooking equipment hood. We recommend re-balancing the makeup air and hood
exhaust fan, including a smoke test to confirm proper capture of cooking smoke and vapors.

Utility Summary
Utility Information
Reported Utility Data (Sep 2011 - Sep 2012)
Electricity 1,382,005 kWh $0.08 $116,680
Natural Gas 59,689 therms $0.80 $47,521
Electricity Demand 3,293 kW $10.22 $33,662
The following chart depicts monthly energy expenditure at the facility for the time period Sep
2011 to Sep 2012. The stacked profile indicates how each utility impacts the monthly energy

consumers of energy are misc, heating, and lighting which represent approximately 78% of
total annual energy consumption.

Benchmarking
Energy Star
The Building Performance Team used the ENERGY STAR Performance Rating as the
methodology to benchmark Holiday Inn Downtown Grand Rapids building against other similar
peer buildings. The national energy performance rating is a type of external benchmark that
helps energy managers assess how efficiently their buildings use energy relative to similar
buildings nationwide. The rating systems' 1-100 scale allows interested parties to quickly
understand how a building is performing; a rating of 50 indicates average energy performance
while a rating of 75 or better indicates efficient performance. Organizations can evaluate
energy performance among their portfolio of buildings while also comparing performance with
other similar buildings nationwide. Additionally, building owners and managers can use the
performance ratings to help identify buildings that offer the best opportunity for improvement
and to track and measure performance over time. To qualify for ENERGY STAR certification, a
building must have a rating of 75 or greater.
The current Energy Star score for the Holiday Inn Downtown Grand Rapids building is 53, as
shown in the graphic below. If all the energy conservation measures outlined in this report are
implemented, the expected score is 80.

“Time-of-replacement” (ToR) Measures
These measures constitute a special category of savings measures. They are not economical as
stand-alone measures, but will be important and beneficial to consider as you plan replacement
of certain equipment. They will also need coordination with ongoing plans to upgrade and
improve the facility.
The cost for these measures is intended to reflect the cost difference between replacement of
the equipment with a) the same equipment or b) premium efficiency equipment. It does not
reflect any costs associated with, for example, replacing equipment earlier than absolutely
necessary. An example of this is that, while it might be reasonable to operate your boilers for
several more years, you may elect to replace them now to capture increased efficiency for
those years. This effectively moves a known and needed replacement project to an earlier year
and trades the present worth of that earlier expense against the present worth of the additional
savings.
The “time-of-replacement” ECMs are included in the “Low Cost / No Cost” ECM table when the
(standard efficiency) new equipment is inherently more efficient than what it replaces. When
there is a premium efficiency option that bears some additional cost compared to standard
efficiency equipment, it is shown in the “Capital Measures” table. “Time of Replacement”
measure for this audit are:
• “Upgrade chiller condensing unit…”. (Low Cost / No Cost table)
• “Upgrade HEATING boiler…” (Capital Measures table)
• “Upgrade DOMESTIC HOT WATER boiler…” (Capital Measures table)
Low Cost / No Cost Measures
This section describes low cost/no cost recommendations for general building management,
operations and maintenance, energy awareness, and small-scale equipment procurement. For
the purposes of this study, measures with a cost less than $300 have been included in this
category.
Recommended
Energy Conservation
Measure
Electricity
Savings
(kWh)
Fuel
Savings
(therms)
Total
Yearly
Savings
($)
Estimated
Cost ($)
Rebate
($)
Simple
Payback
(years)
Turn Kitchen Hood &
MUA OFF at night
11,574 1,362 $1,618 $0 0.0

