# M&V Guidelines: Measurement and V erifi cation for F ederal Energ y Projects

V ersion 3.0M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Pr ojects Version 3.0

Prepared For: U.S. Department of Energy Federal Ener gy Management Program www1.eere.e nergy.gov/femp/

Prepared By: Nexant, Inc. 1401 Walnut Street, Suite 400 Boulder, CO 80302 Tel: 303.402.2480
www.nexa n t.com

Under Subcontract To: EMP2, Inc. www.emp2.c o

m

April 2008

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 iAcknowledgements
This document was prepared by Lia Webster and James Bradford of Nexant, Inc. in Boulder, Colorado.

Contributors to this document include: Dale Sartor of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, John Shonder and Er ica Atkin of Oak Ridge Nati onal Laboratory, and Steve

Dunnivant of EMP2. Other ma terials were developed by various industry-government working gr oups and the authors of FEMP Guide lines v 2 .2 (Ellen F r anconi, David Jump, Steve Schiller, and Mark Stetz).

This document follows the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) Concepts and Options fo r Determining Energy and Water Savings Volume 1, April 2007.

M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP ii

## Contents

Section Page

Section 1 Measurement and Verification (M&V) Guides

.................................................. 1-1 1.1 Overview and purpose of the Federal Energy Managem e nt Program (FEMP) M&V Guide

................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1.1 The Federal ESPC Authority

........................................................................... 1-1 1.1.2 The Financial Structure of ESPCs

................................................................... 1-1 1.1.3 Purpose of the FEMP M&V Guide

.................................................................. 1-2 1.1.4 Overview

.......................................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 Other M&V Guidelines

................................................................................................ 1-4 1.2.1 IPMVP

............................................................................................................. 1-4 1.2.2 ASHRAE Guideline 14

.................................................................................... 1-4 Section 2 Overview of M&V for ESPCs

............................................................................... 2-1 2.1 General Approach to M&V

......................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Steps to Determ ine and Verify Savings

....................................................................... 2-3 2.2.1 Step 1: Allocate Proj ect Responsibilities

........................................................ 2-4 2.2.2 Step 2: Develop a Proj ect-Specific M&V Plan

............................................... 2-4 2.2.3 Step 3: Define the Baseline

............................................................................. 2-5 2.2.4 Step 4: Install and Comm ission Equipm ent and System s

............................... 2-5 2.2.5 Step 5: Conduct Post-Install ation Verification Activities

............................... 2-6 2.2.6 Step 6: Perf orm Regular-Interv al Verification Activities

............................... 2-6 Section 3 Risk and Responsibility in M&V

.......................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Using M&V to Manage Risk

....................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Risk, Responsibility, and Perform a nce Matrix

............................................................ 3-2 Section 4 Detailed M&V Methods

........................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Overview of M&V Options A, B, C, and D

................................................................ 4-1 4.2 Developing Regression Models

................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.1 Independent Variables

..................................................................................... 4-3 4.2.2 Choosing a Model

............................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.3 Weather Data

................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.4 Docum e ntation

................................................................................................. 4-5 4.2.5 Savings Determ ination

..................................................................................... 4-5 4.3 Option A—Retrofit Isolation with Key Param e ter Measurement

............................... 4-6 4.3.1 Approach to Option A

...................................................................................... 4-6 4.3.1.1 Measurem ents

.................................................................................................. 4-7 4.3.1.2 Estim ates

.......................................................................................................... 4-7 4.3.1.3 Ongoing Verification

....................................................................................... 4-8 4.3.2 M&V Considerations

....................................................................................... 4-8 4.4 Option B—Retrofit Isolation with All Param e ter Measurem ent

................................. 4-8 4.4.1 Approach to Option B

...................................................................................... 4-9 4.4.2 M&V Considerations

....................................................................................... 4-9 4.5 Option C—Whole-Building Data Analysis

............................................................... 4-10 4.5.1 Approach to Option C

.................................................................................... 4-11

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 iiiSection Page

4

. 5

. 2 Data Collection

.............................................................................................. 4-11 4.5.2.1 Utility Billing Data

........................................................................................ 4-11 4.5.2.2 Other Site Changes

........................................................................................ 4-12 4.5.3 M&V Considerations

..................................................................................... 4-12 4.6 Option D—Calibrated S i m ulation

............................................................................. 4-12 4.6.1 Approach to Option D

.................................................................................... 4-14 4.6.1.1 Collecting the Data

........................................................................................ 4-14 4.6.1.2 Inputting the Data and Runni ng the Baseline Model

..................................... 4-16 4.6.1.3 Calibrating the Baseline Model

..................................................................... 4-16 4.6.1.4 Create and Refine the Perf orm a nce Period Model

........................................ 4-16 4.6.1.5 Verifying Perform a nce a nd Calculating Savings

........................................... 4-17 4.6.2 Sim ulation Software

....................................................................................... 4-18 4.6.3 Model Calibration

.......................................................................................... 4-18 4.6.3.1 Weather Data

................................................................................................. 4-19 4.6.3.2 Statistical Indices

........................................................................................... 4-20 4.6.3.3 Subsystem Level Calibration with Monitored Data

....................................... 4-22 4.6.3.4 Whole-Building Level Calibra tion with Monthly Data

................................. 4-22 4.6.3.5 Whole-Building Level Calibra tion with Hourly Data

................................... 4-23 4.6.4 M&V Considerations

..................................................................................... 4-23 Section 5 Selecting An M&V Approach

............................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Key Issues in Selecting the Appropriate M&V Approach

........................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Value of ECM in Term s of Project ed Savings and Project Costs

.................... 5-1 5.1.2 Com plexity of ECM or System

........................................................................ 5-2 5.1.3 Num ber of I nterrelated EC Ms at a Single Facility

.......................................... 5-2 5.1.4 Risk of Achieving Savings

............................................................................... 5-2 5.1.5 Responsibility Allocation Between th e ESCO and the Federal Agency

......... 5-3 5.1.5.1 Other Uses for M&V Data and System s

.......................................................... 5-4 5.2 Determ ining an M&V Approach

................................................................................. 5-4 5.2.1 General Criteria for Sele cting an M&V Approach

.......................................... 5-4 5.2.2 M&V Planning Tool

........................................................................................ 5-5 5.2.2.1 Step 1: Develop a list of proj ect and ECM-level objectives and constraints that relate to m easure m ent and verification of savings.

................ 5-5 5.2.2.2 Step 3: Evaluate the savings risk associated with the selected M&V option(s)

. .................................................................... 5-7 5.2.2.3 Step 4: Estim ate costs for the M&V option

. ................................................... 5-8 5.2.2.4 Step 5: W r ite the M&V plan

. .......................................................................... 5-8 5.3 Cost and Rigor

............................................................................................................. 5-8 5.3.1 Balancing C ost and Rigor

................................................................................ 5-8 5.3.2 Savings Calculations

........................................................................................ 5-9 5.3.3 M&V Costs

...................................................................................................... 5-9 5.4 Uncertainty

................................................................................................................ . 5 -10 5.4.1 Measurem ent

.................................................................................................. 5-10 5.4.2 Sa m pling

........................................................................................................ 5-12 5.4.3 Estim ating

...................................................................................................... 5-12 5.4.4 Modeling

........................................................................................................ 5-13

iv M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPSection Page

Section 6 Incorporating M&V in Super ESPCs—Key Submittals

.................................... 6-1 6.1 M&V Approach

........................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 ESPC Risk and Responsibility Matrix

......................................................................... 6-2 6.3 Measurem ent and Verification P l an

............................................................................. 6-2 6.4 Comm issioning Approach, Plan, and Report

............................................................... 6-2 6.5 Post-Installation Report

............................................................................................... 6-3 6.6 Annual Inspections and Reports

.................................................................................. 6-3 Section 7 M&V Plan Details

.................................................................................................. 7-1 7.1 Defining the baseline

................................................................................................... 7-2 7.2 Adjustm e nts

................................................................................................................ . 7

- 3 7.2.1 Routine Adjustm e nts

........................................................................................ 7-3 7.2.2 Non-Routine Adjustm e nts

............................................................................... 7-4 7.3 Interactive effects

........................................................................................................ . 7

- 4 7.4 Metering

................................................................................................................... .... 7-5 7.4.1 Equipm ent

........................................................................................................ 7-6 7.4.2 Sensor and Meter Accuracy and Calibration

................................................... 7-6 7.4.3 Metering Duration

............................................................................................ 7-7 7.4.4 Sa m pling

.......................................................................................................... 7-7 7.5 Energy Costs

............................................................................................................... . 7

- 8 7.5.1 Using Escalation Rates

.................................................................................... 7-9 7.6 Agency W itnessing of M&V Activities

..................................................................... 7-10 7.7 Reporting

.................................................................................................................. .. 7-10 7.7.1 Communicating M&V Activities to Federal Agencies

.................................. 7-10 7.7.2 Form at and Content

........................................................................................ 7-10 7.7.3 Approvals

....................................................................................................... 7-11 7.8 Annual Inspections

..................................................................................................... 7-11 7.9 O&M and other Energy-related Savings

.................................................................... 7-12 Section 8 Commissioning

....................................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 Overview

................................................................................................................... ... 8-1 8.2 Comm issioning Process for ESPCs

............................................................................. 8-1 8.2.1 Specifying Comm issioning Require m e nts in the Contract

.............................. 8-2 8.2.2 Defining Commissioning Activitie s During Project Design

........................... 8-3 8.2.3 Im ple m enting Comm issioning Activ ities During Construction

...................... 8-4 8.2.4 Com pleting Comm issioning Activities Prior to Project Acceptance

............... 8-4 8.2.5 Post-Acceptance Phase Co mm issioning Activ ities

......................................... 8-5 Section 9 Planning and Reporting for Operations & Maintenance

................................... 9-1 9.1 Overview

................................................................................................................... ... 9-1 9.2 Steps To Plan & Report on O&M and R&R Issues

..................................................... 9-1 9.2.1 Step 1: Develop ESPC Contract Risk & Responsibility Matrix

..................... 9-2 9.2.2 Step 2: Develop Detailed O&M Responsibilities and Reporting R e quirem e nts

.................................................................................. 9-2 9.2.3 Step 3: Develop Project-specific O&M Checklists

........................................ 9-3 9.2.4 Step 4: ES CO Asse m b les O&M manuals & Provides Training

..................... 9-4 9.2.5 Step 5: Governm e nt (or ESCO) Periodically Reports on Maintenance Perform e d

................................................................................... 9-4

FEMP M&V Gui delines v3.0 vSection Page

9.2.6 Step 6: ES CO Subm its Annual Report

........................................................... 9-5 Section 10 Review and Oversight of M&V Activities

......................................................... 10-1 10.1 Governm e nt W itnessing of M&V Ac tivities

............................................................. 10-1 10.2 Using the Review Checklists and R e port Tem plates

................................................. 10-2 10.2.1 Project Docum e ntation Needed

..................................................................... 10-2 10.2.2 Using the Checklists

...................................................................................... 10-2 10.2.3 Summ arize Findings in Evaluation Report

.................................................... 10-3 10.3 Reviewing M&V Plans

.............................................................................................. 10-3 10.3.1 Prescriptive and Qualitative Evaluation Item s

............................................... 10-3 10.4 Reviewing Post-Installati on and Annual Reports

...................................................... 10-5 10.4.1 Prescriptive and Qualitative Evaluation Item s

............................................... 10-5 Section 11 Technology Applications

..................................................................................... 11-1 11.1 Lighting Efficiency

.................................................................................................... 11- 1 11.1.1 Equipm ent Inventory

..................................................................................... 11-1 11.1.2 Operating H ours and Diversity Factor

........................................................... 11-2 11.1.3 Equipm ent Perform a nce

................................................................................. 11-2 11.1.4 Interactive Effects

.......................................................................................... 11-3 11.1.5 Savings Calculations

...................................................................................... 11-3 11.1.6 Ongoing Verification

..................................................................................... 11-4 11.2 Lighting Controls

....................................................................................................... 11 -4 11.2.1 Operating H ours

............................................................................................. 11-5 11.2.2 Equipm ent Perform a nce

................................................................................. 11-5 11.2.3 Savings Calculations

...................................................................................... 11-5 11.2.4 Ongoing Verification

..................................................................................... 11-6 11.3 Constant-Speed Motors

.............................................................................................. 11-6 11.3.1 Equipm ent Inventory

..................................................................................... 11-6 11.3.2 Equipm ent Perform a nce

................................................................................. 11-7 11.3.2.1 Verify Constant Loading

............................................................................ 11-8 11.3.2.2 Accounting for Motor Slip

......................................................................... 11-8 11.3.3 Operating H ours

............................................................................................. 11-9 11.3.4 Savings Calculations

...................................................................................... 11-9 11.4 Variable-Speed Motors

............................................................................................ 11-10 11.4.1 Establish Baseline Equipm ent Perf or m a nce and Operating H ours

.............. 11-10 11.4.2 Post-Installation Perform a nce

...................................................................... 11-11 11.4.3 Savings Calculations

.................................................................................... 11-12 11.4.4 Ongoing Verification

................................................................................... 11-13 11.5 Chillers

.................................................................................................................. ... 11-13 11.5.1 Baseline M&V Activities

............................................................................. 11-14 11.5.2 Post-Installation Perform a nce

...................................................................... 11-15 11.5.3 Savings Calculations

.................................................................................... 11-15 11.6 Water

..................................................................................................................... ... 11-16 11.6.1 Typical Measures

......................................................................................... 11-17 11.6.2 Equipm ent Inventory

................................................................................... 11-17 11.6.3 Equipm ent Perform a nce

............................................................................... 11-17 11.6.4 Usage Characteristics

................................................................................... 11-18

vi M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPSection Page

11.6.5 Ongoing Verification

................................................................................... 11-19 11.6.6 Other Issues

.................................................................................................. 11-19 11.7 Geotherm al Heat Pum ps

.......................................................................................... 11-20 11.7.1 Equipm ent Efficiency and System Perform a nce

......................................... 11-21 11.7.2 Borefield Perform a nce

................................................................................. 11-21 11.8 Renewable Energy Projects

..................................................................................... 11-22 11.8.1 Savings Calculations

.................................................................................... 11-23 11.8.1.1 Net Energy Use

........................................................................................ 11-23 11.8.1.2 Nor m alized Savings

................................................................................. 11-24 11.8.2 Energy Metering

.......................................................................................... 11-24 11.8.2.1 Electrical Metering

................................................................................... 11-25 11.8.2.2 Therm a l Metering

.................................................................................... 11-25 11.8.3 Notes on Som e Renewabl e Energy Technologies

....................................... 11-25 11.8.3.1 Active Solar Therm a l System s

................................................................. 11-25 11.8.3.2 Passive Solar System s

.............................................................................. 11-26 11.8.3.3 W i nd, PV, a nd Other Renewabl e Generation Projects

............................ 11-26 11.9 New Construction

.................................................................................................... 11-26 Appendix A Definition of Terms

..................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B Sampling Guidelines

................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts

.... C-1 Appendix D M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines

........................................................... D-1 Appendix E Review ing Measurement & Verification Plan s ........................................ E-1 Appendix F Review ing Post Installation and Annual Repo rts

..................................... F-1 Appendix G Standard M&V Plan for Lighti n g Equipment Retrofits

......................... G-1 Appendix H Standard M&V Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects

......................... H-1 Appendix I Including Retro-Commissioning in Federal ESPCs

................................. I-1

FEMP M&V Gui delines v3.0 vii

## Figur es and Tables

Figure Page
Figure 1-1 ESPC Reallocation of Money Paid for Utilities

........................................................ 1-2 Figure 2-1 Energy Savings Depend on Perform a nce and Usage

................................................ 2-3 Figure 4-1 Retrofit Isolation (O ptions A and B) vs W hole-Faci lity M&V Methods (Options C and D)

......................................................................................................................... .................. 4-1 Figure 5-1 M&V Plan ning Flowchart

......................................................................................... 5-6 Figure 5-1 The Law of Di m i ni shing Returns for M&V

............................................................. 5-9 Figure 5-1 Exam ple I m pact of Sens or Accuracy on Calculations

............................................ 5-11

Table Page

Table 2-1 S t eps to Verify Savings from Perfor mance Contracts

................................................ 2-4 Table 3-1 E nergy Savings Perform a nce Contract Risk, Responsibility, and Perform a nce Matrix

............................................................................................................................... ....................... 3-3 Table 4-1 O verview of M&V Options A, B, C, and D

............................................................... 4-2 Table 4-2 S t atistical Va lidations Guidelines

............................................................................... 4-4 Table 4-3 A cceptab l e C a lib ration Toleran ces

........................................................................... 4-22 Table 4-4 E xam ple Calculations to De term ine Monthly Model Calibration

............................ 4-23 Table 5-1 E xam ple Estim ate of Savi ngs Risk

............................................................................. 5-3 Table 5-2 E x am ple Benefit-to -Cost Evaluation for M&V

......................................................... 5-3 Table 5-3 E xam ple M&V Considerations Matrix

...................................................................... 5-7 Table 6-1 S uper ESPC Subm ittals Relate d to Measurem ent and Verification

........................... 6-1 Table 6-2 S uper ESPC Project Term inology

.............................................................................. 6-1 Table 9-1 S t eps to Plan & Re port on O&M and R&R Issues

..................................................... 9-1 Table 9-2 E x cerpt from Risk & Responsibility Matrix

.............................................................. 9-2 Table 9-3 E xcerpt from M&V Plan & Savings C a lculation s Outline

........................................ 9-3 Table 9-4 E xcerpts from Annual Report Outline for Each ECM

............................................... 9-5 Table 11-1 Exam ple M otor Survey Data Form

........................................................................ 11-7

viii M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Equations

Equation Page
Equation 2-1: General Equation Used to Calculate Savings

....................................................... 2-2 Equation 4-1: Multi-Variant Regression M odel f or a W eather-Dependent ECM

....................... 4-3 Equation 4-2: Measured Energy Consum ption

.......................................................................... 4-21 Equation 4-3: Root Mean Square Error

..................................................................................... 4-21 Equation 4-4: Mean of the Measured Data

................................................................................ 4-21 Equation 4-5: Cv(RSME)

......................................................................................................... . 4 -21 Equation 7-1: General Equation Used to Calculate Savings

....................................................... 7-3 Equation 7-2: Expanded Equation U s ed to Calculate Savings

.................................................... 7-3 Equation 11-1: Total Energy Savings

........................................................................................ 11-3 Equation 11-2: Total Dem a nd Savings

...................................................................................... 11-4 Equation 11-3: Energy S a vings for Each Usage Group or Piece of Equipment

........................ 11-4 Equation 11-4: Dem a nd Savings for Each Lighti ng Usage Group or Piece of Equipm e nt

....... 11-4 Equation 11 -5: Peak Dem a nd Savings for Each Usage Group or Piece of Equipm ent

........... 11-10 Equation 11-6: Total Energy Savings

...................................................................................... 11-12 Equation 11-7: Total Dem a nd Savings

.................................................................................... 11-12 Equation 11-8: Baseline (or Perf ormance period) Energy Used by Each Usage Group or Piece of Equipm ent

...................................................................................................................... .......... 11-12 Equation 11 -9: Energy S a vings for Each Piece of Equipm ent

................................................ 11-12 Equation 11-10: Peak D e m a nd Savi ngs

................................................................................... 11-13 Equation 11 -11: Energy Savings fo r Each Piece of Equipm e nt

.............................................. 11-16 Equation 11 -12: Cost Savings Determ ina tion Utilizing Net E nergy Use Approach

............... 11-23 Equation 11-13: General Savings Equati on for R e newable E nergy Projects

.......................... 11-24

FEMP M&V Gui delines v3.0 ixM&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP x

## Section 1 Measur ement and V e rification (M&V) Guides

1.1 OVERVIEW AND PURPO SE OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (FE M P) M&V GUIDE This document provides guideline s and m e thods for m easuring a nd verifying energy, water, and cost savings associated w ith federal energy savi ngs perform a nce contracts (ESPCs). An ESPC is a contracting m e thod in whic h the contractor provides and arranges financing and im ple m entation of energy im prove ments and is re paid over the contract term from the cost savings generated by the im prove ments.

1.1.1 The Federal ESPC A u tho r ity
The federal use of ESPCs was authorized in the 1986 am endm ents to the National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978 (NECPA), whi c h ga ve federal agencies the authority to enter into shared-energy-savings contracts with privat e-sector en ergy serv ice com p anies (E SCOs). The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT) further am ende d NECPA, authorizing federal agencies to execute gu aranteed -savin gs ESPCs. EPACT also directed DOE to develop an ESPC regulation through a form al rule-making process. The fi nal ESPC rule was published on April 10, 1995 and im ple m ented the DOE ESPC regulation at 10 CRF Part 436 Subpart B. The Ronald W . Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2005 revised the de finition of energy sav i ngs in federal ESPCs to include water conservation m e asures, and the National Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 ex tended the federal ES PC authority indefinitely.

Som e aspects of the legis l ation are related to m easurem ent and verification of savings. These item s include requirem ents for m eas urem ent and verification of savings, annual energy audits, and factors that adjustm e nts can be m a de for.
Current federal energy goals are defined in Executive Order 13423, released in January 2007, which strongly supports the use of alternative financing m e thods, including ESPCs, to achieve them

.
For m o re inform ation about federal ESPCs, in cluding the authorizing le gislation, regulations, and all aspects of im plem enting ESPC pr ojects, go to the w e bsite of the FEMP, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/fem p/ f in ancing/superespcs_espcrule.htm l

. 1.1.2 The Financia l Structure of ESPCs In an ESPC, the ESCO provides the energy surveys, engineering, design, construction

m a nage m e nt , labor, equipm ent, and som e tim es ma intenance to reduce energy and water use and costs, as well as related costs such as operati ons and m a intenance (O&M) of energy system s. In f

e deral ESPCs, the ESCO is require d to guaran t ee a spec if ic level of cos t savings tha t will b e sufficient to pay for the improvem e nt s over the term of the contract. Savin g s m u st exceed paym ents in every year of the contract. The fe deral ESPC authority requi res the con t ractor to undertake measurem ent and verification (M&V) activities and provide docum e ntation to dem onstrate that the guarantee has been m e t.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 1-1Agen cy sa

ving s Agen cy sa

ving s Bas e lin e utilit y b ill ES C O p a

ym en t s

R e du ce d util it y b ill R e du ce d utilit y b ill As shown in Figure 1-1, ESPCs reallocate the m o ne y the agency pays for utilities. Energy costs are reduced, and part of the savings are paid to th e ESCO f o r the im provem e nts that generate the savings. The energy savings realized through an ESPC project provide the incom e stream to finance the projec t. After the con t ra c t te rm ends, any addition al sav i ngs will accru e to the agency.

