Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results

Transcription

1 Facility Type: Multi-Tenant Commercial Building Project ID: _dnv 1.0 Summary of Savings and Adjustments This project includes the installation of new T8 lighting and compact fluorescent lamps in place of existing T12 fixtures, metal halide fixtures and incandescent bulbs. Table 1 presents a summary of the energy and demand savings for this project. Savings are recalculated based upon file reviews, site inventories of equipment, and monitored operation. Savings are adjusted according to the six categories presented below. The adjusted gross energy savings of 1,052,380 h is 32% lower than tracking estimates. Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results Energy Summer Demand Winter Demand Reporting Parameter h %Gross %Gross %Gross Gross (TRACKING) Savings 1,539,036 N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Documentation Change % 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Technology Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Quantity Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Operation Change -536,190-35% N/A N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Coincident Change N/A N/A % % Adjustment - HVAC Interaction 49,336 3% % 0.0 0% Adjustment - TOTAL -486,656-32% 1.8 1% % Adjusted Gross (ONSITE) Savings 1,052,380 68% % % 2.0 Project Overview This facility is a 468,000 square foot building which is used as a multi-tenant office building. The building includes multiple office spaces common and private, government offices, mechanical and electrical spaces along with cafeterias and restrooms. Majority of the various office spaces operate on a common schedule of 7:00 am to 8:00 pm. The government offices and spaces operate 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The facility is occupied after hours to allow for cleaning and maintenance to be done. This facility observes ten holidays throughout a calendar year. This project included replacing the existing one lamp, two lamp and three lamp F40/T12 fixtures with one lamp, two lamp, and three lamp F32/T8 fixtures, metal halides were replace with two lamp F32/T8 vapor tight fixtures and incandescent bulbs were replaced with new compact fluorescent bulbs.

2 3.0 Tracking Baseline Description Table 2 presents a summary of the existing system as outlined in the customer application. Line Fixture Description Table 2: Baseline System Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 2L4' T12 MAG 2F40SEM , , L4' T12 MAG 1F40SEM , , L4' T12 MAG 1F40SEM , , L4' T12 MAG 3F48SES , ,768, L2' HO/STD/STD 2F24HSS , , W FLOOD 1INC90W , , W FLOOD 1INC90W , , L4' T12 MAG 1F30SEM , , WABULB 1INC52W , , L8' T12 2F96SEM , , (1) F20T12/HPFMAG 1F20SSE , , WMH 1M0175S , , EXIT EX , , WABULB 1INC60W , ,872 Totals ,854, Tracking Proposed Description Table 3 presents the installed fixtures and quantities as proposed in the customer application. Line Fixture Description Table 3: Proposed System Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 2L4' T8/ELIG 2F32EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 1F32EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 2F32EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 2F32EEE , , L2' T8/ELIG 2F17EEE , , L2' T8/ELIG 2F17EEE , , WFLOOD 27WFLD , , L4' T8/ELIG 1F32EEE , , WSPIRAL 15WSPIRAL , , L8'T8 2F328EE , , (1) F20T12/HPFMAG 1F20SSE , , L4' VAPOR T8 2F81VTG , , LED EXIT 19LEDSSX , , WSPIRAL 15WSPIRAL , Totals ,315, Tracking Savings Review The tracking estimates of energy use were calculated based on the full load of the existing and proposed fixtures. The energy savings were calculated as the difference in the pre and post installation energy use based on annual operation of 6,240 hours per year. Table 4 presents a summary of the tracking savings.

3 Line Connected Table 4: Tracking Savings Summary Fixture Savings Summer Winter h Connected Total Tracking Savings Summer Winter h , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,404 Totals ,539, ,539, On-Site Methodology The evaluation included a verification of installed fixtures, on-site monitoring and interview. All fixtures are controlled manually using wall switches. The base case used in the evaluation of the lighting savings was developed from information contained in the customer application. The pre-existing fixture types were confirmed while on-site with the facility contact. An evaluator visited the facility to verify the installed fixtures and install monitoring equipment to quantify the hours of use of the different spaces. The evaluator surveyed facility personnel to obtain information on the lighting usage throughout the year. He also inquired about any HVAC equipment serving the space. To determine the hours of use for the new fixtures, the field engineer installed seventeen time-of-use lighting loggers. Each logger recorded the on/off of the lighting fixtures monitored.

4 Table 5 presents the fixtures monitored by the evaluation team.

5 Table 5: Spaces Monitored Logger # T Equipment Monitored Conference Room-Two Lamp F32/T8 Parameter Measured T Private Office-Two Lamp F32/T T Mens Restroom-Two Lamp F32/T8 Unoccupied Area-Two Lamp F17/T8 Test Equipment Measurement Type Installation Method Frequency of Observations Monitoring Duration 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 T Hallway-Two Lamp F32/T8 T File Storage-Two Lamp F32/T8 T Private Office-Two Lamp F32/T8 T Lunch Room Floor 21-Two Lamp F32/T8 T Hallway-Two Lamp F17/T8 T Mens Restroom-Two Lamp F32/T8 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 T Document/Production Area-Two Lamp F32/T8 Telephone Closet-One Lamp F32/T8 T Hallway-Two Lamp F32/T Private Office-Two Lamp F32/T8 T T Basement Lobby-One Lamp F32/T8 Chief Mechanic Office-Two Lamp F17/T8 Recycle Center-Two Lamp F32/T8 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/09 9/18/09-10/21/ On-site Observations and Findings This project involved the retrofitting of older lighting fixtures throughout the facility. These spaces included open offices, private offices, government offices, electrical and mechanical spaces along with cafeterias and restrooms. Also included, was the parking garage for the facility. Included in this retrofit were the replacement of (2,145) three lamp F40/T12 fixtures with (2,751) two lamp F32/T8 fixtures, (12) two lamp F96/T12 fixtures

