USI BOILER EFFICIENCY PROGRAM 

A REPORT SUMMARIZING 

THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

OF AN EVALUATION OF BOILERS 

IN STATE OPERATED FACILITIES

Prepared for 

The State Energy Office 

NC Department of Administration 

1830A Tillery Place 

Raleigh, NC 27604 

By

Dr. Herbert M. Eckerlin

Eric W. Soderberg 

Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering 

Industrial Extension Service 

P.O. Box 7910 

North Carolina State University 

Raleigh, NC 27695 

Telephone: (919) 515-5227 

September 15, 2003 (original) 

(this revision - 2/25/04) 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

An analysis of 123 steam and hot water boilers has been conducted at the larger state 

operated facilities across North Carolina. The analysis included site visits to the 

facilities, interviews with boiler operators and maintenance personnel, and measurements

of important variables for identifying energy saving opportunities and boiler efficiencies.

The tests were conducted by NCSU as part of the Utility Savings Initiative (USI)

Program administered by the State Energy Office (SEO). These tests are a necessary first 

step in the development of a comprehensive program to improve boiler 

operation/efficiency at state facilities and to reduce their overall energy costs. Of the 123 

boilers tested to date, 78 are steam boilers installed in the 28 central heating plants 

located across the state. The remaining 45 smaller boilers (including 18 steam and 27 hot 

water boilers) are located in individual buildings. 

The boiler test data has been categorized into two parts. Part I includes the 78 larger 

boilers located in the central heating plants and Part II covers the 45 boilers located in 

individual buildings. An analysis shows that the Part I boilers in the central heating 

plants have an annual fuel bill of $23,666,407 (see Table 1). For these plants, the USI 

Boiler Program identified potential energy savings of $1,338,000 (or 5.65 percent of the 

total fuel usage) (see Table 2). Fuel use data on the smaller boilers (located in individual 

buildings) are not yet available. When they become available, these data will be included

in the subject report.

The major findings and resulting recommendations growing out of the USI Boiler 

Program are presented below:

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO STACK LOSS 

Temperature gauges to measure the stack temperature are not in place on any of the 

45 boilers located in individual buildings. This measurement is essential for the 

proper monitoring of boiler operation and efficiency. 

RECOMMENDATION:Install flue gas temperature gauges after the last point of

heat recovery on all boilers included in this study. 

In 37 percent of the boilers tested, energy savings in the 2 to 5% range can be 

achieved by reducing the stack temperature.

RECOMMENDATION:Clean the heat transfer surfaces and/or repair the baffles to 

reduce the exit flue gas temperature.

Sixty-two (62) percent of the 123 boilers have not had a burner tune-up in the last 12 

months. Forty-two (42) percent of the boilers in individual buildings have never been

tuned. Burner tune-ups can typically provide efficiency gains in the 1 to 5 percent

range.

RECOMMENDATION:Establish a state-wide program that requires annual burner 

tune-ups.

2
RECOMMENDATION RELATING BOILER SIZE TO LOAD

Many of the boilers in state facilities are oversized and have to operate at low firing 

rates (particularly in the summer) where they are generally less efficient. 

RECOMMENDATION:At these facilities, identify a boiler that can be tuned for 

low fire operation. 

COMMENT: It should also be noted that radiation losses (as a percent) 

become quite large at lower firing rates.

RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO CONDENSATE RETURN 

In 39 percent (11 out of 28) of the central heating plants, condensate return is 50% or 

less. A 50% loss in condensate is equivalent to a 6 percent energy loss. 

RECOMMENDATION:Establish a program for the continuous evaluation and

repair of condensate return systems.

RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO FUEL USAGE 

Fuel flow to individual boilers is not measured on seventy-three (73) percent of the 

boilers tested. For boilers in individual buildings, fuel flow is not measured on any of 

the 45 smaller boilers.

RECOMMENDATION:Install fuel flowmeters on boilers larger than 50 HP. It is 

also recommended that plant personnel track their monthly

energy use and report it to the SEO or NCSU.