Agen cy sa

ving s Agen cy sa

ving s Bas e lin e utilit y b ill ES C O p a

ym en t s

R e du ce d util it y b ill R e du ce d utilit y b ill

Be

f o re ES PC Du g PC A fte r ESP C ri n ES

Figure 1-1 E SPC Reallocation of Money Paid for U t ilities
An ESPC ca n be used to finance renewable en ergy system s, water conservation, related O&M im prove m e nts, and other m easures, as well as en ergy conservation m easures and energy-efficient system s. Thus, in this docum e nt the word “energy” is used as a generic term that includes other things besides traditional sources of heat and el ectric power. The contract can apply to both new construction and retrofits . In m a ny cases, old, in efficient equ i p m ent is replaced with new equipm ent and control system s.
1.1.3 Purpose of the FEMP M&V Guide This document contains procedures and guideli nes for quantifying the sa vings resulting from energy efficiency equip m ent, water conser vation, im proved operation and m a intenance, renewable energy, and cogeneration projects im plem ented through ESPCs . This docum ent is intended for federal energy m a nagers, federa l procurem ent officers, and contractors im ple m enting perform ance contr acts at federal facilities.
The DOE Super ESPCs include a co ntrac t ual req u irem ent f o r ESCOs to com p ly with this guide in planning and carrying out M&V activiti es for federal agen cy custom ers. The “perform ance” aspect of perform a nce contrac ting refers to energy p erform ance and drives the way in which savings are determ ined. Sin ce the M&V approach calculates and docum ents energy savings, it is one of the m ost importa nt activities associated with implem e nting perform ance contracts an d is a cru cia l issue in contract negotiations.
This document has two prim ary purposes:

 It serves as a reference docum ent for sp ecifying M&V m ethods and procedures in delivery orders, requests for proposals (RFPs), and perfor m a nce contracts.

1-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP It is a resource for those developing proj ec t-sp ec if ic M&V plans f o r f ederal ESPC projects, especially under DOE’s S uper ESPC contract m echanism

. The procedures defined in this docum ent 1) can be applied with consistency to sim ilar projects throughout all geographic regi ons, and 2) are im partial, reliable, and repeatable. If the procedures in this docum e nt are followed by a federal agency or other entity, then that agency o r entity can be assured that their guaranteed savings can be realized.

1.1.4 Overview
The first th ree chapters of this Guideline p r es ent an overview of the M&V process and issues related to responsibility allocation, thereby providing the context for the specific M&V requir em ents that are e ss entia l in a f e deral ESPC project. Chapter 4 presents details of the four general M&V m e thods that should be used. Chap ter 5 offers guidance on selecting an M&V approach f o r

specif i c p r o j ects, and Chapter 6 d etails the M & V related su bm ittals tha t are required in a Super ESPC project. C hapters 7, 8, and 9 discusses im portant issues that m ust be considered and specified in the con t ract , including M&V Plan details, com m i ssioning requirem e nts, and O&M responsibilities. Chapter 10 covers the key oversight issues that are the responsibility of the governm e nt . Chapter 11 includes guidance on determ ining savings from the most common technologies included in federal ESPCs. The Appendices to this d o cum e nt are fairly large, and are provided as a separate PDF docum ent. Item s include a definition of term s; guidance on s t atistical sa mpling; as well as instr u ctions, for m ats, and checklists f or reviewing M&V subm ittals. Several item s developed by governm e ntindustry working groups are also provided, including standard M&V Plan tem plates for both lighting retrofits and chiller replacem e nts, guidance on ve rifying O&M savings, and the M&V Plan and reporting outlines. The final appe ndix includes guidance on incorporating retrocomm issioning services in perform a nce contracts. Additional m a terials developed for the Super ESPC program are available online 1 , includ ing th e M&V Plan and repor ts f r om a f i ctitious project. This is Version 3.0 (2008) of the Guideline. Version 2.2 was published in 2000; Version 2.0 was published in 1996. This new version incorporates significant updates to the 2000 version. Much of the guidance included was developed by a va riety of industry-govern ment working groups, facilitated by DOE, since the release of the previ ous version. Som e of the m a terial developed has been incorporated in the Super ESPC contract. In developing the present version, the entities involved:

 Updated term inology and processes to harm onize with the 2008 Super ESPC m a ster contract

 Updated definitions of savings a nd adjustm e nts to m a tch IP MVP 2007

 Revised Option A strategies to be in line with IP MVP 2007, noting when exceptions can be m a de

 Elim inated s evera l m easure-spe cif ic appro aches and added a disc ussion on key issues rela ted to th e m o st common ener gy conservation m easures (ECMs)

1 Additional Super ESPC mat e rials re lated t o measurement and verificat i on of savi ngs are available at http: //www1.eere. ener gy. gov/femp/ f i nancing/supere spcs_mvresources.html and htt p

://

ate a m .lb

l .g

ov/mv/

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 1-3 Added significant inform ation on planning fo r operations and m a intenance in ESPCs

 Provided details and example on verifying en ergy related cost saving from operations and m aintenance

 Added detailed form ats for M&V plans and reports

 Added an exam ple of an M&V Plan a nd reports f o r a f i ctitiou s Super ESPC projec t

 Included FE MP’s Standard M&V Plan for Lighting Replacem e nts

1.2 OTHER M&V GUIDELINES Measuring and verifying savings from perfor m a n ce contracting projects requires special project planning and engineering activit ies. Although M&V is an evol ving science, industry best practices have been developed. These practices are docum ented in severa l guidelines, including the International Perform a nce Measurem ent and Verification Protocol 2 (IP MVP 2007) and ASHRAE Guideline 14: Measurem ent of Energy and De m a nd Savings 3 (2002). These two guidelines are described below.

1.2.1 IPMVP The IPMVP 2007 is a guidance docum ent that provi des a conceptual framework in m e asuring,

com puting, and reporting savings achieved by energy or water efficiency pr ojects at facilities. The IPMVP def i nes key term s and outlin es issu es that m u st be consider ed in developin g an M&V Plan, but does not provide deta ils for specific m easures or t echnologies. The latest version is an update of the 2002 edition.
Developed through a collaborative effort involving industry, gove rnm e nt, financial, and other organization s, the IPMV P serves as the fram ewor k for M&V procedures, provides four M&V options, and addresse s is sues re lated to the us e of M&V in th ird-par t y-f i na nced and utility projects.

The FEMP M&V Guideline con t ain s specific p r o ce dures for applying concepts originating in the IPMVP. The Guideline represen ts a s p ecific app l ication of the IPMVP for federal projects. It outlin es pro cedures f o r determ ining M&V appr o aches, eva l u a ting M & V plans and r e ports, and establishing the basis of paym ent for energy savings during the contract. T h ese proced ures are intended to be f u lly compatib le and c onsisten t with the IPMV P.

1.2.2 ASHRAE Guideline 14
ASHRAE Guideline14-2002 Measurem ent of En ergy and Dem a nd Savings is a reference for calculating energy and dem a nd savings associ ated with perform a nce contracts using

m easure m ents. In addition, it sets forth instru m e ntation and data m a nage ment guidelines and describes methods for accounting for uncertainty associated with m odels and m easurem ents. Guideline 14 does not discuss other issu es related to perf ormance contracting.

2 Inter nat io

nal P e rf orma nc e M eas ure m ent

an d V e rific a t

i on Pro toc

ol: Conc epts a nd Opt io

n s f

o

r Deter m

in in g En ergy an d Wa ter S a v

ings Volume I , EVO-10 000 - 1 .2 00

7, Eff ic

i enc y Valu ati on Or gan iz atio n.
3 ASHRAE Guidel in e 14- 20 02: Me as

u r

eme n t o

f En ergy and D e ma nd Sav i ngs , Am eric an S o c

i ety of He atin g, R e frig erat ing

an d Ai rCondi tio n in

g En gi neers

.

1-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPThe ASHRAE docum ent specifies three eng i neering appro a ches to M&V

. Com p liance of each approach requires that the overall uncertainty of the sav i ngs estim ates is below prescribed thresho l ds. The three ap proaches p r esented ar e c l osely re la ted to a nd support the options provided in IPMVP.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 1-51-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 2 Overview of M&V for ESPCs

Im ple m enting m easurement and ve rification (M &V) stra tegies in energy perform a nce contracts is requ ired in federal co ntracts such as the Super Energy Savings Perform a nce Cont racts (Super ESPCs). Since energy savings are gu aranteed, the le gislation requires that the contractor verify that energy cost savings have been achieved each year.

The f ederal legislation o u tlin ing the rules f o r im plem enting f edera l ESPC projec ts is the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT). The EPACT legisla tion includes specific requirem e nts for annual verification of energy cost savi ngs to support the savi ng guarantee. The goal of m e asurem ent and verification is to reduce the risk to agenci es by providing a mechanism to evaluate the perform a nce of a project throughout the term of the contract. The savings guarantee is defined by the M&V activities, whose function is to reduc e agency risk. The challen ge of M&V is to balance M&V costs with the valu e of incre ase d certainty in the cost savings from the conservation m easure. Many of the reasons for using M&V strategies go beyond m e r e ly satisfying the law. Properly applied, M&V can:

 Accurately assess energy savings for a project

 Allocate ris k s to the appropriate parties

 Reduce uncertainties to reasonab l e levels

 Monitor equipm ent perform ance

 Find additional savings

 Im prove operations and m aintenance (O&M)

 Verify that the cost savings guarantee is m e t

 Allow for future ad justm e nts, as need ed

2.1 GENERA L A PPROAC H T O M&V Facility energy (O&M or water) savings cannot be m easured, since they represent the absence of energy use. Instead, savings are determ ined by comparing the energy use b e fore and after the installation of conservation m easure(s), m a ki ng appropriate adjustm e nts for changes in conditions.

The “before” case is called the ba s e line. The “after” case is referre d to as the post-installation or perform a nce period. Proper determ ination of savings includes adjusting fo r changes that affect energy use, but that are not caused by the c onservation m easure(s). Such adjustm e nts m a y account for changes in weather, occupancy, or other factors betwee n the baseline and perform a nce periods. Equation 2-1 shows the ge neral equation used to calculate savings.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 2-1

### _ _ _ Equation 2-1: General Equation Used to Calculate Savings 

### Sav i ngs = ( Base line Ene r gy

− P o st I n stallation Ene r gy ) ± Adjustm e n ts
Baseline and perform a nce period en ergy use can be determ ined by using the m e thods associated with several different M&V appr oaches classified by the types of m easurem ents perform e d. The f

our options, origin ating in the Inte rn ati onal Perf orm a nce Measurem ent and Verification Protocol (IP MVP), are term ed Options A (Retrofit Is olation with Key Param e ter Measurem ent), B (Retrof it I solation with All Param eter M eas urem ent), C (Whole Building), and D (Calibrated Sim ulation). (These options are discussed in Chapter 4 of this docum ent.) These optio ns enables one to apply a range of suitable techniques for a variety of applications. H ow one chooses and tailors a specific option is determ ined by the le vel of M&V rigor required to obtain the desired accuracy lev el in the sav i ngs determ ination a nd is dependent o n the com p lexity of the conservation m easure, th e potential f o r changes in perform a nce, the m easure’s savings value, and the project’s allocation of risk.

Two funda m e ntal factors drive energy savings: perform a nce and usage. Perform a nce describes how m u ch energy is us ed to accom p lish a sp ecific ta sk ; usage describ e s h o w m u ch of the ta sk is required, su ch as the nu mber of operating hours during which a piece of equipm ent operates. For

exam ple, in the sim ple case of lighting, perfor mance is the power required to provide a specific

am ount of li ght, and usage is the operating hours per year. For a chiller (which is a m o re
com p lex system ), perform ance is defined as the energy required to provid e a specific am ount of cooling (which varies with load), whereas usag e is defined by the cooling load profile and the total am ount of cooling required. Both perform a nce and usage factors need to be known to determ ine savings, as shown in Figure 2-1.

2-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPImproved P e rformance ( E fficiency ) Energy Savings

Baseli ne O p er ati ng Hours Baseline Ener gy U se Post-retrofit Energy Use

Baseli ne Ef ficiency

Po s t
- Retrofit Ef ficiency



### Performance R e duced ( r at e of ene r gy Operating use) Ho ur s 

### Hours per y e a r

Post- r etrofit Operat i ng Hours Figure 2-1 E n ergy Savin g s Depend o n Performance and Usag e In Figure 2

- 1, the area o f the large b ox repres ents the to tal en ergy used in the baseline case. Reduction in the rate of energy use (increase in pe rform a nce) or reductions in usage (d ecrea se in operating hours) lead to reduced total energy use, which is re presented by the sm aller box. The difference between the two boxes—the shaded area—represents the energy savings.

M&V activities includ e site su rveys, m etering of energy and independent variables, engineering calcu lations, and reportin g. How these activities ar e applied to determ ine energy savings depends on the characteristics of the energy conserva tion m easures (ECMs) being im ple m ented and balancing accuracy in ener gy savings estim ates with th e cost of conducting M&V.

2.2 STEPS TO DETERMINE A ND VERIF Y SAVINGS In general, determ ining actual savings achieved can be difficult and costly. In m a ny pe rform a nce contra cts, it is m o re im portan t to ve r i f y the poten tia l of the ECM to gener ate th e pred icted savings. Verifying the potential to perfor m requires confirm i ng that:

 The baseline conditions were accu rately defined

 The proper equipm ent/system s were installed and properly commissioned

 The equipment/system s are pe rform i ng to specification
Although confirm i ng these item s m a y appear simple, a structured approach is helpful. Regardless of the M&V option used, sim ilar steps are ta ken to verify and determ ine the project’s perform a nce. These step s are outlin ed in Table 2

- 1, and an overview of each one is included in this se ction.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 2-3Table 2-1 Steps to Verify Savi ngs from Performance Contracts Timing Activ i t y Before Proj ect Implementation Step 1 Allocate p r oje c t re spon sibili ties Step 2 Develo p a project-sp ecifi c M&V plan Step 3 Define the b a s elin e Duri ng Proj ect Implementation Step 4 Install and co mmission e q uipment an d system s Step 5 Con d u c t post

- install a tion verificatio n acti vities After Project Impleme n tatio n Step 6 Perform regul ar-i nterval verification a c tivities duri ng th e perfo rman ce perio d

The sections below provide an overv iew of M&V activ ities in each phase of the ESPC project. Additiona l d etails on th e se topics ar e included in late r sec tion s.
2.2.1 Step 1: Allocate Pr oject Respon sibilities The basis of any project-specific M&V Plan is de term ined by the allo cation of key project responsibilities between the energy service com p any (ESCO) and the federal agency involved. On an ESPC project, a num ber of typical financial, operational, and perform a nce issues m u st be considered when allocating risks and responsibili ties. These issues are discussed in Chapter 3. The distribu tion of respo n sibilities w ill d epend o n the agency ’s resou r ces and pref eren ces, and the ESCO’s ability to co ntrol cer tain f actors.

2.2.2 Step 2: Develop a Proj ect-Specific M&V Plan
The M&V Plan is the s i n g le m o st importan t it em in an energy savings guarantee. The plan defines how savings will be cal culated and specifies any ongoing ac tivities that will occur during the contract term

. Although the M&V Plan is usually developed duri ng contract negotiations, it is im portant that the agency and the ESCO agree upo n general M & V approaches to be used prior to starting the Investm e nt Grade Audit (IGA). The M&V m ethod(s) chos en will de term ine to a large extent what activities are condu cted during the audit, an d will affect the cos t and duration of the audit.
The project-specific M & V Plan inclu des project- wide item s as well as details for each ECM.
Projec t-wide item s inclu d e:

 Overview of proposed energy and cost savings

 Schedule f o r

all M & V ac tivitie s

 Agency witnessing requ irem ents

 Utility rates and the m e thod used to calcu late co st saving s

 O&M reporting responsibilities

ECM-level item s include :

 Details of baseline conditions and data collected

 Docum e ntation of all assum p tions and sources of data

2-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Details of engineering analysis perform e d

 The way energy savings will be c alcu l ated

 Details of any O&M or other cost savings claim e d

 Details of proposed energy and cost savings

 Details of post-in sta lla tion verif i ca tion activ ities, includ ing in spections,

m easurem ents, and analy sis

 Details of any antic ipate d routin e adjustm e nts to baseline or reporting period energy

 Content and for m at of all M&V reports (pos t-in stalla tion a nd periodic M&V)

2.2.3 Step 3: Define the Baseline Typically, the ESCO defi nes the baseline as part of the IGA. Baseline physical conditions (such as equipm ent inventory and conditions, occ upancy schedule, nam e plate data, equipm e nt operating schedules, energy consumption rate, curre nt weather data and control strategies) are determ ined during the IGA through surveys, insp ections, spot m e asurem ents, and short-term

m e tering activities. Utility bills are of ten used to v e rify the ba s e line h a s be en accurate ly defined. Baseline co nditions are estab lished f o r the pur pose of estim ating savings by com p aring the baseline energy use with the post-installation ener gy use. Baseline information is also used to account for any changes that m a y occur duri ng the perform a nce period, which m a y r e quire baseline energy use adjustm e nts. This baseline infor m ation is included in the ESCO’s Final Proposal. It is the agency’s respon sibility to ensure that the base line has been properly defined. If a whole building m e tering or calibrated sim ulation approach is used, it is important to docum ent the baseline energy use of all end uses, not jus t th ose af f

ected by the re trof it.

After the ECM has been im ple m ented, one cannot go back and reevaluate the baseline. It no longer exists! Therefore, it is very important to properly defi ne and document the baseline conditions. Deciding what needs to be m onitored (and for how long) depends on such factors as the com p lexity of the m easure and th e stab ility of the baseline, includ ing the variability of equipm ent loads and operating hours, and th e other variables that affect the load.
The prim ary sources of questions and com plain ts on Super ESPC proj ects are th e occasional situations w h ere the custom er does not think that savings are bei ng realized. Adequate docum entation of the baseline is critical to reso lving any such disagreem e nts that m a y arise.

2.2.4 Step 4: Install and Commission Equipment and Systems
Comm issioning of installed equipm ent and system s is considered industry best-practice and is required on Super ESPC projects . Co mmissionin g ensures th at sy stem s are designed, installed, functionally tested in all modes of operation, and are capable of being operated and maintained in conform ity with the design in tent (appropr ia te li ghting levels, cooling capacity, co mfortable tem p eratures, etc.). Com m i ssioning is generally com pleted by the ESCO and witnessed by the agency. In s o m e cases, h o wever, it is contracted out to a third party.

Comm issioning activities include inspections and functional testing. These activities are specified in a Comm issioning Pl an, and their results are docum ented in a Comm issioning Report

. More specific inform ation on comm i ssioning fo r ESPC projects is provided in Section 8.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 2-5Comm issioning usually requires perf orm ance m e asurem ents to ensure th at system s are working properly. Because of the overlap in comm issioning and post-inst a lla tion M&V activities, som e people m a y confuse the two. The difference is th at comm issioning ensures that sys t em s are functioning properly, whereas pos t- in stallation M & V quantif ies how well the system s are working from an energy standpoint.

2.2.5 Step 5: Conduct Post-Insta llation Ve rification Activities
Post-installation m easurem ent and verification activities are conducted by both the E S CO and the federal agency to ensure that proper e quipm ent/system s were installed, are operating correctly, and have the potential to generate the predicted savings. Verification m e thods include surveys, inspections, spot m easur em ents, and short-term metering.
The Post-Installation Report includes:

 Project description

 Detailed list of installed equipm ent

 Details of any changes between the F i nal Proposal and as-built conditions, including any changes to the estim ated energy savings

 Docum entation of all po st-in sta lla tio n verif i ca tio n activ itie s and perform a nce
m easure m ents conducted

 Perform a nce verification—how pe rform ance criteria were m et

 Docum e ntation of constructio n-period savings (if any)

 Status of rebates or incen tives (if any)

 Expected savings for the first year
For projects using certain M&V m e t hods (Op tion A)(see Chapter 4), the post-installation verification is the m o st importa nt M&V step, because any m easurem ents to substantiate the savings guarantee are m a de only once. For som e m easures, where equ i pment perform ance and energy sav i n g s are not ex pected to vary signifi can tly ove r tim e, post-in sta l lation m easurem ents
m a y be the prim ary source of data used in the savings calculations.. Ther eafter, in spections are conducted to verify that the potential to perf orm exists.

2.2.6 Step 6: Perform Regular-Int erval Verification Activities
At leas t once a year, the ESCO and t he federal ag ency are required to au dit th e proje ct. This includes, at a m i ni m u m, verify ing that the installed equipm en t/system s have been properly

m a intained, continue to operate correctly, and co ntinue to have the pot en tia l to gene r ate th e predicted savings.
An Annual Report from the ESCO is required to docum ent annual M&V activities and report verified and guaranteed savings for the year. In many cases, however, m or e frequent verification activities are appropriate. More frequent m on itoring and/or inspection ensures that the M&V monitoring and reporting system s are working pr operly, installed equipment and system s are operating as intended throughout the year, allows fine-tuning of m easur es throughout the year based on operational feedback, and it avoi ds su rp rises at the end of the year.

2-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPThe Annual Reports m u s t include:

 Results/d oc um entation of perfor m a nce m easurem ents and inspections

 Verified sav i ngs for the year (energy
, energy cos t s, O&M cos t s, etc.)

 Com parison of verified savings with the guaranteed am ounts

 Details of all analysis and savings calcul ations, including commodity rates used and any baseline adjustm e nts perform e d

 Summ ary of operations and m a in tenance activities conducted

 Details of any perform a nce or O& M issues that require attention

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 2-72-8 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 3 Risk and Respon sibility in M&V

3.1 USING M&V TO MANAGE RISK DOE’s overarching energy savings perform a nce cont ract, Super ESPC, esta blishes general term s and conditions of the agreem ent between the ag ency and the energy service com pany (ESCO). On individual projects (Task Orders) there is br oad latitude to ta ilor a de al to su it the f ederal agency’s ow n particular needs, priorities, a nd circum stances. At the heart of a performance contract is a guarantee of a speci fied level of cost savings and perform a nce. One of the prim ary purposes of m easure m ent and verification (M&V ) is to reduce the risk of non-performance to an acceptable level, which is a subjective judgm ent based on th e agency’s p r iorities and preferences. In perform a nce contr acts, project ris k s and respo n sibilities are allo cated b e tween the ESCO and t he owner. In the cont ext of M&V, the word “risk ” ref ers to th e uncer tain ty that expected savings will be realized, includi ng the potential m onetary consequences. The allocation of responsibilities between the ES CO and the agency drives the m easurem ent and verification strategy, which actual ly defines the s p ecifics of h o w fulfillm ent of the sav i ngs guarantee will b e determined. Both E S COs and agen cies are reluctant to assum e responsibility for factors they cannot control.

A few funda m e ntal principles can be applied to the allocation of responsibilities in Super ESPC agreem ents:

 Logic and cost-effectiveness drive the allocation of responsibilities.

 The responsible party predicts its likely tasks and associ ated costs to fulfill its responsibilities, and m a kes sure these ar e covered in the ESP C or the agency’s budget.

 Any unforeseen costs are paid by the party that caused the costs, or by the party responsible for that risk area.

 Stipulating certain parameters in the M&V Plan can align resp onsibilities, especially for the item s no one controls.
The risks in achieving energy savings can be al located to usage and perform a nce factors.
Risk related to usage stem s from unc ertainty in operational factors. For exam ple, savings fluctuate depending on weather, the num ber of hours in which equipm ent is used, user intervention, and equipment load s. Because ESCOs often have no contro l over such factors, they are usually reluctant to assum e usage risk. The agency generally assum e s responsibility for usage risk by either allowing baseline adjustm e nts base d on m easurem ents or by agreeing to stipulated equipm ent operating hours, cooling load prof iles, or other usage-related factors.

