ECM-22 Roof Replacement

Transcription

1 ECM-22 Roof Replacement The roof at Technology High School is nearing the end of its life span and replacement should be seriously considered. See following documents regarding the condition and scope.

2 Clarke Caton Hintz Architecture Planning Landscape Architecture 1 Barrack Street Trenton NJ 868 clarkecatonhintz.com Tel: Fax: October 1, 214 Mr. Kevin Keenan, PE, CEM, MBA, LEED AP Vice President of Project Development JDC Energy Services 1 Lenox Drive Suite 1 Lawrenceville, NJ 8648 Re: Technology High School 223 Broadway Newark, NJ Subject: Roof Assessment and Estimated Roof Replacement Costs Dear Mr. Keenan: Here is our assessment of the existing roofs at Technology High School in Newark, NJ. Please let us know if you have any questions or need additional information. Introduction: John Clarke, FAIA Philip Caton, FAICP Carl Hintz, AICP, ASLA John Hatch, AIA George Hibbs, AIA Brian Slaugh, AICP Michael Sullivan, AICP Roof inspections were conducted at Technology High School by Clarke Caton Hintz and Newark Public Schools staff on October 2, 214. The estimated square foot areas of the roofs surveyed are provided below and a sketch indicating the locations is attached. Roof Areas: Roof Area A (New Wing of the School Including Roof Area F ) 23, +/- SF Roof Area B 11,5 +/- SF (Lower Roof of Original Building Including Roof Area H ) Roof Area C 12,6 +/- SF (Higher Roof of Original Building Including Roof Area G ) Roof Area D 3,2 +/- SF Page 1 of 5

3 Clarke Caton Hintz Roof Area E 1, +/- SF Total Area 51,3 +/-SF The Roof survey included a visual investigation of the existing Low-Slope waterproofing membrane, examination of all masonry parapet walls, the quantity, condition and size of roof drains, and the stone copings above the Low-Slope roof areas. Digital photographs were taken and deficiencies found in the roof systems and parapet walls were noted. Observations: The roofs of Technology High School appear to be in satisfactory condition and per conversation with School Maintenance Staff and the District Representative there are currently no roofing issues at the school. The school has 5 primary roof areas with multiple secondary roofs over stair towers, elevator towers and other elevated elements. CCH was able to physically access 4 of the 5 primary roofs and was able to overlook the remaining primary roof and many of the secondary roofs. At inaccessible and unobserved roofs it is our assumption (unless otherwise noted) that these roofs are of a similar composition and age as the primary roof they are associated with. Roof Area A is covered with a spray applied roofing system that was installed in 212. In addition to the horizontal roofing surfaces this spray applied coating has completely covered the interior face of the parapet walls and the back and stop sides of the parapet capstones. There are 4 roof drains and 2 through wall scuppers removing water from this roof. The roof drains do not appear to have been replaced as part of the new foam roofing installation. This roof was in good condition and CCH would not recommend replacement at this time. The roof assembly at Roof Area B appears to be an older built up roofing system. The age of this roof is unknown but we estimate that it is approximately 15-2 years old. The granules on the cap sheet are delaminating and some of the exposed roofing mastic is beginning to dry out however the membranes are well adhered to one another. This roof is served by 2 centrally located roof drains and has a greater than the standard ¼ per foot slope pitching towards them. Roof G is the roof above the elevator shaft tower near the center of roof B. We anticipate this roof to be of similar age and construction. These roofs are in serviceable condition but nearing the end of their life span. While the need to replace these roofs is not imminent the District should monitor their condition and begin planning for their future replacement. Page 2 of 5

4 Clarke Caton Hintz Roof Area C appears to be a built up roofing system that has been coated with a reflective aluminum coating. Per the school s representative this roof was replaced in 29 or 21. This roof appears to be in good condition. This roof has an unusual 4 step running across the short axis of the entire roof. All roof areas are sloped to a central series of 3 roof drains along the long axis of the roof with tapered insulation crickets between them. There are a series of smaller roofs above this primary roof and they all appear to be of the same age and construction. These smaller roofs drain into a gutter system that discharges onto Roof Area C. These roofs are in good condition and CCH would not recommend replacement at this time. Roof Area D and its associated smaller roofs were of identical construction and age to Roof Area C. Again the smaller roofs drain via gutter to Roof Area D which is drained by 2 roof drains. These roofs are in good condition and CCH would not recommend replacement at this time. Roof Area E is the roof over the bridge connecting the old school with the new addition. This roof is covered with a foam roofing system that appears to be considerably older than the foam system at Roof Area A. It is possible that this roof is from the same era as the original foam roof that was installed on Roof Area A in CCH was unable to access this roof while on site but from our visual inspection and the lack of leaks as told by the school staff we believe this roof to be in good condition. Similar to Roof Area B this roof is nearing the end of its lifespan and should be monitored with an eye towards future replacement. Roof Area F is located above Roof Area A and serves the elevator tower at the new addition. Per the district and school staff this roof was not replaced concurrently with Roof Area A. It is our assumption that this roof was last replaced in 1999 when the first foam roof was installed at the addition. Per the school s staff there are no leaks in this location. CCH would recommend that this roof be monitored and that the district begin planning for its future replacement. Page 3 of 5

5 Clarke Caton Hintz Recommendations: If the district is interested in replacing the roofing at any of the areas of the building here are some generic roofing numbers for estimating purposes. These are square foot numbers for basic roofs with no additional energy efficiency requirements. EPDM (the most cost effective roofing) ranges between $11 -$16 installed included insulation and demo. TPO (this seems to be the current trend in roofing but we have only limited experience) ranges between $14 - $2 installed including insulation and demo. MOD BIT ( 3 ply cold process Modified Bitumen John Wang indicated he wasn t crazy about the cold systems but it s our experience you can t roof with hot materials when people are in the building due to smells.) ranges between $18 - $25 To provide an energy efficient but cost effective option I d suggest we double the thickness of insulation. That would add $5 - $7 per square foot per roofing system. Ultra High U value and Green Roofs are much harder to provide a square foot number on and will depend on a number of factors. For an Ultra High U value system the selected roof membrane type, the existing parapet height, and structural load bearing capacity will all factor in the cost. For Green Roofs, decisions would need to made regarding any actual occupancy of the roof, the type of green system being used (trays or built-in) size of the proposed plant material, additional drainage requirements, leak detection equipment and structural, parapet and other concerns. Roofs of these types can start at around $35 per sqft for the most basic of system and go up from there. CCH has extensive Green Roof experience and if the owner is interested we would be happy to work with the district to develop a Green Roofing system that would meet their requirements and budget. If the decision is made to replace the roofs closest to requiring replacement (B, E, F and G - 13, sqft) our office would suggest a 3 ply Modified Bitumen system and would anticipate a construction cost of $23, to $325,. Page 4 of 5

6 Clarke Caton Hintz A total roof replacement (51,3 sqft) at the school using the same Mod Bit system would have a construction cost in the neighborhood of $923, to $1.28 Million. Conclusion: We trust that you will find this report to be useful. This information is intended to assist the School District in determining potential roofing work for the indicated project. Please call if you have any questions or require future clarification. Very Truly Yours, John Goliszewski, AIA Project Architect CC: George Hibbs, AIA; CCH Page 5 of 5

7

8 Roof Area 'A' Roof Area 'B' Roof Area 'C' Roof Area 'D' Roof Area 'E' Budet for Old Building Note Squre Footage 23, 11,5 12,6 3,2 1, Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM) $ 31,5 $ 155,25 $ 17,1 $ 43,2 $ 13,5 $ 382,5 Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) $ 391, $ 195,5 $ 214,2 $ 54,4 $ 17, $ 481,1 Modified Bitumen $ 494,5 $ 247,25 $ 27,9 $ 68,8 $ 21,5 $ 68,45 System used if the building is occupied Addition Insulation $ 161, $ 8,5 $ 88,2 $ 22,4 $ 7, $ 198,1 *Addtiive to above budgets Ultra High U System $ 85, $ 42,5 $ 441, $ 112, $ 35, $ 99,5

9 Ruberoid Torch Smooth Data Sheet Updated: 1/1 Quality You Can Trust Since From North America s Largest Roofing Manufacturer