Because of the recent increase in the price of natural gas, many state facilities have

switched to oil firing. This switch has the potential to create maintenance problems in 

the future because of sulfur induced cold-end corrosion inherent in oil firing. As a 

result, state administrators should consider increasing their maintenance budgets to 

cover the higher maintenance costs (expected to show up in about two years). 

RECOMMENDATION:Increase maintenance budgets to cover the higher 

maintenance costs.

Facilities that only have the capability to fire natural gas are at risk to future price 

increases in natural gas. Most of the boilers located in individual buildings fall in this 

category.

RECOMMENDATION:Establish dual fuel capability for these boilers (e.g., low 

sulfur oil or propane). If oil is selected as the second fuel, 

its use should be limited to reduce the potential for

corrosion.

3
RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO EQUIPMT. & MAINT. 

The lack of parts has become a serious problem in maintaining boilers in an 

operational condition. This is particularly true for burner and control system parts – 

even for systems of recent vintage (less than 10 years old). This problem appears to 

be an outgrowth of the state’s current "low bid process." Other factors will have to be 

included in the bidding process to insure that the state equipment purchases will have

replacement parts available for at least ten years.

RECOMMENDATION:Establish a new bid process that considers system quality

and guarantees the availability of parts for at least ten 

years.

The larger boilers in the central heating plants are better maintained than the smaller

boilers located in the individual buildings. This can be attributed to the fact that the 

central plants typically have staff dedicated to their operation and maintenance.

RECOMMENDATION:For smaller facilities where boilers are likely to be located

in individual buildings, the administration should be 

encouraged to establish a maintenance team dedicated to 

the maintenance of the boilers in the individual buildings.

Some boiler plants have experienced problems that have persisted for years without 

resolution (e.g., cavitation in boiler feed pumps, reduction in boiler capacity over 

time).

RECOMMENDATION:Establish a technical assistance organization (perhaps at a 

state land-grant university) with the capability to research

these problems and provide unbiased expert 

advice/assistance.

POLITICAL AND CULTURAL FACTORS 

At a more philosophical level, the poor condition of the boiler rooms across the state 

can be attributed to three factors: 

1. The lack of education and training among boiler staff in boiler operating and

efficiency principles.

2. The lack of funds to properly maintain the boilers and steam/hot water 

distribution equipment.

3. And, perhaps most importantly, the lack of top-management support. In cases 

where top-management support exists, factors (1) and (2) are usually not an issue.

_______________________________________________________________________

4
IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS – SOME SUGGESTIONS 

In light of the above analysis, the issue before us is: “How should the State of North 

Carolina move forward in the development of a comprehensive program to improve

boiler operation and efficiency and reduce boiler fuel usage/cost?” As a first step, we 

would offer the following suggestions: 

1. Establish a policy requiring all boiler operators, maintenance personnel, and 

boiler plant supervisors to regularly attend “Boiler Efficiency Workshops” offered 

by NCSU under sponsorship of the State Energy Office. State personnel would 

be able to attend at no charge. 

2. Establish a Technical Resource Center for Plant Operations at one of the state 

supported land-grant universities to provide advice, guidance and technical 

assistance to boiler operators and supervisory personnel in the implementation of 

the above recommendations. Without the burden of having to sell a particular 

service or product, this Center would be able to provide unbiased advice on a 

wide variety of boiler issues, as well as assisting on bid evaluation, project 

oversight, and performance testing related to guarantees. 

3. Establish a technical assistance program for the resolution of irritating problems 

that have tended to persist for years. Examples of these types of problems are 

"feedwater pump cavitation" and "boilers unable to attain full load operation."

These types of problems may be caused by a variety of factors and often cannot 

be resolved in a telephone call or a single plant visit. Allowing these problems to 

continue unattended is a disservice to the state and its citizens. 

4. Develop guidelines for assisting state agencies in establishing realistic 

maintenance budgets for their boilers and other mechanical equipment. 

5. Develop guidelines for assisting state agencies in determining when it is to their 

advantage to switch fuels (e.g., from natural gas to oil and vice versa). 