Perform ance risk is the u n certainty as sociated wi th characterizing a specified level of equipm ent perform a nce. The ESCO is ultim a tely responsible for selection, application, design, installation, and performance of the equipm ent, and typically assum e s responsibility f or achieving savings related to equipm ent perfor m a nce. Operations, preventiv e m a intenance, and repair and

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 3-1replacem ent practices can have a dram atic im pac t on equipm ent perform a nce. These responsibilities m u st be carefully planned, and are discussed in furt her detail in Chapter 8 of this docum ent. Stipulating certain parameters in the M&V Plan can align respons ibilities, especially f o r the item s that no one controls. Using stipulations means that the ESCO and agency agree to em ploy a set value for a param eter throughout the term of the contract, regardless of the actual behavior of that param e ter. If no stipulated values are used and savings are ve rified based entirely on m easurem ents, then all risk resides with the ES CO, which must show that the gu aranteed s a vin g s are realized, regardles s of contributing factors. Alterna tive l y, the agenc y assum es the risk f o r th e param eters that a r e stipulated. In the even t that the stipu l ated v a lues oversta te the savings , or reductions in use decrease the savings, the agency m us t still pa y the ESCO for the agr eed-upon savings. If the actual savin g s are greater than exp e cted, the agency retains all of the surplus savings.
The use of stipulations can be a practical, cost -effectiv e way to reduce M & V costs an d allocate risks. Stipulations used appr opriately do not jeopardize the savings guarantee, the agency’s ability to pay for the project, or the value of th e project to the governm e nt . However, stipulations shift risk to the agency, and the agency shoul d understand the potential consequences before accepting th em . Risk is m i ni m i zed and optim a lly allocated th rough carefully crafted M&V requir em ents, includ ing dilig ent es ti m ation of any stipulated values.

3.2 RISK, RESPONSIBILITY, AND PERFO R MANCE MATRIX A project-specific Risk, Responsibil ity, and Perform a nce Matrix (referred to below sim ply as the “Responsibility M a trix”) is required f o r Super ESPC projects. This m a trix details risks, responsibilities, and verificati on requirem ents that should be considered w hen developing perform a nce contracts. T h e m a trix is developed to help iden tif y the im portant p r ojec t r i sks, assess their potential impacts, and clarify the party respons ible for m anaging the risk.
The first step in developing an M&V Plan for a Super ESPC project is th e com p letion of a project-specific Re sponsibility Matrix. Early in the projec t developm ent process, the ESCO and the agency review Federal Energy Managem e nt Program ’s (FEMP’s) Responsibility Matrix and evalua te ho w to alloc a te the key r e sp onsibilities.
The Responsibility Matrix, shown in Table 3-1, de scribes typical financial and operational issues and their inf l uence on E SPC contracts. The tabl e lists the p r im ary factors that im pact the determ ination of savings and illustrates how thei r definition indicates wh ich party—the ESCO or the governm e nt agency, or perhaps n e ither—is res ponsible fo r each facto r . These risk s fall into three p r im ary catego r ies : financial, o p erationa l, and perform a nce. E ach category has several subcatego r ies.
For Super ESPC projects, the Responsibility Ma trix is f i rs t included in the Prelim inary Assessm ent and finalized in the Final Proposal

. A blank colum n in the Re sponsibility Matrix is

com pleted by the ESCO to describe the proposed a llocation of responsibilities in the project, and an additional colum n can be added for the agen cy’s assessment. The final version will only contain allocations agreed upon by both the ES CO and agency..

3-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPCom pleting the Responsibility Matrix serves as a useful exercise in understanding the approaches required in th e M&V Plan because the Matrix ind i cates what factors are th e responsibility of the ESCO and thus need to be docum e nted during the life of the contract term

. The allocation of responsibility m ust take into account the agency’s resources and preferences and the ESCO’s ability to contro l cer tain f acto r s. In general, a contract objective m a y be to release the ESCO from responsib ility for factors beyond its contro l, such as building occupancy and weather, yet hold the ESCO responsible for cont rollable factors (risks), such as m a intenance of equipm ent efficiency.

Table 3-1 Energy Savings Performance Contr act Risk, Responsi b ility , and Performance Matrix 4

Responsibili ty/ D escripti on Con t ract or Pro pose d Appr oach 1. Financial

a. Interest ra te s : Neither the contractor nor the agency has si gni ficant control over prevailing inte rest rates. Higher interest rates will in crease project cos t, financing/pr oject term, or both. The timing of the Task Order signing may impact t he available inte rest rate and pro j ect cost. b. Co nstr ucti o n cos t s: The contractor is responsible for det ermining construct i o

n costs and defining a budget. In a fixed-price design/build contract, th e agency assum es little respon si bility for co st overruns. Howe ver, if construction estimates are si gnificantly greater than originally assumed, the contractor may find that the project or measure is no longer viable and drop it before TO awa r d. In a ny design/build con t ract, the agency loses some de sign control. Clarify design s t andards and the design approva l process (i ncluding cha nges ) and how cos t s will be revie w

e

d

. c. M&V confide n ce: The agency assumes the r esponsibilit y of d etermining the confidence that it desires to have in the M&V program and energy sa vings determin ations. The desired confidence will be reflected in th e resources required for t he M& V program, and t he ESCO must consider the requirement prio r to submittal of the final proposal. Clarify how pr oject savings a r e being veri f ie

d (e.g., eq ui pme n t perf orma nce, operati onal fact ors, energy use ) an d t h e im pac t o n M&V cos t s

. d. Energy Rela ted Cost Savi ngs : The agency and the contractor ma y agree th at the project will include sa ving s f

r om recurring and/or one-time costs. This may include one-time savings from avoid ed expenditures for projects that were appropriated b ut will no longer be necessary. In cluding one-time cost savings bef ore the money has been appropriated may invo lve some risk to th e agency. Recurring savings generally result from red uced O&M expens es or reduced water consumption. These O&M and water savings must be based on actual spending reductions. Clarify sources of non-energy c o

st savings and how they will be v e rified.

e. Delays: Both the contractor and the agency can cause delays. Failure to implement a viable project in a timely manner costs t he agency in the form of lost savings and can add cost to the proje c

t (e.g., construction interest, remobilizat ion). Clarify schedule a n d how delays wil l be handle d. f. Major c h anges in facility : The agency (or Congress) controls major changes in facility u s

e, including clo s

ure. Clarify responsibilities in the event of a premature facili ty cl osure, loss of fu ndi ng, or ot h e r major cha n g e

. 2. Operati o nal

a. Operati n g hours : The agen cy generally ha s control ov er operating hours. Increases and decreases in op erating hours can show up as in creases or decreases in “savings” depending on the M&V method (e.g., operating hours multiplied b y improved efficie ncy of equipment vs. wholebuilding/utilit y bill analysis). Clarify whether operating hours are to be meas ured or sti pula t ed and wha t the impac t will be if they change. If the operating hours are stipulated, the baseline shou ld be carefully docum ented and agreed to by both parties.

4 ESPC Risk, Responsibi lity, and Perf orma nce M a trix is included in the Super ESPC master contract.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 3-3Responsibili ty/ D escripti on Con t ract or Pro pose d Appr oach b. L o ad : Equipment loads can change over time. The agency generally has con t rol over hours of operation, condit i oned floor area, intensity of u s

e (e .g., changes in occupancy or le vel of automatio n). Changes in load can show up as increases or decreases in “savings” depending on the M&V method. Clarify whether equi pme n t l o a

d s are to be me asured or s t ipulated and wha t the i m pac t will be if they c h ange . If the equipment lo ads are stipulate d, the baseline should be carefully documented a nd agreed to by both parties.

c. Weather: A n umber of energy efficiency measures are affected by weather, which neither the contractor nor th e agency has co ntrol over. Shoul d the agency agree to accept risk for weather fluctuations, it will be contingent upon aggr egate payments not exceeding aggregate savings. Clea rly specify how we ather correc t ions will be performed. d. User par t ici p ati o n: Many energy conservatio n measures require user participation to generate savings (e.g., co ntrol settings). The savings can be variable, and the contractor may be unwilling t o invest in the s

e measures. Clarify what degree of user part ici p ation is nee d ed and utilize
mo nit o ring a n d trainin g t

o

mi ti gate risk. If perf ormance is stipu l ated, document and review assumptions carefully and con s

id

er M&V to confirm the capacity t o save (e.g., con f irm that the controls are functioning properly). 3. Performa nc e

a. Equipment performa nce: Th e contractor has control over the selection of equ ipment and is responsible for it s proper installat i on, commiss ioning, and perform ance. The contractor has the responsibility to demonstrate that the new improvem ents meet expected performa nce levels, in clu ding specified equ ip ment capacity, standards of service, and efficien cy. Clarify w ho i s responsi b le f o r initial and l o ng-term per f or

mance, how it will be verified, and wha t will be done if perfor mance does not mee t expectati o ns. b. O p erati ons : Performance of t he day-to-day operations activities is negotiab l e and can impact performance. Ho wever, the contractor bears the ultimate risk reg ardless of which party performs t he activit y

. Clarify whic h par t y will perfor m eq uip m en t o p eratio n s , the im plicati ons of e qui pme n t control, how changes in operati ng procedures will be handled, and how pr oper operati ons will be assured.

c. Preventive Mainte nance : Performance of day-to-day maintenance activitie s is negotiable an d can impact performance. Howev er, the contractor bears the ultimate risk regardless of which party performs the activity. Clarify how long-term prev entive mai n te nance will be as sured, especial ly if the party responsible for long-term per f or

man ce is not res p onsible for mai n tenance (e. g ., contractor prov ides mainte nance ch ecklist an d repor tin g fre q uency )

. Clarify who is responsi b le f o r

perfor min g lo n g

- t erm preve nt

i ve mainte nanc e to main tain o p eratio nal perfor mance th roug ho ut the c o n t ract ter m

. Cl arify wha t will be done if i n ade qua te preventiv e main tena nce impac t s perf or

mance. d. Equi pme n t Repair and Re placement : Perf ormance of day-to-day repair an d replacement of contractor-installed equipment is negotiable; however it is often tied to project performance. The contractor bears the ultimate risk regardl ess of which party performs the activity. Clarify who is responsi b le for perfor ming replacement of fail ed compone nts or equi pme n t r e placement throughout the term of the contract. Speci fical ly address pote ntial i m pac t s on performa nce due to e qui pme n t failure. Speci fy expecte d

eq uipment life a n d warranties for all installed equi pme n t. Dis c uss replacement responsi b ili ty when e

qui pment life is shorter tha n the ter m

of the c o ntract.

3-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 4 Detailed M&V Methods

4.1 OVERVIEW OF M&V OPTIONS A, B, C, AND D
The m easurem ent and verification (M&V) protoc ol m a ndated for projects conducted under the Super Energy Savings Perform a nce Contract (S uper ESPC) is the Federal Energy Managem e nt Program (FEMP) M&V Guidelines: Measurem ent a nd Verification for Federal Energy Projects. The FEMP Guideline s a r e an app lica tion of the International Perform a nce Measurem ent and Verification Protocol 5 (IP MVP). Both of these guidelines group M&V m e t hodologies into four general categories: Options A, B, C, and D. Th e options are generic M&V approaches for energy and water saving projects.
M&V approaches are divided into two general t ypes: retrofit isolati on and whole-facility. Retrofit isolation m e thods look only at the affected equipm ent or sy stem independent of the rest of the facility; whole-facility m e thods consider the total energy use and de-em phasize specific equipm ent perform a nce. One prim ary difference in these approaches is where the boundary of the energy conservation m easure (ECM) is draw n, as shown in Figure 4-1. All energy used within the boundary m u st be c onsidered. Options A and B are retrofit isolation m e thods; Option C is a whole-facility m e thod; Option D can be used as either, but is usua lly applied as a wholefacility m e thod.

Figure 4-1 R e trofit Isolation (O ptions A and B) vs Whole-Facility M&V Meth ods (Options C and D) The four generic M&V options are summ arized in Table 4-1 and desc ribed in m ore detail below. Each option has advantages and disadvantages ba sed on site-specific factors and the needs and expectations of the agen cy (see Chapter 5) . W h ile each op tio n defines an approach to determ ining savings, it is im portant to realize that savings are not dir ectly m e asured, and all savings a r e estim ated va lues. The ac curacy of th ese estim ates, however, will im prove with the

num b er and quality of the m easure m ents m a de. Although not required in Super ESPC projects, the accu racy of savings estim ates can be quantified, as discussed in Sectio n 5.4.

Inter nati o n a l P e rfo r manc e Me as

ure m ent

an d V e rific a t

i on Pro toc

ol: Conc epts a nd Opt io

n s f

o

r Deter m

in in g En ergy an d Wa ter S a v

ings Volume I , EVO-10 000 - 1 .2 00

7, Eff ic

i enc y Valu ati on Or gan iz atio n.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-1 5Table 4-1 Overview of M& V Options A, B, C, and D
M&V O p ti on Performa nce 1 and Usa g e

2 Fac t ors Savings Calc ul atio n Op tio n A— Retr ofi t Isolati on wit h K ey Parameter Measureme nt This option is ba sed on a combin ation of measured and estimated factors when variations in fa ctors are not expected. Measurements are spot or short-t e rm and are tak en at the component or system leve l, both in the basel ine and post-inst allation ca ses. Measurements should include th e key performance parameter(s) which define the energy use of the ECM. Estimated factors are supported by historical or manufacturer’s data. Savings are det ermined by means of engineerin g calculat ions of baseline and po st-installat i on en ergy use based on measured and estimated value s

. Direct measurements and estimated value s

, engineering calculations and/or component or system model s often developed through regression analysis Adjustments to models are not typically req uired.

Op tio n B— Retr ofi t Isolati on with All Parameter Measureme nt This option is ba sed on periodic or continuous measurements of energy use take n at the component or system le vel when variatio ns in factors are expected. Energy or proxies of energy use are measured continuously. Periodic spot or short-term measurement s may suffice when variations in factors are not expected. Savings are det ermined from an alysi s of base lin e and reporting period energy use or proxies of energy use. Direct measurements, engineering calculations, and/or component or system model s often developed through regression analysis Adjustments to models may be required. Op tio n C – U t ili ty Data Analysis This option is ba sed on long-term, continuous, whole-building u t ility meter, facility level, or sub-meter energy (or water) data. Savings are det ermined from an alysi s of base lin e and reporting period energy data. Typically, regressio n analysis is con ducted to correlate with and adjust energy use to in dependent variables such a s weather, but simple comp arisons may also be used. Based on regression analysis of utility meter data to account f or factors that drive energy use Adjustments to models are typically require d. Op tio n D— Cali brated C o mp ut er Simulat i on Computer simulation software is used to model e nergy performan ce of a whole-facility ( or sub-facility). Models must be calibrated with a c tual hourly or monthly bill ing data from the facilit y. Implementation of simulation mo deling requires engineering expertise. Inputs to the model include fa cilit y characteristics; performance specifi c ation s of new and existing equipment or systems; engineeri ng estimates, spot-, short-term, or long-term measurements of syste m components; an d long-term whol e-building utility meter data. After the model has been calibra ted, savings are determined by comparing a sim ulation of the ba seline with either a simulation of t he performance period or actual utility data. Based on comp uter simulation mode l (such as eQUEST) calibrated with whole-building o r end-use metered data or both. Adjustments to models are required.

1 Per f or

mance factor s indicate equ ipment or syste m per for

m

ance char acter i stic s, s uch as kW/ton fo r a chiller or

watts/fixtur e for lighting.

2 Operating factors indicate equ ip ment or system operating char acteristics such as annual cooling t on-hours for chillers or operating hours for lighting.

4.2 DEVELOPIN G REGRESSI ON MODELS
All M&V o p tions utiliz e m odels to predic t the b a seline and perform a nce period energy use of the project or E C M based on the behavior of the appr opriate independent vari ables. An independent variab le is a param eter th at is expected to ch ange regularly and has a m easurable effect on the energy use of a system or building. T h e m odels us ed to predict energy use, with the exception of Option D which utilizes sim ulation software, are often m a the m atical equations derived through regression analysis that incorpor ate key independent variables. Regression m odels involve an

4-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPevaluation of the energy behavior of a facility or system to de term ine how it r ela tes to one or more independent variables (e.g., weather, occupa ncy, production rate). Re gression models are a technique often used to adjust baseline or perform a nce period energy use to account for changes in weather, occupancy, or other factors betw een the baseline and performance periods. Proper applications of these routine adju stm e nts are discussed in Section 5.2.
IPMVP 2007 Appendix B-2 and ASHRAE Guidelin e 14 -200 2 Annex D both have ad dition a l details on developing m odels by m eans of regr ess i on analy ses as well as techniques for validating these m odels.

4.2.1 Independent Variables An independent variable is a para meter that is e xpected to c h ange regularly and has a m easurable effect on the energy use of a system or building. Typical independent vari ables that drive energy

consum ption that can be incorporated in regre ssion m odels include outd oor tem p erature, other weather param e ters (e.g., heating or cooling de gree days), occupancy, operating hours, and other variable site conditions.
Data on independent variables m a y be from a third party or m a y be tracked using onsite data collection, depending on their natu re. W eather data are typically m ore reliable when supplied by an independent source, but should be validated w ith site data to ensure applicability.
Once the data have been collected, th e m athem atical m odel that is us ed to predic t the b aseline (o r perform a nce period) energy use is developed. Th e m odel should m a ke intuitiv e sense—the independent variables should be reasonable and the coefficients should have the expected sign (positive or negative) an d be within an expected range or m a gnitude.

4.2.2 Choosing a Model
There are various form s of m odels used in standard statistical pract ice. Ex am ples of multi-variant regression models are included in IP MVP 2007 and ASHRAE Guideline 14.

One exam ple of a linea r multi-va rian t regr ession model f o r a weather

- dep e ndent ECM is shown in Equation 4-1 below. In m odels using weather da ta, it can be beneficial to define a custom tem perature base for calculating HDD and CDD da ta based on the actual behavior of the building. 6
Equation 4-1: Multi-Variant Regression Model for a Weather-Dependent ECM
E = B 1 + ( B 2 × T i − T i

− 1 ) ) + ( B 3 × H D D i ) + ( B 4 × C D D i ) + ( B 5 × X 1 ) + ( B 6 × X 2 ) + ( B 7 × X 3 )

whe r e: E = energy use i = index for unit s of time for period B 1-7 = coeffici ents T = ambient temp eratu r e HDD = heating d egre e days u s ing a base tempe r ature of 60 o F

6 200 5 ASHRAE H and book - F u n d

a m ent als

, pag e 3 2

. 17.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-3CDD = cooli ng deg re e days u s ing a base tempe r ature of 65 o F X n = indep ende nt steady-state variable s
It is im portant tha t the b est m odel type be used, which in tu r n will depen d on the nu mber of independent variables that affect energy use and the com plexity of the relationships. F i nding the best m odel often requires testing several m odels a nd com p aring their sta tis tica l re sults. The

num ber of coefficients should be appropriate for the num ber of observations. Sim ilarly, the form of the polyn om ial should be suitable to num be r of independent variab les. Additionally, the independent variables m ust be tr uly independent of one another. The m odel should be tested for possible statistical problem s (e.g., autocolinearity 7 ) and corrected.
Validation steps should include checks to m a ke su re that statistical results m e et accep t able standard s. The sta tis tica l requir em ents outlin ed in Table 4-2 a r e exam ples of validation standard s f

o r m athem atica l m odels using typica l sta tis tic al indicators. An exam ple application of these indices is in cluded in th e Standard M&V Pl an for Chiller R e placem ents (Appendix H). The statistical validity of m o dels can be dem ons trated using other published sources such as ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002. Specific goals should be set for validating m a the m atical m odels used in each project based on suitable levels of effort (see Chapter 5) a nd should be specified in the M&V Plan. Many analysis tools provide som e of these statistic al results, while others will need to be calculated.

Table 4-2 Statistical Validations Guidelines

Parameter Evaluate d Abbrevia t io n Sugges t ed Accepta ble

Values Purpose Coefficient of de termination R 2 > 0.75 Indicates model ’ s overall abi lity t o account for variabilit y in the dependent variable. Lower R 2 values may ind i cat e independent variables may b e missing or add itional data is ne eded. Coefficient of va riation of root-mean squared erro r C V (RSME) < 15 % Calculates the st andard deviation of the errors, in dicating overall uncertainty in th e model Mean Bias Error MBE +/- 7 % Overall indicator of bias in regression estimate. Positive value s indicate higher t han actual value s

; negative va lu es indicate that regression under-p redicts value s

. t-statistic t-stat > 2.0 Absolute va lue >2 indicates inde pendent variable is sign ificant

4.2.3 Weather Data If the energy savings m o del incorporates weathe r data, several issues should be considered:

 The relationship between tem perature and energy use m a y vary depending upon the tim e of year. For exam ple, an am bient tem p erature of 55°F in January has a different im plication for energy usage than the sam e te m p erature in A ugust. Thus, seasons m a y need to be addressed in the m odel.

 The relationship between energy use and w eather m a y be nonlinear. For exam ple, a 10°F change in tem p erature m a y result in a very different energy use im pact if that change is from 75°F to 85°F rather than 35°F to 45°F.

7 Autoc o

l in

earity c

a n res u lt

whe n o

ne or mor e i m p o

rta n t ind epe nd ent v a r

ia b

les

were le

ft o u t of th e m o

d

e l.

4-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Matching degree-day and other data w ith billing start and end dates.

4.2.4 Documentation
All m odels should be thoroughly docum ented in cluding specifying m odel lim its. Ideally, the range of values of the independent variables used to create the m odel span the entire range of possible conditions. Models are ge nerally good only for the range of independent variables used in creating the regression m odel.

The criter ia used f o r ide n tif ying and elim inating any available data m u st be docum ented. Outliers are data beyond the expected range of values (or two to three standard deviations away from the average of the data). The elim inatio n of outlie rs, however, sh ould be jus t ified by abnorm a l or specific m itigating factors. If a reason for th e unexpected data cannot be found, the data should be included in the analysis. Outliers should be defined using comm on sens e as well as common statistical practice.

4.2.5 Savings Det e rmination In general, the procedure for determ ining energy savings with a regression m odel is as follows:

 Develop and validate an appr opriate baseline m o del rela ting the baseline energy use during norm a l operations to key independent variables.

 Install ECMs and continuously m easure th e independent variables used in the baseline m o del. along w ith any additiona l variables that m a y be needed for perform a nce period m odel development.

 Using the baseline m odel, estim ate what th e energy use would have been without the ECMs by driving th e bas eline m odel with th e perform a nce period weather or other independent variables.

 Calculate savings by comparing the predic ted baselin e energ y use with the actual energy use of the perform a nce period.

An altern ative approach that is som etim es wa rranted includes creating a separate regression model to describe perform a nce period energy us e. Both the baseline and perform a nce period models are then adjusted to the sam e period’ s conditions prior to com parison. This approach allows for calculation of norm a lized savings 8 based on a predefined set of param e ters, such as typical weather. All inde pendent variables and criteria for validating perform a nce period m odels should be included in the M&V Plan.
The best reg r ession m odel is on e that is sim p le an d yet produces accu rate and repeatable savings estim ates. Determ ining the best m odel often requir es testing several m ode ls to find one that is easy enough to use and m eets statistical re quirem e nts for accuracy (see Section 4.2 ).