6 with (12) two lamp F32/T8 fixtures, (304) one lamp F40/T12 with (288) one lamp F32/T8 fixtures, (232) two lamp F40/T12 with (324) two lamp F32/T8, (457) 175 watt Metal Halide fixtures with (457) two lamp vapor tight F32/T8, (71) incandescent bulbs were replaced with (37) 15 watt compact fluorescent and (92) 27 watt compact fluorescent bulbs. Finally (56) exit signs were replaced with (65) LED exit signs throughout the facility. Evaluators identified all of the installed fixtures within the facility. According to facility personnel, the operating hours are seven days a week between 7:00 am and 8 pm according to facility personnel. The facility observes ten holidays in which it is closed and unoccupied. These include New Years Day, Martin Luther King Day, Presidents Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. The monitoring period did not cover any of the facility holidays. Therefore, evaluators assumed that each holiday would be unoccupied and the lights would be off. With the exception of a small number of emergency fixtures, that were accounted for in the analysis as always being on, this assumption for holiday use was verified by facility personnel.

7 Table 6 presents the values obtained from the monitored data including annual operation, summer and winter diversity factors. These values were used for both the pre and post installation calculations because there was no difference in operation with the new lighting according to facility personnel. Note that s 18 through 23 were used to represent the average operation of several space types including restrooms, private offices, hallways, open offices and basement. These schedules were created by averaging the logger data from the spaces corresponding with the average space type.

8 Table 6: Hours of Use and Diversity Factors for Monitored Spaces ID Logger # Description Hours Summer Diversity Winter Diversity 1 T Basement Lobby 6, % 100% 2 T Fl 21 Lunch Room 3,833 96% 79% 3 T Basement Recycling Area 8, % 100% 4 T Fl 21 File Storage 13 0% 0% 5 T FL 18 Hall 8, % 100% 6 T Fl 20 Restroom 4, % 100% 7 T Fl 20 Open Area 2, % 97% 8 T Fl 22 Hall 5, % 100% Fl 11 Private Office % 0% Basement Private Office 2,770 79% 48% Fl 19 Tele Closet % 5% Fl 26 Restroom 3, % 100% 13 T Fl 27 Private Office 1,843 72% 47% 14 T Fl 21 Private Office % 0% 15 T Fl 27 Open Area 171 2% 3% 16 T Fl 25 Unoccupied Open Area 339 5% 5% 17 T Fl 21 Hall 5, % 100% 18 Custom Avg Restroom (Sch 6 & 12) 4, % 100% 19 Custom Avg Private Office (13 & 14) 1,222 45% 23% 20 Custom Avg Hall (Sch 5, 8 & 17) 6, % 100% 21 Custom Avg Open Area (Sch 7 & 15) 1,494 51% 50% 22 Custom Avg Basement (Sch 1, 3 & 10) 5,900 93% 83% 23 Custom 24/7 Operation 8, % 100% 8.0 Conclusions Adjusted gross annual energy savings are 68% of the tracking system estimate. The following factors influenced the difference between the UI Tracking and Gross On-Site estimates of energy savings: The reason for the decrease in annual energy savings was due to the decrease in annual hours of operation as compared to the tracking estimate. The tracking savings estimated all of the fixtures that were installed to operate 6,240 hours per year. However, monitoring data combined with information gathered from facility personnel showed that the weighted average of annual operating hours for all fixtures is 3,855 hours per year. This resulted in a reduction in savings equal to 35% of the tracking savings estimate. There was also an increase of savings resulting from the evaluation s estimate of annual cooling savings compared to the tracking estimate. The tracking savings did not calculate any HVAC interactive savings. However, evaluators estimated that a reduction in cooling energy would be realized due to the reduced wattage of the newly installed lighting. The evaluation estimated this savings to be approximately 3% of the tracking savings estimate.