Upgrade chiller
condensing unit
efficiency at time of
replacement (ToR)
11,427 0 $1,037 $100 0.1
Sum Total: 23,001 1,362 $2,655 $100 0.04
Capital Measures
In addition to low cost measures, capital measures were identified to improve the energy
efficiency of the facility. These measures typically affect major building systems and require a
more substantial capital outlay than low-cost measures. The following ECMs highlight
opportunities identified at this facility.
Recommended
Energy Conservation
Measure
Electricity
Savings
(kWh)
Fuel
Savings
(therms)
Total
Yearly
Savings
($)
Estimated
Cost ($)
Rebate
($)
Simple
Payback
(years)
Replace Spa jet pump
motor with 90.2%
efficient 3.0 hp motor
2,158 -12 $180 $1,030 5.7
Reduce Pool space
temperature during
unoccupied periods
0 2,809 $1,938 $1,000 0.5
Install occupancy
sensors for hallway
lighting
11,959 0 $1,018 $8,000 7.9
Replace older washing
machine with more
efficient machine
5,620 0 $2,050 $21,000 10.2
Reduce Spa
temperature during
unoccupied periods.
0 865 $597 $1,000 1.7
Upgrade HEATING boiler
efficiency at
replacement (ToR)
0 1,691 $1,167 $4,500 3.9
Replace PTACs with
Heat Pumps
127,057 0 $14,195 $175,000 12.3
Upgrade DOMESTIC
HOT WATER boiler
efficiency at
replacement (ToR)
0 2,030 $1,401 $17,000 12.1
Demand Controlled
Ventilation for first floor.
-2,275 2,945 $1,820 $6,000 3.3

Demand controlled
ventilation - Guest
Rooms
98,711 0 $9,682 $240,000 24.8
Replace Guest Room
windows with high
performance alternative
81,388 0 $9,393 $350,000 37.3
Reflective Dark Tint
Low-E Interior Window
Film for First Floor
3,211 15 $296 $4,712 15.9
Sum Total: 327,829 10,343 $43,737 $829,242 18.96
After the above ECMs are implemented, the Holiday Inn Downtown Grand Rapids will realize
significant cost benefits due to decreased energy consumption and operations and maintenance
expenditure. The three end-uses with the largest energy reduction potential from these ECMs
are heating, cooling, and miscellaneous.
emissions by 0.76 million pounds of carbon dioxide per year, equivalent to removing 67 cars

The building asset data collected during the ASHRAE Level 2 energy audit was used to develop
an 8,760 hourly energy model of the building. Inferences were made about the unknown
building characteristics using data from tens of thousands of prior audits. The energy model
was calibrated to actual energy use utilizing local weather data from the same time period as
the actual utility bills.
determine the most life cycle cost effective package of ECMs for this particular building.
findings follows.

ECM-1
Turn Kitchen Hood & MUA OFF at night
Turn Kitchen Hood & MUA OFF at night. It is also possible to add a hood temperature sensor to
cycle these or vary their speed during the day during low use periods.
Installed Cost $0
Utility Incentive Assumptions $0
Payback Period <0.1 Years
ECM-2
Replace Spa jet pump motor with 90.2% efficient 3.0 hp motor
The existing 3-hp motor will consume 20,223 kWh per year. Converting to an efficient 3-hp
motor will reduce the electricity consumption to 18,476 kWh per year.
Annual Natural Gas Savings -12 therms

ECM-3
Reduce Pool space temperature during unoccupied periods
Reduce Pool space temperature during unoccupied periods. Because the pool is heated with
100% outdoor air, this will reduce the makeup air heating requirement in addition to reducing
envelope losses. This must be tested to make sure fogging in the pool area does not occur.
ECM-4
Install occupancy sensors for hallway lighting
Install occupancy sensors for hallway lighting. Long periods during the day and most of the
night do not need a fully illuminated hallway. The cost must be verified after research into the
current circuiting and discussion regarding the acceptability of this option for guest perceptions
of safety and comfort.
Annual Natural Gas Savings 0 therms

ECM-5
Replace older washing machine with more efficient machine
Replace older washing machine with more efficient machine. The old machine uses almost
three times the power of the two newer machines and may be due for replacement due to its
age. Water consumption may also result. (Pricing from Jerry Pearson – A&B Equipment, the
Milnor rep; 269 599 2367)
ECM-6
Reduce Spa temperature during unoccupied periods.
Reduce Spa temperature during unoccupied periods. A simple programmable control can
reduce the spa temperature each night, with no impact on the guests. This will result in less
heating energy and less water use (due to less evaporation)

ECM-7
Upgrade HEATING boiler efficiency at replacement
Upgrade heating boiler efficiency at replacement to 90% or better. This boiler is at or near its
useful life. When replaced, the new boiler should be a condensing type with 90+% efficiency.
Cost is roughly estimated as the difference between a standard and high efficiency replacement
boiler.
For reference, the complete cost of a new boiler is approximately $38,000. If all of the boilers
are replaced at the same time with a combination space / domestic water heating system, the
total price will be approximately $87,000.
ECM-8
Replace PTACs with Heat Pumps
Replace PTACs with Heat Pumps. This measure assumes that a reliable Heat Pump can be
substituted for the existing PTACs without significant need of architectural or electrical
modifications. This will dramatically improve heating efficiency and can be done gradually as
PTACS fail. The cost includes only the differential between a PTAC and a Heat ump of similar
capacity and assumes that no special wiring or other modifications are required.