8 See S e c t io

n 7. 2.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-54.3 OPTION A—RETROFIT ISOLATION WI TH KEY PARAMETER MEASUREMENT M&V Option A involves a retrofit or system leve l M&V assessm e nt. The approach is intended for retrofits where key perform a nce factors (e.g., end-use capacity, dem a nd, power) or operational f actors (e.g., lighting operational hours, cooling ton-hour s) can be spot- or shortterm

- m easured during the baseline and post-inst allation periods. Any factor not m easured is estim ated based on assumptions, analysis of historical data, or m a nufacturer’s data.
All end-use technologies can be veri fied using Option A. However, the accuracy of this option is genera lly in versely p r op ortion al to the com p lex ity of the m e asure. Thus, the savings from a sim p le lighting retrofit will typic ally be m o re accurate ly es tim a ted with Option A than the savings fro m a m ore complicated ch iller retrofit. If greater accurac y is required, Options B, C, or D m a y be more appropriate. Prope rly applied, an Option A approach:

 Ensures that baseline conditions have been properly defined

 Confir m s that the proper equipm ent/system s were installed and that they have the potential to generate predicted savings

 Verif i es th at the ins t alled equipm ent/system s continue to have the capacity to yield the predicted savings during the term of the contract
Option A can be applied when identifying that th e potential to generate savings is the m ost critical M&V issue, including situations where:

 The m a gnitude of savings is low for the enti re project or a portion of the project to which Option A is applied.

 The risk of not achieving savings is low.

 The independent variables that drive ener gy use are not difficult or expensive to

m easure, and are not ex pected to ch ange.

 Interactive effects can be r easonably estim ated or ignored

 Long-term m easure m ents are not warranted

 The agency is willing to accept som e uncertainty

4.3.1 Approach to Option A Option A is an approach designed fo r projec ts in which the p o tentia l to generate savings m ust be verified, but the actual savings can be determ ined from short-term m easurem ents, estim ates, and engineering calculations. Perform a nc e period energy use is not m easured throughout the term of the contract. Perform a nc e period energy use and baseline energy use are predicted using an engineering or statistical analys is of infor m ation that does not involve long-term m easurem ents.

W ith Option A, savings are determ ined by m eas uring the key param e ters such as capacity, ef

f i ciency, o r opera tion o f a system bef o re and af ter a r etrof it, and by m u ltiplying th e dif f

erence by an estim a ted factor. U sing estim a tes is the eas iest and least expensive m e thod of determ ining savings. It can also be th e least accu rate and is ty pically the m e thod with the greatest uncertainty in savings. This level of savings determ ination m a y suffice for certain types of projects where a single factor represents a significant portion of the savings uncertainty.

4-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPOption A is appropriate for projec ts in which both parties agree to a paym ent stream that is not subject to fluctuation due to ch anges in the operation or perform a nce of the equipm ent. However, paym ents could be subject to change ba sed on periodic m easurem ents or non-routine adjustm ents.

4.3.1.1 Measuremen t s W ithin Option A, variou s m e thods and levels of accuracy determ ining savings are av ailab l e. The level of accu racy depend s on what measurem ents are m ade to verify equip m ent ratings , capacity, operating hours, and/or efficiencies; the quality of assum ptions m a de; and the accuracy of the equipm ent inventory including nam eplate data an d quantity of installed equipm ent. There m a y be sizable differences between published in form a tion and actual operating data. W he r e discrepancies exist or are believed to exist, field-operating data should be obtained.
A key consideration in implem e nting Option A is identif y ing the par am eters tha t will be

m easured and those th at will be e stim ated. The ke y perf ormance par am e ter( s) th at th e ESCO is responsible for should be m easured in both th e baseline and perform a nce period cases, and savings should be calculated from these valu es. For exam ple, the watts/fixture is the key perform a nce param e ter for a lighting retrofit.
Other parameters that affect en ergy use (e.g., operating hours) that the agency or no one controls, can be estimated and then stipul ated in the contract. W h ere thes e other param e ters are not known with sufficient certainty, they s hould be m easured in the baselin e case and then stipulated. The penalty asso ciated with low accuracy is not achi eving the estim a ted savings and the associated utility b ill c o st reduc tio ns. A ppropriate sources of estim ated values are discussed below.

4.3.1.2 Estimates
The estim ated param eters will af f

ect the repo rt ed savings ove r the en tire c ontrac t te rm . All estim ates should be based on reliable, docum en table sources and should be known with a high degree of confidence. While direct measurem en ts from short-term logging or existing E MCS records are the preferred inform ation source, such inform ation m a y not be available or m a y be costly to obtain. Sources of infor m ation on wh ich estim ations should be based include the following (in decreasing order of preference):

 Models derived from m e asurem ents and m onitoring

 Manufacturer’s data or standard tables (suc h as lighting tables used in utility dem a ndside m anagem ent program s)

 Manufacturer’s curves, such as pum p, fan, and chiller performance curves

 Industry-accepted perform a nce curves, such as standards published by the Am erican National S t a ndards Ins t itute (ANSI), Am erican Refrigeration Institute (A RI), and the Am erican Society of Heating, Refrig eration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)

 Typical Meteorological Y ear (TMY) weather data

 Observations of building and occupant behavior

 Facility operations and maintenance logs

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-7Estim ated param eters should not co m e f rom the f o llowing:

 Undocum ented assum p tions or “rules-of-thum b”

 Proprietary “black-box” algorithm s or other undocum ented software

 Handshake agreem ents with no supporting docum e ntation

 Guesses at o p erating param e ters

 Equations that do not m a ke m a the m a tical se nse or are derived from questionable data

4.3.1.3 Ongoing Verification The potential to generate savings m a y be verified through spot/short-term m e tering and inspections conducted immediately before and immediately after installation. Annual (or som e other regular interval) inspections must be conduct ed to verif y that the proper equipm ent/system s are installed and the equipm ent/system s are pe rform i ng to specification. If conditions have changed, ad dition al perform ance period m easurem ents or non-routine ad justm ents may be appropriate.

4.3.2 M&V Considerations Option A is for projects in whic h the potential to generate savi ngs m ust be verified and actual savings can be determ ined from short-term m eas urem ents, estim ates, and engineering calcu lations. Som e considerations when using Option A approaches include:

 Option A methods can v a ry in the level of accuracy in determ ining savings and verifying perform a nce. The le vel of accuracy depends on the valid ity of estim ates, the quality of the equipm ent inventory, a nd the m easurem ents that are m ade.

 Verifying proper ongoing operation and potential to perform is an im portant aspect of Option A.

 Option A is appropriate f o r rela tive l y sim p le ECMs whose baseline and postinstallation conditions (e.g., equipment quantit ies and ratings such as lam p wattages
or m o tor kW ) represent a significant portion of the unce r ta inty assoc i ated with the project.

 Option A methods are not suitable f or EC Ms whose performance is uncertain or unpredictable.

4.4 OPTION B—RETROFIT ISOLATION WI TH ALL PARAMETER MEASUREMENT M&V Optio n B is a re tr of it isolation or system -l evel app r oac h. The appro ach is intend ed for retrofits with perform a nce factors (e.g., end-use capacity, dem a nd, powe r) and operational factors (lighting operational hours, cooling ton-hours) that can be m easured at the component or system level and where long-term perform a nce needs to be verified. It is sim ilar to O p tion A, but uses periodic or continuous m e tering of all en ergy quantities, or all param e ters needed to calcu late en ergy, during the perform ance period. Th is approach provides the greatest accuracy in the calculation of savings, but increa ses the perform a nce-period M&V cost.
The Option B approach ensures the s a m e ite m s as Option A, but also:

4-8 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Determ ines energy savings using periodic or continuous m e as urem ent of e nergy use or all param eters n eeded to calculate en ergy use during the term of the contract.
Option B is typically used when any or all of these conditions apply:

 For sim p le equipm ent replacem ent projects with energy sav i n g s that are less than 20% of total facility energy use as recorded by the relevant utility m e ter or sub-m e ter (Option C is not applicable)

 When energy savings values per individual m easure are desired

 When interactive effects can be estimated using methods that do not involve long- term m easurem ents

 When the independent variables that a ffect energ y use are no t com plex and excessively difficult or expensive to monitor

 When operational data on the equipm ent is available through control system s

 When sub-m e ters already exist that r ecord the energy use of subsystem s under consideratio n (e.g., a sep a rate sub-m e ter for heating ventilatio n and air-co ndition i ng (HVAC) sys t em s)

4.4.1 Approach to Option B Option B verification procedures inv o lve the same item s as Opti on A, but require m ore end-use

m e tering. Option B relies on the physical assessm en t of equi pm ent change-outs to ensure that the installation is to specification. The potenti al to generate savings is verified through observations, inspections, and spot/short-term / continuous m e tering of energy or proven proxies of energy use, such as variable frequency dr ive sp eed for m o tor power. Bas eline m odels are typically developed by correlating metered ener gy use with key independent variables. Depending on the ECM, spot or short-term m e tering m ay be sufficient to characterize the baseline condition, and the continuous m e tering of one or more variables m ay occur after retrofit installation. It is appropriate to use spot or short-term m easurem en ts in the perform ance period to determ ine energy savings when variations in perfor m ance are not expected, and m a y support
som e nor m a lized savings approach es (Section 7.2) though adjustm e nt s to the baseline and/or the perform a nce period m odel(s). W h en variations are expected, it is approp riate to m easure factors continuously during the contract period. Continuous m onitoring of infor m ation can be used to im prove or optim ize the operation of the equipm ent over tim e, thereby improving the perform a nce of the retrofit.

4.4.2 M&V Considerations Option B is for projects in whic h the potential to generate savi ngs m ust be verified and actual energy use d u ring th e co ntract term needs to be m easured for com p arison with the bas e line model for calculating savings. Option B involves pr ocedures for verifying the sam e item s as Option A plus the determ ination of energy savings during the contract term through short-term or continuous end-use m e tering. Som e consideratio ns when using Option B approaches include:

 All end-use technologies can be verified with Option B; however, the degree of difficulty an d costs as so ciated with veri f i ca tion incre ases a s m etering complexity increases.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-9 The task of m easuring or determ ining en ergy savings using O ption B can be m ore dif f i cult and costly than that of Optio n A. However, results are typically more precise using Option B than the use of estim ations as defined for Option A.

 Periodic spot or short-term m easurem ents of factors are appropriate when variations in loads and operation are not expected. W h en variations are expected, it is appropriate to m easure factors continuously.

 Perform i ng continuous m easure m ents or peri odic m easure m ents over the term of the contract will account for operati ng variations and will result in closer approxim ations of actual energy savings. Continuous m easur e m ents provide long-term persistence data on the energy use of the equipm ent or system.

 Data collected for energ y savings calculati ons can be used to im prove or optim ize the operation of the equipm ent on a real-tim e ba sis, thereby im proving the benefit of the retrofit. For constant-load retrofits, however, there m a y be no inherent benefit of continuous over short-term m easurem ents.

4.5 OPTION C—WHOLE-BUILDING DATA ANALYSIS M&V Option C involves whole-facility utility or sub-m e ter data analys is procedures to verify the perform a nce of retrofit projects in w h ich whole- f acility baseline and perform a nce period data are available. O ption C usually involves collecting hi storical who l e-facility baselin e energ y use and related data and continuously m easuring whole-f acility ener gy use after E C M installation. Baseline an d period ic in specti ons of the equipm ent are also needed. Energy savings under Option C are estim a ted by developing statistically re presentative m odels of whole-facility or subm e tered energy consumption (i.e., therm s and/ or kW h). Thi s m e thod confirm s total energy savings, but does not m easure the sa vings from i ndividual components.
In general, Option C should be used with com p lex equipm ent rep l acem ent and con t rols pro j ects for which predicted savings are rela tively large, i.e., greater than about 10% to 20% of the site’s energy use, on a m onthly basis. Option C regr ession m e thods are valuable for m e asuring interactions between energy system s or determ in ing the im pact of projects that cannot be

m easured directly, such as insulation or other building envelope m easures . Regression analysis requires experienced, qualified analysts, and Option C m e thods should be em ployed only for projects th at m eet the following requirem ents:

 Savings are predicted to be greater than about 10% to 20% of the overall consum ption

m easured by the utility or sub-m e ter.

 At least 12 and preferably 24 m onths or m o re of pre-in sta lla ti on data are used to calcu late a b aseline m o del.

 At leas t 9 an d preferably 12 m onths of perfor m a nce period data are used to calculate annual savings.

 Adequate data on independent variables are available to g enerate an accu r ate bas elin e model, and procedures are in p l ace to track the v a riab les req u ired for perfor m ance period m odels.

4-10 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Significant operational or other changes are not planned for the f acility d u ring th e perform a nce period, and procedures are in p l ace to docum ent changes th at do occur at the site.

4.5.1 Approach to Option C
W ith Option C, energy savings are determ ined us ing whole- building u t ility m eter or facilitylevel m e tered data. Savings are determ ined through an alys is of utility data (therm s, fuel oil, kW
, kW h, etc.) and the independent variables that a ffect energy consum ption. Regression models are developed to predict energy use based on the appr opriate independent vari ables for the project. Although simple m a the m atical techniques utilizi ng utility bill com parison are som e tim e s used, they are unreliable and not recomm e nded on federa l ESPC projects. Regression m odels can take into account the im pacts of w eather and other independent va riables on energy use, whereas sim p le utility bill com p a r ison techniques cannot. The analys is requires an evaluation of the behavior of the facility as it relates to one or m o re inde pendent variable s (e.g., weather, occupancy, production rate) usi ng regression analysis.
Utility data analys is can take sev era l approache s to calcu late s avings, as d escrib ed in Section 4.2.5 and Section 7.2. T he key elem ents of these approaches include deve loping an appropriate baseline m o del which r e late s the ba s eline ener gy use to key indepe ndent variables, and continuously m easuring the perform a nce period en ergy use and the key inde pendent variables. Savings are often calculated by co m paring the energy use predicte d by the baseline model using

m easured conditions w i th the actual energy use of the perform a nce period. Alternately, perform a nce period m odels m a y be developed if the baseline and perfor mance period models are to be adjusted to typical condi tions prior to com p arison. Perform a nce period m odels m a y also be needed if th ere is no t a f u ll year’s w orth of data availabl e for the perform a nce period.

4

. 5

. 2 Data Collection Collecting, validating, and properly applying data are im portant elem ents of using utility data analysis. Option C techniques utilize three type s of data: utility billing data, independent variables, and inform ation on unrelated changes at the s ite. Th ese data elem ents are discussed below.

4.5.2.1 Utility Billing Data Utility billin g data prov ide the bas i s f o r savi ngs c a lculation s b y allowing a com p arison of adjusted bas eline m odels with perf or m ance period energy use

. Regardless of the type of utility data used, a key to properly applyi ng the data is ensuring that all st art and end dates of the utility data are aligned with those of the independent variables. Collecting data on independent variab les m o re of ten tha n colle c ting billing data can help align tim e fra m e s. Billing data can be:

 Monthly billing data. Billing data should be m easured at leas t once a m onth. There are typ i ca lly two types o f m onthly billing d ata : to tal us age f o r

the m onth and usage aggregated by tim e-of-use periods. Although e ither type of data can be used with a regression model, tim e-of-use is preferab le because it provides m ore insight into usage patterns. In m a ny cases, the peak dem a nd is also recorded.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-11 Interv al dem and billing d ata. This typ e of billing data r ecords the ave r age dem and (or energy use) for a given interval (e.g., 15 m i nutes) associated with the billing period, and typically includes peak dem a nd charges.

 Stored energy billing data. I nventory readings or delivery inf o rm ation can be used to determ ine historical consum ption for re sources such as fuel oil, although subm e tering is preferred.

4.5.2.2 Other Site Changes One of the challenges in applying Option C is ac counting for factors beyond the ECM that affect overall site energy use, such as changes in s quare footage or loads. Tracking site changes provides a m eans for accounting for changes in ener gy use n o t assoc i ate d with ECM insta lla tion. Adequately track ing the inf o rm ation needed to m a ke these non-routine baselin e adjus t m ents can be a challenging task for long-term contracts a nd sites that have significant operational changes.

4.5.3 M&V Considerations 9 The following points sh ould be cons idered when conducting Option C utility d a ta an alyses for M&V:

 All indepen d ent variables that affect ener gy consum ption m u st be specified, whether or not they are accounted for in the model. Critical variables can include weather, building occupancy, set points, tim e of day, number of m eals served, etc. The m ost common variable for m a ny types of ECMs is outdoor air tem perature.

 The for m and content of any separate pe rform a nc e period m odel(s) (if used) should be specified, along with the statistical valida tion targets. S t atistic al validity of the final regression m odel(s) m u st be demonstrated.

 Independen t variab le data need to co rres pond to the tim e periods of the billing m e ter reading dates and intervals. A plan fo r data collection, in cluding sources and frequencies, should be specified.

 It is best to develop m o de ls using data in whole-year sets (12, 24, 36, or 48 m onths) so that any seasonal varia tions are not overstated.

 It is n ecess a ry to specify how site ch ange s unrelated to the in stallation of the ECMs will be track ed over th e perf orm ance period and how these d a ta will be u sed to perform savings adjustm ents.

 If baseline energy use needs to be adju sted to inco rporate m i nimum energy or operating standards ( suc h as m i nim u m ventila tio n rates o r lig h ting levels )
, any modification to the m odel needs to be detailed.

4.6 OPTION D—CALIBRATED SIMULATION Option D involves whole facility or system analys is procedures to verify the perform a nce of retrofit projects using calibrate d computer sim ulation m odels. Co m puter sim u lation is a powerful tool that allows an experienced user to m odel the building and m echanical system s in order to

9 See ASHRAE Guid eli ne 14-2 0

0

2 a nd IP MVP Vo lu me 1 (EVO 1 000 0-1. 200 7) for ad dit

ion

al i n for

m

at

ion

on u

tility b

ill in g a naly s

i s

.

4-12 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPpredict building energy use both before and after the installation of ECMs . The accuracy of the models is ensured by using m e te red site data to describe baseline and/or perform a nce period conditions. Carefully constructed models can pr ovide savings estim ates for the individual ECMs on a project. More elaborate m odels generally im prove the accuracy of sa vings calculations, but increase costs. A calibrated sim ulation of a build ing, however, can be utili zed to easily evaluate savings from other potential im provem e nts. Building simulation requires experienced, qualif ied analysts, and Option D m e thods should be used only for projects that m eet any or all of the following requirem e nts:

 For com p lex equipm ent replacem ent and contro ls projects with too m any ECMs to cost-effectively use retrofit isolation m e thods A or B

 When interactive effects between ECMs are too com p lex for retrofit isolation approaches, but need to be quantified

 When the Option C utility data analysis appro ach is not viable due to the overall level of savings being less than 20% of metered use

 When com p lex baseline adjustm ents are expected during the perform a nce period

 When energy savings values per individual m easure are desired

 When new construction projects are involved

 When savings levels are sufficient to warrant the cost of sim u lation

 When either baseline or perform a nce peri od energy data, but not both, are unavailable or unreliable.
Option D is especially useful where a baseline does not exist (e.g., new construction or m a jor building m odification) or the factors responsib le for savings are not easily m easured (e.g., reduced solar gain and h eat loss through new windows).
Situations for which computer sim u lation is not appropriate include:

 Analysis of ECM savings that can be m ore cost-effectively determ ined with other

m e thods

 Buildings that cannot be ade quately modeled, such as thos e with com p lex geom etries or other unusual features

 Building system s or ECMs that cannot be adequately m odeled, such as radiant barriers or dem a nd-response control algorith m s that are im portant in com p aring baseline and perform a nc e period scenarios

 Projects with lim ited resources that are not sufficient to support the effort required for data collection, sim ulation, calibration, and docum entation

Even for the sim p lest projects sim u lation m odeli ng and calib ration are tim e-intensiv e activities and should b e perform e d by an accomplished bu ilding sim u lation specialist. Calib rated sim ulation analysis is an expe nsive M&V procedure, and should be undertaken only on projects that generate enough savings to justify its use.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-134.6.1 Approach to Option D
M&V Optio n D f o r an existing bu ild ing typically f o llo ws five general steps: 1) co lle ct data; 2 ) input data and test baseline m odel; 3) calibrate the baseline model; 4) create and refine the perform a nce period m odel; and 5) verify performan ce and calculate savin g s. Each of these step s is discussed in detail below.

The m e thodology followed for new construction projec ts is som e what different, and is detailed in IPMVP Volum e III. 10 One prim ary difference between the m e thods used for existing and new buildings is the ava ilab i lity of utility data. In n ew construc tio n, the perf or m ance period m odel would be calibra ted to u t ility d a ta, wh ereas the bas eline m odel would not due to la ck of data, although comparisons with sim ilar buildings can be m a de. This approach would also apply to an existing building that does not ha ve reliable baseli ne energy data.

4.6.1.1 Collecting the Data The data required for simulating an existing bu ilding can be volum inous, and ensuring collection of all data required to develop the simulation m o dels is k e y. Co llecting com p rehensive baseline data is advis e d. All data collected do not necess a rily need to b e incorpo r at ed into the model, but

m a y be included to m eet specific model accu racy requirem e nts. All co llected information and inputs need to be docum e nted in a form at th at allows due-diligence review. Inadequate, disorganized, self-contra dictory, or conflicting docum e ntation can be grounds for rejecting a subm ittal.

To obtain end-use data for m odel calibration, bui lding subsystem m e tering m u st be included in the project M&V activities for baseline and perform a nce periods. The specific sub-system s selected for monitoring are in m o st cases th e installed ECMs and related system s. For ECMs such as windows or insulation that cannot be m o nitored, the impacted HVAC system s hould be sub-m etered

. The m odel calib ration will benef i t th e m o st f r om m onitorin g the ene r gy end uses f

o r which the leas t inf o r m ation is availab l e. Required data typically includes:

 Utility bill records: Co llect a m i nimu m of 12 (a nd preferably 24, 36, or 48) consecutive months of utility bills f o r

the m onths imm ediately bef o re insta lla tion of the ECMs. The billing data should include m e ter read date, kW h consumption, peak electric demand, and heating fuel use (e.g., na tural gas). Additional data in hourly and 15-m i nute form ats m a y be required.

 Architectural, m echanical, and electrical dr awings: as-built drawings are preferred.

 Site survey data: Com prehensive equipm en t and system data, typically collected during an investm e nt gr ade audit, including:

− HVAC system s: pri m ary equipm ent (e.g., chillers and boilers): capacities,

num b er, m o del and serial num bers, age, condition, operating schedules, etc.

10

Inter nat io

nal P e rf orma nc e M eas ure m ents and Veri fic a tion Prot oc

ol: Co n c epts and Opti ons for Det e rmi n i ng E nergy Sav i ngs in New Constructio n , Vo lu me II I, A p ril 20 03.

4-14 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP− HVAC system s: secondary equipm ent (e.g., air-handling units, term inal boxes): characteristics, fan sizes and types, m oto r sizes an d efficiencies, design-flo w rates and static pressures, duct-system type s, econom izer operation, and type of controls

− HVAC system controls, including location of zones, tem perature set-points, control set-points and schedules, and any special contro l sequ ences

− Lighting system s: num b er and types of la m p s, with nam e plate data for lamps and ballasts, lighting schedules, etc.

− Building occupants: population counts, o ccupation schedules in different zones

− Other m ajor energy-consum ing loads: type (industrial process, air com pressors, water heaters, elevators), energy consum ption, schedules of operation

 Site survey data that m a y be required in addition to data norm ally collected during an audit include:

− Plug loads : s u mm arize major and typical plug loads for a ssigning values per zone

− Building envelope and therm a l m a ss: dim e nsi ons and type of interior and exterior walls, properties of windows, and buildi ng orientation and shading from nearby objects. Infiltration rates are im portant , but are often difficult to determ ine

− HVAC system s: ventilation air-f low r a tes c a n hav e a dram atic ef f

ect on energy
use

 Short-term monitoring: The building energy m a nagem e nt control system (EMCS) or data-logging equipm ent is set up to record system data as it varies over tim e. Typically, prim ary energy using system s and equipm ent involved in an ECM are monitored. These data m a y be required if particular subsystem s (e.g., the chiller plant) need to be accurately m odeled in or der to determ ine savings. The d ata reveal how variable loads change with buildi ng operating conditions such as weather, occupancy, daily schedules, etc.