6. Distribute to all participating State Agencies copies of the three master summary 

tables (to be provided under separate cover) entitled: 

A SUMMARY OF PLANT FEATURES 

A SUMMARY OF BOILER FEATURES 

A SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EACH BOILER 

These tables provide detailed information on the characteristics and operation of 

each boiler and plant, as well as related recommendations. These tables will 

enable plant personnel to compare their operation with others, will encourage 

communication and sharing of information among plant operating personnel 

across the state, and will serve to motivate and spur them to action. This process 
could be further enhanced through boiler workshops (conducted by the above 

proposed Center) that highlight the successful implementation of ECOs and 

demonstrates for others how it is done.

7. Introduce a program for educating our legislators on the financial and operational 

costs associated with continual postponement of much needed maintenance

projects.

TABLE 1. ANNUAL FUEL COST FOR CENTRAL HEAT PLANTS

FACILITY ANNUAL FUEL COST 

($/yr)

UNC-CH $5,920,000

Appalachian State Univ. $2,250,000

Eastern Carolina Univ. (main campus) $1,830,000

DOA - Central Heating Plant $1,714,035

NCSU – Yarbrough $1,306,711

UNC – Greensboro $1,200,000

Cherry Hospital $1,153,500

UNC – Charlotte $1,093,600

A&T University $1,083,000

NCSU – Cates $798,070

Umstead Hospital $670,000

Dorothea Dix $571,607

Broughton Hospital $510,000

McCain Corr. Inst. $500,000

Winston-Salem State Univ. $404,000

Central Prison $400,000

Caswell Center $400,000

Murdoch Center $286,114

Women's Prison $275,000

NC Central University $273,000

NCSU - Vet Sch $228,000

NC School of Math & Science $221,870

Western Carolina Sch. For the Deaf $171,000

Black Mt. Center $164,000

Western Youth Institute $134,000

NC Special Care $87,200

Gov. Morehead School for the Blind $21,700

Western Carolina Univ. 

Eastern Carolina Univ. (med. school)

Total $23,666,407

6
TABLE 2. ENERGY AND COST SAVING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOILERS IN CENTRAL HEATING PLANTS

Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

UNC-CH $5,920,000 Reduce Operating Pressure on New Boiler No. 8 $6,000 (5)Appalachian State Univ. $2,250,000 Continue to Replace Old Condensate Return Lines to Increase Return $160,000

Reduce Boiler Operating Pressure $27,000Reduce Maintenance on John English Boilers $15,000Watch for Economizer Plugging on Oil Firing -------

Eastern Carolina Univ. (main campus)$1,830,000 Continue Improving Condensate Return SystemDOA - Central Heating Plant $1,714,035 Repair Condensate Return System to Improve Return. $100,000 (5)

Burner Tuneup on Boilers No. 2, 3, & 4 to Adjust O2 and Reduce CO. (O2 on

Boiler No. 4 is Dangerously Low). $40,000

$3,000 to 

$7,000/boiler(1) 0.5 to 0.7 

Correct High Stack Temperature (600 F) on Boiler No. 4. $14,000 (2)

Improve Steam Trap Maintenance Program (Plumbing Shop) $10,000 $10,000 1

Open Side Damper on Air Inlet Duct at Roof to Draw In Warm Boiler Room Air for 

Combustion. $8,000 $1,200 0.15

Reduce Bottom Blowdown to 3 – 5 seconds Per Blow. $5,000 Negligible Immediate

Repair In-Situ O2 Readouts and Controls (as part of tuneup). Improves safety. --------

UNC - Greensboro $1,200,000 Repair O2 Trim (3 boilers) $42,000 $4,000/boiler(3) 0.3

Modify One Boiler for Low Load Operation $5,200 $2,600 0.5Repair Soot Blowers on All Boilers – Particularly for Oil Firing $4,500 $45,000 10Repair Flooding Problem in Steam Tunnels $1,400

(1) Cost is for initial setup. Thereafter, annual tuning would be approximately $1,000/boiler.(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of the problem must 

first be identified.

(3) Total cost to repair O2 Trim is $12,000 (for three boilers) plus travel expenses.(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the nature of the 

problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be made.