9 The summer seasonal peak reduction was found to be approximately 101% of the tracking estimate. The reason for this increase was the result of the additional cooling savings discussed above. However, this increase was partially offset by a reduction in operation estimated for the summer seasonal peak period. The evaluation estimated the summer diversity factor to be 74% for all of the installed fixtures compared to 85% from the tracking estimate. The winter seasonal peak reduction was estimated to be approximately 100% of the tracking estimate. Evaluators found that the lighting operated less during the winter seasonal peak hours between 5 pm and 7 pm than estimated in the tracking savings. The evaluation estimated the winter diversity factor to be 66% for all of the installed fixtures compared to 70% from the tracking estimate. 9.0 Analysis Methods To estimate annual energy and demand savings, a spreadsheet method was employed. hours and diversity factors from

10 Table 6 are multiplied by the quantities and wattages of the baseline and installed fixtures to calculate energy and demand savings. The entire building is air-conditioned using a large chilled water plant. Evaluators calculated additional energy savings resulting from reduced cooling loads on the system. Evaluators assumed an efficiency rating of 0.64 /ton for the air-conditioning system. The facility s heat is provided by natural gas which has no electrical interaction with the new lighting. However, because of the reduced heat going into the space due to the installation of more efficient lighting, there will be a need for additional heat from the facility s steam boiler system. It was estimated that this heating penalty is equal to approximately 1,032 MMBTU s of natural gas per year. This is calculated using a heating efficiency of 72% for the steam boiler system. This efficiency is assumed to be a standard efficiency for this type of heating system.

11 Facility Type: Data Center Project ID: 9AbE 1.0 Summary of Savings and Adjustments This project includes the installation of two 225 kva uninterruptible power supply (UPS) modules at a telecommunications data center. Table 1 presents a summary of the energy and demand savings for this project. Savings are recalculated based upon file reviews, site inventories of equipment, and monitored performance. Savings are adjusted according to the six categories presented below. The adjusted gross energy savings of 556,110 h is 19% more than the tracking estimate. Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results Energy Summer Demand Winter Demand Reporting Parameter h %Gross %Gross %Gross Gross (TRACKING) Savings 467,000 N/A 64.0 N/A 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Documentation Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Technology Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Quantity Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Operation Change 86,483 19% N/A N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Coincident Change N/A N/A 5.9 9% 51.2 N/A Adjustment - HVAC Interaction 2,627 1% % 1.5 N/A Adjustment - TOTAL 89,110 19% 5.1 8% 52.6 N/A Adjusted Gross (ONSITE) Savings 556, % % 52.6 N/A 2.0 Project Overview This is a telecommunications facility that contains offices, switching/relay operations, and data center spaces. The majority of the facility is office space that operates from approximately 8:00 am until 5:00 pm on weekdays. However, there are some significant switching and data center operations that run around the clock, 365 days per year. 3.0 Tracking Baseline Description Baseline equipment includes two 1000 kva (800 ) UPS units, each with approximately 50 of load. While the baseline UPS units are rated at a full load efficiency of 92%, at 6% load the efficiency drops to 62%. Based upon these inputs, the baseline usage of each UPS is 81 for a total demand of 162 and total annual energy consumption of 1,419,120 h. 4.0 Tracking Proposed Description Proposed equipment was two new nominal 225 kva (180 ) static UPS units with a nominal full load efficiency of 93%. These UPS systems have more advantageous partload efficiency profiles. At 28% load, the estimated efficiency is 89.5%. Based upon these inputs, the proposed usage of each UPS would be 56 for a total demand of 112 and total annual energy consumption of 981,120 h. 5.0 Tracking Savings Review Tracking savings were calculated in a vendor worksheet that subtracted the proposed from the baseline energy and demand assumptions above. In addition, the vendor captured some interactive HVAC savings due to 1) reduced mechanical cooling load in the UPS room and 2) the elimination of one supply and one exhaust fan.

12 Finally, the tracking system applies an 88% adjustment factor which adjusts the original vendor calculations based upon measured UPS load of 44 each versus the preliminary estimate of 50 each. The following exhibit details the tracking system calculations. Note that the final numbers entered into the tracking system were rounded slightly. EXISTING ROTARY UPS Capacity Capacity Load Percent Full Load Part Load Operating Input Quantity kva Full Load Efficiency Efficiency Hours h % 92% 62.0% 8, , % 92% 62.0% 8, , ,419,120 PROPOSED STATIC UPS Capacity Capacity Load Percent Full Load Part Load Operating Input Quantity kva Full Load Efficiency Efficiency Hours h % 93% 89.5% 8, , % 93% 89.5% 8, , ,120 h UPS POWER REDUCTION ,000 MECHANICAL COOLING Heat Convert Heat Chiller Eff Cooling Cooling Cooling Redux Btu/ Redux tons /ton Hours Saved Saved h , ,500 FANS Eliminated Size Load Motor Fan Fan Motor HP Factor Eff Hours Saved Saved h AHU 15 80% 90% ,000 Exhaust 2 80% 80% ,140 h AIR CONDITIONING POWER REDUCTION ,140 TOTAL GROSS SAVINGS (VENDOR ESTIMATE) ,140 SAVINGS ADJUSTMENT FACTOR (44/50) 88% 88% TOTAL GROSS SAVINGS (TRACKING) , On-Site Methodology Evaluators visited the facility and were escorted to the UPS units in the basement. Site personnel explained the electrical layout, the redundant configuration of the two UPS units, and the estimated operating schedule and load of the loads served by the UPS. At the time of evaluation, only one UPS was operating due to a failed circuit breaker, so the system was operating in a non-redundant mode. Evaluators installed an ELITEpro power recorder on the active UPS from September 1 st through October 9 th, during which time it recorded fifteen-minute integrated true-rms amperage, voltages,, and kva. 7.0 On-site Observations and Findings Each of the UPS units was sized to accommodate the entire uninterruptible data center load, and the system was configured in n + 1 redundancy so that it could sustain the failure of one UPS unit. In simple terms, the uninterruptible load is intended to be divided and synchronized across both UPS units in real-time, so that if one UPS fails, the other half of the load would instantaneous shift to the remaining UPS unit. Since