ECM-9
Upgrade DOMESTIC HOT WATER boiler efficiency at replacement
Upgrade domestic hot water boiler efficiency at replacement to 90% or better. These boilers
are at or near their useful life. When replaced, the new boiler(s) should be condensing type
with 90+% efficiency. Because the kitchen and laundry require 140F water, it may be
appropriate to provide their hot water from the HEATING boiler via a heat exchanger. Cost is
roughly estimated as the difference between a standard and high efficiency replacement boiler.
Note: This measure is highly interactive with replacement of the HEATING boiler; both should
be considered to take maximum advantage of savings opportunities. This is particularly true
because the high efficiency DOMESTIC water boiler carries a big premium, whereas the
HEATING boiler does not. This means that combining the systems becomes much more
economical than replacing them separately.
For reference, the complete cost of a new boiler is approximately $64,000. . If all of
the boilers are replaced at the same time with a combination space / domestic
water heating system, the total price will be approximately $87,000.

ECM-10
Demand Controlled Ventilation for first floor.
Add demand controlled ventilation for first floor. Ventilation should be controlled with a
combination of scheduling and CO2 sensors so that enough outdoor air is used to maintain high
air quality, but not more. Currently the same ventilation is provided 24 / 7 / 365; we have
assumed that the overall rate can be reduced to about 30% over a typical 24 hour period. Cost
assumes that: a) a control damper will be added for each of the Meeting Rooms b) CO2 sensors
will be installed in each Meeting Room and two other locations on the first floor c) The fan coil
now providing outdoor air for the first floor will be equipped with a variable speed drive and
controls which allow modulation based on CO2 level. Cost for this measure needs further
verification.
Annual Electricity Savings -2,275 kWh

ECM-11
Demand controlled ventilation - Guest Rooms
Demand controlled ventilation will vary the amount of outside air delivered to guest rooms
based on input from CO2 sensors or another measure of occupancy, such as the hotel property
management system (PMS). Implementation in the Guest rooms has great savings potential,
but is difficult to accomplish because the original design did not envision this possibility. A new
Dedicated Outdoor Air system (DOAS) is needed, which will provide outdoor air in proportion to
occupancy. The cost for this measure is highly uncertain, and is affected by: a) Integration
with the TelkoNet occupied signal and (ideally) the PMS b) Finding an acceptable location for
the DOAS and its ductwork. The cost must be validated after confirmation of the design
approach and is probably best understood as an adjunct to major renovations.
ECM-12
Replace Guest Room windows with high performance alternative
Replace Guest Room windows with high performance alternative. New windows with better
thermal and solar performance will also reduce infiltration, which is assumed and contributes to
the savings.

ECM-13
Reflective Dark Tint Low-E Interior Window Film for First Floor
A retrofit window film installation delivers a cost-effective solution to improving building
fenestration performance. Installing Window Film Depots 3M Amber 35 Low-E Window Film will
substantially reduce solar heat gain permitted under current conditions. The installed window
film will reflect up to 75% of the suns heat-producing solar energy and 99% of UV rays to keep
occupants comfortable while reducing energy consumption of the buildings HVAC systems. This
product will also improve the conductive thermal performance of the existing windows up to
25%; a benefit that will yield energy savings in the summer and winter months. This system is
ideal for applications where exterior building aesthetics will benefit from a reflective window
coating system and visible transmittance of the existing windows is not critical.