10 RUBEROID TORCH SMOOTH Description RUBEROID Torch Smooth membrane is a tough, resilient modified bitumen membrane manufactured to stringent GAF Materials Corporation specifications. Its core is a strong, resilient, non-woven polyester mat that is coated with weather resistant, APP polymer modified asphalt. The membrane is available with smooth surface. Uses RUBEROID Torch Smooth is designed for new roofing and reroofing applications as well as flashings. RUBEROID Torch Smooth is also an ideal product for repairs of built-up roofing membranes or other modified bitumen systems. Advantages Typical system guarantees available for up to 15 years, select system constructions available with up to 2 year guarantee coverage. Cost effective the installed cost of RUBEROID Torch Smooth is less than most single-ply systems on the market today. Lightweight installed roof designs weigh less than 2 pounds per square foot. Resilient RUBEROID TORCH SMOOTH s polyester mat core allows it to resist splits and tears due to its pliability Advantages (Continued) and elongation characteristics. Durable specially formulated modified asphalt for lasting performance. RUBEROID TORCH SMOOTH is backed by GAF Materials Corporation, a company with over 1 years in the roofing business. Applicable Standards Meets ASTM D6222, Type I, Grade S FM Approved Meets CGSB-37-GP-56M ICC ESR#1274 Miami-Dade County Product Control Approval State of Florida Product Approval Texas Department of Insurance UL/ULc Listed Products Specifications (nominal) Roll Size 1 square (16.5 gross sq.ft.) (9.8m 2 ) Roll Length (9.8m) Roll Width (1.m) Approx. Roll Weight 83.2 lbs (37.74kg) Product Thickness.148 (3.8mm) This product meets or exceeds the following ASTM D6222, Type I, Grade S, minimum requirements: Property Test Method Value Tensile F (min), lbf/in ASTM D F (min), % ASTM D Low Temperature Flexibility (max), F ASTM D Tear Strength (min), lbf ASTM D Dimensional Stability, (max) % ASTM D GAF Materials Corporation 1/ ROOF-411

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19 Firestone UltraPly TM TPO Products EXPERIENCE THE ULTIMATE IN COOL ROOFING TECHNOLOGY. 1

20 Firestone UltraPly TPO Exceptional building performance starts at the top. Significant reduction in roof s surface temperature. Greater energy efficiency. More indoor comfort and lower electricity bills. It s no surprise that thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) roofs are the fastest growing, sustainable commercial roofing products available. And with nearly two decades of TPO experience, Firestone proudly stands behind our family of UltraPly TPO products. Introduced in 1998, our TPO formulation is designed to provide excellent ozone and chemical resistance, ensuring long-term roof performance. Plus, TPO is environmentally friendly, offers superior puncture resistance (especially against hail) and costs less than competitive roofing materials. So you can stay at the top of your game sustainably. ULTRAPLY TPO SYSTEM OPTIONS Mechanically attached, fully adhered, self-adhered and ballasted systems Installed in 8', 1' and 12'4" widths Available in white, tan or gray Designed for low-slope application 2

21 TOP FIVE BENEFITS OF ULTRAPLY TPO See what a partnership with Firestone can bring to your building. ENHANCED ENERGY EFFICIENCY White reflective surface exceeds the EPA s ENERGY STAR requirements White, tan and gray are listed with the Cool Roof Rating Council (CRRC) White and tan are compliant with California s Title 24 Energy Efficiency Building Standards and can be used to gain credits with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED ) certification LONG-LASTING PERFORMANCE Resists degradation from ultraviolet (UV) radiation and ozone Guards against erosion from harmful chemicals and microbial growth Performs at more than three times the ASTM International standard for weathering resistance LESS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Firestone s manufacturing plants are ISO-91-certified and located to provide nationwide coverage Can add LEED points to the design, construction, operation and maintenance of a commercial building Proximity of product availability reduces greenhouse gas emission and contributes to energy conservation Does not contain chlorinated or halogenated components EXCELLENT WIND UPLIFT RESISTANCE Firestone Wide-Weld TPO seaming technology creates a full-width seam extending on both sides of the seam attachment Process allows uplift forces to be distributed uniformly along all edges of the fastening system for improved wind resistance SUPERIOR DURABILITY AND STRENGTH Average thickness over scrim exceeds ASTM D6878 standard on 45-mil, 6-mil and 8-mil Provides enhanced puncture, tear and abrasion resistance LEGENDARY WARRANTIES 3

22 Firestone UltraPly TPO Platinum TM Systems Extend your roof life and peace of mind. In addition to long-lasting performance, UltraPly TPO Platinum membrane delivers: Exceptional 3-year warranty coverage 8-mil thick reinforced membrane Mechanical or fully adhered attachments Excellent field seams and high-wind ratings Chlorine - and halogenate-free components Exceeds EPA s ENERGY STAR requirements! PATENTED WIDE-WELD SEAMING TECHNOLOGY Superior strength for high-wind areas Higher wind uplift ratings than traditional single-weld systems Full-width seam distributes uplift forces uniformly 4

23 UltraPly TPO Platinum Products UltraPly TPO Platinum Mechanically Attached Firestone UltraPly TPO Platinum with Wide-Weld Seam Technology Firestone Batten Strip and Fasteners 3. Firestone HailGard Fasteners 4. Firestone HailGard Insulation 5. Roof Deck UltraPly TPO Platinum Fully Adhered Firestone UltraPly TPO Platinum with Wide-Weld Seam Technology 2. Firestone UltraPly TPO Bonding Adhesive 5 3. Firestone HailGard Fasteners 4. Firestone HailGard Insulation 5. Roof Deck YOU RE COVERED. MULTIPLE TYPES OF PLATINUM WARRANTIES AVAILABLE: Puncture: Coverage for incidental punctures Puncture/hail: Coverage for punctures of up to 2"-diameter hail Puncture/hail/wind: Coverage for punctures, hail and 1-mph wind 5

24 Firestone UltraPly TPO XR Greater versatility. Easy choice. Whether you re installing a new roof or covering your existing system, UltraPly TPO XR has your back. Reinforced with eight-ounce, nonwoven polyester fleece, UltraPly TPO XR membrane combines the attributes of UltraPly TPO membrane with a fleeceback material. So you and your building benefit from: Three thickness options XR 1 (45-mil), XR 115 (6-mil) and XR 135 (8-mil) Quick and easy installation methods, especially efficient for large areas LVOC low-rise foam adhesive options from Firestone (XR Stick TM and I.S.O.Spray TM S Adhesives) specifically designed for use with UltraPly TPO XR membrane Superior cut and puncture resistance, enhancing sustainability Excellent resistance to microbial growth, environmental pollutants and UV rays CRRC-rated and may contribute to LEED points Ideally suited for reroof applications and new construction 6

25 Firestone ReflexEON TM TPO The bright way to save on energy. ReflexEON TPO offers high solar reflectivity. Its enhanced formulation provides uncompromised weatherability and durability year after year. Firestone ReflexEON TPO R e fl ex EO N T P O i s s i g n i fi c a n t l y b r i g h t e r t h a n standard TPO membrane. That means potentially even lower energy bills! Conventional White 7

26 Firestone UltraPly TPO SA Membrane Time is money. Go with a membrane that saves on both. We understand that you need to get the job done quickly. That s why our UltraPly TPO SA membrane requires no bonding adhesives or extra drying time. That means less labor and faster installation without compromising on quality. EASY POSITION AND PEEL INSTALLATION Position the membrane over the ISOGARD TM HD Cover Board or approved substrate Peel off the release liner and mate the membrane to the substrate Poly release liner and packaging are designed to protect the rolls during handling, yet make it easy to remove from the rooftop ZERO VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOCS)! Less harmful to the environment Improve worksite air quality outside and inside Eliminate odor FLEXIBLE TPO PERFORMANCE Enhanc es adhesion to the approved substrates, resulting in a lay-flat application Of fers better conformity to insulation joints and step-offs Virtually no wrinkling when applied professionally 8

27 Firestone UltraPly TPO InvisiWeld TM System Labor Cost Savings for Contractors: The InvisiWeld System typically requires 25% to 5% fewer fasteners compared to conventional, mechanically attached TPO systems allowing a more seasoned welder to weld up to 3 plates an hour The system can be applied even in cold conditions, allowing for faster drying in inclement weather The installation is simple and quick, with a well-established technology that s been proven to perform since the 199s QUALIFIES FOR A 2-YEAR RED SHIELD TM WARRANTY No membrane penetrations Faster roof dry-in Increased wind uplift resistance Symmetrical load distribution Elimination of half sheets Improved aesthetics The patented InvisiWeld System uses advanced technology to mechanically install TPO roofs without fasteners penetrating the UltraPly TPO membrane bringing you considerable savings in labor and material costs. 9