13 this intended operation requires each UPS to operate below 50% loading, the improved part-load efficiency of the new static UPS units is the key feature of the new system. However, due to the aforementioned failed circuit breaker on one UPS unit, the units were not operating in this intended and redundant manner during the evaluation. Instead, one UPS was locked out, and the other was carrying the entire uninterruptible load. Site personnel anticipated that this condition would endure the entire monitoring period, and this proved true; when retrieving the power logger, evaluators noted that the non-monitored UPS was still locked out. As discussed in Analysis Methods below, this atypical operation affected the manner in which evaluators assessed typical savings for this project. 8.0 Conclusions Adjusted gross annual energy savings are 19% higher than the tracking system estimate. The following factors influenced the difference between the CL&P Tracking and Gross On-Site estimates of energy savings: As evidenced by the following table, the installed UPS system consumes about 1% more annual energy than reflected in the tracking system estimate, but hourly modeling concludes that the baseline UPS system would have consumed 6% more energy across a typical year. Evaluators employed the same baseline and installed system efficiency curves documented in the project file. In essence, the hourly analysis approach assessed savings with greater rigor by modeling the dynamics of the load rather than assuming it was level at a mean operating. Component TRK h EVAL h % DIFF Baseline UPS System 1,248,826 1,328,902 6% Mechanical Cooling 35,200 43,626 24% AHU Fan Motor 35,200 39,071 11% Exhaust Fan Motor 11,563 13,070 13% Installed UPS System 863, ,836 1% Savings 467, ,833 19% Another result of the hourly analysis approach was the ability to model HVAC interaction according to typical meteorological year (TMY) temperature data. Accordingly, HVAC interaction is higher, although this did not have a substantial impact on the overall savings. The monitored UPS load profile revealed that the uninterruptible load is not flat but has base load of approximately 85 with additional first shift load stacked on top. Site personnel speculate that personal computers and other non-data center loads are on the UPS systems and are responsible for that load shape. Site personnel also suspect that the 3 AM blip in load is a scheduled network backup activity.

14 9.0 Analysis Methods As opposed to the tracking savings which were based upon line-item calculations reflecting average operation across an entire year, evaluators modeled UPS operation dynamically by hour-of-day and day-of-week as informed by the power loggers. Savings were verified by a spreadsheet utilizing hourly calculations. The one power logger monitored the operation of the active UPS unit, and the monitored data provided a unique power value for each operating hour for every day of the week. These values were constructed into lookup tables to feed an 8,760 hourly analysis The first graph below shows the monitored UPS load by hour-of-day and day-of-week. The following figures present the part-load efficiency curves for the baseline and installed UPS systems. These efficiency curves are consistent with those documented in the project files. Figure 1: Monitored UPS Load Monitored UPS Load Demand () Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Hol Hour of Day

15 Figure 2: Baseline UPS Efficiency Baseline UPS Efficiency 100% 90% 80% 70% %Efficiency 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %Load Figure 3: Installed UPS Efficiency Installed UPS Efficiency 95% 94% y = x x x x R 2 = 1 93% 92% %Efficiency 91% 90% 89% 88% 87% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% %Load

16 10.0 Metering One ELITEpro power logger was installed to trend the operation of the active UPS unit. Average true-rms amperage, voltage,, and kva values were obtained every 15- minutes during the monitoring period. The data covers a 38-day period from September 1, 2010 through October 9, Table 2 presents the metering equipment that was installed in support of this evaluation. Table 2: Installed Metering Equipment Measure Equipment Measurement Points Metering Period True-RMS, kva, UPS ELITEpro volts, amps UPS #1 38-Days

17 Facility Type: Manufacturing Project ID: 9IDe 1.0 Summary of Savings and Adjustments This project includes the installation of variable speed drives on rolling mill machines. Table 1 presents a summary of the energy and demand savings for this project. Savings are recalculated based upon file reviews, site inventories of equipment, and monitored performance. Savings are adjusted according to the six categories presented below. The adjusted gross energy savings of 7,308 h is 97% less than tracking estimates. Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results Energy Summer Demand Winter Demand Reporting Parameter h %Gross %Gross %Gross Gross (TRACKING) Savings 224,155 N/A 40.7 N/A 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Documentation Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Technology Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Quantity Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - Operation Change -216,847-97% N/A N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Coincident Change N/A N/A % 1.9 N/A Adjustment - HVAC Interaction 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 N/A Adjustment - TOTAL -216,847-97% % 1.9 N/A Adjusted Gross (ONSITE) Savings 7,308 3% 1.4 4% 1.9 N/A 2.0 Project Overview This is a specialty wire manufacturer. Products include flat, shaped, and square wires of various gauges. Nickel bases, copper bases, carbon steels, stainless, and carbon steels are used in manufacturing. Current operation is from 7:00 am until midnight on weekdays. 3.0 Tracking Baseline Description Baseline equipment includes four 15.0-hp rolling mill machines, one 3.0-hp machine, one 30.0-hp mill, and one 20.0-hp mill. These units were equipped with eddy current clutches to modulate speed and production according to wire gauge and material. 4.0 Tracking Proposed Description The eddy current clutched were removed from the machines and variable speed drives were installed to control production throughput. Four 15.0-hp drives were installed at the site along with one 3.0-hp drive and one 20.0-hp drive. Control modifications were made at each unit to accommodate this installation of the new drives. 5.0 Tracking Savings Review Tracking savings were generated by a spreadsheet that calculated the baseline and installed operation of each machine. The 30.0-hp unit was estimated to operate at a full load of 22.4 in the baseline scenario. Two 15.0-hp machines were estimated at 19.9 each. Two other 15.0-hp mills operate at a full load of The 20.0-hp and 3.0-hp units were estimated to operate with baselines of 26.5 and 1.0 respectively. The total connected full load is All units operate at full loads for 4,992 hours annually.