ECM-14
Upgrade chiller condensing unit efficiency at time of replacement
Upgrade chiller condensing unit efficiency at time of replacement. This is nominally no cost
because we have assumed that you are replacing it anyway. The EER of the existing unit is
about 9.9, whereas standard EER for new equipment is significantly higher, about 13.
Installed Cost $100
ECMs Considered but Not Recommended
We did not exclude any ECMs from consideration

Appendix 1: Energy Analysis Methodology
Approach
The general approach is to collect building asset data inputs to develop an 8,760 hourly energy
model of the building, calibrate that model to actual energy use, and then utilize the calibrated
model to estimate energy consumption and identify cost-effective energy conservation
measures using localized weather data.
Inputs & Inferences
Retroficiency's AEA is designed to work with as little or as much information about the building
as is available. Utilizing minimal inputs and data from tens of thousands of prior audits, the
system builds accurate "inferences" about the energy subsystems of the building. These
inferences can always be adjusted and modified based upon the user's knowledge of the
building, or as more information becomes available. These inferences are used to run an 8,760
hourly energy model and allow for an iterative yet efficient process of refinement and tuning to
rapidly align the energy model with actual energy consumption patterns.
Tuning
The tuning process compares modeled energy consumption with actual utility bills, and allows
the user to make changes to inputs and inferences to better align modeled consumption with
historical consumption – providing a transparent view of the accuracy of the modeled output.
During the tuning process, the model utilizes local weather data from the same time period as
the actual utility bills. AEA's sophisticated analysis tools help guide the user to the right answer
in a streamlined manner allowing an accurate energy model of the building to be built in a
fraction of the time it takes today with traditional methods.
Results
AEA combines the tuned 8760 hourly energy model with an extensive Energy Conservation
Measure (ECM) database with localized costs and optimization algorithms to determine the most
life cycle cost effective package of ECMs for a given building. Thousands of measures are
automatically considered on each building in minutes, and all interactive effects between the
building systems are explicitly modeled and considered when creating the optimal packages of
ECMs. In addition to the automatically generated ECM packages, the user can view and select
from additional ECM recommendations and/or create custom ECMs to further refine the ECM
portfolio.
Retroficiency's AEA software allows the user to view recommended ECM packages that
correspond to their business objectives. The user is able to view the projected impact of
implementing the selected ECM package on various metrics including Energy Intensity, Energy
Cost, CO2 emissions etc.

Energy Model Correlation to Actual Bills
energy consumption. A graph for each utility used in the facility is represented below. The
"Actual" trend line represents the actual amount of energy consumed in units per month based
on the utility bills provided. The "Predicted" trend line represents the energy consumption
predicted by the model.

Appendix 2: Building Floor Plan(s)

Appendix 3: Inventory of Major HVAC Equipment
Inventory of Major HVAC Equipment
Designation Location Serves Model / Type Capacity Operating
Hours / Yr
Remarks
Boiler #1, 2 Boiler room Domestic
Water
heating
RayPak H3-
1458A
~1,500MBH in
/ 1,200MBH
out
8,760
Boiler #3 Boiler room Heating HydroTherm
MR600B
600MBH in /
470MBH out
4,000
Boiler #4 Pool Equip Rm Spa Raypack P-
R206A-EN-C
200MBH in /
~160MBH out
8,760
Boiler #5 Pool Equip Rm Pool Hayward
H3001
300MBH in /
~240MBH out
8,760
ACCU1 West side of Bldg all ChW
needs
Carrier
38AKS024
~240MBH 12 months
ACCU2 West side of Bldg all ChW
needs
Carrier
38AKS028
~280MBH ~6 months
FC9 Above corridor Mtg Rm A na ~700 cfm,
20MBH clg,
10MBH htg
12 months
FC10 Above corridor Mtg Rm B na ~700 cfm,
27MBH clg,
10MBH htg
12 months
FC11 Above corridor Mtg Rm C na ~700 cfm,
20MBH clg,
10MBH htg
12 months
FC12 Above corridor Mtg Rm C na ~700 cfm,
27MBH clg,
10MBH htg
12 months
AHU5 Roof Restaurant 12 months
AHU6 Above corridor Bar 12 months
AHU7 Roof Fitness Trane +
MicroMetl
~2300cfm;
100MBH htg
out
12 months
FC1 Above ceiling -
Men's Rm
Office /
Admin
na ~800 cfm,
35MBH clg,
20MBH htg
12 months
FC2 Above ceiling Lobby na ~3,000 cfm,
35MBH clg,
0MBH htg
12 months
FC7 Above ceiling Laundry
Corridor
na ~2,200 cfm,
71MBH clg,
30MBH htg
12 months
DOAS Laundry Room Various na ~1500 cfm 8,760
MUA1 Pool Hastings ~3,000 cfm,
0MBH clg,
260MBH htg
8,760
EF8 Pool Equip Rm Pool Brundage ~3,300 cfm,
.75HP
8,760
MUA2 Restaurant Roof Restaurant Greenheck ~3,000 cfm,
0MBH clg,
260MBH htg
8,760
Pool Circ pump Pool Equip Rm Pool Taco 1.5HP 8,760
Spa Circ pump Pool Equip Rm Spa Taco .75HP 8,760
Spa Jet pump Pool Equip Rm Spa Taco 3HP ~1,000
Dom. CW Booster Pool Equip Rm All SyncroFlo 100gpm
@54psi; 15HP
8,760
Fire Pump na 30HP 3
ChW Pump1 Mechanic Rm non-guest
areas
na 160gpm @ ??
Ft.; 1.5HP
12 months
ChW Pump2 Mechanic Rm non-guest
areas
na nameplate not
readable
~6 months
Under repair
Tested how often?
Heating only
Electric Duct heater
DOAS in Laundry Room?
Electric Duct heater
DOAS in Laundry Room
RTU + ERV
Larger, installed ~2009
Installed ~ 1987
Installed ~ 1987
Installed ~ 2005
Installed ~ 1987
smaller, installed ~1995 (EER
= ~9.9)