28 Plus: Check These Out! UltraPly TPO Custom Accessories Round Pipe Boot Square Boot For building projects with unique roof designs and elements, it pays to have customized UltraPly TPO accessories from a company you can trust. All of our standard and custom made-to-order TPO accessories are branded with the Firestone name and covered in the Firestone warranty. Save time and money with a variety of options designed to enable a professional installation on every project. Coned Boot Curb Flashing THE FIRESTONE DIFFERENCE PRODUCTS Choose from single-ply and APP/SBS modified bitumen roofing systems, metal roofing systems, polyiso insulation and a full line of accessories QUALITY CONTROL Rest assured knowing that each Firestone manufacturing facility meets or exceeds ISO 91 EXPERTISE Expect installation and product support from a wide-ranging network of expert contractors, distributors and sales reps RESOURCES Access a broad depth of raw materials as part of the world s largest tire and rubber company R&D COMMITMENT Benefit from annual investments of millions of dollars in research and development GREEN FOCUSED Partner with a company that plays a global role in protecting the environment. Firestone prioritizes recyclability, reflectivity, conservation and sustainability 1 STABILITY AND INNOVATION Count on over 1 years of success in rubber and polymer technology

29 11

30 Partnering with Firestone Building Products means superior support that goes beyond the materials you need for your projects. We look at the big picture with you, taking the entire building envelope into consideration, so we can provide you with a complete solution. For exceptionally performing building materials backed by the services, warranty and expertise you need... Count on Firestone. For more information, ask your local Firestone sales rep or visit firestonebpco.com. FIRESTONE BUILDING PRODUCTS 25 WEST 96 TH ST., INDIANAPOLIS, IN 4626 CORPORATE OFFICE: (8) (317) Note: This brochure is meant only to highlight Firestone s products and specifications. Information is subject to change without notice. ALL products and specifications are listed in approximate weights and measurements. For complete product and detail information, please refer to the Technical Manual. Firestone takes responsibility for furnishing quality materials which meet Firestone s published product specifications. As neither Firestone itself nor its representatives practice architecture, Firestone offers no opinion on, and expressly disclaims any responsibility for, the soundness of any structure on which its products may be applied. If questions arise as to the soundness of a structure or its ability to support a planned installation properly, the owner should obtain opinions of competent structural engineers before proceeding. Firestone accepts no liability for any structural failure or for resultant damages, and no Firestone representative is authorized to vary this disclaimer. 12 Printed on Recycled Paper Item #1165 9/13

31 Case Study K-12 Education Project: Judge Memorial High School Salt Lake City, UT See How Judge Memorial High School and Firestone Building Products Built Success. How the Building Needed to Perform. The roof over Judge Memorial High School s (JMHS) auditorium had exceeded its performance life cycle and needed to be replaced. Blake Redd, Vice President of Superior Roofing Company, Inc., the contractor firm for the project, convinced the school to go with a Firestone UltraPly TPO Roofing System. Basically, we hadn t had good success with PVC membranes, and Judge Memorial let the choice of the roofing system be left to the contractor s discretion, Redd said. TPO was newer at the time, and Firestone always has reputable product, so we thought we would try their UltraPly TPO. The Team Customer Judge Memorial High School Ken Lewis, Maintenance Supervisor Roofing Contractor Blake Redd, Vice President of Superior Roofing Company, Inc. Flip to see the Building Performance Solution

32 The Building Performance Solution. How we got the job done. Firestone s UltraPly TPO system, the first of its kind in Utah, was installed in Approximately 45, sq. ft. of 45-mil UltraPly TPO membranes replaced the built-up roof. Superior Roofing has a long history with Firestone Building Products, but the reason we keep choosing Firestone is because they stand behind their products and we believe in the performance of Firestone products, said Redd. Firestone Building Product s solution provided: Low-maintenance Consistent whiteness Very little wear Zero repairs to date High-quality products. Long-term performance. Following past experiences and choosing Firestone Building Products turned out to be an excellent choice for both Superior Roofing and JMHS. Redd reported that they have not received any calls, complaints or repair requests from Judge Memorial regarding the auditorium. Ken Lewis, the Maintenance Supervisor from JMHS, was able to confirm this report, saying, I ve been here for the last seven years, and we have had NO problems over the auditorium where the TPO was installed. The Firestone UltraPly TPO Roofing System has been a good product all around. We haven t even had minor repairs. I d recommend Superior Roofing and Firestone Building Products UltraPly TPO to anyone who would like to have a quality product and an exceptional installation. Ken Lewis Judge Memorial High School Maintenance Supervisor ZERO REPAIRS FOR OVER 15 YEARS AND COUNTING! Item #1892 6/13 Are you ready to improve your building s performance? Visit firestonebpco.com today.

33 SECTION 5 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Energy Savings Plan

34 FORM VI 2 Year Project ESCO's ENERGY SAVINGS PLAN (ESP): ESCO's ANNUAL CASH FLOW ANALYSIS FORM Newark Public Schools- ENERGY SAVING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ESCO Name: Tozour Energy Systems Note: Respondents must use the following assumptions in all financial calculations: (a) The cost of all types of energy should be assumed to inflate at 2.4% gas, 2.2% electric per year and 1. Term of Agreement: 2 years 2. Construction Period (2) (months): 12 Months 3. Cash Flow Analysis Format: Project Cost (1) : $ 18,674,958 Interest Rate 2.75% Asbestos $ 28, Construction Rate 2.5% Cost of Issuance $ 1, Total Financed $ 19,54,958 Year Annual Energy Savings Annual Operational Savings Energy Rebates/Incentives/Dem and Response Total Annual Savings Annual Project Costs Board Costs Annual Service Costs (3) Net Cash-Flow to Client Cumulative Cash Flow Installation $ 347,3 $ 794,673 $ 1,141,73 $ (969,147) $ 172,556 $ 172,556 Year 1 $ 991,515 $ 83,673 $ 1,795,188 $ (1,745,188) $ - $ 5, $ 222,556 Year 2 $ 1,14,161 $ 54, $ 1,68,161 $ (1,18,161) $ 5, $ 272,556 Year 3 $ 1,37,325 $ 1,37,325 $ (987,325) $ 5, $ 322,556 Year 4 $ 1,61,17 $ 1,61,17 $ (1,11,17) $ 5, $ 372,556 Year 5 $ 1,85,251 $ 1,85,251 $ (1,35,251) $ 5, $ 422,556 Year 6 $ 1,11,38 $ 1,11,38 $ (1,6,38) $ 5, $ 472,556 Year 7 $ 1,135,391 $ 1,135,391 $ (1,85,391) $ 5, $ 522,556 Year 8 $ 1,161,324 $ 1,161,324 $ (1,111,324) $ 5, $ 572,556 Year 9 $ 1,187,848 $ 1,187,848 $ (1,137,848) $ 5, $ 622,556 Year 1 $ 1,214,979 $ 1,214,979 $ (1,164,979) $ 5, $ 672,556 Year 11 $ 1,242,729 $ 1,242,729 $ (1,192,729) $ 5, $ 722,556 Year 12 $ 1,271,113 $ 1,271,113 $ (1,221,113) $ 5, $ 772,556 Year 13 $ 1,3,145 $ 1,3,145 $ (1,25,145) $ 5, $ 822,556 Year 14 $ 1,329,84 $ 1,329,84 $ (1,279,84) $ 5, $ 872,556 Year 15 $ 1,36,214 $ 1,36,214 $ (1,31,214) $ 5, $ 922,556 Year 16 $ 1,391,281 $ 1,391,281 $ (1,341,281) $ 5, $ 972,556 Year 17 $ 1,423,58 $ 1,423,58 $ (1,373,58) $ 5, $ 1,22,556 Year 18 $ 1,455,561 $ 1,455,561 $ (1,45,561) $ 5, $ 1,72,556 Year 19 $ 1,488,86 $ 1,488,86 $ (1,438,86) $ 5, $ 1,122,556 Year 2 $ 1,522,81 $ 1,522,81 $ (1,472,81) $ 5, $ 1,172,556 Totals $ 24,784,44 $ - $ 1,652,346 $ 26,783,78 $ (25,611,224) $ - $ - $ 1,172,556

35

36

37 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Energy Savings Plan

38 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Upon final selection and approval of the Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) identified in the Energy Savings Plan (ESP), TES will coordinate the preparation of design development documents, specifications, and equipment selection for the District s approval. Once the project scope is approved, TES design engineers will work closely with Pennoni Engineering and equipment suppliers, to complete the most efficient design for each particular ECM. The design will include complete engineered drawings and project specifications. The information at this point will be detailed sufficiently for bid document development. This phase of project development includes accomplishing the following tasks: Document past, current and future facility and operational data Perform a detailed technical and economic analysis of the targeted improvement measures Select the final Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) Establishing operational baselines for future comparison of improvement results Produce a detailed design of each improvement measure using outside design consultants, as necessary Produce bid specifications and bid packages for public bidding of ECMs Execute detailed project implementation plan Establish measurement and verification methods and plan BPU and third party ESP review and owner acceptance Energy Savings Plan DETAILED ANALYSIS, ENGINEERING, PROJECT APPROACH DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY SAVINGS IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT With the investment grade audit complete and the final ESP delivered and approved by NPS, ECMs will be bid via public contract law. Once the bids have been received, financing for the project can be arranged. A contract for the final project will be issued to accomplish the goals established in the ESP. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION The purpose of this phase is to deliver the work to complete the improvement measures defined in the ESP accepted by the Owner that will achieve their business objectives. For the installation and management of this project, TES will use our dedicated project management team who has demonstrated expertise with similar projects. Our energy savings contracts include a project manager for a single focal point of responsibility for the construction contract. This person will apply technical knowledge, people and communication skills, and management talent in a pro-active manner to ensure that our contract commitments are met on time, within budget and at the quality expected for of the project.