18 The installed scenario in the tracking calculations are based upon one 30.0-hp unit [19.5 ], two 15-hp motors [9.9 each], two 20.0-hp mills and 13.2 ], and a 3.0-hp [2.0 ] machine. The total full load in the installed scenario is operation remains at 4,992 hours. 6.0 On-Site Methodology The rolling machines that were retrofitted with variable speed drives were identified in the field. Site personnel confirmed that the eddy current drives were removed and control modifications were made to permit the machines to work with the drives. Five Elite power loggers were installed to monitor the operation of each of the roll mills. 7.0 On-site Observations and Findings The site analysis found that four 15.0-hp variable speed drives, one 20.0-hp drive, and one 3.0-hp drive was installed at the site. The 30.0-hp unit was not converted and is still controlled by the eddy current drives. The control modifications were made along with the drive installations. The 3.0-hp machine is only used for specific product and is now rarely used. Site personnel stated that production has dropped significantly during the current economic recession. Production has shifted from this side of the plant to other newer machines. Site personnel could not estimate when or if production will increase to prerecession levels. 8.0 Conclusions Adjusted gross annual energy savings are 3% of the tracking system estimate. The following factors influenced the difference between the CL&P Tracking and Gross On- Site estimates of energy savings: Two thirds of the savings shortfall is linked to the over calculation of savings in the tracking documentation. Baseline operation is linked to 7 operating machines while the installed case is based upon 6 machines. Two 15.0-hp rolling mills in the baseline are compared to one 20.0-hp unit in the installed case. The site visit identified four 15-hp machines, one 20-hp unit, and one 3.0-hp machine. The 30-hp unit was not converted and still operates with the eddy current drive. Four of the baseline motor s exceed full load capacities for the units. The 20-hp unit is rated at 26.5 in the baseline. Full load capacity for a 20-hp unit is The baseline value is 61.6% greater than the calculated full load value. The total base load of for all the machines is 23.7% greater than anticipated full loads. Adjusting the calculations for these discrepancies reduces savings to 72,607 h annually. Also, all machines operate at that full load for each of the 4,992 estimated operating hours. No diversity or load factors were incorporated into the calculations. Rolling mills and other process equipment have set up times and operate at various speeds and loads according to material and

19 production rates. The readjusted savings value of 72,607 does not include any load modifications. The significant reduction in production further reduces projected savings. Production has been shifted to other machines in the facility. Five of the six machines were monitored with Elite power loggers. The 3.0-hp unit has limited usage and monitoring would have yielded no usable data. The monitoring data shows that the remaining five units also had limited usage during the monitoring period. The trend data found that the units operated at less than 5.0% load for most of the monitoring period. 9.0 Analysis Methods Savings were verified by a spreadsheet utilizing hourly calculations. Five Elite power loggers were installed to monitor the operation of the process machines. The four 15-hp and one 20.0-hp units were selected for monitoring. The remaining 3.0-hp unit has very limited usage. The loggers were set to average power usage every 15-minutes throughout the monitoring period. These process loads are not weather dependent. The monitored data provided a unique power value for each operating hour for every day of the week. These values were constructed into lookup tables to feed the 8760 hourly analysis The graphs below show the weekly operating profile for the 20.0-hp unit and the average operation of the four 15.0-hp machines. The profile shows the limited usage of the machines during the monitoring period. 20-HP Rolling Machine - Weekly Operating [] Profile Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Hour

20 Figure 1: 20.0-hp Machine Average Weekly Operation Average 15-HP Rolling Machine - Weekly Operating [] Profile Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Hour Figure 2: 15.0-hp Machine Average Weekly Operation 10.0 Metering Five Elite power loggers were installed to trend the operation of the process equipment. Average power values were obtained every 15-minutes during the monitoring period. The data covers a 34-day period from September 18, 2009 through October 22, Table 2 presents the metering equipment that was installed in support of this evaluation. Table 2: Installed Metering Equipment Measure Equipment Measurement Points Metering Period VSD ELITEpro True, volts, amps 15.0-hp mill 34-Days VSD ELITEpro True, volts, amps 15.0-hp mill 34-Days VSD ELITEpro True, volts, amps 15.0-hp mill 34-Days VSD ELITEpro True, volts, amps 15.0-hp mill 34-Days VSD ELITEpro True, volts, amps 20.0-hp mill 34-Days