 Spot m easurem ents of specific equipm en t: The power draw on lighting, plug load, HVAC equipm ent, and other circuits shoul d be recorded to determ ine actual equipm ent operating powers.

 Operator interviews: Building operators can provide m uch of the above listed inform ation and also any deviation in the intended operation of bu ilding equipm ent.

 W eather data: For ca lib r ation purposes, representative site weather data are required for the period in question, as outlined below (Section 4.6.3).

 Minim u m c ode performance standards: Fo r new construction projects and m a jor renovations, m i nim u m perform a nce standards are often m a ndated for the baseline based on required codes. 11 If standards must be referenced in the baseline model, the

m i ni m u m equipm ent effi ciencies to repr esen t the standard s should be used.

11 Min im u m effic i enc y s

tandards i n

c

lu

d

e CA Tit le 24, AS HRAE 90.1, IECC 200 6, a nd s t ate en ergy c

odes

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-154.6.1.2 Inputting the Data and Running the Baseline Model
The data m u st be adapted as required to the baseline m odel and entered into the sim u lation program input files. Key data for inclusion are ph ysical properties of the facility, equipm ent and system types and efficiencies, app r o p riate weath e r data, and control sequen ces. Spec if ic atten tion should be given to system s that will be m odified by ECMs.

The m o re site-specific data inco rporated the m o re accurate th e savings calculations, but the greater the costs. The simulation program ’s user guide and other resources should be consulted as needed to determ ine how to properly input the collected data into the model. From the volum e of data collected, m a ny decisions must be m a de to best repr e sent th e data in the s i m u lation program ’s input file. This can be done m ost cost-effectively by an experienced building modeling specialist.
After the data have been inputted, a few sim ula tions should be run to debug the m ode l and the model output files should be checked to verify that there are no errors in running the program
, such as:

 Does the HVAC system satisfy the heating and cooling loads?

 Are the equ i pm ent sched u les correct?

 Are equipment efficiencies accurate?

 Are the m o del pred iction s reasonab l e?

4.6.1.3 Calibrating the Baseline Model
The baseline sim u lation model s hould be calibrated using the pro cedures described in Section 4.5.3 by comparing the energy usage and dem a nd projected by the m ode l with the usage and dem a nd of the m easured utility data. For new construction projects, the baseline energy use should be compared to other buildings that ha ve sim ilar operation and function. If required tolerances to the m easured data are not m e t, th e input data to the m ode l should be refined until requirem ents are m et.

The calibrated m odel should be docum ented by show ing final input param e ters for the m odel. This information, as well as the actual calibrati on results, needs to be provided in the M&V subm ittals.

4.6.1.4 Create and Refine the Performance Period Model Starting with the calibrated baseline model, the model should be updated to include the building’s E C Ms to create the perform a nce period m odel.
If individual savings lev e ls from each ECM are de sired, an approach th at includes the interactive effects of the ECMs is to input the ECMs consecutively into the baseline m odel. Some software allows th e modeler to cr e ate a rolling baseli ne by including the previous E C Ms in the model. After each E C M has been m odeled, the sim u latio n is run. The first run is the baseline model, the second run is ECM 1, the third run is ECM 1 a nd ECM 2, the fourth run is ECM 1, ECM 2, and ECM 3, etc. After the final ECM has been input ted, the m odel should represent the perfor m ance

4-16 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPperiod condition with all ECMs in stalled. This ap proach in clu d es interactive effects in the savings for each ECM.

Determ ining the sequen c e to inpu t th e ECMs into the m odel is an im portant consid era tion in

m a naging interactive effects. Typi cally, m easures that will affect the overall heating and cooling loads of the building (e.g., envelope improvem e nt s or lighting upgrades) sh ould be inputted first. Secondary ECMs are those that affect the HVAC subsystem s, and the final ECMs that should be inputted are those affect ing the central plant.

Som e si m u lation p r ogram s run each ECM agains t the o r igin al baseline, which neglects any interactive effects between the m easures. Thes e interm ediate results are n o t always 10 0% additive, as two ECMs that sa ve 2% alone, m a y not save 4% com bined. Considering the interactive effects of ECMs, th ese E C Ms com b i n ed m a y save 3%. W h en using this approach, a f i nal run in c l uding a ll measures m u st be execu te d to dete rm ine the in ter a ctive ef f

ects of all the ECMs. This approach does not allocate in teractiv e effects to the indiv i dual ECMs.

4.6.1.5 Verifying Performance and Calculating Savings
The m e thod used to determ ine savings will dep e n d upon the p h ase of the p r oject. Durin g project developm ent, proposed savings are determ ined by subtracting the result s of the perform a nce period m odel from the results of the calibra ted baseline m odel, both using the agreed-upon weather data and facili ty operating conditions.

As with all M&V m ethods, af ter im plem entatio n of the ECMs the prop er ins t allatio n and operation of the ECMs must be verified periodic ally. Perform a nce data should be collected not only to ca lib rate the m o del, but to validate that th e new equip m ent and system s are in stalled and operating properly.
After the first year of perform a nce, there are two options to calculate verified savings: 1) calibrate the perform a nc e period m odel and subtract the r esu lts of base lin e m odel using the sam e conditions; or 2) subtract m easured utility data for the perform a nce period from the results of baseline m o del that was upda ted to actual conditions.
The first option requires that the perf orm a nce period m odel be calibrated using the procedures described in Section 4.6.3. Update the perform a nce period model us ing data collected during the perform a nce period from site surveys, spot m easurem ents, short-term m onitoring, and utility data. Effort can be m i nim i zed by focusing da ta colle ction o n the ins t alle d ECMs.
If savings are to be es tim ated for a sp ecific year , actual weather and other data from that year must be used. If savings are to be norm alized to typical conditions (see Se ction 7.2), for exam ple, then typical weather data (e.g., TM Y data) should be used. In a ny case, both the baseline m odel and the perform a nce period m odel must be run w ith the sam e weather data. The weather data to be used are specified in the site-specifi c M&V Plan. Although tim e-intensive, Option D approaches are well suited to adjust models when significant site changes occur during the perform a nce period.
If savings for each ECM are to b e determ ined including interactive effects, the ECMs must be inputted con secutively in to the m odel and sim u la tions run after each input, as described above.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-17Individual E C M savings are determ ined by the dif f

erence in energy or dem a nd use be tween two consecutive runs. The savings determ ined fo r the individual ECMs should total the savings determ ined from the baseline and perform a nce pe riod runs. It is im porta nt that savings be determ ined with both models using the sam e conditions (weather, oc cupancy schedules, set points, etc.), except for the charac te r i stics of the insta lled EC Ms.
The energy values and rate struct ure specified in the M&V P l an ar e applied to the energy savings determ ined by the m odel. If utility ra tes ar e inc l u d ed in the m odel, suf f i cient inf o rm ation on the savings should be provided so that cost calcul ations can be verified. W hen tim e-of-use charges or other variable usage schedul es are applied, the dem a nd (kW ) and energy (kW h ) sa vings m u st be broken down into the proper categories to determ ine cost savings (see Section 7.2).

4.6.2 Simulation S o ftware

The m ost fre quently used type of building en ergy sim u lation program for energy analyses are whole-building program s that create custom ized models of buildings and their systems, and

em ploy hourly weather data to predict energy use. Such program s are very versatile, allowing the accurate m o deling of m o st build ings through cust om input data. Two of the m o st common public dom a in program s of this type are eQUEST and EnergyPlus. 12 A com p lete list of ava ila ble ene r gy sim u lation p r ogram s is m aintained by the DOE. 13
These building sim u lation program s require extensiv e input data to accurately m odel the energy use of a building. Recently, user interfaces have b een im proved that sim p lify the input process with graphical form ats, and libraries of typical building com p onents have been added to facilitate model developm ent.

Sim u lation program s acceptab l e for Option D s hould have th e following characteristics 14 :

 The program is comme rcially ava ilable, supported, and docum ented.

 The program has the ability to ad eq uately m odel the p r ojec t site and ECMs.

 The m odel c a n be calibrated to an acceptable level of accuracy

.

 The program allows the use of actua l weathe r da ta in hourly for m at.

4.6.3 Model Calibr a tion 15

The m odel calib ration f o r exis ting bu ildings is accom plished by linking simulation inputs to actua l opera ting cond itio ns and com p aring s i m u lati on r e sults with whole- building and / or end-u se data. The simulation m a y be of a whole facility or just for the end use or system affected by the ECM. Both baseline and perform a nc e period m odels should be calibrated wherever possible. Model ca lib ration is typically an iter ative p r o cess of adjusting m odel inputs and re-com paring

12 eQUEST is av ail a ble thro ug h ht tp:/ / doe 2.c om/ eq ues t/ (c urrent re leas e is eQUEST 3.6 an d 3.61 b) a nd E ner gy

Plus is

av ail a b le t

h roug h http: //www.eere.energy.gov /buildings/energyplus/

. 13 See http://www.eere.energy. gov/buildings/tools_dir e

ctory/subjects_sub.c f m
14

For mor e i n

for

m

atio n o n b

u il di ng s i mul a ti on progr am ele m en

ts

See AS HRAE 90.1- 200 4 Energy St

and ard f o

r Bui ldi ngs Ex c e p

t Low- Rise Res ident ial Bui ldi n g

s

, Sec tio

n G.2 or ASHRAE Guidel in e 14- 20 02.

15

See ASHRAE Guid eli ne 14-2 0

0

2 a nd IP MVP Vo lu me 1 (EVO 1 000 0-1. 200 7) for ad dit

ion

al i n for

m

at

ion

on s

imu lati on mo del in g an d
v alida t io

n t

ec

hni qu es

.

4-18 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPthe resu lts to m easured d ata. A m odel is cons id e r ed in ca libr a tion when th e sta tis tica l indices dem onstrating calibration have been m e t. Exp ected calibration requirem e nts should be specified in the project-specific M&V Plan, and industry standard guidelines are included in Table 4-3. These requirem ents should be adjusted as re quired to m eet the needs of the project.

For m o st m o dels, th ere a r e m u ltiple levels of calibration tha t can be perf o r m ed:

 System level calibration w ith hourly monitored data

 Whole-building level calibration with m onthly utility data

 Whole-building level calibration with hourly utility data

Determ ining the lev el of calib ration that is n eed ed depends on the value of the project, the availability of data, and the need for certainty in the savings estim ates. All m odels should be calibrated to m onthly data at a m i nimum

. Si m u lation m odels that focus on specific system s should be calibrated to s y stem level data. Also, calib rating th e m odels to hourly data will help ensure accuracy, especially for determ ini ng peak dem a nd savings. Calibrating a com puter sim u lation to m easured utility da ta n ecessita tes th at actual w eather data be used, as discussed below.
The calibration procedures should apply to all energy sources (dem and, electricity, natural gas, etc.), but should focus on the prim ary source(s) of savings. Each of these m odel calibration strategies is discussed below.

4.6.3. 1 Weath e r D a t a The first step in calibrating a m odel is updating and running the m odel using weather data that correspond precis ely to the sam e calendar days as each utility bill. Pro g ram s that allo w the use of only average weather files or weather data from only a few representative periods per m onth or per season are not suitable for the calibration techniques required for Option D.
Obtaining w eathe r data f o r the app r o p ria t e loc a tion and tim e-period is an im portant step in calibrating any sim ulation m odel. Several resou r ces are available for getting real-tim e weather data and converting them into the proper form at for use with the sim u latio n sof t ware. DOE

m aintains a website 16 that provides weather data fro m 1998 to the present from up to 4,000 weather stations. Som e data m a y be m i ssing, but can be extrapolated from the DOE’ s database. 17 The database provides data in a format used by E nergy Plus, but can be converted for use with eQUEST and other program s. 18 Since using actual weather data can be time consum ing, it is

som e ti m e s appropriate to m odify average weathe r to m o re closely m atch the actual w eather. 19

The tim e period and frequency of the weather data need to align with the utility data periods, which can require data manipulation. The m e as ure-specific M&V Plan m u st specify which

16 The DOE webs it e is http: //www.eer e. ener gy.gov/bui l d ings/ener gyplus /cfm/weatherdata/ w

eat her_r equest.cfm

. 17 Detail ed inf o

rm

ati on o n t

he dat a c

a n

be f o

u nd in Re al-

Time Wea ther Dat a Ac c e

s s Guide, U s er’s Guide NREL / BR-550-3 4

3 03 Ma rc h 200 6

, Natio nal R enew ab

le En ergy L abor at

ory . The FAQ an d ins truc tio

ns

on this web p a g

e s

h o

u ld be f o

ll owed to f ill i n th

e m is

s

ing d a ta : http: //www.eere.energy.gov /buildings/energyplus/c fm/ w

eatherdata/f aq.cf m
18 Weat her f ile

c

onv e r

ter s o

ftwar e is av aila bl e thr o

u gh htt p

://d

oe 2.com/ in

de

x_Wth.ht ml

. 19 See h ttp: //g und og

. lbl. gov / f

o

r dis c u s s

ion on s i mul a ti on i s s ues

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-19weather data sources will be used, including both the source of the data and the physical location of the weather station.

Af ter the m o del has be en calib ra ted using actual weather data, the building’s energy use m a y be adjusted to average-year weather. Av erage weather data m a y be obtained from ASHRAE (W YEC2) and the Natio nal Renewa ble Energy Laboratory (TMY2). 20

4.6.3.2 Statistical Indices For all of these approaches, two prescribed st a t istic al ind i ce s (desc r ibed below) m u st be calcu lated in order to d eclare a m odel calib rated: the m ean bias erro r (MB E ) and the coefficient of variation of the root m ean squared error C v (RMSE). 21 The recomm ende d calibration requirem e nts are those specified by ASHRAE Guid eline 14. Specific calibration goals should be set for each project based on appropr iate level of effort (see C h ap ter 5 ) . T his process should be applied to electricity (kWh), de m a nd (kW ) , and all other fuels used.

In addition to statistical indi ces, graphical com pa r ison technique s can be an effective tool understanding the variances present in a m odel. Sim p le or advanced m e thods of graphical

com parison techniques can be effective, and are detailed in A S HRAE Gui deline 14.

As m e ntioned above, actual weathe r corresponding to the time period in question should be used in the m odel. Typically, the energy consum pti on predicted by the m odel and m easured by the utility o r sub

- m eter are d eterm ined f o r every m onth or interva l in the da ta s et, as well as f o r the whole year or period, and statisti cal analyses are perform ed on th e results. The sam e techniques can be applied to hourly and subsystem data. The stat istical values that need to be calculated are MBE and C v (RMSE).

 MBE—m ean bias error. The MBE indicat es how well the energy consumption is predicted by the m odel as com p ared to th e m easured data. Pos i tive values indicate that the m o del overp redicts actual v a lues; n egativ e values indicate that the model underpredicts actual values. However, it is subject to cancellation errors, where the

com b ination of positive and negative values serv es to redu ce MBE. To account for cancellation errors, the C V (RSME) is also need ed.

 C V (RSME)— coefficient of variation of th e root-m ean-squared e rror. T h is valu e indica tes the overall unc erta inty in th e pr ediction of whole-building energy usage. The lower th e C V (RSME), the be tte r the calibra tio n. This valu e is a l ways positiv e.
The m ean bi as error is calculated by subtrac ting th e sim u lated energy consum ption from the

m easured energy consumption for all the intervals over a given tim e period. The differences from each interval are su mmed and then divided by the sum of the m easured energy

consum ption over the sam e ti m e period. MBE is calculation is expressed in Equation 4-2.

20 A c o

mpre he ns iv

e l is t of s ourc e

s f

o

r weath e r d a ta is av aila bl e at http: //www.eere.energy.g ov/buildings/ener gyplus/weat herdata_sources.html

. 21 See ASHRAE Gui deli ne 14- 200 2 a n d Sec tio

n 4.2. 2 f o

r add iti ona l i n for

m

a tion

.

4-20 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPEquation 4-2: Measured Energy Consu m ption

− 

# ∑ ( SM ) In t e rv a l MBE (% ) = Pe r i o d × 100 

# ∑ M Int e rv a l Pe r i od Where:

M is the m e asured kWh or fuel consum p tion d u ring th e tim e interval S is the sim u lated kWh or f u el consum pt ion during the same ti me interval
The C v (RSME) is a no rm alized m easure of variabili ty betwe en two sets of data. For calib rated sim ulation purposes, it is obtained by squari ng the difference between paired data points, summing the squared d i fferences over each interval th rough the period, and then div i ding by the

num b er of points, which yields the m ean squared error. Th e square roo t of this quantity yields the roo t m ean squared e r ror (RMSE). The C v (RMSE), is obtained by dividing the RMS E by the

m ean of the m easured data for the period.

The root m ean square error for the p e riod is calculated using Equation 4-3. Equation 4-3: Root Mean Square Error

− 2 

## ∑ ( SM ) Int e rval = RMSE Per i o d N In t e r v a l
Where:

N Inter v a l are the num ber of t i m e intervals in the m onitoring period.

The m ean of the m easured data for th e period is calculated using Equation 4-4. Equation 4-4: Mean of the Measured Data 

## ∑ M In t e r v a l A = Perio d

Pe riod N In te rva l

The Cv(RSME) is calculated using Equation 4-5. Equation 4-5: Cv(RSME)

Cv RM SE Pe r i o d ) = RMSE Peri o d × 100 ( A Per i o d The prim ary differences in applyi ng these indices to the various data sets (monthly, hourly, subm etered) are 1) the a ccep table v alues of the i ndice s and 2) the definition of “inte r val” a nd “period ” in each of the equations abo v e. The application of th ese stat istical indices for each lev e l of

calibra tio n is detailed in the s ectio ns below.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-21The recommended accep table v a lues for each app r oach are in cluded in Table 4-3. These values have been adopted from ASHRAE Guideline 14. Specific calibration goals should be set for each project based on the appropriate le vel of effort (see Chapter 5) and should be specified in the projec t-sp ec if ic M&V Plan. For exis ting build ing s, the m odel calib ration will occu r pr ior to contract award, and both the calibration goals an d results shou ld be inc l ud ed in the IGA.

Table 4-3 Acceptable Calibration Tolerances 22

Calibrati on Type Index Accepta ble Val u e* Monthly MBE month ± 5% Cv(RMSE mont h ) 15% Hourly MBE Month ± 10 % Cv(RMSE Mont h ) 30% *Lower values in dicate better calibration

4.6.3.3 Subsystem L evel Calibration with Monitored Data
Calibra tion of a building m odel’s sub system s to m easured data m ay be required to enhance or ensure th e o v erall accu racy of the model m eets specified targ ets. The m o del’s hou rly predicted energy usage (kW h , therm s, or Btu) is com p ared against m e a s ured hourly energy usage for the monitored b u ilding su bs ystem s to determ ine wh ether the m o del accu rately predicts sub system level u sage.
Most sim ulation program s , including eQUEST, out put subsystem usage values m i nim ally in 1-hour intervals. Therefore, for calibration, m e a s ured data must be averaged over each hour. For

exam ple, if 15-m i nute chiller dem and (kW ) data ar e collected, they m ust be averaged into hourly values.
When applying the statistical equations above to sub-m e tered data, the interval is an hour and the period can be defined by the user.

4.6.3.4 Whole-Building Level Calibra tion with Monthly Data
Com p aring energy use projected by the building model with monthly utility bills is th e m i nim u m level of calibration that shoul d be conducted on any m odel of an existing building with monthly utility data available. In the sta tistical equations above, the interval is a m onth and the period is a year. When using monthly data, an additional check of the m onthly variances should be m a de by calculating MBE by defining both th e inte rval an d th e period as a m onth.

Exam ple calibration calculations and results using m onthly data are shown in Table 4

- 4 . The results show that in addition to m eeting th e overall MBE and CV (RMS E) goals, th e MBE f o r each m onth was also below the targ et value.

22 ASHRAE Guidel in e 14- 20 02, S e c tio

n 6. 3.3. 4.2 .2.

4-22 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP4.6.3.5 Whole-Building Level Calibration with Hourly Data When hourly data are applied, the interval is an hour and the period can be defined by the user, and often a 1-m onth billing period is used. Thes e indices, however, m a y be calcu lated for the entire period or for weekdays, weekends, and holidays separately. 23

Table 4-4 Example Calculations to Determine Monthly Model Calibration

Mo nt h 2,006 Measured kWh (M) eQUEST Simulated kW h (S) S-M MBE Squared Error
Jan 839,040 842,236 3,196 0 % 10,212,435 Feb 814,080 774,882 (39,198) 5 % 1,536,448,710 Mar 766,080 827,555 61,475 -8 % 3,779,175,625 Apr 874,555 928,017 53,462 -6 % 2,858,226,075 May 984,960 1,077,269 92,309 -9 % 8,520,951,481 Jun 960,000 1,005,105 45,105 -5 % 2,034,461,025 Jul 1,079,040 1,184,382 105,342 -10 % 11,096,884,293 Aug 956,160 1,034,555 78,395 -8 % 6,145,776,025 Sep 908,160 1,009,812 101,652 -11 % 10,333,192,128 Oct 888,960 999,842 110,882 -12 % 12,294,831,230 Nov 952,320 840,194 (112,126) 12 % 12,572,295,939 Dec 871,680 822,511 (49,169) 6 % 2,417,626,946 Total 10,895,035 11,346,360 451,325 -4% 73,600,081,912

Overall Resul t s : MBE month Cv(RMSE ): -4% 9%

4.6.4 M&V Considerations Many issues m u st be con sidered and addressed in developing a project-specific M&V Plan using Option D. Som e of the m o re com m on steps a r e outlin ed below.

 Use an experienced building m odeling professional. Although new sim ul a tion software packages m a ke much of the pro cess easier, a prog ram ’ s capabilities and real data requirem e nts cannot be fully underst ood by inexperienced users, and resulting models m a y not be accu rate.

 Determ ine the availability of utility bill d ata.

 Determ ine whether hourly or m onthly billi ng data are av ailab l e and wheth e r m e ters can be installed to collect hourly data. Calib rations to hourly data are generally m ore accurate th an calib ration s to m onthly data becaus e there are more points to com p are. Hourly ener gy or dem and data, howe v er, ar e gen erally only a v ailab l e f o r a utility ’s largest custom ers or m a y be collected w ith portable data loggers. If only monthly billing data are available, conducting addi tional short-term monitoring of building sub-system s can im prove the accuracy of the m o del.

23 Bou-Sa ada , T.E. a nd J .S. Ha berl , “ A n Im prov ed

Proc e

dure for Dev e lop in

g Cali brat ed H ourl y Simul a ti on Mod e ls

,” Internat ion

a l B u ild in g Perform anc e S i m u lati on As s o

c

i at

ion
, Report No. ES L-P A -95/0 8

-0

1, 1 9 9

5

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 4-23 Use actual equipm ent perform ance data in the s i m u lation m o dels. Many s o f t ware packages have lib raries of HVAC equi pm ent that closely m a tch actual sys t em perform a nce. Be cautious and investigate th e library HVAC d e scrip tion to be sure it is a good representation of the real syst em and consider developing user-defined equipm ent perform a nce curves based on fiel d measurem ents or m a nufacturer’s data.