39 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH TES personnel have maintained a successful track record for timely installation of projects and client satisfaction. The various functions necessary for successful completion of a site project will be coordinated by the project manager, including sub-contracting, training, education, payment flows, Quality Assurance, and communications with entities including the maintenance and building staff. Savings are verified, and payments are made per the terms of the contract. TES will perform monthly utility bill analysis and audit reports, which compare the current year with base year energy consumption and costs. TES will perform periodic on-site analysis to determine whether mechanical and electrical systems are operating at optimal efficiency and to assess the occupancy and operational schedules of the buildings. In addition, we will use our Sustainability Service Center to ensure savings occur on a daily basis; not waiting until the end of a year to see if the savings occurred. TES will also complete on-site training and education of the owner s maintenance and operating personnel in the functions, operations and maintenance of equipment installed as a part of an approved comprehensive energy conservation and cost reduction plan for each building or group of buildings. We will provide manuals, charts, diagrams, equipment, hardware, software, and step-bystep instructions as appropriate. Proper savings determination is necessary to the energy program. Therefore, the program design should include some elements of monitoring and verification entailing the following: Select the IPMVP Option that is consistent with the intended scope of the project, and determine whether adjustment will be made to post-retrofit conditions, or to some other conditions. Gather relevant energy and operating data from the base year and record it in a way that it can be accessed in the future. MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION PLANNING METHODOLOGY The purpose is to deliver the work to complete the improvement measures defined in the ESP accepted by OBT The purpose is to deliver the work to complete the improvement measures defined in the ESP accepted by NPS that will produce the District s objectives. For the installation and management of this project, TES will use a dedicated project management team with demonstrated expertise in similar projects. Our energy savings contracts include a project manager for a single focal point of responsibility for aspects of the construction contract. This person will apply technical knowledge, people and communication skills, and management talent in a pro-active manner to ensure that our contract commitments are met on time, within budget and at the quality expected for of the project. Energy Savings Plan

40 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH TES personnel have maintained a successful track record for timely installation of projects and client satisfaction of the various functions necessary for successful completion of a site project will be coordinated by the project manager, including sub-contracting, training, education, payment flows, Quality Assurance, and communications with entities including the maintenance and building staff. Each member of our project management team has at least 1 years field experience. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND PROJECT CONTROLS We are committed to the design and construction of quality projects in an efficient manner, on time, and within budget. In support of this commitment, we have developed and implemented sophisticated project control systems that are used for each of our projects. Since control systems are most effective when they are tailored to the specific requirements of the project, our systems are flexible. The descriptions below are typical of Construction Management and Project Control procedures. This list will be customized to address the needs of the Project. Major control systems presented in this section include the following: Cost Control Planning and Scheduling Accounting Purchasing and Material Control Safety Subcontract Administration Quality Control The following are brief outlines of each of the control systems. Detailed descriptions can be furnished upon request. PROJECT COST REPORTS The Project Cost Reports and Inquiries put management in control by providing current job status information in many formats. Estimated cost at completion and cost remaining are calculated from actual costs plus outstanding purchase orders and open subcontracts. In addition, variance projections are made by comparing planned costs with the total of actual and committed costs and costs remaining. Energy Savings Plan

41 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Project Cost Reports are as follows: * Project Cost Report * Actual vs. Committed Report * Unit Cost Report * Hours/Dollars Report * Construction Manager Report * Detail Job Cost Ledger by Job * Change Order Analysis * Committed Cost Report * Inquiry (Job Cost Detail) * Field Reporting Worksheet * Subcontract Status Report by Job PLANNING AND SCHEDULING We understand this to be a fast track project and are committed to the thorough planning and scheduling of ECM tasks from evaluation and selection to completion. Our scheduling program uses a multitude of proven techniques, which support project-specific and overall company disciplines. These methods have enhanced our ability for timely completion of any size or type of project with varying degrees of responsibility. Pennoni will be available at both the corporate office and at the jobsite. Briefly described below are the elements of the effective and comprehensive scheduling system. Schedule documents are illustrated in a time scaled format. THE MASTER PROJECT SCHEDULE The Master Project Schedule is prepared use Primavera P6 Scheduling Software. The Master Project Schedule outlines the framework of the project and provides the basis for development of the detailed schedule and additional schedule support documents. The Master Project Schedule is updated monthly with a timeline to illustrate activities either ahead or behind schedule. The preliminary schedule identifies the critical tasks, crucial to the successful commencement of the project. BPU and DCA approval are required to begin construction. We anticipate early order placement of long lead equipment prior to their approvals. Similarly, we will early bid tasks not requiring approval. Energy Savings Plan

42 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH 3-DAY LOOK AHEAD REPORT This report is generated from the Master Project Schedule and demonstrates subproject activities scheduled for the next thirty days. SCHEDULE ANALYSIS The Schedule Analysis is a narrative discussing the status of activities relative to the critical and sub critical paths and will include any special factors, which are critical to achieving the scheduled completion of the work. Changes in schedule from the previous month will be highlighted, and deviations from planned percent complete will be discussed. Any new or continuing problems affecting the schedule will be addressed along with any appropriate solutions being recommended or implemented. This section will mention major activities relative to the project schedule to be started or completed in the next month and any change in the scheduled completion of major project milestones. SAFETY Tozour Energy Systems is vitally interested in the safety and health of its employees. This interest is recognized as essential to our position as a viable and morally responsible working unit in a productive society. To ensure and further this active policy of concern, we consider it mandatory for employees to maintain at times an attitude emphasizing an awareness of safety within themselves and also within those persons under their supervision as well as follow all applicable OSHA regulations and site specific requirements. In this spirit, we have established a Field Safety Policy and Procedure Manual for use on our construction sites to ensure each employee s right of a safe place to work. Energy Savings Plan

43 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH QUALITY CONTROL Our quality control program provides assurance that work is installed in compliance with the drawings and specifications, meets the requirements of applicable codes, and is in complete accordance with the requirements of the Quality Control Manual. The Quality Assurance / Quality Control Policies and Procedures specifically address the following areas: Organizational Structure Authority Responsibilities Corrective Action Design Control Design Development Codes and Standards Verification and Approval Document Control Design Change Control As-Built Drawings Material Control Purchasing Shop Inspections Receipt Inspections Storage/Maintenance of Material and Equipment Special Processes Welding Heat Treatment Non-Destructive Examination Inspections and Tests Calibration of Measurement and Test Equipment Control of Non-Conformance Systems Turnover and Start-up By designing and constructing our projects in accordance with high quality standards, we have been able to establish a track record of providing our excellent results to our clients. Energy Savings Plan

44 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH CONTRACTOR ADMINISTRATION Scheduling milestones for subcontract of the district work are provided with requests for quotation. Each subcontractor of the district is required to supply work schedules and schedule updates in a manner and format compatible with our project scheduling system. This subcontract scheduling information is collected on a regular basis, and integrated into the overall project schedule. Regular progress review meetings are conducted with each subcontractor to review and optimize quality control, safety, schedule, and project coordination. FACILITY START UP AND COMMISSIONING Our approach to facility startup begins with preparation of a customized Startup Manual for the specific facility. Startup responsibilities are assigned, testing, inspection and overall startup work scope is developed, and turnover packages with specific boundaries are defined. Individual systems will typically be contained within their own turnover package. The startup function typically begins during the final stages of construction. The startup team will frequently provide input for the construction punch-lists; priorities are identified for those items where punch-list items are required to be done before startup activities can commence. As startup activities are completed within a specific package and independent verification confirms this completion, turnover to operations personnel occurs. SAVINGS CALCULATIONS AND MONITORING Tozour Energy Services (TES) calculated energy savings on a computer simulation of the facility using ESIP-approved energy modeling software. Our energy modeling software applies techniques recommended by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The program is tested in accordance with ASHRAE Standard 14-27, Standard Method of Test for The Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs, and meets the requirements for simulation software set by ASHRAE Standard and the Leed Green Building Rating System. This model will be calibrated based upon historic energy usage data, survey information and building schedule. The schedules shall outline the building s operating schedule and occupancy schedule. The following will also be included in the baseline model: Energy Savings Plan