Appendix 4: Energy Use History

FACILITY
ENERGY
ASSESSMENT
a A
March,
2014
1391 Judson Rd Norton Shores, MI 49456

Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4
Facility Description............................................................................................................. 5
Utility Summary ................................................................................................................. 6
Benchmarking...................................................................................................................10
Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Overview....................................................................11
Appendix 2: Building Floor Plan(s) ......................................................................................24
Appendix 3: Lighting ECM Return on Investment Calculations ...............................................25

Executive Summary
Overview
The Building Performance Team performed an energy assessment at 1391 Judson Rd Norton
Shores, MI in order to assess the potential for cost effective Energy Conservation Measures
(ECMs). Currently the 112,600 square foot warehouse building consumes 481,649 kWh of
electricity and 38,117 Therms of natural gas per year for a total annual energy expenditure of
$76,881 per year. The facility has an annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 48 kBtu/square foot
and an ENERGY STAR Score of 77.
Out of the thousands of ECMs considered, 12 rose to the surface as candidates for
implementation. If all ECMs are implemented, the facility can expect to reduce electricity
consumption by 29% and natural gas consumption by 31%. This would produce an annual
operational savings on the order of 137,484 kWh and 11,904 Therms for a combined $24,359
of utility and O&M expenditure reduction. The full implementation cost of these projects is
estimated at $150,949, yielding a simple payback of 6.2 years. The following table depicts
expected savings figures for this facility:
Estimated Utility Incentives $0

Introduction
Energy professionals from The Building Performance Team conducted an ASHRAE Level 2
energy audit in March of 2014 at the Nichols Supply located in Norton Shores, MI. The auditors
included James Dirkes and Mitchell Gleason who were accompanied onsite by Jim Rees. At the
time of several visits, weather conditions were gnerally observed to be cloudy with an outdoor
air temperature of 10 - 25F.
The audited building systems included lighting, cooling, heating, domestic hot water and snow
melt equipment.
The scope of this audit adheres to the guidelines developed by the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) for a Level 2 audit. As described in
ASHRAE's Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits, a Level 2 "Energy Survey and
Analysis" will identify and provide the savings and cost analyses of all practical energy efficiency
measures that meet the owner's/operator's constraints and economic criteria, along with the
proposed changes to Operation and Maintenance (O&M) procedures.
A Level 2 audit includes a more detailed survey than a Level 1. Utility analysis is performed
based on historical energy bills which may cover consumption data as well as peak demand. It
may also provide a listing of potential capital-intensive improvements that require more
thorough data collection and engineering analysis. Cost and savings analysis is performed for
each measure recommended for implementation. This level of analysis should provide adequate
information for the owner/operator to act upon recommendations for most buildings and for
most measures.
As part of this assessment, we measured and verified:
* programmable thermostat settings and schedules
* outdoor air flow in the warehouse
* warehouse temperature stratification
* warehouse lighting power for several circuits
* battery charger power
* office critical power panel power
These measurements enabled a significantly better understanding of energy usage and the
resulting high correlation between actual and predicted energy use.
Some of the energy conservation measures evaluated, especially the lighting retrofits, have
non-annual maintenance schedules and also differing schedules for each alternative. For these
measures, we prepared a comprehensive life cycle comparison to assure a realistic evaluation.