 Specify spot m easurem e n ts and short-term m onitoring of key param e ters for both the baseline and perform a nc e period m odels. S pot and short-term m easurem ents augment the whole-b u ilding d ata and m o re accurately characterize building sys t ems. It is

recomm ended that an en d use be m o nitore d over a period that captures the full range of the equipm ent’s operation (e.g., spring a nd summer for cooling systems. The data

m u st also be colle cted in a way that f acilita tes su b-system lev el ca libr atio n . Caref u l selection of spot m easurem ents and short- term monitoring is n ecessary because it can add significant cost and tim e to the project.

 Use trend da ta to de term ine actua l co ntro ls. Sequencing of building controls is dif f i cult to interpr et f r o m interviews, site surveys, m a nufactur er’s data, and spot

m easure m ents. The best way to ascertain actual sequences is through trending data. Som etim es, the EMCS system s can be ut ilized to determ ine actua l opera ting

scenar ios. However, the capability f o r data s t or ag e in m any system s m ay be lim ited.

 Specify m odel calibration procedures that will be followed for m onthly, hourly, or subsystem data for both the baseline a nd performance period models. Prescribe statistical calibration req u irem ents based on the accuracy req u ired for th e project.

 Specify the sim u lation program and version a nd the source of weather data used (onsite, loca l weathe r sta tio n or typical weather data).

 Clearly explain how savings w ill be c alculated af ter the f i rst y ear. Keeping m odels up to date can be expensive. Fo r projects without substantia l site changes expected, an Option C utility b i lling a nalys is appr oach m ay be viable. 24 Regardless of how savings are calculated each year, the ongoing perfor m a nce of the m eas ures needs to be verified periodically.

24

IPMVP V o lu me 1 200 7, Sec t ion

4. 1 0 .4

4-24 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 5 Selecting An M&V Approach

Since the prim ary purpose of m easurem ent and ve rif i ca tion ( M &V) is to valida t e pay m ents or perform a nce guarantees, the cost of M&V should be less than the paym ent am ount or guarantee that is at risk. Consequently, th e objectiv e of M&V should not neces sarily be to derive a precise energy savings num ber, but rather to ensure th at energy services com p anies (ESCOs) properly

com p lete their pro j ec ts and that the resulting energy savings are reasonabl y close to the savings claim e d. The appropriate level of M&V rigor an d accuracy is a level that protects th e project investm ent a nd f u lf ills th e inten t of th e f ederal leg i sla tive requ irem ents. Caref u l consid eration of the M&V le vel, type, an d rigor ben e f its both pa rties and c an help m itigate potential p r oblem s during the perform a nce period.
In general, the selection of a proj ect specific M&V m e thod is based upon:

 Project costs and expected savings

 Com p lexity of the ECM

 Num ber of i nterrelated EC Ms at a s i ngle facility

 Uncerta inty or risk of savings being achieved

 Risk allo cation between the parties

 Other uses f or M&V data and system s This chapter discusses th ese issu es, p r esents some rules of th um b to use when selecting an M&V approach, an d discusses a m e thodology for evalu a ting p r oject-specific M & V options. Additional discussion is provided on bala ncing M&V costs and technical rigo r, as w ell a s tip s on
m i ni m i zing uncertainty in the savings results.

5.1 KEY ISSUES IN SELECTI NG TH E APPROPRIATE M&V APPRO ACH
The level of certainty an d thus e ffort required to verify both a pr oject’s potential to perfor m and its a ctua l per f o rm ance will va ry f r om projec t to p r oject. The c ontrac t and/or the pro j ec t-spec if ic M&V plan should be prepared with serious cons ideration of what M&V requirem e nts, reviews, and costs will be specified. Som e key factors, outlined below, should be considered when choosing th e M&V optio ns and techn i ques to use for each Energy Savings Perform a nce Contract (ESPC) project.

5.1.1 Value of ECM in Terms of Proj ected S avings and Project Costs
The scale of a project, energy rates, term of the contract, comprehensiv en ess of energ y conservation m easures (ECMs), the benefit-sh ari ng arrangement, and the m a gnitude of savings can all affect the value of the ECM or ESPC pr oject. The M&V effort should be scaled to the value of the projec t so th at the v alue of the inform ation provided by the M&V activity is appropriate to the value of th e ECM and the pro j ect itself.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-1For Super ESPC projects, the average annual M&V costs are 3.3% 25 of a nnual project cost savings. So m e m o re com p lex ECMs will of ten wa rrant g r ea ter M & V costs, but the o v erall M&V costs for the project are typically balanced by ot her ECMs that do not require substantial annual activ ities.

5.1.2 Complexity of ECM or Sy stem
More com p lex projects m a y require more com p l e x (and thus m ore expensive) M&V m e thods to determ ine energy savings. In general, the com p lexity of isolating the sav i ngs is the c r itical f ac t or. For exam ple, a com p licated chiller measure m ay not be difficult to assess if there are energy subm eters and m onitoring s y stem s dedicated to the chiller sy ste m

. When defining the appropriate M&V requirem e nts for a given project, it is helpful to consider ECMs as being in one of the following cat ego r ies (lis ted in ord er of incre as i ng M&V

com p lexity):

 Constant load, constant operating hours

 Constant load, variable operating hours

 Variable hours with a fixed pattern

 Variable hours without a fixed pattern (e.g., weather-dependent)

 Variable load, variab le o p erating hou rs

 Variable hours or load with a fixed pattern

 Variable hours or load without a fi xed pattern (e.g., weather-dependent)

5.1.3 Number of In terrelated ECMs at a Single Facility
If m u ltiple E C Ms are being insta lled at a s i ngle s i te, the savin g s from each m easure may be, to

som e degree, related to the savings resulting fr om other m e a s ures or other non-ECM activities at the facility. Exam ples include in teractive effects between li ghting and H VAC measures or between env elope im provem ents and a chiller re p l acem ent. In these s ituations, it m ay not be possible to isolate and m easure on e s y stem in order to de term ine savings. Thus, f o r m u ltip le, inte rre lated m easures, whole-bu ildin g Options C or D m a y be the m ost appropriate.

5.1.4 Risk of Achieving Saving s The im portance of the M & V activ itie s is of ten tie d to the conf idence a ssoc i ated with th e estim ated en ergy or cos t savings. An ECM with which the f a cility s t af f is f a m iliar m ay, subjectively, require less M&V ri gor than ECMs that are less well known. Sim ilarly, unproven technologies m a y warrant additional attention.

A sim p le m e thod of estim a ting paym ent risk ca n be based on the estim ated project value, technical uncertainty, and projec t sponsor experience. Such a m e thod assum e s that, as a starting point, a ll pr ojects will b e inspec ted to verif y the projec t’s po tentia l to pe rf orm and estim ate savings uncertainty and paym ent risk. A sim p le illu s t ration o f this m e thod is shown in Table 5-1.

25

Cos ts

are b a

s ed on c o

s t s

c hed ules from 166 Sup e r E SPC proj ec ts

.

5-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPTable 5-1 Example Estimate of Savings Risk Sample Projec t Estimate d Savi ngs Estimate d Unc e rtainty Savings Risk Small light ing $50,000 10 % $5,000 Large custom $500,000 20 %

$100,000

A lim it on the M&V budget can then be established as a percentage of the project’s paym ent risk bef o re an M & V plan is s p ecif i ed. As illus t r ated, s m aller proje cts cons istin g of predicta ble technologies have less paym ent risk (and thus a lower M&V budget cap) than large projects that include less predictable technologies.

In the sam e exam ple, for the “large custom ” m e a s ure, two M&V approaches m a y be evaluated based on their benefit-to-cost ra tio, as indicated T a ble 5-2. In this exam ple M&V Optio n C appears to b e the better approach.

Table 5-2 Example Benefit-to-Cost Evaluation for M&V

Sample Project Estimate d Savings Estimate d Uncertai n ty

(No M&V) Savings Risk (No

M&V) Propose d M&V Meth od Estimate d Annual M&V Cos t Resulti ng Savings Uncertai n ty/ Savings Risk Benefi t- to -C ost Ratio: Risk Reduc tio n in Savings/M&V Cost Large custom $500,000 20 % $100,000 Option C $25,000 10 %

/ $50K 2.0 Large custom $500,000 20 % $100,000 Option B $50,000 8 %

/ $40 K 1.2
Accuracy requirem e nts for m easuring and verify ing savings are either defined by the federal agency in its RFP or negotia ted w ith the ESCO. In eithe r cas e , the requ ire d level of m easurem ent and verification effort is specified in the task order between the federal ag ency and the ESCO in the f o rm of the M&V pla n . This plan m u st be developed in early phases of a project’s developm ent to ensure that (a) M&V is not left as an afterthought or th at (b) inadequate funding has been a l located to the requir ed M & V activ itie s.
5.1.5 Respon sibility Allocation Between the ESCO and the Federal Agency For Super ESPC projects, the achievem e nt of gu aranteed cos t and energy savings m u st be verified each year. At a m i ni m u m, the ESCO and th e federal agency m u st verify that the ins t alled equipm ent/system s have been properly m a intained, continue to operate corre ctly, and continue to have the potential to generate the predicted sa vings. Although annual reports m a y be required for establishing savings guarantees, in terim reports can be prepared sem i -annually for m ore com plex projec ts. This ensures tha t the M & V m onitori ng and reporting system s are working properly; it also allows fine-tuning of m easures throughout the year based on operational feedback, and it helps avoid surprises at the end of the year.
Typically, th e aspects of the pro j ects that are m easured and verified are th ose for which the ESCO is held responsible. The Responsibility Ma trix and contract should specify how savings will be de ter m ined and thus what ne eds to be ve r i f i ed. For ex am ple, varia tions in the operating hours of a facility during the term of a task ord er m ay be an a cceptab l e risk to the federal ag ency. For exam ple, operating hours m a y be determ ined by short-term m easurem ents rather than continuously m easured for purposes of paym ent.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-35.1.5.1 Other Uses for M&V Data and Systems Often, the array of instrum e nt ation in stalled and the m easurem ents collected for M&V can be used for other purposes, includi ng commissioning and system optim ization. Data and system s are more cost-effective if they are used to m eet several objectives, and not just those of the M&V plan. In addition, savings could be quantifie d beyond the requirem ents of the perform a nce contract. This inform ation could be useful for allocating costs am ong diff e r ent tenants, planning f u ture proje cts, or a llo ca ting r esea r c h

. 5.2 DETERMINING AN M&V APPROACH An M&V approach m u st be tailored f o r the specif ic project, based on the pr oject’s costs, saving s, objectives, a nd constra i n t s. This se ction outlin es s o m e general criter ia tha t can be used to determ ine an approach, and presen ts the M&V P l a nning Tool that provides general procedures to develop a project-specific M&V approach.

5.2.1 General Criteria for Sele cting an M& V Approach The four M&V options can be applied to alm ost any type of ECM. Howe ver, the rules-of-thum b listed below generally indicate the m o st appr op riate M & V approach for an applicatio n. Option A can be applied when the most critical M&V issue is iden tif yin g the poten tial to generate savings, including situations in which:

 The m a gnitude of savings is low for the enti re project or a portion of the project to which Option A can be applied.

 The risk of not achieving savings is low or ESCO paym ents do not need to be directly tied to actu a l savings. Option B, re trof it isola t ion, is typica lly used when any or all of these conditions apply:

 For sim p le equipm ent replacem ent projects with energy sav i n g s that are less than 20% of total facility energy use, as recorded by the relevant utility m e ter or sub-m e ter

 When energy savings values per individual m easure are desired

 When interactive effects are to be ignore d or are estim ated using estim ating m e thods that do not involve long-term m easurem ents

 W h en the in dependent v ariab les that affect energ y use are no t com p lex and excessiv ely dif f i cult or e xpensive to m onitor

 When sub-m eters already exist that r ecord the energy use of subsystem s under consideration (e.g., a 277 V li ghting circuit, a separate sub-m e ter for HVAC system s )
Options C, billing analysis, is typically used when any or all of these conditions apply:

 For com p lex equipm ent replacem ent and contro ls projects

 W hen predicted sav i ngs are relatively large (greater than 10% to 20%) as com pared with the en ergy use reco rded by the re levant utility m e ter or sub-m e ter

 When energy savings values per i ndividual m easure are not desired

5-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP W h en interactive effects are to b e included

 W h en the in dependent v ariab les that affect energ y use are co mplex and excessively difficult or expensive to monitor.
Option D, calib rated sim u lation, is used in situa tions s i m ilar to Option C , or in add ition when any or all of these conditions apply:

 When new construction projects are involved

 When energy savings values per m easure are desired

 When Option C tools cannot cost-effectively evaluate particular m easures or their inte ractions with the bu ilding when com p lex baseline ad justm e nts are anticipated

5.2.2 M&V Planning Tool The M&V Planning Too l is an iterative exercise de signed to assist in the developm ent of custom M&V approaches for individual projects. The Tool uses a five-step process that requires the developm ent of a custom list of objectives and constraints that relate to m easure m ent and verification of savings. The process considers bo th project le vel and ECM-spec if ic o b jectives and constraints, which must be prio ritized du rin g the evaluati on process. The steps described below correspond to the step num bers on the flowchart show n in Figure 5-1.

5.2.2.1 Step 1: Develop a list of project and ECM-level objectives and constraints that relate to
measuremen t and verification of savings.
Som e typical objectives and constraints for M& V are lis ted below. A custom list sho u ld be developed f or the specif ic project based on key topics th at will affect the M&V plan for the project and/or ECMs.
Typical Objectives

 Track energy savings through utility m e tering

 Verify energy perform a nce continuously

 Verify energy perform a nce annually

 Track post-retrofit consumption

 Track perform a nce of individual m e asures

 Adjust baseline for changes

 Maxim i ze infrastructure by us ing least-cost M&V option
Typical Con straints

 Historical utility data not available

 Lack of dedicated u tility m eters

 High degree of Interaction between ECMs

 ECMs scope affects a very sm all portion of overall utility baseline

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-53. E v al u at e sa v

i n g s r i s

k f

o r t he

M

&

V opt i o n.

4. E s t i m

a t

e c os t f

or t he M

&

V opt i on. I s M

&

V c os t
a cce p t a b l e ? A B C D E v

a l ua t e

ne w M &

V opt i on.

5

. W r i t

e M &

V Pl a n

. 1. L i st E C M an d p r o j e c t obj e c t

i v

e

s a nd c ons t r a

i nt

s

2. E va l u at e

P

r o j e

c t an d E C M l e ve l O b j e ct i v es & C o ns t r

a i n t s t

o i de nt i f y c

a ndi da t e M & V opt i o ns

. It is appropriate to identify objectives and cons traints that m a y apply, but enough inform ation is not yet av ailable, as thes e item s m ay be si gnificant to th e M & V approach selected. T hese uncertain item s should be clarified as early in th e project as possible if they drive the approach selected.
As shown in Table 5-3, a priority (hig h, m e dium , or low) can be assigned to each ob jective and constra i nt id entif ied to h elp with the evalua tion. High-priority objectives and constraints have the strongest inf l uence on M&V selection and shoul d be considered m ost i m portant in the evaluation.

M&V a p p r o

a

c h t o

o

r i sk y.

M

&

V

c o s

t not
acc ep t ab l e.

C o

st

a cce p t a b l e S e le

c t

a

n M &

V

O

p t i o n

R i s k ac ce p t ab l e 3. E v al u at e sa v

i n g s r i s

k f

o r t he

M

&

V opt i o n.

4. E s t i m

a t

e c os t f

or t he M

&

V opt i on. I s M

&

V c os t
a cce p t a b l e ? A B C D

M&V a p p r o

a

c h t o

o

r i sk y.

M

&

V

c o s

t not
acc ep t ab l e. E v

a l ua t e

ne w M &

V opt i on.

5

. W r i t

e M &

V Pl a n

. 1. L i st E C M an d p r o j e c t obj e c t

i v

e

s a nd c ons t r a

i nt

s

2. E va l u at e

P

r o j e

c t an d E C M l e ve l O b j e ct i v es & C o ns t r

a i n t s t

o i de nt i f y c

a ndi da t e M & V opt i o ns

.

C

o

st

a cce p t a b l e S e le

c t

a

n M &

V

O

p t i o n

R i s k ac ce p t ab l e

Figure 5-1 M&V Planning Flowchart Step 2: Select an M&V option for ev aluation (O ptions A, B, C, or D).
Project and ECM-level objectives and constraints m ust be evaluated to identify the most appropriate M&V option. The nature of the objective o r cons tra i nt will either lend its elf to or

5-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPrule ou t spec if ic M&V o p tions, in clu d ing a re trof it iso l a tion a pproach (Op tions A and B), a whole-building utility data an alys is ( O ption C), or a ca libr ate d sim u lation (Option D).

One should determ ine if a single M&V Option can be used and is desirable for the entire project or if a m o re custom M&V approach is required f or the proposed set of ECMs. If one of the im portant project-lev el o b jectives o r constrai nts is not m e t, another M&V option should be selected for evaluation. If none of the M&V Op tions can satisfy project level objectives and constraints, an appropriate M& V Option should be selected for the first E C M and the evaluation process sho uld be com p leted following Steps 3 through 5. This process s hould be followed until an M&V ap proach is d e fined for ECM.

Table 5-3 Example M&V Considerations Matrix

Objec t ive
or Cons train t ECM or Project Level Priority Project Speci fi c Objec t ives and Cons traints (Li s t the Ones That Directly Affec t the M&V Appr oa

ch for the Projec t) Retrofit Isolati o n Appr oach (O pti ons A

and B ) Utility Bills Com p arison Appr oach (O pti on C) Calibrate d Simulati on Appr oach (O pti on D) Objective Project High Ensure equipment performance f or life of contract X
Objective Project Medium Want to track energy savings at utility meter(s ) X

Constraint Project Medium Historical utility data pertinent to project scope are availa ble X X Objective Project Medium Verify energy performance perio dically X X X
Objective Project Low Maximize infrast r ucture improve m

ent by implementing th e most cost-effective M&V option X

Objective HVAC High Ensure long-term equipment performance X
Objective HVAC High Ensure savings f or the duration o f the contract (persistence) X X Objective Lighting High Maintain light ing levels X Objective Lighting Medium Quantify saving s through measurements X Constraint Windows Medium High interactive effects X X Objective Windows Medium Quantify saving s from ECM X

5.2.2.2 Step 3: Evaluate the savings risk associ ated with the selected M&V option(s). To perform t his exercise, a custom list of risk elem ents should be develo ped based on project and ECM specifics. The Responsibility Matrix in C hap ter 3 provides a com pete discussion of risk elem ents, how responsibilities s hould be allocated, and how they im pact M&V plan selection.
Typical risk elem ents fo r ESPC projects include:

 Operating hours

 Environm ental/process loads

 User participation

 W eather

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-7 Equipm ent perform ance

 Major ch ang es to th e f acilities

 Savings risk associated w ith the perform a nce of O&M, repair, and rep l acem ent

5.2.2.3 Step 4: Estimate costs for the M&V option. If one M&V option has been selected for all ECMs, the cos t of using this M&V optio n in relation to savings risks should be estim ated. If a custom approach is being followed for individu al E C Ms, Steps 3 and 4 should be rep eated for each ECM until an M&V optio n has been associated w ith each ECM. Then, the cost of using the selected M&V options should be estim ated.
If the M&V requirem e nts and the savings risk fail to justify the M&V expenses one should return to Ste p 2.

5.2.2.4 Step 5: Write the M&V plan.
If all th e M & V requirem ents are met and th e sa vings risk ju stify the M & V expenses, proceed with the developm ent of the M&V plan for the project.

5.3 COST AND RIGOR In gener al, the m o re rigorous the M & V, the m o re expensive it will be to de term ine ener gy savings. The factors that typica lly affect M & V accuracy and co sts (som e are in terrelated) are listed below.

 Level of detail and effort associated with verifying baseline and performance period surveys

 Sa m ple sizes (num ber of data points) us ed for m e tering rep r es entative equ i pm ent

 Duration an d accuracy o f m etering activ ities

 Num b er and com p lexity of dependent and i ndependent variables th at are m etered or accounted f o r in analyses

 Level of engineering required to conduct analyses

 Availability of existing d ata co llec tin g system s (e.g., energy m anage m ent system s)

 Contract term

 Level of accuracy need ed in energy savings analyses

5.3.1 Balancing Cost and Rigor
One of the most challen ging aspects of M&V is providing adequate accur acy while en suring th at M&V costs are reasonab l e. As shown in Figure 5- 2, the incr em ental value of the inf o rm ation obtained f r o m additiona l M&V will at som e poi nt be le ss tha n the cos t to obtain it. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to define this point and one m ust rely upon judgment and experience to determ ine what is cos t -effective an d what is no t. A few strategies for keeping costs down while m aintaining technical rig o r inc l ude:

5-8 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPUncer tain ty in S a v i ng s M& V

C o st

Uncer tain ty in S a v i ng s  Use extensive m e tering in the baseline pe riod and stipulate values over which the ESCO has no control.

 Verify key perform a nce item s using periodic rather than continuous data collection to reduce data collection and m a nagem e nt issues.

 Rely upon existing instrum e ntation, en ergy m anagem ent system s, and energy

m a nage m e nt behavioral pract ices wh erever possible.

 Engage a third-party M&V expe rt to assis t in th e developm ent of the m e asurem ent and verification plan to ensure key agen cy interes t s are pro t ected and costs are mi n i mi z e d

. Figure 5-2 The Law of Diminishing Returns for M&V

M& V

R i gor %

Uncer tain ty in S a v i ng s

M& V

R i gor M& V

C o st

%

V R i gor M& V

C o st

5.3.2 Savings Calculations The savings calculation approach usually depends on the M&V m e thod selected for the m easure. If long-term monitoring is not used in the M&V technique, the ESCO and t he agency must accept that the agreed -u pon savings will not equ al the saving s that would be determ ined through a process that involves rigorous analyses and m e asurem ents. If im portant values are es tim ated, both parties should understand that the savings d e term ination will tend to be less accurate th an if

m easurem ents were used to determ ine the values.

5.3.3 M&V Costs
The M&V effort should be scaled to the value of the project so that the value of the infor m ation provided by the M&V activity is a ppr opria te to th e value of th e proje ct itse lf . Rule-of

- thum b estim ates pu t overall ann u al M&V co sts at 1 % to 10% of typical project cost saving s. Often,

som e ECMs will en tail g r eater M & V costs, but th e overa ll M & V costs f o r the pro j ec t are balanced by other ECMs that do not re quire substantial annual activities.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-9For a Super ESPC project, M&V are reported in to two categories: initial and annual M&V expenses. T h e initial M & V costs may includ e m e te ring or instrum e ntation required to perform the M&V ac tivitie s, and is delinea t ed by ECM on Task-Order Cost Schedule TO-2 (Im ple m entation Price by Energy Conservati on Measure). The perform a nc e-period M&V expenses included for the entire project are in cluded on Task-Order Cost Schedule T O -3 (PostAcceptance Perform a nce Period Cash Flow). M&V cost break outs should be requested and evalua ted to ensure th at c o sts ar e in line w ith the s cope of work outlin ed in the M&V P l an.
5.4 UNCERTAINTY Any statem ent of m easured savings includes so m e degree of uncertainty. Since no instrum e nt can be 100 % accu rate, all m easurem ents contain so m e error or difference between th e true and observed value. In addition, energy savings are typically based on m easured values, w h ich to

som e extent are es tim ates. As with all estim ates, there will be som e uncertainty in the r eported

num b ers. The goal for each project is to reduce th e uncer tain ty in the repo rted sav i ngs values, which is accom p lished by lim iting the errors in the m easure m ents and analyses conducted.