45 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Weather data weather data are obtained from US Federal Government websites Building Envelope Data Building envelope data is obtained from the building s original architectural and mechanical drawings. Those values are confirmed through on-site inspections. Existing HVAC Equipment Nameplate HVAC nameplate data is recorded from the building plans, during the site survey and/or from vendor and manufacturer s websites Existing HVAC Equipment Operating Setpoints and Control Sequences HVAC equipment setpoints and control sequences are obtained from site visit spot-measurements and/or weekly data logging (indoor temperature, indoor humidity and lighting operating hours), interview of HVAC operating staff, mechanical drawings and equipment operating parameters printouts from building EMS workstations. Subsequently, the model will be revised to simulate building performance with the energy conservation measures implemented. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES AND TRAINING During the Investment Grade Audit (IGA) period, TES works with your staff members and assesses your staff s training and development needs. Based on these findings, training gets incorporated into the Energy Savings Improvement Plan (ESIP) to ensure successful project turn over to your staff and achievement of energy cost savings. The training process focuses on the areas each Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) impacts. We employ the following processes to provide the training your staff needs to maintain a successful program: Assess group/employee knowledge and competency levels Inventory instruments and service tools required to maintain ECMs Determine amount of time and schedule required to service ECMs in addition to staff s time required for existing responsibilities Select and design the training program(s) needed based on the previous three items listed Train employees according to the design of the program (onsite, offsite or web-based) Test employees knowledge as it applies to the facility Energy Savings Plan

46 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Update employees knowledge at periodic intervals to stay current with new codes and improved processes TYPES OF TRAINING TES has five (5) means of delivering training to our clients. TES has included 8 hours of owner training. Equipment specific training will be included in ECMs. 1. Standard Training - These custom-tailor courses help our clients learn how to use and maintain lighting, controls, plumbing and HVAC systems and components. Our training programs provide objective-based learning experiences for your staff. These courses teach your staff how to manage your facilities more efficiently, reduce energy costs, increase comfort, and maximize system benefits. 2. Custom-Designed Courses We design these classes to meet your staff s particular skill needs. Customized course materials and classes provide specific training to meet your building operational goals with your own equipment. An on-site course is suggested if you have a large group to be trained and/or have specific needs. On-site classes provide students with hands-on-practice. Custom designed courses may be taught by a third party expert by topic, manufacturer s representative or a combination of both. 3. Locally Presented Seminars on HVAC and Controls - Seminars are one to five day sessions, presented locally and covering generic topics and specific automation skills of interest to building personnel. Typically these seminars cover ideas that are of immediate use to the participants. Seminars are usually presented at your site. Specific training courses typically run 4-6 hours and include hands-on practice (when applicable). 4. Web-Based Training With the advent of the Internet, technical training can now be accomplished on-line. Many organizations and companies offer on-line training on a variety of subjects. With inter-active presentations and testing, these training tools prove more effective than text books only courses. TES uses this training tool when feasible. Energy Savings Plan

47 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH 5. Behavioral Management - Energy Awareness Training Programs - We strongly believe the longterm success of any conservation program remains equally dependent upon the appropriate application of technologies and continuous, follow-on support and training. Primary contributors to program failure include lack of operator training and equipment maintenance. For this reason, TES facilitates a dedicated training program to educate our clients on both proper usage of the equipment installed at their sites and on the adoption of new behaviors. We provide a tailored training program covering the energy management, temperature controls, mechanical, electrical and refrigeration systems as part of a project. SERVICE PROGRAMS WHAT IS TOZOUR SMART SERVICES? Tozour Smart Services incorporates a variety of customized facility solutions and reports designed to ensure optimal building operations (see samples on next page). From simple system alarm monitoring to complex building performance analysis, Tozour Energy Systems has the solutions specifically designed for educational environments. Tozour Smart Services helps save time and money, as well as extend the equipment lifecycle through lower energy costs, reduced down-time, proactive problem solving, and efficiently planned maintenance. Tozour Smart Services reduces the risk of major equipment failure and increases building occupant productivity. 24/7/365 System Alarm Monitoring & Technical Support At a Glance Performance Summary Energy Savings Plan

48 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Very few facilities have the resources to constantly monitor their building for developing problems. Sometimes sudden equipment failure is not recognized until the situation has become critical. Tozour Energy Systems (TES) delivers peace of mind by constantly monitoring buildings for comfort, energy savings, and operational issues. Our equipment automatically contacts us 24/7/365 in the event of a critical situation such as HVAC system failures. Our experienced professionals immediately work to rectify the problem. Many problems can be corrected remotely before anyone in the building is aware of an issue. As a part of this service TES offers high level technical support on facility equipment and building automation systems. BUILDING PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS What if, at a glance you could tell how your entire facility and of your systems are really performing? Tozour Energy Systems uses the normally untapped horsepower of the facility management system to create custom building reports. The reports demonstrate a very clear picture of how the facility is actually performing, instantaneously or over time. Data gets constantly collected and analyzed from any type of system. The criteria used to assign performance ratings for a building gets developed from equipment specifications and an analysis of the building's current operating parameters. The report structure is customized to meet the needs of any facility staff or building owner. The performance results of the reports are derived from energy usage, equipment efficiency, and occupant comfort. Energy Savings Plan

49 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Our Service Team is trained to understand and assist our clients in determining the best overall service solution for any facility. Over the past 38 years our goal has not changed, we seek to build the foundation for a long term, mutually beneficial relationship. TES provides our clients a full range of operations and preventative maintenance and repair services. Our service offerings are designed to keep your building s equipment and systems running at peak efficiency. TES will assist Newark Public Schools in designing a comprehensive service program that addresses both routine and emergency situations. Service programs are designed to maintain the efficiency of the installed energy measures to ensure energy conservation goals are met and sustained. Our staff of experienced and skilled field service technicians are trained and equipped to handle emergency responses as well as types of maintenance services and repairs, provide rental equipment, and on-site facility operations. We recruit and retain the top service technicians in our industry and provide them with on-going factory and in-house training to ensure we are able to support the latest products in the HVAC industry. TES Service Agreements provide many types of offerings such as: Operational & Preventive Maintenance Services, Total Facility Solutions, Repair Service, Energy Management Service, Consultative Services, Automation System Services, Sustainability Services, Facility Management Services, Nondestructive Testing Service, Guaranteed Performance and Temperature Control Systems. By keeping your facility's equipment and systems running at peak efficiency the Tozour Energy Systems service agreements provides: Energy Savings Plan» 24/7 coverage and protection» Budget Assurance» Reduced operating costs» Energy savings» Minimized breakdowns, repair and replacement costs» Extended equipment life SERVICE PROGRAMS SERVICE AGREEMENTS

50 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH ASSESMENT OF RISKS / DESIGN AND COMPLIANCE ISSUES Moving from a conceptual design to engineered documents TES has identified areas of the project that could change during the detailed design. The table below represents potential conceptual areas of concern that will need to be investigated further with a corresponding party responsible for the compliance of each item. Potential Design and Compliance Issues Ventilation Compliance With Code Boilers Capacity And Turndown Unexpected Underground Utilities Lighting Levels Of Appropriate Areas Cogeneration Noise Levels Unrealized Energy Savings Energy Modeling Performance Monitoring Capacity Of Equipment Efficiency Of Equipment Run Hours Of Equipment Existing Plumbing Infrastructure With New Low Flow Devices Adaptation To New Rtus (Curb, Electric, Ductwork, Condensate) Structural Loads For RTU Replacement Transformer Loading Site Work For CHP And New Boiler Condition Of Roof Under Units Crane Lift And Clearance For Rooftop Units Physical Space Constraints And Clearance For Boiler And CHP Replacement Building Envelope Energy Related Repairs Acceptable To Office Environment Responsible Party Pennoni Pennoni Pennoni Pennoni TES / Pennoni TES/ Pennoni TES TES Pennoni / Basis of Design Vendor Pennoni / Basis of Design Vendor TES Data Loggers / Bas System Pennoni Pennoni / Basis Of Design Manufacture Pennoni Pennoni Pennoni Pennoni Pennoni / Rigger Pennoni DCO Energy Energy Savings Plan

51 SECTION 6 PROJECT APPROACH Refrigerant Reclaim / Refrigerant Disposal Unit Ventilator & Fin Tube / 2nd System Control Existing Tie In Locations Schedule Oversight Impact Of Boiler / CHP To Boiler Flue Condition Of Walls Behind Unit Ventilators Impact Of Space Usage During Construction Permitting (DCA, DOE) Contractor Pennoni Pennoni DCO Energy Pennoni Pennoni / Contractor / Contingency Pennoni / Owner DCO Energy Energy Savings Plan