21 Facility Type: Education Project ID: 9iEY 1.0 Summary of Savings and Adjustments This project includes the installation of new T5 lighting in place of existing T12 technology. Table 1 presents a summary of the energy and demand savings for this project. Savings are recalculated based upon file reviews, site inventories of equipment, and monitored operation. Savings are adjusted according to the six categories presented below. The adjusted gross energy savings of 98,153 h is 63% higher than tracking estimates. Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results Energy Summer Demand Winter Demand Reporting Parameter h %Gross %Gross %Gross Gross (TRACKING) Savings 60,416 N/A 16.7 N/A 13.1 N/A Adjustment - Documentation Change % 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Technology Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Quantity Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Operation Change 44,353 73% N/A N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Coincident Change N/A N/A % % Adjustment - HVAC Interaction -6,257-10% % % Adjustment - TOTAL 38,096 63% % % Adjusted Gross (ONSITE) Savings 98, % % % 2.0 Project Overview This facility is a 50,000 square foot building which is used as a student center. The building includes a cafeteria, restrooms and other recreational spaces. The facility is occupied seven days per week between 7:30 am and 11 pm. The building is occupied during the school year and follows the same holidays, breaks and summer schedules as a typical school. During these holidays, breaks and summer days, the student center remains closed. This project included replacing the existing four lamp F34/T12 fixtures with new two lamp F28/T5 fixtures. This was a one-to-one retrofit, meaning that each newly installed fixture replaced one existing fixture. 3.0 Tracking Baseline Description Table 2 presents a summary of the existing system as outlined in the customer application. Table 2: Baseline System Line Fixture Description Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 4L4' EE/STD 4F40SES , ,504 Totals , Tracking Proposed Description Table 3 presents the installed fixtures and quantities as proposed in the customer application.

22 Line Fixture Description Table 3: Proposed System Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 2L4' T5/ELIG 2F28SSE , ,350 Totals , Tracking Savings Review The tracking estimates of energy use were calculated based on the full load of the existing and proposed fixtures. The energy savings were calculated as the difference in the pre and post installation energy use based on annual operation of 2,582 hours per year. Cooling savings were also accounted for in the tracking estimate of savings. It was assumed that the entire space that was affected by the lighting retrofit was air-conditioned year round, which is why there is 2.32 saved in the winter as well as the summer. Table 4 presents a summary of the tracking savings. Table 4: Tracking Savings Summary Fixture Savings HVAC Savings Total Tracking Savings Line Summer Winter h Summer Winter h Summer Winter h , , ,416 Totals , , , On-Site Methodology The evaluation included a verification of installed fixtures, on-site monitoring and interview. All fixtures are controlled manually using wall switches. The base case used in the evaluation of the lighting savings was developed from information contained in the customer application. The pre-existing fixture types were confirmed while on-site with the facility contact. An evaluator visited the facility to verify the installed fixtures and install monitoring equipment to quantify the hours of use of the different spaces. The evaluator surveyed facility personnel to obtain information on the lighting usage throughout the year. He also inquired about any HVAC equipment serving the space. To determine the hours of use for the new fixtures, the field engineer installed eleven time-of-use lighting loggers. Each logger recorded the on/off of the lighting fixtures monitored. Table 5 presents the fixtures monitored by the evaluation team.

23 Table 5: Spaces Monitored Logger # Equipment Monitored Parameter Measured Test Equipment Measurement Type Installation Method Frequency of Observations Monitoring Duration T Main Entrance - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/ Hallway - 2F28/T5 Lower Level Center of Stage - 2F28/T5 Lower Level Left of Stage - 2F28/T5 Lower Level Right of Stage - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/09 9/11/09-10/9/09 9/11/09-10/9/09 9/11/09-10/9/09 T Hallway - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/ Hallway - 2F28/T5 Upper Level Landing F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/09 9/11/09-10/9/ Cafe - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/ Restroom - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/ Hallway - 2F28/T5 9/11/09-10/9/ On-site Observations and Findings This project involved the retrofitting of older lighting fixtures in the main common areas of the facility. These spaces included the cafeteria, open recreation area, restrooms and corridors. Included in this retrofit were the replacement of (183) four lamp F40/T12 fixtures with (183) two lamp F28/T5 fixtures. Evaluators identified all of the installed fixtures within the facility. This facility is associated with a school and operates according to a typical school calendar. According to facility personnel, the operating hours are seven days a week between 7:30 am and 11 pm according to facility personnel. In addition to a summer vacation and winter break, the facility observes eight holidays in which it is closed and unoccupied. These include Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President s Day, Good Friday, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veteran s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Thanksgiving Friday. The monitoring period did not cover any of the facility holidays. Therefore, evaluators assumed that each holiday would be unoccupied and the lights would be off. With the exception of a small number of emergency fixtures, that were accounted for in the analysis as always being on, this assumption for holiday use was verified by facility personnel. Table 6 presents the values obtained from the monitored data including annual operation, summer and winter diversity factors. These values were used for both the pre and post installation calculations because there was no difference in operation with the new lighting according to facility personnel. Note that s 14 through 24 have been adjusted for holiday and summer usage as detailed above. 25 was used to represent the