Calcula ting the unce r ta inty in th e es tim ated sa vings is not required by Super ESPC, but this uncertainty is often estimated by the ESCO in or der to se t th e overa ll le vel of savings guarantee for each ECM. Includ in g the uncertainty in calculated savin g s values p r ovides a m o re
m eaningful statem ent of savings. Uncertainty is typically pro portion al to the com p lexity of the ECM.

Uncerta inty at the p r oje c t leve l can b e broken down into four general types: m easurem ent,
sam p ling, estim ation, and m odeling. For any given projec t, th e proje ct e r r o r is ca lcu l ated f r om theses four uncertainties. Projects often do not contain one or more of the four com ponents; however, in a hypothetical project th at contains all four com p onents, the total project uncertainty (standard error) would be calculate d by taking the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual standard errors of the components, as below:

2 2 2 2 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) proje c t M e a sure m ent S am pling S ti p u l a t i on M odeling SE SE SE SE SE = + + +

The following sections discuss the s ources of th ese errors an d the way th at these sources can be

m i ni m i zed in a Super ESPC project. 26

5.4.1 Measuremen t
Measurem ent uncertain ty is due to m etering equipm ent inaccuracies. F o r exam ple, the specification s for a m eter m ay indicat e that it is ac curate to within ± 5%, m eaning that any reading take n the m eter m ay be up to 5% of f in eithe r direction. Addition al er ror in

m easure m ents m ay be introduced if an instrum ent is not prop e r ly ca lib rate d or if it is a pplied under inapp r opriate cond itions. Data m a nage m e nt can also introduce errors through o m itted, adjusted, or lost da ta. For an M&V plan to be successful, the sens ors used for baseline and perform a nce period

m easurem ents m u st m eet m inim u m accuracy re q u irem ents f o r the app lic a tion and m u st be

26 Addit ion

al inf o

rm

at

ion on thes e to pic

s is

c

ontain ed in A S HRAE Guidel in e 14 Sec ti o

n 5. 2.1 1 and IPMVP A p p e n

d ix

B.

5-10 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPproperly calibrated. If th e accuracy o f any instru m e nt is less than suitable, the m easurem ents m ay introdu ce un acceptable levels of erro r into the en ergy calculations.

Instrum e ntation accu racy requirem e nts should be suffi cient to ensure th at o v erall energ y and cost estim ates are reasonable. Although error analysis is not required by Super ESPC projects, it is im portant to keep in m i nd that the in accuracies introduced b y the ins t ru m entation will likely be the greatest source of uncertain ty in calcu lated s avings.

For exam ple, in a chiller proj ect, the most im portant m easurem ents are th e chilled water tem p eratures which are used to determ ine load . The im pact of sensor accu racy on pred icted kW /ton values is shown in Figure 5-35-3. Figure 5-3 E xample Impact of Sensor Accuracy on Calculations 27
U n ce r t ai n t y o f D i f f e

r e

n t

i a l T e m p e r at

u r

e C

a l c u l a t e d kW / t o n v s

. at

va r i o u T em p e r

a t

u r

e S en s o r A cc u r a ci es s F l o w

M

e as u r em en t E r r o r

= + /

- 5

% P o

w

er M e as u r e m en t E r r o r + /

- 2

% =Error 25

. 0%

20

. 0%

15

. 0%

10

. 0%

5. 0 %

0. 0 % 3. 00 o F

2. 00 o F

1. 10 o F

0. 10 o F 0. 20 o F 0. 50 o F

2 6 10 1 4 18 22 M

eas u r ed

D i f f e r

en t i a l T em p e r at

u r

e (

T r

- T s)
Tips for red u cing m easurem ent error:

 Determ ine and prescribe the needed accuracy for m easurem ent equipm ent.

 Ensure that the m easurem ent equipm ent has been recen tly calib rated.

 Specify data m a nagem e nt strategies , including periodic checks and back-up procedures.

27

Analy s

is

prov id

ed

by

Sc ott J uds o

n

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-115.4.2 Sampling
Sam p ling uncertainty o c curs when measurem ents are taken o n a sam p le of the affected equipm ent and the results extrapolated to the en tire population of the equipm ent. For exam ple, it

m a y not be econom ically feasible to m onitor the hours on every fixture in a building lighting retrof it. Of ten, a sam p le is m onitored, and the r esu lts app lied to the rem ainder of the lighting population. Sa m pling uncertainty is calculated from the standard deviation of the sam pl e d results. W he n the standard deviation is large, th e u n certainty is also large. A detailed d i scuss i on
on sam pling can be found in Appendix B.
Tips for red u cing sam p ling erro r:

 Assign homogeneous usage groups based on sim ilarities in equipm ent perfor m a nce or operating characteristics.

 Use statistic al sam p ling stra tegi es described in Appendix B.

 Use sam p le sizes that m eet a confidence of at least 80% and a precision of 20%.

 Ensure that the m easured data m eet statis tical req u irem ents by calcu latin g the actual coefficient o f variation (Cv) from the m easurements.

 Use a conservative appro ach in selecting original sam ple sizes by using a high Cv, typically greater than 0.5, especially f or populations that ar e know to contain variations. T h is will increase th e initial sam p le size, but redu ce the risk o fundersam p ling.

5.4.3 Estimating
Estim ates have to be m a de when values are n ece ssary to complete a calcu lation, but th e values cannot be m easured directly. W h en engineer ing estim ates are used in lieu of actual

m easurem ents, uncer ta in ty is in trodu ced. This un cer tainty itself m ust ofte n be estim a ted based on the expected accuracy of the es tim ated values. Fo r exam ple, the efficiency of a boiler m a y be estim ated rather than m e asured direc tly. The es tim a te would be based on the type and age of the boile r, and m ay result in an estim ated stipu l atio n error of ± 20% (e.g., 75%, between 60% and 90%). If a b u ilding engineer who is f a m ilia r with the boiler gives add itional oper ational inform ation about the boiler, the unc ertainty m a y be less, such as ± 10% (e.g., 75%, b e tween 67.5% and 82.5%).
Tips for reducing estim ating error:

 Use m easured values w h erever poss i ble, especi a lly f o r par a m eters that c ontribu te to a high percentage of project savings.

 Use the m a nufacturer’s o r igin al specifi cations o r industry-accepted perform a nce curves to d eterm ine perform ance.

 Use typical m eteorological yea r (T MY) weathe r data 28 f r om an applic able site to conduct calculations.

28

TMY we ath e r d a t

a is

av ai lab l e from Natio nal Oc eano g r

aphic At

mos p

heri c Admin i s trati on ( N OAA).

5-12 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Use observations of building occupant behavior and facility operating and

m aintenance logs.

 DO NOT us e rules-of-thum b, proprietary software/algorithms, guesses at operating param e ters, or data from other facilities.

5.4.4 Modeling Modeling u n certainty is introdu ced when saving s are es tim ated us ing engineering or sim ulation models. The accuracy of any m odel is based on the ability of the m odel to account for all variations in energy use by em ploying the proper analysis tec hniques, including all relevant variables, and excluding t hose th at are irrelev ant. A tip for reducing m odeling error is to request the ESCO provides calculations in electronic for m at, and to have a qualified third-party revi ew er clos ely an alyze the savings calculations.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 5-135-14 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 6 Incorporating M&V in Su per ESPCs—Key Submittals

This sec tion provides an overview of m easurem ent and ver i f i c ation (M&V ) subm ittals requir ed in each phas e of a Super Energy Savings Pe rformance Contract (ESPC) project. The k e y subm ittals r e lated to M & V in a Super ESPC proj ect are ou tlined in Table 6-1 and dis c ussed below. In th is table, the n am e of the Super ESPC subm ittal o r item is shown in italics. Som e of the term inology used specifica lly in Super ESPC projects is defined in Table 6-2.

Table 6-1 Super ESPC Submittals Re lated to Measu rement and Verification Require d M&V I t em Loca t io n(s ) Timi ng for Dev e lop m en t 29 M&V Approach Preliminary Assessment Initial project sco ping

Risk and Respo nsibility Matrix Preliminary Assessment Final Proposal Initial project sco ping, prior to Not i ce of Intent to Award During Investment Grade Audit M&V Plan and Savings Calcu l ation Methods Final Proposal After Notice of Intent to Award an d during Investment Grad e Audit Commissioning Approach Final Proposal During Investment Grade Audit Commissioning Plan Separate submittal After approval of Design & Const r uction Package Commissioning Report Separate submittal Prior to Project Acceptance Post-installat i on Report Separate submittal Prior to Project Acceptance Annual Reports Separate submittal 60 days after anniversary date of Project Acceptance

Table 6-2 Super ESPC Pr oject Terminology Project Phase M&V Submittal Term Use d Project Develop m

ent M&V Plan (Final Proposal) Proposed Savin gs Project Accepta nce Post-Installation Report Expected Savin gs Performance Period Annual Reports Verified Saving s

6.1 M&V APPRO ACH
The first M & V-related item received on a S uper ESPC project is the ECM Perform a nce Measurem ent sec tion of the Pre lim inary Assess m e nt. This section provides a general description of the M&V Plan proposed for the project. Although ve ry little detail is included in this section, it is im portant tha t the a g ency and th e ESCO ag ree on the general M&V approach(s) to be used prior to starting the Investm e nt Grade Audit (IG A). The M&V m e thod(s) chosen can have a dram atic effect on how the baseline is defined, determ ining what activities are conducted during the IGA.

29

Detailed information on DOE’s Su per ESPC process is available at ht tp:/ / www1.eere. ener gy.gov/femp/fi nanci ng/superespcs.ht ml

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 6-16.2 ESPC RISK AND RESPO NSIBILITY MATRIX A project-specific Risk, Responsib ility and Perform a nce Matrix is required for Super ESPC projects. It is first presented in the Prelim inary Assessm ent and is finalized in the F i nal Proposal.
The Responsibility Matrix details risks and responsibilities that should be considered when developing perform a nce contracts, especially th e verification requirem e nt s of these co ntracts. This Responsibility Matrix was developed to help identify the im portant project risks, assess their poten tial im pact, and clarify th e pa rty responsible for m anaging the risk.
The final agreed-upon R e sponsibility Matrix wi ll greatly influence the m easurem ent and verification approach(s) used in th e p r ojec t, whic h m u st ref l e ct the allo cation of respo n sibilities. Additional discussion of the Responsibility Matrix is included in Chapter 3.

6.3 MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION PLAN The project-specific M & V Plan is in cluded in th e ECM Perform a nce Measurem ent section of the Final Proposal. The M&V Plan is the single m os t im portant item in an energy savings guarantee, as it d e fines how savings will be calculated a nd s p ecifies any ongoing activities that will take place du ring the contract term . The M&V Plan details th e p r oposed Year 1 energy and cost savings. The ESCO prepares th e pro j ect-sp ecific M&V Plan a nd subm its it to th e f eder al agency for review and approval.
Super ESPC projects are required to use th e M&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods Outline de sc ribed in Appendix C.
Details requ ired in the Measurem ent and Verifica tion P l an are discussed in Section 7 of this docum ent.

6.4 COMMISSIONING APPROACH, PLAN, AND REPO RT
The Comm i ssioning Approach for each ECM is included in the ECM Perfor m a nce Measurem ent section of the Final Prop osal. The Co m m i ssionin g Approach outlin es the expected

comm issioning activities and identifies roles and responsibilities of the ESCO and the federal agency. The project-specific Co mmissionin g Plan is devel oped after the engineering design is finalized and the Design and Construction Package has be en approved by the agency. The Comm issioning Plan finalizes the Comm i ssioning Ap proach outli ned in the F i nal Proposal and addresses each ECM with specific s t eps that will be taken during the comm is sioning process.

Once commission ing activities hav e been com pleted and docum ented per the approved Com m issioning Plan, th e Com m issi oning Report is subm itted. This repor t details th e in spections and performance tests implem ente d, along with the results of th ese inspections and tests, to ensure th at the system s were installed and perf orm i ng properly. It also verifies system s and equipm ent are operating as intended and accord ing to design inten t

. Inform ation on comm issi oning can be found in Section 7 of this docum ent.

6-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP6.5 POST-INSTALLATION REPORT
Af ter the co m m i ssionin g activ ities h ave been co m p leted, the post-in sta l lation ve rif i c ation activities defined in the M&V Plan are conducted. The results of the post-installation verification activ ities a r e presented in the Post- I ns tallation Re port, which is deliv ered b y the ESCO prior to project acceptance. This report also docum ents any changes in the project scope and energy savings that m a y have oc curred since the Final Proposal, and reports the expected Year 1 energy and cost savings.
Super ESPC projects are require d to use the Post- I nsta lla tion Re port Outline shown in Appendix C. Infor m ation on post-installati on is included Section 2.2.5.

6.6 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS AND REPORT S Each year d u ring th e perfor m ance period, typ i call y just after the anniversary of the project’s acceptance, the contractor subm its an Annual Report

. The report docum ents the execution and results of th e activities p r escr ibed in the M& V Plan (m easurem ents, savings calcu latio n s) and reports the v e rified Year 1 energy an d cost sav i n gs. The repo rt also describes O&M activities conducted during that perform a nce period, as we ll as any identifying item s that m a y require additional follow-up.
For Super ESPC, M&V needs to show only that th e overall cost savings gua rantee has been m e t, and not that the pred icted savings for each ECM have been achieved.
The verified savings values presented in the Annual Report determ ine if the annual savings guarantee has been m e t, and if any true-up of paym en ts is req u ired. As stipulated in th e contract or Task Order, the federal agency m a y use the a nnual report to reconcile paym ents made to the ESCO for previous billing periods if previous paym ents were based on expected savings that then need to be trued-up to refl ect verified saving s . The estim ates in the report m a y also be used as the basis for subsequent paym ents. Super ESPC projec ts a r e requir ed to use th e Ann u al Report Outline sho w n in Appendix C.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 6-36-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 7 M&V Plan Details

The Measurem ent and Verification (M&V) Plan is a docum ent that defines project-specific M&V m ethods and tech niques th at will be us ed to dete rm ine savings r es u lting f r om a specif i c perform a nce contracting project. The plan m a y include 1) a singl e option that addresses all the

m easures installed a t a s i ngle f acility , or 2) seve r al M&V options to add r ess m u ltiple m easures insta lled at the f acility.
In addition to providing accurate and conservativ e m ethods to calcu late en ergy saving s, a good M&V Plan is clear, consistent, and repeatable. In a long-term contract, it is very im portant to ensure that all assum ptions, procedures, and data are recorded properly so they m a y be easily referenced and verified by othe rs. The data included should be sufficient for a third party to im ple m ent or verify the M&V procedures.

M&V activities includ e site su rveys, energy m easurem ents, m e tering of key variables, data analyses, calculations, quality a ssurance procedures, and reporti ng. All of these key components need to be a d equate ly de tailed in the M&V Plan.
The projec t- specif i c M & V Plan m u st be subm itted and appro v ed by the f edera l agenc y bef o re M&V activities b e gin. I n som e cases, the agen c y will spe c if y an approac h in the RFP, while in other cases the energy s e rvice com p a ny (ESCO) will propos e a site-specific plan for approval. Final resolution of M&V and other p r oject issues are left to th e discretion of the federal agency, although the details of the M&V Plan can be a highly negotiated item

. Contracts implem ented under DOE’s Super Energy Savings Perform a nce Contract (S uper ESPC) are required to follow the M&V Plan and Savings Calculati on Methods Ou tlin e included in Appendix C. This outline was developed through an industry-governm e nt working group and has been inco rp orated into the Super ESPC cont ract. The project-specific M & V Plan includes project-wide item s as well as d etails f o r each en ergy conservation m easure (ECM) (see Section 2.2.6).
In general, the contents of a project-specific M&V Plan should:

 Provide an overview of the ECM a nd verification activ ities, in cluding :

− State the go als and ob je ctive s of the verif i ca tion activ ities

− Define the M&V optio n and techn i ques to be u sed for each m easure

− Identify the key physical characteristics of the facility, system, and ECM to be insta lled

− Define the critical factors that affect energy consum ption of the system or ECM

 Adequately define the base line conditions, including:

− Identify the key baseline perform a nc e char acteristics of the sy stem or ECM, such as ligh ting intensitie s an d tem p eratur es

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-1− Define baseline operating conditions, such as loads and hours of operation

 Detail all m easurem ents , data analys es procedu r es, algorithm s, and assumptions

 Define all perform a nce period veri f i cation activities, includ ing:

− Specify the param e ters to be m easured, period of m e tering, accuracy requirem e nts, calibration procedures, m e te ring protocols, sampling protocols, and archiving requirem e nts

− Explain req uirem ents for agency witnessing of M&V activities

 Detail the sc hedule f o r p eriod ic M&V reports and procedures

 Describe procedures and de tails for annual inspections

 Describe O & M reporting requirem e nts by ag ency and ESCO (See Sectio n 9 of this docum ent).

 Detail how savings will be calcu lated, includ ing:

− Provide rationale and procedures for a ny baseline or reporting period energy adjustm ents anticipated

− Detail how intera ctiv e ef f

ects will b e handled

The first step in defining a project-specific M&V Plan involves selec ting an appropriate M&V approach or approaches. This pr oces s is discu ssed in deta il in Chapter 5 and includes evaluating projec t-wide and ECM-specif i c obje c tive s and c onstra i nts, a ssessing the viability of various M&V options, ascertaining savi ngs risks, and evaluating im plem entation costs.
The following sections discuss a nd provide insight into the key areas co vered by an M&V Plan. Procedures f o r reviewing M&V Plans for content and quality are detailed Section 10 of this docum ent, and review checklists can be f ound in Appendix E. Issues and requirem e nts associated w ith specific technologi es are described in Chapter 8.

7.1 DEFINING THE BASELINE Since energy savings must be determ ined by comp aring energy use before a nd af te r a retrof it, th e characterization of the pre-retr ofit or baseline conditions is critical. Defining the baseline consists of identifying the perform a nce and opera ting f acto r s that inf l ue nce energy consum ption, and determ i ning their values through observations and m easurem ents. Regardless of the M&V option or m e thod used, the baseline conditions for all projects and ECMs m ust be adequately def i ned. Typically, the ESCO will def i ne the b aseline cond itions during the Investm e nt Grade Audit, but the fe deral agency m a y define baseline conditions.
The purpose of establishing the baseline conditions is to:

 Defi ne t h e baseli ne suffi ci entl y fo r purposes of calculating savings

 Docum e nt the baseline conditions in case operational change s occur after ECM insta lla tion that m andate adjustm ents to the perform a nce period baseline energy use

7-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

### _ _ _



### _ _ _

_ _ Baseline conditions include physical, operational, and energy use data on the facility and system s. Ba seline conditions are t ypically determined th rough surveys, inspections, and spot and short-term m e tering activities. Typically, pre-in stallation metering is co nducted for a period of tim e required to capture all ope rating conditions of affected system s and/or processes.
Physical conditions that shoul d be docum e nted include equi pm ent inventories, locations,

nam e plate data, system design features, and bu ilding occupancy. The key operational conditions include control strategies, set points, operati ng schedules, condition of equipm ent, loads,

m a intenance procedures used, peripheral equi pment conditions, and weat her. Energy use data that con stitu te the b aseline m ay include utility b i lling d ata, s ub-m etered system data, and utility rate s t ru ctures. Although only a portion of a facility ’s system s may be includ ed in the ES PC project, it m a y be appropriate to docum ent the site conditions for othe r key energy using system s. This is especially true if a whole-building M&V appr oach (Option C or D) is bei ng used. O f ten, changes outside the scope of the ESPC project at a large facility can affect th e overall energy consum ption at a site and m a y warrant an adjustm e nt , as discussed in Section 7.2.

7.2 ADJUSTMENTS As indicated in Chapter 2 and the basic equa tion used to determ ine savings shown below (Equation 7-1), adjustm e nts are som e tim es require d to accoun t for changes unrelated to the ECM that affect energy use. S uch adjustments m a y account for changes in weather, occupancy, or other factors between the base line and perform a nce periods. Equation 7-1: General Equation Used to Calculate Savings 

### Sav i ngs = ( Base line Ene r gy

− P o st I n stallation Ene r gy ) ± Adjustm e n ts
The purpose of adjustm e nts is to express both bas e l i n e a nd pos t

- i ns t a llation energy under the

sam e set of conditions. The m odi fications to the savings can be further distinguished as routine and non-routine adjustm e nts, as shown in Equation 7-2. Equation 7-2: Expanded Equation Used to Calculate Savings 

### Sa v in g s = ( B a s e lin e E n e r g y

− P o st I ns ta lla tion E n e r g y ) ± R o utine A d ju stm e n ts ± Non

− R o u tine A d ju stm e n ts

7.2.1 Routine Adjustments Routine adjustm e nts are used to account for exp ected variations in independent variables and energy use. These adjustm e nts often use regression analys is to correlate and adjust en ergy use to independent variables such as w eather, but sim p le com p arisons m a y also be em ployed. Routine adjustm ents are used to n o rm alize en ergy use as a function of one or m ore independent param eters s u ch as tem p eratu r e, humidity, o r m eals serv ed.

Nor m alizing energy savings to a prescribed set of conditions is a very im portant technique used in ESPC projects. Using a fixed set of conditi ons for both the baseline and perform a nc e period

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-3cases, such as average weather con d itions and the corresponding cooling load prof ile, allows the risks associated with thes e opera tional factors to be reduced.
Alternatively, baseline and perform a nce period c onditions could be norm a lized to either baseline or perform a nce period conditions. If perform a nc e period con d itions are u sed to ad just the baseline cas e, the sav i ng s calcu lated will es tim ate the ac tual avoided ene r gy use f o r that per i od.
One of the key assum p tions m a de when norm a lizing savings is that the perform a nce period energy use will have a predic table r elationship to the indep e ndent var i ab les to b e sta ndardiz ed. The baseline m odel will be com p letely def i ned in the contrac t , but the pe rf orm ance period m odel will need to be develope d f r om m easured da ta co llec t ed dur in g the perf or m ance period. Typically, a valid baseline m odel indicates th at a sim ilar perform a nce period m odel can be successfully developed.
Once the baseline and perform a nce period m odels of the equipm ent’s energy consumption and the param e ter(s) are established and validated, th e standardized values of the independent param e ters can be used to drive the both m odels and calculate savings.
Therefore, a project-specific M& V Plan should identify critical independent variables, explain how these v ariab les will be m easured or docum en ted, and dis c uss how th ey will be u s ed in the

em pirical models. Additionally, assumptions and m athem atical form ulas used in th e M&V Plan must be clearly stated, and the validity of any m a them atical m odel used should be verified. The verification strategies discussed in S ection Erro r! Reference source not found. can be applied to any m athem atical m o del.

7.2.2 Non-Routine Adjustments Non-routine adjustm e nts are used to com p ensa te for unexpected changes in energy driving factors, such as facility size, operating hours, and facility use. These factors m u st be monitored for change to ensure th at they are not aff ecting the perform a nce of the energy conservation

m easure. Tracking th ese factors is p r im arily a concern for projects usi ng whole-building options (Options C & D). Option A approach es typically avoid these types of adjustm e nts as m a ny of the factors that could change are s tipulated. If future changes ar e expected, the M&V Plan should incorporate m e thods for m a king these non-routine adjustm e nts.