52 SECTION 7 OPTIONAL ENERGY GUARANTEE NOTE: Energy Savings Plan Financial Guarantee Not Accepted Energy Savings Plan

53 Optional Energy Guarantee OPTIONAL ENERGY GUARANTEE DESCRIPTION Overview NOTE: The following is meant only to serve as a description of an optional energy guarantee and does not constitute any contractual obligations between the Owner and TES. If the Owner chooses to implement an energy guarantee contract, a separate document will be used based on mutual agreement and acceptance of all parties of its terms and conditions. A successful energy project consists of a partnership between an ESCO and Owner. Both parties have defined roles and accept their individual responsibilities as well as support any joint initiatives of the program as defined in the RFP and this document. Both Tozour Energy Services (TES) and the Owner will have a role in ongoing maintenance and operations as defined in the agreed-upon energy guarantee contractual documents. Both parties will be required to meet their obligations for the guaranteed energy units savings (referred to as guarantee or savings ) to be achieved and to ensure the guarantee stays intact. Tozour Energy Services will guarantee the Owner will achieve 1% of the total energy units savings per the provisions of the agreed-upon energy guarantee contractual documents based on the final selection of ECMs and their associated energy savings as measured and verified by the Owner s third-party, independent firm. The energy savings will be in energy units, not dollars as TES has no control over the costs of utilities. The energy units guarantee contract shall commence thirty (3) days after the start-up and commissioning of the last Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) and be enforce for a period of fifteen (15) years or until terminated by the Owner. If the Owner chooses to terminate or buy-out the contract early TES will refund any unused portion of the associated and mutually, agreedupon measurement and verification costs. The Owner may buy out the energy guarantee at any time by paying TES a termination fee. SAVINGS VERIFICATION There are events that cause energy savings to change. HTSD and TES will agree to baseline energy consumption that represents the facility s energy use and cost prior to the date of any Agreement (the Base Year ) and parameters, which affect the energy usage and cost of the facility, including but not limited to, utility rates, local weather profile, facility square footage, environmental conditions, schedules (e.g., lighting, HVAC) and an inventory of equipment in the facility. Energy savings are determined by comparing measured energy use or demand before and after implementation of an energy savings program. ECM ENERGY SAVINGS = BASELINE ENERGY USE POST INSTALLATION ENERGY USE +/- ADJUSTMENTS Changes in estimated energy savings fall into two categories. These categories are Routine Adjustments and Non-Routine Adjustments. Routine Adjustments are expected changes during the savings reporting period to energy governing factors (e.g. weather). TES uses IPMVP approved mathematical techniques to determine adjustments. Non-Routine Adjustments include energygoverning factors which are not usually expected to change, such as the facility size, the design and operation of installed equipment, occupancy and the type of occupants or any physical changes to the building or equipment that impact the facilities utility use. These factors will be monitored for change throughout the reporting period.

54 Optional Energy Guarantee TES will perform monthly utility bill analysis and audit reports which compare the current year with base year energy consumption and costs. TES will perform periodic on-site analysis to determine whether mechanical and electrical systems are operating at optimal efficiency and to assess the occupancy and operational schedules of the buildings. In addition, we will use our Sustainability Service Center to ensure savings occur on a daily basis, not waiting until the end of a year to see if the savings occurred. MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION (M&V) PLAN Our approach to M&V of energy savings aligns with the International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol. More detailed information may be found at It s most cost-effective to perform M&V using the least costly option that still adequately documents system performance and permits analysis of savings. This approach lowers the total cost of the program leaving more dollars available to perform more facility improvements. Depending upon which ECMs are implemented by HTSD, the M&V plan proposed by TES would incorporate one or more of the following options which outlines the four most common approaches for M&V: Option A Retrofit Isolation with Key Parameter Measurement Option B Retrofit Isolation with Parameter Measurement Option C Utility Data Analysis Option D Calibrated Computer Simulation This option is based on a combination of measured and estimated factors when variations in factors are not expected. Measurements are spot or short-term and are taken at the component or system level, both in the baseline and post-installation cases. Measurements should include the key performance parameter(s) which define the energy use of the ECM. Estimated factors are supported by historical or manufacturer s data. Savings are determined by means of engineering calculations of baseline and post-installation energy use based on measured and estimated values. This option is based on periodic or continuous measurements of energy use taken at the component or system level when variations in factors are expected. Energy or proxies of energy use are measured continuously. Periodic spot or short-term measurements may suffice when variations in factors are not expected. Savings are determined form analysis of baseline and reporting period energy use of proxies of energy use. This option is based on long-term, continuous, whole-building utility meter, facility level, or sub-meter energy (or water) data. Savings are determined from analysis of baseline and reporting period energy data. Typically, regression analysis is conducted to correlate with and adjust energy use to independent variables such as weather, but simple comparisons may also be used. Computer simulation software is used to model energy performance of a whole-facility (or sub-facility). Models must be calibrated with actual hourly or monthly billing data from the facility. Implementation of simulation modeling requires engineering expertise. Inputs to the model include facility characteristics; performance specifications of new and existing equipment or systems; engineering estimates, spot-, short-term, or long-term measurements of system components; and long-term wholebuilding utility meter data. After the model has been calibrated, savings are determined by comparing a simulation of the baseline with either a simulation of the performance period or actual utility data Direct measurements and estimated values, engineering calculations and/or component or system models often developed through regression analysis. Adjustments to models are not typically required. Direct measurements, engineering calculations, and/or component or system models often developed through regression analysis. Adjustments to models may be required.` Based on regression analysis of utility meter data to account for factors that drive energy use. Adjustments to models are typically required. Based on computer simulation model calibrated with whole-building or enduse metered data or both. Adjustments to models are required.

55 Optional Energy Guarantee Each of the options can be used for a wide array of energy efficiency upgrades and each has different costs and complexities associated with it. When selecting an M&V approach, the following general rule of thumb can be applied: Option A When magnitude of savings is low for the entire project or a portion of the project The risk for not achieving savings is low Option B For simple equipment replacement projects When energy savings values per individual measure are desired When interactive effects are to be ignored or are estimated using estimating methods that do not involve long term measurements When independent variables that affect energy use are not complex and excessively difficult or expensive to monitor When sub-meters already exist that record the energy use of subsystems under consideration Option C For complex equipment replacement and controls projects When predicted energy savings are in excess of 1 to 2 percent as compared with the record energy use When energy savings per individual measure are not desired When interactive effects are to be included When the independent variables that affect energy use are complex and excessively difficult or expensive Option D When new construction projects are involved When energy savings values per measure are desired When Option C tools cannot cost effectively evaluate particular measures or their interactions with the building when complex baseline adjustments are anticipated TES will perform measurement and verification of the energy units savings at the conclusion of each month in the first year of the energy units guarantee. After the first year, M&V will be performed and presented within 3 days of year end. The Owner will work with TES to provide necessary information and provide access to any buildings to allow TES to properly verify and measure energy savings. TES energy guarantee will be based on units of energy saved as determined from the baseline provide in the RFP, or adjusted baseline if original baseline is determined by both parties to be inaccurate. Adjustments to the baseline and associated savings will be taken for weather, hours of operation, building usage, utility rates increases, code or statute changes, requirements listed in Table 1, and any other actions that adversely affect the savings beyond the control of TES. Any savings discrepancies will be resolved to the satisfaction of both the Owner and TES in a timely manner. In the event of a savings shortfall, TES agrees to pay the Owner within 3 days or the Owner may elect to receive the shortfall amount in a credit towards additional work or services from TES. Excess saving will be credited towards and used to offset any energy savings shortfall in future years of the contract.