(3)

7
Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

NCSU – Yarbrough $1,306,711Insulate Oil Storage Tanks – insulation removed because of tank rust problem. $24,000

Repair Condensate Return System to Increase Return – now being corrected. $16,000

Improve Steam Trap Maintenance Program – part of steam distribution/condensate return systemnow under repair. $16,000

Repair Cold-End Corrosion on all Tubular Air Heaters – underway. $11,000 (5)Burner Tuneup to Reduce O2 . $11,000

$3,000 to 

$7,000/boiler(1)

Repair/Replace O2 Trim System – required for tuneup to work effectively. $11,000 $4,000/boiler

1 year (both

tuneup and

O2 trim 

repair)

Consider Switching to Lower Sulfur No. 2 Fuel Oil to Reduce Cold-End Corrosion and ReduceFuture Maintenance Costs. 

Cherry Hospital $1,153,500

Boilers are Oversized; Purchase Smaller Boiler for Low Load Operation (Existing 2 boilers are

rated at 66,000 lb/hr each) $30,000 $50,000 1.7

 Improve Hot Water Distribution System - must be evaluated. $5,000 Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,000 Negligible Immediate Evaluate “Cascades” Hot Water Circulation System (by NCSU)

UNC - Charlotte $1,093,600Repair Condensate Return System to Increase Return – partially underway, very important) $100,000 (5)

Burner Tuneup on Boilers No. 3 & 4 $25,000

$3,000 to 

$7,000/boiler(1) 0.5

NC A&T University $1,083,000Combined Effect of Burner Tuneup and Reducing FG Temp. on all Boilers $46,000

$3,000 to 

$7,000/boiler(1) 1

Repair Condensate Return System to Increase Return – very important. $20,000 (5)Improve Steam Trap Maintenance Program $10,000 $10,000 1Repair Flooding Problem in Steam Tunnels $1,000 (4)

(1) Cost is for initial setup. Thereafter, annual tuning would be approximately $1,000/boiler.(4) Cause and effect of problem must be evaluated before this recommendation can be considered for implementation.(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the nature of the 

problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be made.

8
Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

NCSU - Cates Ave. $798,070

Repair Condensate Return System to Increase Return – campus-wide problem now being

addressed. $24,000 (5)

Consider Switching to Lower Sulfur No. 2 Fuel Oil to Reduce Cold-End Corrosion and ResultingMaintenance – important preventive maintenance step. $20,000 $20,000 1

Tune Boiler for Lower Load Operation (If Boiler Continues to Be the Summer Boiler) $14,700 $1,000 0.1

Improve Steam Trap Maintenance Program - part of steam distribution/condensate return systemnow under repair. $10,000

Umstead Hospital $670,000Burner Tuneup to Reduce O2 (3 boilers) $11,000

$3,000 to 

$7,000/boiler(1) 1.4

Clean Heat Transfer Surfaces to Reduce Stack Temp. $5,000 $5,000 1Institute Steam Trap Maintenance Program $7,000 $10,000 1.5Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,000 Negligible ImmediateRepair Blowdown Heat Recovery $2,500 $2,500 1

Dorothea Dix $571,607Repair Condensate Return System to Increase Return $14,000 (5)

Burner Tuneup - Reduce O2 (4 Boilers) $7,500 $1,000/boiler 0.6Reduce Soot Deposits on Boiler No. 3 (some analysis is required to identify cause of problem). $6,000 $18,000 3Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $2,000 Negligible Immediate

Repair Economizer on Boiler No. 1: Also Repair Soot Blowers (some analysis is required to identify cause of problem). $2,000 (2)

Broughton Hospital $510,000Correct High Stack Temperature $32,000 (2)

Repair Condensate Return System and Increase Return - very important $19,000 (5)

Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 2 & 4 – Reduce O2 and CO $12,000 $3,000 0.25Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,500 Negligible Immediate

(1) Cost is for initial setup. Thereafter, annual tuning would be about $1,000/boiler.(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of

the problem must first be identified.

(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the 

nature of the problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be given.