Location
Nichols Supply w/ Data Center, 1391 Judson Rd, Norton Shores, MI 49456
Nichols' purchased a vacant freight terminal warehouse in 2004 and converted a portion to
corporate offices and re-purposed the warehouse for their products and operation. It is
principally a pre-engineered structure that is well maintained.
Occupancy and Schedule
The Warehouse is occupied from 6am till 2am Monday-Friday and 5pm till 2am on Sundays. It
is not occupied on Saturdays.
The occupied heating setpoint for the warehouse is 55F and for the office is 74F. Unoccupied
setpoints are 55F for the warehouse (no setback) and 68 for the office.
Renovations and Additions
See the Building Description.
Building Envelope
See the Building Description.
Lighting System
Lighting throughout the facility has been extensively modified from the original. The
Warehouse now uses 6 lamp, 25W T8 fixtures which stay on continuously during occupied
hours. The office uses a combination of 2 lamp suspended and 3 lamp recessed fixtures, all of
which use 25W T8 lamps. The offices also have task lighting. The open office suspended
fixtures generally stay on during occupied periods. THe private office lighting has switches and
occupancy sensors, which keep the lights off a large percentage of the time.
Cooling System
The warehouse has no cooling system. The offices rely on 6 residential furnaces with SEER 14
DX cooling. The Data room has a separate mini-split AC system.
Heating System
The warehouse has two indirect-fired "air turnover" systems. The offices rely on 6 residential
furnaces with 90+ % efficiency natural gas heating. The Data room has a separate mini-split
AC system.

Domestic Hot Water System
Electric water heaters (approx. 20 gallon) provide domestic hot water for the facility. These
have additional insulation around their tanks.
Ventilation System
Warehouse ventilation is provided by outdoor air ducts that terminate at the base of each air
turnover unit. The office furnaces also have outdoor air duct which terminates at the furnace
return air inlet.
Utility Summary
Utility Information
Reported Utility Data (Dec 2011 - Dec 2013)
Electricity 1,023,599 kWh $0.08 $84,441
Natural Gas 51,228 Therms $0.76 $39,000
Multi-Year Energy Analysis of Electricity and Fuel Trends
The following graphs illustrate the total monthly consumption of the facility for each year. This
year over year consumption can help facility personnel identify trends in consumption,
particularly seasonal, which can depict areas for improvement. The following charts are
normalized for weather based on 30 year averages to remove any weather related variations.

Electricity Use Previous Years
Natural Gas Use Previous Years

The following chart depicts monthly energy expenditure at the facility for the time period Dec
2011 to Dec 2013. The stacked profile indicates how each utility impacts the monthly energy

consumers of energy are heating, lighting, and miscellaneous which represent approximately
93% of total annual energy consumption.

Benchmarking
ENERGY STAR
The Building Performance Team used the ENERGY STAR Performance Rating as the
methodology to benchmark Nichols Supply w/ Data Center building against other similar peer
buildings. The national energy performance rating is a type of external benchmark that helps
energy managers assess how efficiently their buildings use energy relative to similar buildings
nationwide. The rating systems' 1-100 scale allows interested parties to quickly understand how
a building is performing; a rating of 50 indicates average energy performance while a rating of
75 or better indicates efficient performance. Organizations can evaluate energy performance
among their portfolio of buildings while also comparing performance with other similar buildings
nationwide. Additionally, building owners and managers can use the performance ratings to
help identify buildings that offer the best opportunity for improvement and to track and
measure performance over time. To qualify for ENERGY STAR certification, a building must have
a rating of 75 or greater.
The current ENERGY STAR score for the Nichols Supply w/ Data Center building is 77, as shown
in the graphic below. If all the energy conservation measures outlined in this report are
implemented, the expected score is 91.