56 Optional Energy Guarantee M&V TASKS OR SERVICES PROVIDED BY TOZOUR ENERGY SERVICES (TES) TES will assign a dedicated Senior Energy Analyst (SEA) to manage the ongoing M&V and the energy savings guarantee for the life of the program (15 years) or until such time as the Owner terminates the energy guarantee contract. The SEA will be fluent with: the ECM(s) implemented during the construction-phase of the program, the associated energy savings, and the required maintenance / support measures associated with maintaining peak building operation. The SEA will self-implement or manage the following professional services over the course of the program: Implementation and Documentation of M&V Services: The dedicated SEA shall implement or manage the agreed upon measurement and verification services outlined in the M&V section. Verification and Review of Services: A Certified Energy Manager (CEM) will be available for consultation services for the life of the agreement. Some of the responsibilities of this individual may include: verification of energy savings as applicable to M&V, a liaison when dealing with your utility companies and or identify additional energy conservation opportunities within the facility. In addition, any energy unit savings shortfalls will be documented with recommendations to correct and its current impact on the energy guarantee. These tasks will be performed onsite as well as offsite, to take full advantage of the essential tools and resources available to the CEM. Operating Inspections: TES wants to ensure equipment continues to operate efficiently, safely and with little operating disruptions. The dedicated SEA will independently, provide periodic operating inspection(s) to check system performance in accordance with a program of standard routines as determined by our experience, the equipment manufacturer s published recommendations, equipment application, and location. Any deficiencies will be documented and brought to the attention of the Owner and or the responsible service provider. MAINTENANCE PLAN Owner Tasks and Responsibilities: As a general statement the Owner or its 3rd party service providers shall be responsible for providing ongoing maintenance through the duration of the energy savings guarantee. TES will review operational procedures and schedules associated with such things as the building automation/control upgrades as well as the manufacturers published requirements for all installed equipment be it: quarterly, semiannually or annually. In most cases, the Owner is already aware of or self-implementing similar maintenance practices on campus or has contracted a 3rd party for such services. Failure to properly maintain the equipment will cause the energy guarantee to become null and void. Specific Areas of Consideration: In order to sustain energy savings the Owner s Staff will be required to implement new maintenance tasks and even modify existing policies and practices. Outlined are two examples of specific instances. Example 1. Advanced Building Operations Programming: The Owner will be given specific training on the changes and advancements in the environmental operations and energy savings strategies. The Owner will be responsible for following the agreed upon guidelines associated with programmed schedules and any use of override functions. Example 2. Verification of Proper Operations: Mechanical Equipment

57 Optional Energy Guarantee The Owner will be required to assure that proper mechanical maintenance continues to be implemented on its mechanical equipment. Example: outside air dampers will require proper operation with the appropriate seals in order to maintain ECM(s) such as demand ventilation. TES dedicated SAE will periodically spot check system operations to verify the Owner or its 3rd party representative is implementing proper maintenance. Any deficiencies that may be identified will be brought to the Owner s attention for correction. Optional Energy Guarantee Terms and Conditions

58 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS SECTION 8 Energy Savings Plan

59 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs ARTS HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

60 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Baseline Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 18,915 98,476 19,792 11,73 115,122 19,197 11,86 14,533 11,79 115,623 15,939 18,94 1,37,45 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 41,412 32,59 21,289 1,996 1, ,615 22,328 33,1 171,873 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 16,499 Btu/(ft2-year) 154,856 Btu/(ft2-year) 23,284 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX No Data Available No Data Available No Data Available Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:29 PM on 2/4/215 Dataset Name: ARTS HS.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

61 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-1 Lighting Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 86,22 77,961 87,86 88,31 94,753 87,552 92,421 79,853 93,537 92,692 83,958 86,227 1,5,273 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 42,98 32,683 22,243 12,15 2,563 1,84 9,63 23,244 33, ,522 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 15,944 Btu/(ft2-year) 145,864 Btu/(ft2-year) 23,284 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX No Data Available No Data Available No Data Available Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:29 PM on 2/4/215 Dataset Name: ARTS HS.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

62 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-2 Conversion to HW Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 69,417 61,434 66,755 67,474 77,322 87,552 92,421 79,853 78,96 71,21 64,47 67, ,238 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 24,761 18,695 11,941 6,173 4,727 12,525 19,114 97,936 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 63,23 Btu/(ft2-year) 95,254 Btu/(ft2-year) 23,284 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX No Data Available No Data Available No Data Available Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:29 PM on 2/4/215 Dataset Name: ARTS HS.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

63 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-3 DDC Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 69,572 61,412 65,179 59,989 7,485 83,551 85,32 77,88 73,18 63,116 63,13 67,51 839,848 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 21,659 15,82 9,528 3,967 3,233 9,558 15,14 78,95 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 52,916 Btu/(ft2-year) 83,164 Btu/(ft2-year) 23,284 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX No Data Available No Data Available No Data Available Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:29 PM on 2/4/215 Dataset Name: ARTS HS.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

64 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-4 Lighting Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 67,734 59,745 63,352 58,214 68,538 81,594 83,281 75,829 71,26 61,315 61,49 65, ,57 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 21,716 15,868 9,574 4,3 3,267 9,63 15,193 79,225 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 52,698 Btu/(ft2-year) 82,24 Btu/(ft2-year) 23,284 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX No Data Available No Data Available No Data Available Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 4:55 PM on 2/4/215 Dataset Name: ARTS HS2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 1

65 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs BARRINGER HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

66 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Baseline Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 129, , , , , , , , , ,62 134, ,345 1,533,648 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 27,355 17,814 14,18 7,715 3,75 7,2 17,685 95,52 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 49,829 Btu/(ft2-year) 86,811 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,73,677 lbm/year 4,86 gm/year 1,12 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:46 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: BARRINGER.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

67 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-1 LED Lighting Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 111,878 1, ,73 18,819 12, ,876 15,96 98,718 16, ,925 18,651 11,78 1,311,711 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 28,45 18,749 15,192 8,58 4,879 8,249 19,255 13,39 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 49,97 Btu/(ft2-year) 81,921 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 918,32 lbm/year 3,495 gm/year 958 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:46 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: BARRINGER.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

68 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-2 Condensing Boilers Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 98,762 88,237 99,183 94,41 12, ,876 15,96 98,718 16,762 1,886 94,224 96,454 1,213,222 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 18,133 12,5 9,79 5,388 3,197 5,261 12,72 65,844 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 36,147 Btu/(ft2-year) 65,231 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 849,353 lbm/year 3,233 gm/year 886 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:46 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: BARRINGER.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

69 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-3 DDC Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 75,998 64,628 7,761 63,187 64,52 94,976 74,3 67,798 7,32 65,116 63,971 69, ,685 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 16,834 11,793 9,961 5,314 3,382 5,616 11,728 64,628 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 31,498 Btu/(ft2-year) 52,8 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 591,347 lbm/year 2,251 gm/year 617 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:46 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: BARRINGER.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

70 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-4 PIV Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 75,782 64,384 7,527 63,83 64,52 94,976 74,3 67,798 7,32 65,49 63,846 69,23 843,473 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 19,192 12,928 1,388 5,494 3,388 5,795 13,46 7,23 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 33,372 Btu/(ft2-year) 54,26 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 59,499 lbm/year 2,247 gm/year 616 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 5: PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: Barringer 2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 2

71 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Alternative: 2 Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 73,99 62,719 68,627 61,152 62,592 92,877 71,83 65,581 68,356 63,159 62,1 67,316 82,92 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 19,261 12,988 1,452 5,552 3,445 5,843 13,126 7,666 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 33,25 Btu/(ft2-year) 53,373 Btu/(ft2-year) 296,78 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 574,13 lbm/year 2,185 gm/year 599 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 5: PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: Barringer 2.trc Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 2

72 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

73 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Baseline Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 17,91 97,154 17,63 14,221 84,839 82,85 84,859 84,744 88,315 18,59 14,155 17,578 1,161,971 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 36,142 24,79 2,77 13,27 1,612 1,48 7,96 12,124 25, ,46 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 87,14 Btu/(ft2-year) 128,38 Btu/(ft2-year) 21,384 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 813,473 lbm/year 3,96 gm/year 849 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools Group 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:1 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: GWC SCHOOL.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

74 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-1 LED Lighting w/ Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 96,428 86,784 96,121 93,84 73,358 7,974 73,378 73,263 76,855 96,915 93,1 96,97 1,26,267 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 36,743 25,331 21,347 13,579 1,612 1,48 8,452 12,671 26, ,369 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 86,697 Btu/(ft2-year) 123,686 Btu/(ft2-year) 21,384 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 718,469 lbm/year 2,734 gm/year 749 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools Group 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:1 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: GWC SCHOOL.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

75 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-2 HW Condensing Boilers Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 76,4 67,941 74,771 72,79 73,358 7,974 73,378 73,263 76,855 75,16 71,967 75,45 881,45 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 22,216 15,376 13,127 8,246 1,612 1,48 5,311 7,771 15,599 9,739 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 57,423 Btu/(ft2-year) 88,283 Btu/(ft2-year) 21,384 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 616,82 lbm/year 2,348 gm/year 643 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools Group 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:1 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: GWC SCHOOL.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

76 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-3 DDC Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 66,599 57,47 61,923 57,719 57,55 55,235 55,7 55,64 59,437 59,43 57,749 62,372 74,943 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 19,73 12,446 1,585 5,584 1,612 1,48 3,727 5,595 12,72 72,174 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 45,742 Btu/(ft2-year) 7,423 Btu/(ft2-year) 21,384 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 493,516 lbm/year 1,878 gm/year 515 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools Group 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:1 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: GWC SCHOOL.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