24 average hallway operation. It was generated by taking the average of s 14, 15, 21 and 24. Table 6: Hours of Use and Diversity Factors for Monitored Spaces ID Logger # Description Hours Summer Diversity Winter Diversity nd Fl landing 8, % 100% 13 Always On SCH2 8, % 100% Adj for HOL/SUM Hall by bookstore 5,435 8% 52% Adj for HOL/SUM Hall left of security office 4,403 8% 52% Adj for HOL/SUM Center stage 1,446 3% 21% Adj for HOL/SUM Cafe 2,705 8% 50% Adj for HOL/SUM Men s RR 2,780 6% 30% Adj for HOL/SUM Right of stage 3,786 8% 49% Adj for HOL/SUM 2nd Fl hall 5,589 8% 52% Adj for HOL/SUM Left of stage 4,208 8% 51% 23 T Adj for HOL/SUM Main entrance 3,943 8% 52% 24 T Adj for HOL/SUM Hall by pool/foos table 4,965 8% 52% 25 Avg Hall Adj for HOL/SUM Hall (Avg: 14, 15, 21, 24) 5,098 8% 52% 8.0 Conclusions Adjusted gross annual energy savings are 162% of the tracking system estimate. The following factors influenced the difference between the UI Tracking and Gross On-Site estimates of energy savings: The reason for the large increase in annual energy savings was due to the increase in annual hours of operation as compared to the tracking estimate. The tracking savings estimated all of the fixtures that were installed to operate 2,582 hours per year. However, monitoring data combined with information gathered from facility personnel showed that the weighted average of annual operating hours for all fixtures is 4,991 hours per year. This increase in annual operating hours resulted in an increase in savings of 73% of the tracking estimate. There was also a reduction of savings resulting from the evaluation s estimate of annual cooling savings compared to the tracking estimate. The tracking savings estimated the annual cooling savings by assuming the cooling systems were operating for all 2,582 hours per year that the fixtures operate. However, evaluators estimated that cooling would be required only at temperatures above 55 F. The weighted average of annual cooling hours for all spaces was estimated to be 1,405 hours per year based on this assumption. This decrease in cooling savings resulted in a decrease in savings equal to approximately 10% of the tracking estimate. The summer seasonal peak reduction was found to be approximately 28% of the tracking estimate. The majority of this decrease was the result of the fixtures not operating for most of the summer hours because of the summer vacation. It was found that the facility is closed between the end of May and the end of August. This encompasses almost the entire summer peak period

25 of June through August. This means that there is little operation of the lights during the majority of the summer peak period. The winter seasonal peak reduction was estimated to be approximately 135% of the tracking estimate. Evaluators found that the lighting operated less during the winter seasonal peak hours between 5 pm and 7 pm than estimated in the tracking savings. This is partially due to the winter break extending from the end of December through mid-january. During this break, the facility remains unoccupied and the majority of the lights are typically off. The evaluation estimated the winter diversity factor to be 59% for all of the installed fixtures compared to 62% from the tracking estimate. 9.0 Analysis Methods To estimate annual energy and demand savings, a spreadsheet method was employed. hours and diversity factors from Table 6 are multiplied by the quantities and wattages of the baseline and installed fixtures to calculate energy and demand savings. The entire building is air-conditioned using rooftop packaged DX units. Evaluators calculated additional energy savings resulting from reduced cooling loads on the system. Evaluators assumed an efficiency rating of 1.2 /ton for the air-conditioning system. The facility s heat is provided by natural gas which has no electrical interaction with the new lighting. However, because of the reduced heat going into the space due to the installation of more efficient lighting, there will be a need for additional heat from the facility s forced air system. It was estimated that this heating penalty is equal to approximately 112 MMBTU s of natural gas per year. This is calculated using a heating efficiency of 74% for the forced air system. This efficiency is assumed to be a standard efficiency for this type of heating system.

26 Facility Type: Transportation Project ID: 9iFU 1.0 Summary of Savings and Adjustments This project includes the installation of new T5 and T8 lighting in place of existing T12 and Metal Halide technology along with the installation of occupancy sensors. Table 1 presents a summary of the energy and demand savings for this project. Savings are recalculated based upon file reviews, site inventories of equipment, and monitored operation. Savings are adjusted according to the six categories presented below. The adjusted gross energy savings of 42,312 h is 10% lower than tracking estimates. Table 1: Summary of Tracking and Evaluation Savings Results Energy Summer Demand Winter Demand Reporting Parameter h %Gross %Gross %Gross Gross (TRACKING) Savings 46,964 N/A 11.8 N/A 9.7 N/A Adjustment - Documentation Change % 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Technology Change 0 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Quantity Change 9.09E-13 0% 0.0 0% 0.0 0% Adjustment - Operation Change 2,317 5% N/A N/A N/A N/A Adjustment - Coincident Change N/A N/A 0.5 4% 0.3 3% Adjustment - HVAC Interaction -6,969-15% % % Adjustment - TOTAL -4,652-10% % % Adjusted Gross (ONSITE) Savings 42,312 90% % % 2.0 Project Overview This facility is a 20,000 square foot facility which is used as a transportation garage and call center. The building includes two garage areas and office space which serves as a call center and administrative center. The facility s call center is occupied seven days per week between 5:00 am and 12:00 am. The building s administrative center and the garage are occupied five days per week between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm. The facility observes twelve holidays throughout a calendar year. This project included replacing the F34/T12 fixtures with new two lamp F32/T8 fixtures, and replacing the 400 Watt Metal Halides with four lamp F54/T5 fixtures. This was a one-to-one retrofit, meaning that each newly installed fixture replaced one existing fixture.