9
Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

McCain Corr. Inst. $500,000Repair Condensate Return System and Increase Return $37,000 (5)

Reduce Stack Temperature (the two boilers are over 50 years old and may not be worth fixing). $25,000 (2)Burner Tuneups to Reduce O2 and CO - (because of boiler age, this may not be practical). $19,000 (6)

Initiate Steam Trap Maintenance Program $5,000 $5,000 1

Purchase Smaller Boiler for Summer Operation $2,500Refurbish Continuous Blowdown System $1,000 $1,000 1Reduce Duration of Bottom Blowdown $500 Negligible ImmediateReplace Boilers

Winston-SalemState Univ. $404,000Repair Condensate Return System to Improve Return $24,000 (5)

Improve Steam Trap Maintenance Program $5,000 $5,000 1

Add Soot Blowers to Boilers No. 1 and 3 if use of No. 2 Fuel Oil Increases $3,600 $10,000 3

Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 2 – Adjust O2 and Reduce CO $2,400 $1,200 0.5Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 3 to Reduce O2 and Stabilize Combustion $1,800 $1,200 0.7Correct High Stack Temp. on Boiler No. 3 $1,200 $2,400 (2) 2

Central Prison $400,000Burner Tuneup – Reduce O2 $12,000 $3,000 0.25

Reduce Stack Temp. $12,500 $15,000 (2) 1.2Repair Condensate Return System and Increase Return $4,000 (5)

Initiate Steam Trap Maintenance Program $5,000 $5,000 1

Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,200 Negligible ImmediateDesignate one boiler for low-load operation $2,000 $1,000 0.5

(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of

the problem must first be identified.

(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the 

nature of the problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be given.

(6) These burners are quite old and may have to be replaced.

10
Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

Murdoch Center $286,114Burner Tuneup for All 3 Units (3 boilers) $10,600 $3,000 0.3

Reduce Stack Temp. on Boiler No. 2 & 3 $10,000 $15,000 (2) 1.5Tune One Boiler for Low Load Summer Operation $5,000 $2,000 0.4

Re-establish a Good Water Treatment Program $1,000 $1,000 1

Women's Prison $275,000Correct High Stack Temp. (3 boilers) $8,600 $13,000 (2) 1.5

Burner Tuneup – Reduce O2 (3 boilers) $6,900 $3,000 0.5Increase Condensate Return $3,000 (5)Designate and Tune One Boiler for Summer Operation $1,900 $2,000 1Initiate Steam Trap Maintenance Program $1,600 $2,000 1.2Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,000 Negligible Immediate

NC CentralUniversity $273,000Reduce Exit Flue Gas Temperature On Boiler No. 1. $1,000 $2,000 (2) 1.8

Conduct Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 2 $13,200 $1,000 <0.1

Or Discontinue Alternating Boilers No. 1 & 2 in Winter.

Or

$13,200 $500 <0.1

Conduct Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 3 $1,000 $800 0.8Repair Campus Condensate Return System $33,000 (5)Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $500 Negligible ImmediateInstall Makeup Water Flowmeter $1,000 $1,000 1Institute Steam Trap Maintenance Program $5,000 $5,000 1

NCSU - Vet Sch $228,000Burner Tuneup - Reduce O2 (on existing boiler) $3,000 $1,000 0.3

Measure and Increase Condensate Return $3,000 (5)Establish a Steam Trap Maintenance Program $3,000 $5,000 1.7Designate and Tune One Boiler for Low-Load Summer Operation (perhaps new boiler) $2,000 $2,000 1

(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of

the problem must first be identified.

(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the 

nature of the problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be given.