77 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-4 Lighting Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 65,4 55,929 6,664 56,512 55,793 53,986 54,46 53,768 58,136 57,817 56,523 61,85 69,19 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 19,77 12,594 1,629 5,643 1,612 1,48 3,757 5,631 12,12 72,525 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 45,667 Btu/(ft2-year) 69,872 Btu/(ft2-year) 21,384 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 483,69 lbm/year 1,839 gm/year 54 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:55 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: GWC 2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 1

78 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs MALCOLM X SHABAZZ HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

79 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Malcolm X Shabazz HS Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 214,8 193,38 218,668 27, , , , , ,66 22,625 21,18 211,33 2,437,39 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 57,26 4,421 33,125 2,26 1,699 2,57 42,36 224,127 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 96,998 Btu/(ft2-year) 153,242 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,76,368 lbm/year 6,494 gm/year 1,78 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 11:23 AM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

80 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 1 Interior LED Lighting Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 172, , , ,61 145,17 129,2 165, ,188 15,92 178, , ,558 1,924,552 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 58,717 41,84 34,818 21,944 12,386 21,672 43, ,332 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 95,1 Btu/(ft2-year) 14,389 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,347,341 lbm/year 5,128 gm/year 1,46 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 11:23 AM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

81 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 2 Lighting Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 17, , , , , , , , , , , ,875 1,93,98 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 58,778 41,896 34,886 22,14 12,449 21,739 44,2 235,782 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 94,929 Btu/(ft2-year) 139,871 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,332,888 lbm/year 5,73 gm/year 1,39 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 11:23 AM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

82 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 3 LED Exterior Lighting Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 167, ,46 172, ,452 14, ,74 161,33 14, , , , ,269 1,873,227 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 58,778 41,896 34,886 22,14 12,449 21,739 44,2 235,782 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 94,599 Btu/(ft2-year) 138,88 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,311,49 lbm/year 4,991 gm/year 1,368 gm/year Project Name: Newark Public Schools TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 11:23 AM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

83 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 4 Boiler Conversion to HW Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 165, , ,2 158,162 14, ,74 161,33 14, , ,543 16,98 16,835 1,844,726 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 44,6 31,479 26,148 16,421 9,86 16,2 33,59 176,399 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 75,549 Btu/(ft2-year) 118,229 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,291,456 lbm/year 4,915 gm/year 1,347 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ 2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 3

84 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 5 VFD on HW Pump Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 142, , , ,27 14, ,74 161,33 14, , ,38 137,1 136,957 1,678,82 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 44,6 31,479 26,148 16,421 9,86 16,2 33,59 176,399 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 73,761 Btu/(ft2-year) 112,867 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,175,295 lbm/year 4,473 gm/year 1,226 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ 2.trc Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 3

85 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM - 6 DDC Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 119,36 13, ,863 13,969 11,988 82,986 15,46 93, , ,519 17,693 11,862 1,283,431 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 35,325 22,856 16,85 7,964 3,95 8,968 22, ,712 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 51,295 Btu/(ft2-year) 8,922 Btu/(ft2-year) 316,828 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 898,54 lbm/year 3,42 gm/year 937 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 1/14/214 Dataset Name: MX SHABAZZ 2.trc Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 3

86 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs TECHNOLOGY HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

87 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Baseline Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 114,191 99,88 15,58 96,216 87,212 15,61 82,473 77,38 99,37 98,477 96,13 19,486 1,171,6 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 3,236 19,829 16,54 9,565 1, ,358 8,664 2,41 112,95 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 88,86 Btu/(ft2-year) 138,717 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 82,214 lbm/year 3,122 gm/year 856 gm/year Project Name: Newark 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:49 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

88 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-1 LED Lighting w/ Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 12,311 89,192 93,737 84,52 74,88 15,868 68,472 63,362 85,32 86,92 84,447 97,777 1,35,185 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 29,588 19,644 16,612 9,867 1, ,818 9,37 2, ,244 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 86,299 Btu/(ft2-year) 13,811 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 724,712 lbm/year 2,758 gm/year 756 gm/year Project Name: Newark 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:49 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

89 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-2 Condensing HW Boilers Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 88,788 76,499 79,532 7,634 74,88 15,868 68,472 63,362 85,32 71,642 7,539 83, ,41 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 2,49 13,32 1,763 6,245 1, ,711 5,738 13,345 75,668 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 62,555 Btu/(ft2-year) 12,8 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 656,962 lbm/year 2,5 gm/year 685 gm/year Project Name: Newark 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:49 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

90 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-4 DDC Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 71,363 56,24 56,6 46,818 44,4 73,269 58,463 63,162 52,833 45,492 47,217 61, ,341 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 17,953 11,62 9,567 5, ,57 5,32 11,674 66,967 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 52,325 Btu/(ft2-year) 81,232 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 474,193 lbm/year 1,85 gm/year 495 gm/year Project Name: Newark 1 TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:49 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

91 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-5 Roof Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 7,734 55,837 56,271 46,183 42,887 71,988 57,354 62,47 52,58 45,342 46,86 6, ,18 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 17,615 11,367 9,393 5,79 1, ,418 5,9 11,416 65,69 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 51,351 Btu/(ft2-year) 79,847 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 467,666 lbm/year 1,78 gm/year 488 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:6 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS 2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 2

92 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM6- Lighting Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 68,428 54,568 55,416 45,377 41,961 7,559 55,897 6,524 5,81 44,262 45,74 59, ,741 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 17,685 11,411 9,424 5,16 1, ,449 5,159 11,466 65,92 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 51,23 Btu/(ft2-year) 79,129 Btu/(ft2-year) 172,163 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 456,971 lbm/year 1,739 gm/year 477 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 3:6 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: TECHNOLOGYHS 2.trc Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 2

93 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS Modeled ECMs WEEQUAHIC HIGH SCHOOL Energy Savings Plan

94 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Baseline Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 16, , ,61 147,111 17, ,63 164, , ,58 156, , ,262 1,867,745 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 6,731 48,336 39,814 2,386 2, ,556 18,921 28,45 5, ,176 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 143,86 Btu/(ft2-year) 27,612 Btu/(ft2-year) 22,995 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,37,571 lbm/year 4,977 gm/year 1,364 gm/year Project Name: Weequahic HS TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: WEEQUAHIC HS.TRC Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 4

95 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-1 LED Lighting Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 135, , , , , , ,68 152, ,59 134,646 13,28 126,4 1,639,98 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 61,41 49,66 4,668 2,417 2, ,557 19,488 29,42 5, ,198 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 142,148 Btu/(ft2-year) 198,933 Btu/(ft2-year) 22,995 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,147,5 lbm/year 4,367 gm/year 1,197 gm/year Project Name: Weequahic HS TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: WEEQUAHIC HS.TRC Alternative - 2 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 2 of 4

96 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-2 Boiler Upgrade Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 132, , , , , , ,68 152, ,59 129,47 125, ,157 1,613,915 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 47,616 37,985 31,446 2,417 2, ,557 15,164 22,464 39,418 21,659 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 116,175 Btu/(ft2-year) 17,836 Btu/(ft2-year) 22,995 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,129,869 lbm/year 4,3 gm/year 1,179 gm/year Project Name: Weequahic HS TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: WEEQUAHIC HS.TRC Alternative - 3 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 3 of 4

97 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-3 Setback Thermostat Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 124, ,13 121,75 111,7 125,96 117, ,325 13, , , , ,16 1,435,94 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 33,267 25,496 19,892 1,736 1, ,335 7,56 12,61 24, ,373 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 8,717 Btu/(ft2-year) 128,156 Btu/(ft2-year) 22,995 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 1,5,248 lbm/year 3,826 gm/year 1,49 gm/year Project Name: Weequahic HS TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 2:2 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: WEEQUAHIC HS.TRC Alternative - 4 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 4 of 4

98 MONTHLY ENERGY CONSUMPTION By DCO Energy, LLC Monthly Energy Consumption Utility Alternative: 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total ECM-3 Lighting Controls Electric On-Pk Cons. (kwh) 122,153 19,51 119,349 18, , ,92 123,729 13, , , ,86 111,359 1,414,913 On-Pk Demand (kw) Gas On-Pk Cons. (therms) 33,355 25,592 19,957 1,744 1, ,335 7,547 12,92 25,22 129,746 On-Pk Demand (therms/hr) Water Cons. (1gal) Building Source Floor Area Energy Consumption 8,562 Btu/(ft2-year) 127,361 Btu/(ft2-year) 22,995 ft2 Environmental Impact Analysis CO2 SO2 NOX 99,552 lbm/year 3,77 gm/year 1,33 gm/year Project Name: TRACE 7 v6.3 calculated at 1:4 PM on 2/5/215 Dataset Name: Weequahic HS 2.trc Alternative - 1 Monthly Energy Consumption report Page 1 of 1

99 SECTION 8 ENERGY SAVINGS CALCULATIONS ECM-5 CONDENSING DOMESTIC WATER HEATER Energy Savings Plan

100