27 3.0 Tracking Baseline Description Table 2 presents a summary of the existing system as outlined in the customer application. Line Fixture Description Table 2: Baseline System Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 1L4' STD/EEMAG 1F40SSM , , W Incandescent 1I , W METAL HALIDE 1M0400S , , L4' STD/EEMAG 2F40SSM , , L8' EE/STD 2F96SES , , L4' STD/ELIG 3F40SSE , , L4' STD/ELIG 3F40SSE , ,636 Totals , Tracking Proposed Description Table 3 presents the installed fixtures and quantities as proposed in the customer application. Line Fixture Description Table 3: Proposed System Fixture Type Watts/ Fixture Quantity Hours Connected h 1 1L4' T8/ELIG 1F32EEE , , W LED Exit 1E , L4' T5 HO/ELIG 4F54HSE , , L2' T8/ELIG 2F17EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 2F32EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 2F32EEE , , L4' T8/ELIG 3F32EEE , ,562 Totals ,586

28 5.0 Tracking Savings Review The tracking estimates of energy use were calculated based on the full load of the existing and proposed fixtures. The energy savings were calculated as the difference in the pre and post installation energy use based on annual operation of 3,380 hours per year. Occupancy sensor savings were calculated by assuming a 30% reduction in annual operating hours for the fixtures that received controls. Cooling savings were also accounted for in the tracking estimate of savings. It was assumed in the tracking estimate that the entire indoor space was air-conditioned year round, which is why there is 2.31 saved in the winter as well as the summer. Table 4 presents a summary of the tracking savings. Line Summer Table 4: Tracking Savings Summary Fixture Savings Controls Savings HVAC Savings Total Tracking Savings Winter h Summer Winter h Summer Winter h Summer Winter h , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,377 Totals , , , , On-Site Methodology The evaluation included a verification of installed fixtures, on-site monitoring and interview. All fixtures are controlled manually using wall switches except for the seventeen fixtures in the garage areas that are controlled by occupancy sensors. The base case used in the evaluation of the lighting savings was developed from information contained in the customer application. The pre-existing fixture types were confirmed while onsite with the facility contact. An evaluator visited the facility to verify the installed fixtures and install monitoring equipment to quantify the hours of use of the different spaces. The evaluator surveyed facility personnel to obtain information on the lighting usage throughout the year. He also inquired about any HVAC equipment serving the space. To determine the hours of use for the new fixtures, the field engineer installed fourteen time-ofuse lighting loggers. Each logger recorded the on/off of the lighting fixtures monitored. Table 5 presents the fixtures monitored by the evaluation team.

29 Table 5: Spaces Monitored Logger # T T T T T T T T T T T T T T Equipment Monitored Upper Mezz-Four Lamp F54/T5 Upper Mezz-One Lamp F32/T8 Wash Bay-Four Lamp F54/T8 Wash Bay-Four Lamp F54/T8 Break Room-Two Lamp F32/T8 Call Center-Two Lamp F32/T8 Over Fridge-Two Lamp F17/T8 Private Office- Three Lamp F32/T8 Private Office- Three Lamp F32/T8 Private Office- Two Lamp F32/T8 Top of Stairs-Two Lamp F17/T8 Lobby-Two Lamp F32/T8 Private Office- Two Lamp F32/T8 Private Office- Two Lamp F32/T8 Parameter Measured Test Equipment Measurement Type Installation Method Frequency of Observations Monitoring Duration 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/09 8/25/09-9/25/ On-site Observations and Findings This project involved the retrofitting of older lighting fixtures in the main areas of the facility. These spaces included the call center, administrative area, restrooms and garages. Included in this retrofit were the replacement of (21) 400 watt metal halide fixtures with (21) four lamp F54/T5 fixtures with occupancy sensors, (32) two lamp F40/T12 fixtures with (32) two lamp F17/T8 fixtures, (5) three lamp F40/T12 fixtures with (5) two lamp F32/T8 fixtures, (22) two lamp F96/T12 fixtures with (22) four lamp F32/T8 fixtures and (34) three lamp F32T8 fixtures with (34) two lamp F32/T8 fixtures. Evaluators identified all of the installed fixtures within the facility. The facility s call center is occupied seven days per week between 5:00 am and 12:00 am. The building s administrative center and the garage are occupied five days per week between 8:00