11
Annual Impementation Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

NC School of Math & Science $221,870Repair Condensate Return System to Improve Return $13,000 (5)

Burner Tuneup to Reduce O2 and CO (New burner controls were installed in summer of 2002). $5,000 (7)Establish Steam Trap Maintenance Program $2,500 $2,500 1Check Effectiveness of Oxygen Removal from Feedwater – Minimize Oxygen Pitting --------

Caswell Center $400,000Correct 800 F Stack Temp. on Boilers No. 2 & 3 

 and Repair Economizer Problem on Boiler No. 2. $20,000 $30,000 (2) 1.5Increase Condensate Return $7,000 (5)Reduce Bottom Blowdown Time $1,000 Negligible ImmediateBurner Tuneup on Boiler No. 1 to Reduce O2 $500 $800 1.6

Black Mt. Center $164,000Burner Tuneup – Improve O2 and Reduce CO $4,000 $2,000 0.5

Replace Burner on Boiler 3. Work completed in 2003. Cost = $95k. Savings projected at $143k. ? ?Initiate Steam Trap Maintenance Program $2,000 $2,000 1Boilers are Oversized; Designate One Boiler for Low-Load Operation $2,000 $2,000 1Repair Flooding Problem in Steam Tunnels $1,000 (4)Correct Boiler Feed Pump Cavitation Problem; Allow Deaerator to Operate Above 212F. $1,000 $1,000 (2) 1Install makeup water flowmeter to get a more accurate Measure of Condensate Return ------- (5)Clarify Rationale for Low Nox Burner on Boiler No. 3. -------

Western CarolinaSch. For the Deaf $171,000Establish a Steam Trap Maintenance Program $2,200 $2,500 1

Burner Tuneup to Reduce O2 on Boiler No. 3 $2,100 $1,000 0.5

Boiler No.1 (800hp) is greatly oversized. Reduce Radiation Loss by not operating 800 hp Boiler.Consider selling it to larger facility and use the proceeds to purchase a smaller boiler. $1,500 Negligible ImmediateAvoid Low-Load Operation on Boiler No. 3 $1,000 Negligible Immediate

(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of

the problem must first be identified.

(4) Cause and effect of problem must be evaluated before this recommendation can be considered for implementation.(5) Problems with condensate return systems are common in state facilities. The cost of repair varies widely depending on the size of the campus and the 

nature of the problems. An evaluation of the system is required before a cost estimate can be given.

(7) The new controls were installed one year before the survey was conducted. Project cost was $108,497, with a projected savings of $64,300/yr. (56% of

annual fuel bill. After one year of operation, fuel usage actually increased by 13.2%. Further study is recommended.

12
Annual

Impementat

ion

Payback

Fuel Cost Savings Cost Period

Facility ($/yr) Recommendations ($/yr) ($) (yrs.)

Western Youth Institute $134,000Convert Webster Burner to Dual-Fuel Firing (having dual-fuel capability is important) $23,400 $25,000 (8) 1

Repair Boiler Feed Pump Controls to Stop Continuous Pump Operation $1,600 $3,200 2Repair Water Level Float in Deaerator and Reduce the use of Sodium Sulfite $1,000 $1,500 1.5Solve Feedwater Pump Cavitation Problem – Reduce Maintenance $1,000 (2) (9)Repair Multiport Relief Valve on Deaerator

NC Special Care $87,200Repair Feedwater Pump Cavitation Problem and Operate Deaerator Properly (Above 212F) $2,100 (10)

Install Makeup Water Meter to determine Condensate Return $1,600 $500 0.3Burner Tuneup on Boiler No. 2 to Reduce O2 $500 $800 1.6Boiler Tuneup on Boiler No. 1 to Reduce O2 at High Fire $500 $800 1.6

Gov. Morehead School for the Blind $21,700Burner Tuneup - Reduce CO & O2 $800 $1,000 1.25

Initiate Steam Trap Maintenance Program $600 $2,000 3Designate 1 Boiler for Low Load Operation $300 $1,000 3Reduce Boiler Operating Pressure $200

Western Carolina Univ.Eastern Carolina Univ. (med. school)

Total $23,666,407 $1,338,000

(2) An analysis of the problem must first be conducted. The solution may be relatively inexpensive, yielding a good payback. However, the exact cause of

the problem must first be identified.

(8) Final cost will depend on if a new fuel train is required. Total cost estimate is $20,000 to $25,000.(9) A new bypass orifice may solve the problem.(10) Problem has been solved with a new bypass orifice. 

13