Identified Energy Conservation Measures
The following table highlights ECM opportunities identified during the Audit.
ECM
#
Recommended
Energy
Conservation
Measure
Electricity
Savings
(kWh)
Natural
Gas
Savings
(Therms)
Total
Yearly
Savings
($)
Estimated
Cost ($)
Rebate
($)
Simple
Payback
(years)
1
Warehouse:
Upgrade to new
0.35-watt
electroluminescent
exit sign retrofit
kits
5,186 -103 $1,766 $1,499 0.8
2
Change
unoccupied
thermostat settings
for the offices to
~15F higher in
summer and lower
in winter.
(currently they're
about 6-8F
different)
2,425 786 $794 $0 <0.1
3
Reduce the
warehouse
unoccupied heating
setpoint to ~45F
2,423 3,486 $2,814 $500 0.2
4
Reduce plug loads
through controls
and increased
awareness
targeting printers,
copiers, fax
machines, coffee
makers, etc.
3,186 -64 $216 $0 <0.1

5
Vary warehouse
ventilation based
on need
(determined by a
CO2 sensor),
instead of a
continuous amount
of outdoor air.
-18 606 $454 $2,000 4.4
6
Remove 2 lamps
from each rack
area fixture
54,224 -1,088 $4,518 $700 0.2
7
Add motion sensor
on each non-
security, non-main
aisle warehouse
fixture.
69,520 -1,371 $5,881 $30,500 5.2
8
Remove
approximately half
of open office
lamps. (Rely more
on task lighting)
9,453 -119 $917 $750 0.8
9
Replace existing
Warehouse
INdirect-fired
heating units with
direct-fired heating
with substantially
higher efficiency.
-12,549 9,777 $6,089 $60,000 9.9
10
Vary office
ventilation based
on need (CO2
sensor), instead of
a continuous
amount of outdoor
air.
-187 188 $128 $5,000 39.1
11
Replace multiple
furnaces with a
single rooftop VAV
unit of higher
cooling efficiency
6,027 -195 $457 $20,000 43.8
12
Replace the office
condensing units
with high efficiency
units.
1,948 0 $325 $30,000 92.3
Sum Total: 141,637 11,903 $24,359 $150,949 6.20

After the above ECMs are implemented, the Nichols Supply w/ Data Center will realize
significant cost benefits due to decreased energy consumption and operations and maintenance
expenditure. The three end-uses with the largest energy reduction potential from these ECMs
are heating, cooling, and lighting.
emissions by 0.41 million pounds of carbon dioxide per year, equivalent to removing 37 cars

The building asset data collected during the ASHRAE Level 2 energy audit was used to develop
an 8,760 hourly energy model of the building. Inferences were made about the unknown
building characteristics using data from tens of thousands of prior audits. The energy model
was calibrated to actual energy use utilizing local weather data from the same time period as
the actual utility bills.
determine the most life cycle cost effective package of ECMs for this particular building.
findings follows.
ECM-1
Warehouse: Upgrade to new 0.35-watt electroluminescent exit sign retrofit kits
Proposed Condition:

ECM-2
Change unoccupied thermostat settings for the offices to ~15F higher in summer
and lower in winter. (currently they're about 6-8F different)
Proposed Condition:
Installed Cost $0
Annual Natural Gas Savings 786 Therms
ECM-3
Reduce the warehouse unoccupied heating setpoint to ~45F
Proposed Condition:
Installed Cost $500

ECM-4
Reduce plug loads through controls and increased awareness targeting printers,
copiers, fax machines, coffee makers, etc.
Proposed Condition:
Installed Cost $0
ECM-5
Vary warehouse ventilation based on need (determined by a CO2 sensor), instead of
a continuous amount of outdoor air.
Proposed Condition:
Annual Electricity Savings -18 kWh
Annual Natural Gas Savings 606 Therms

ECM-6
Remove 2 lamps from each rack area fixture
Proposed Condition:
Installed Cost $700
Annual Natural Gas Savings -1,088 Therms
ECM-7
Add motion sensor on each non-security, non-,ain aisle warehouse fixture.
Proposed Condition:
Annual Natural Gas Savings -1,371 Therms

BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs

BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs

Similar to BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs (20)

BPT - RxCx MSRB III Cover letter & supporting docs