7.3 INTERACTIVE EFFECTS
It is comm only understood that EC Ms and energy system s interact with one another. Reduced lighting loads, for exam ple, can reduce air conditioning energy consum ption (a cooling bonus), but increase heating consum ption (a heating pena lty). W hole-building M&V approaches such as building s i mulation or utility billin g analys is acc ount for thes e types of in teractiv e effects, whereas retrofit isolation M&V approaches do n ot. When using retrofit isolation M&V Options A and B, careful c onsideration m ust be given to dealing with interacti on between ECMs. One m u st properly a ccount for interactive effects and avoid double-counting of savings, which can occur in advertently if interac tions are not carefully considered.

7-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPFor exam ple, if the ligh t ing retrofit mentione d ab ove is acco mpanied by a chiller replacem ent,
care m u st be taken to account for the reduced coo ling loads on both the new and existing chillers due to the change in lighting. In addition, the cooling bonus should be based on the ef ficiency of the new chiller.
In general, the possibility of double-counting en ergy savings can be reduced by considering one ECM at a tim e. The later ECMs should start (t he baseline co ndition ) fro m the perform a nce period condition of the previous EC Ms. For re lated ECMs, such as lighting efficiency and lighting controls, double-counting can som e ti m e s be avoided by using a single equation to determ ine savings from both m easures. Methodologies for determ ining some of the m or e common interactions, such as lighting and HVAC, have been developed (see Section 11.1). However, detailed relationships betw een m a ny dissim ilar but interactive ECMs are not known, and the m e thods fo r m easuring inte ractive effects are not cost-effective for m a ny application s. For projects using retrofit iso l ation appro aches (Options A or B), one of three approaches can be taken to account for sa vings associated with interactive effects between ECMs. These appro a ches are as follows:

 Ignore interac tive effects.

 Use m u tually agreed -up on values th at are based on the site-speci fics of the building and HVAC equipm ent types. The values can be developed on the basis of co m puter model sim u lations for typical building conditions or assigned on the basis of available inf o rm ation f o r typica l b u ildings.

 Develop a site-specific m e thod to measur e and estim ate inter active effects. The f

ederal agen cy and/or E S CO will need to agr ee on the m erit and reason a b leness of th e proposed approach, which m a y include directly m easuring the effects.

7.4 METERING 30
To determ ine energy savings, som e m easure m ent pr ocesses need to be co nducted to identify the pre-retrofit and post-retrofit conditions. Thes e measurem ents typica lly include energy

consum ption and energy-related variables. Mete ring issues that should be considered in preparing a project-sp ecific M& V Plan are d i scu ssed below.
A project-specific M&V Plan shoul d dem onstrate that any m e tering and analysis will be done in a consis tent and logical m anner and with a lev e l of accuracy acceptable to all parties. Metering and m onitoring reports must specify exactly what was m easured, how and when the

m easure m ents were m ade, what m eter or m e ters were used, and who conducted these

m easure m ents. Any m e tering protocols that will b e f o llowed m u st be spe c if ied. 31
Issues covered below include types of m e ters , m e ter accuracy and calibra tion, m etering protocols, duration of meteri ng, and the use of samples.

30 More inf o

rm

atio n on m e

ter

in

g is

av a ilab le thro ug hMe te r

ing Bs et

Prac tic

e

s

: A Guide to Ac h i ev ing Ut ility

res o

ur

c e Effic e i n

c y

, Fed e ral E nergy Man age me nt Pr og ram, Oc tob e r 2 0

0

7

. 31 Meter in

g pr

otoc ols

are s t a n

d

a rdiz ed proc edur es

dev e lo ped for meas ur

ing

phy s

ic

a l c har ac

te ris t ic

s and m e

ter

in

g s

pec ific

ty

p e

s o

f equ ipm ent . For ex amp le, ASHRAE Guide lin e 1 4 An ne x E des c r ibes s

tan dard proc ed ures f

o

r me as

urin g p h y s

ic

a l c harac t e ris tic

s

, inc lu

di ng power, tem per atur e, fl ow, pr es

s u re, and ther ma l e nerg y and des c r ibes s

t and ards for me as

uring th

e p e rfor ma nc e of c h ill ers , fa n s

, pum ps

, motors
, boi lers /fur nac es

, an d t

herm a l s torag e.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-57.4.1 Equipment Many tools are available which he lp collect and analyze sys t em

- w ide HVAC data, control d a ta, and lighting perform a nce data. Data m a y incl ude power (kW ) , energy (kWh), and operating param eters s u ch as tem p eratu r e, hum idity, p r essu re, f l ow rate s, statu s, and lighting lev els. Data can be collected through one-tim e measurem ents or can be recorded in user-defined intervals. Prices, app l ication s, and com p lexity of these tools vary.
For data collection, storage, and reporting, there are two ge ne r al ca tegor ies of m e tering equipm ent for M&V activities: data l oggers and energy m anagem ent system s. Data loggers range from simple battery-powered portable devices to m o re com p lex tools that can collect inputs from up to 30 transducers. Th e m o st sim p le portable data log g ers collect inform ation about a single variable (such as li ght fixture on/of f status or amp draw from a motor). Oth ers can capture m u ltiple inputs (suc h as voltage, p o wer factor, and am perage) and perform som e calculations. Portable data loggers tend to be inexpensive per unit, but are m ore lim ited in applications. T h e downloading of data is usually done m a nually off site through a connection to a personal com puter, although m o de m connections are som etim es used. Batterypowered portable loggers can offer non-intrusiv e monitoring within an occupied area, are rela tive l y sim p le to use, and are inex pensive. Mo re com p lex data logg ers can collect infor m ation from a range of different inputs, conduct som e analyses, prepare reports , and, typically through mode m s, download inform ation for rem o te data collection. Perm anently installed data loggers tend to be re latively exp ensive (w hen transducer and installation co sts are included) and, if hardwired, not very portable, which is an issue wh en only short-term m easurem ents are required.
Energy m anagem ent system s are used for contro lling system s. These would logically be an excellent op tion sin ce su ch system s are often alrea dy in place and have data collection, trending, and com puting capability; however, caution shou ld be exercis ed, as m any system s are not designed f o r

data s t orage and repor tin g, and m any operato rs a r e not f am iliar with M&V requirem ents.

7.4.2 Sensor and Meter Accuracy and Calibration Before any data are collected, all sensors and mete rs should be reviewed to ensure that they are appropriate for the application. The accuracy of the device u sed to co llect data can significantly affect the validity of the data co llected and increase the level of error that is introduced in any calcu lations. Of ten, m easurem ent err o r will b e th e prim ary source of unce r ta inty in a s avings value. Using high-quality sensors for gathering k e y data can help increas e the accuracy of savings es tim ates. Measurem ent uncertainty is discussed in detail in Section 5.4.
Equipm ent accuracies p r ovided by th e m anufacturer are m eaningful only if the equipment is in calibration. Sensors and m e ters used to coll ect M & V data sho u ld be ca libr a ted to kno wn standards (such as those of the National In stitute of Standards and Technology). Forms indicating that calibration ha s been conducted are a required part of the M&V reports.

For the ca lib ration to be valid, the eq uipm ent used to calibrate the sensors and m e ters must be of a greater accuracy than the sensors or m e ters them selves. Calibration m e thods for a variety of applic ation s are in cluded in ASHRAE Guideline 14.

7-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP7.4.3 Metering Duration
The duratio n of m eterin g and m onitoring m u st be sufficient to ensure an accurate rep r esentation of the am ount of energy used by the affected equipm ent both before and after project installation. The appropriate m easurem ents should be taken w ith in a specified and repr esentative tim e period. These m easurem ents can then be us ed to determine tim e -of- use and ann ual energy consum ption. The tim e period of m easurem ent m u st be repr esentative of the l ong-term (i.e., annual) perform a nce of the ECM or system . For exam ple, lighting retrofits in a 24-hour warehouse that is operated every day of the year m a y require onl y a few days of m e tering. However, a chiller retrofit m a y require m e tering throughout the co oling season or perhaps for 1 m onth each season of the year.
The required length of the m e tering period depends on the type of ECM ( s) or system. Som e common scenarios are d i scussed belo w.

 For equipm ent that operates according to a well-defined schedule under a constant load, such as a constan t -speed exhau st fa n m o tor, the period required to determ ine annual savings could be quite short. In such a case, short-term energy savings can be extrapo l ated easily to th e entire year.

 If the projec t’s ene r gy us e varies ac ro ss bot h day and season, as with a i r- c ondition i ng equipm ent, a m u ch longer m onitoring pe riod m a y be required to characterize the system . In a case like that, long-term da ta are used to determ ine annual energy savings. W h en the m eter i ng is com p lete, th e lim its of the m o del used to ch arac ter i ze the system must be defined. For example, if data were taken on the chille r system only when the outside air tem perature ranged from 50 ° F to 70 ° F, then th e resulting chiller m odel would probably be vali d only within the m odel lim its of 50 ° F to 70 ° F.

 For som e types of projects, m e tering tim e periods m a y be uncertain. For exam ple, there is still controversy ove r how long lighting operating hou rs m u st be m easured in office buildings to determ ine a representa tive indication of annual operating hours. In these s ituations, an agreem ent is req u ired be twe en the pro j e ct par tie s to determ ine th e appropriate m easure m ent period and accuracy lev el for the E C M(s) or sy stem s under consider atio n. For ligh t ing projects, 3 weeks of monitoring during non-holiday periods is ty pically ef f

ective.

 For som e pr ojects, the m e tering tim e period can be reduced by forcing a system to go through all of its operating m ode s in a short period of tim e. For exam ple, a variablespeed driv e ventilation s y stem that is controlled by outside air tem perature m a y require m o nths of data collection to cap ture a full range of perform a nce data. However, if the control system were over ridden to force it to operate in various modes, the data collec tion m i ght take only a day. This approach should be used with caution, as a ddition al m o nitor i ng m a y be require d to dete rm ine the sys t e m ’s relationship to independent variables.

7.4.4 Sampling
Sa m pling techniques should be used when it is un realistic to m onitor ev ery piece of equipm ent af

f

ected by a retrof it. Th e sam p ling procedur es o u tlin ed in A ppendix B provide gu ida n ce on selecting a properly sized random sa mple of e quipm ent for monitoring energy-related factors

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-7such as operating hours, load factor, or kW

. The m easurem ents, tak en from a sam p le of equipm ent, can then be used to es tim ate the energy-related factors for the entire population.

A successful sam p le will be sufficien tly repres en tative of the population to enable one to draw reliable inferences about the population as a whol e. The reliability with which the sam p le-based estim ate reflects the true population is a function of specified stat istical criteria, such as the confidence interval and precision level, used in the sam p le design. The r eliab i lity of a sam p lebased estimate can b e com puted only after the m e tered data h a ve been co llected. Before collecting the data, one cannot stat e the level of reliability that a given sample size will yield. However, one can com p ute the sam p le size that is expected to be sufficient to ach ieve a specified reliability level. This is done by us in g projection s of certain values and criteria in th e sam ple size calcu lations.

Based on th e data gathered for a selected pe riod of tim e, the sam p le size required m a y be reduced o r increas ed. If the pro j ectio ns are t oo co nservative, the estim a te will exc eed the reliability re quirem ents. If these pro j ection s prov e to be ove rly optim istic, then the reliability of the es tim ates will fall sh ort of the re quirem ent s, necessita tin g additional data co llec t ion to achieve the specified reliability level. This m e t hod of using projections to calcu late the necessary

sam p le size is the on e ad opted for these guidelines.

7.5 ENERGY CO STS The goal of ESPC is to reduce energ y, water, an d/or operations and m a intenance (O&M) costs at federal facilities. The M&V Plan should be desi gned to provide energy, water, and operating savings inform ation in such a way that co st savings can be reasonably estim a ted.

For exam ple, energy cos t savings will be calcu lated using energy savings and the appropriate cost per unit of energy saved. In m o st cases , the unit cos t of ener gy will be based on the servic ing utility ’s ene r gy rate s chedules at the tim e the pro j ec t is im plem ented. The un it cos t of energy th at will be us ed in calcula tin g energy cos t savings eac h year dur in g the perf or m ance period m ust be defined in sufficien t detail in the contra ct to a llo w savings to be calculated using each of the factors that affect co st savings. These factors in clude ite m s such as (for electric bills ) kW h saved, kW saved, power factor, kW ratchets, and energy rate tie rs. If the ra te use s tim e-of

use period s, the energy and dem a nd savings m a y be calcu lated separately for each tim e-of-use period. More com plex rates, such as dem a nd ra tchets, m a y require additional calculations. The savings calculations ar e straightforward.

De m a nd savings m a y be based on an averag e demand reduction or a m a ximum de m a nd reduction. Average reduction in dem a nd, which is typically not equal to the actual reduction in billing dem a nd, is calculated as the kWh savings during the tim e period in question (usually the utility summer peak period) divided by the hour s in the tim e period. Maxim u m reduction in dem a nd is typically the reduction in the uti lity -metered m aximum de m and under terms and conditions specified by the servicing utility. For exam ple, the billing peak m a y be based on the

m axi m u m building kW load m easured in 15-m i nute in terva l s and coinc i d ent with the utility pe ak dem a nd period. The m a xim u m de m a nd reduction is usually calculated to determ ine savings in utility pe ak dem a nd charges. Thus, if utility dema nd savings are to b e determ ined, each site m u st def i ne 1) ho w the reduc tion will af f

ect the u t il ity bill and 2) h o w the dem a nd reduction will be calculated f or purposes of pa ym ents to the ESCOs.

7-8 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPFor performance contracts with cost savings base d on peak or billing period load reductions, an M&V m e thod should be selected that provides energy savings data by tim e-of-use periods corresponding to the facility’s rate structure. For exam ple, at a federal prison, the water heating peak load m i ght be 252 kW over a 2-m i nute av eraging period, 228 kW over 15 m i nutes, or 192 kW using 60-m i nute time periods of analysis. Cons iderab le error in cost s avings es tim ates are introduced by data that do not correspond to the rate structure ( 15 m i nutes, in this case). Thus, it is critical th at M&V Plans reflect th e effects of tim e-of-use and block rate schedules. Sim ilarly, if the utility’s peak dem a nd period is from 9 a m t o 5 pm , any dem a nd savings realized outside of these hours will not resu lt in re ductio ns in dem a nd charges.

When determ ining the value of the energy, cau tion should be exercise d to ensure that a conservative estim ate is used that will not overv alue savings. The m a rginal cost of energy (i.e., the actual co st for the last portion of energy us ed for each m o nth) should be used, rath er than average v alu es. The m arginal co sts can be dete rm ined by reducing the u tility usage by 1 kW h or 1 kW , f o r electr i city, an d then re calc u lating th e b ill. Bec ause there can be m any f i xed fees, dem a nd cha r ges, and distribution charges, it is importan t that average v alu es are no t us ed and that on ly co mmodity-based charg es are in cluded

. The ESCO m a y propos e rates to use, but it is up to the agency to ensure th at the correct rates are applied and the ar ithm etic is cor r ec t. At a m i nim u m, the ESCO m ust provide the unit cost of fuel for each sou r ce of savin g s in the M & V Plan.

7.5.1 Using Escalation Rates For each pro j ect, the ES CO and agency m u st mu tually agree upon both th e unit cost of energy for each fuel source and any escalation factors th at m ay be applied du ring the perform ance period. Escalation rates are often em ployed in lon g -term contr acts to estim ate th e f u tur e values of energy more accu rately. Although higher valu es of energy will prov ide better cash -flow for the project, overvaluing savings is a serious concern that can cau se budgetary problem s for the agency.

A comm on s ource on which to base this rate of ch ange would be the energy price escalation rates projected annually by the DOE En ergy Inform ation Adm i nistration (EIA). As these ra tes vary from year to year by region, fuel type, and rate schedule, it can be difficult to condense these variables into one annual average rate for all pr oject sources, which is the preferred approach.
The DOE has created a tool, Ener gy Escalation R a te Calculator (EERC), which can calculate a single appropriate escalation rate to u se over th e e n tir e contrac t term . The EERC uses percen tage of base-year cost sav i ngs attribut able to each fuel in the p r oject, comm ercial or industrial rate type, project location, and start and duration of pe rform ance or contract p e riod. I t then retr ieve s the m atching EIA rates and calcu lates the weigh t ed average escalation rate in real term s (excluding inflation) and nom i na l te rm s (including inf l ation ) . Th e default inflation rate, which can be edited, is the long-term inflation rate published annually on April 1 by FEMP for use in life-cycle co st analyses o f energy and wate r conservation and renewable energy projects.

The EERC- calcu lated average annu al escalation ra te, when a pplied to the base-ye ar c o sts or savings of ESPC projects, results in approxi m a tely the sam e future total amounts over the contract period as do the EIA-projected variable rates, m a king the EERC rate a reasonable proxy

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-9rate for escalating contract paym ents. EERC can be downloaded from the FEMP website. 32 It is updated on April 1 of each year with the latest EIA energy price data.
Escalation rates for other savings, su ch as O&M costs, shou ld be dete rm ined separ ate ly f r om energy rates, since inflation in labor and m a terial costs m a y be substantially different from inf l ation in e n ergy costs

7.6 AGENCY WITNESSING OF M&V ACTIVITIES
In federal E SPCs, federal agencies are expected to:

 W itness baseline, post-installation, first-year, and annual M&V inspections

 W itness the comm issioning of installed ECMs

 Approve req u ired subm ittals in writin g These inspections will help ensure that all sche duled activities are proper ly conducted, increase the conf iden ce in th e doc um entation subm itted to the f edera l agency by th e ESCO, and ensure that the agency representa tive is apprised of any ongoing perfor m ance issues. Agency participation in the M&V activi ties does not tak e the place o f a thorough technical review of all subm ittals.

As detailed in Section 10 of this docum ent, witnessing of key M&V activities by a knowledgeable agency representati ve is strongly suggested, and s hould be clearly specified in the pro j ect-s pecific M & V Plan.

7.7 REPORTING
The M&V subm ittals detailed in the M&V Plan are the Pos t -Installation Report, the Annual Reports, and any additional peri odic reports required. Reporting form ats for these rep o rts a re defined by the Super ESPC’s m a ster contract. Sp ecific con t ent requ irem ents, schedu les, and approval p r o cedures for each ESPC project are d e fi ned in the project-sp ecific M&V Plan. All of the subm ittals, however, should a dhere to the sam e general standards and procedures.

7.7.1 Communicating M&V Activities to Federal Agencies ESCOs must notify the f e deral agency whenever th ey ar e abo u t to ins t a ll and calibra te m etering equipm ent, rem ove m e te ring equipment, or perfor m a site inspection. Enough lead-tim e m u st be given in case the federal agency needs to witnes s the activities or conduct a site inspection before the equipm ent is either installed or rem ove d. The federal ag ency can con duct progres s inspec tions of m ete ring, as required.

7.7.2 Format and Content For Super ESPC projects, the form at and conten t of the key reports are p r escrib ed, an d are included in Appendix C of this docum ent. In general, all relevan t d o cum e ntation should be included with the M&V subm ittals, and these data should be provided in bot h electronic and hard-copy form ats, as specified by the federal

32 FEMP’s webs it e is http://www1.eere. ener gy.gov/femp/

.

7-10 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPagency. W h en subm ittin g an M&V report, ESCOs should pro vide the d a ta supporting the M&V activities. D a ta form ats should be specified in th e M&V Plan, and both the or iginal data and final data analyses should be subm itted in support of s u rveys, sav i ngs estim ates, and calculations. Metered data m u st be furnished in form ats that are usable by the federal agency and based on products or software that are pub licly available. For billing an alysis and com puter simulation M&V m e thods, electronic and hard-copy input and output files m ust be provided. If special sof t ware pro ducts ar e req u ired f o r th e reading o r a n alysis of E S CO subm ittals, the f ede ral ag ency
m ay reject the data o r re quest th at th e ESCO supply the sof t ware.
7.7.3 Approvals Federal facility personnel ensure that the report and verificati on docum entation are complete and accurate and in com p liance with th e contract a nd approved site-specific M & V Plan. The federal agency m u st approve th e se subm ittals in wr iting. Federal Acq uisition Reg ulation (FAR) 33 provisions require agencies to ve rify in writing that the term s and conditions of the contract agreem ent have been m et, prior to paym ent by the governm e nt. Verbal comm unication

concern i ng changes or a cceptan ce of ESCO M& V subm ittals is not bin d ing on the federal agency. All subm ittals, c h anges to su bm ittals, an d approvals m u st be in writing and signed by an authorized p arty, as indicated in the ESPC Task Order.
If the federal agency believes that the conditions at the site are not accu rately represen ted by the ESCO’s subm ittals, the ESCO will b e allowed to address the problem and m ake a new subm ittal. If the ESCO and federal agency cann o t agree on s ite cond ition s, however, a contract o r project

m a y be modified or terminated. The f e deral agency’s inspection personnel do not have the author ity to approve cha nges to con t ract do cum e nts or ESCO subm ittals to the f e dera l agency. The f ederal agency’s authorized repr esenta tiv e m u st approve subm ittals a nd any chan ges.
7.8 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS For Super ESPC projects, an annual inspection of the energy conservation m easures is required by DOE’s ESPC regulations. 34 This inspection m a y be conducted by the federal agency or the ESCO, and is intend ed to verif y tha t the in stalled equipm ent/system s have been properly

m aintained, continue to operate cor r ectly, and co ntinue to ha ve the poten tia l to gene r ate th e predic ted sa vings. Typic ally, the ESCO will perf orm an annual site in spe ction while being

accom p anied by an agen cy representative. Any m easurem ents or m onitoring requ ired by the M&V Plan m a y be executed in conjunction with this s ite v i sit. The f edera l agency c an witness

m e tering, as required.
Although an Annual Report from the ESCO is requi red to substantiate savings guarantees and adjust payments, if required, m ore frequent verification activities can be appropriate. This ensures that the M&V monitoring and reporting sy stem s are working pro p erly ; it allo ws f i netuning of m e asures throughout the year based on operational f eedback, and it avoids surprises at the end of th e year.

33 Feder al Ac q u is iti o

ns

Regul ati on
34 See DOE Fi nal Ru le, 10 CFR 4 36 S u bpart B – Met h o

d

s and Proc ed ures f

o

r Ener gy

Sav i n

g

s Perfor manc e Con trac ting , Apr il 1 0
, 199 5, Sec t ion 43 6.3 7

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-11These per i o d ic insp ectio ns by both the ESCO and ag ency sta f f will help ensure th at a ll sch eduled activ ities are properly co nducted, in crease the co nfidence in the docum entation subm itted to the federal agen cy by the ES CO, and ensure that th e agency rep r esentative is apprised of any ongoing perfor m ance issues. Agency participatio n in the M&V activities does not tak e the place of a thorough technical review of a ll subm ittals, including An nual Reports

. The Annual Reports should include:

 Results/d oc um entation of perfor m a nce m easurem ents and inspections

 Realized sav i ngs for the year (energ y , energy cos t s, O&M cos t s, other)

 Com p arison of actual savings with the guaranteed am ounts

 Details of all analysis and savings calcul ations, including commodity rates used and any baseline adjustm e nts perform e d

 Summ ary of O&M activities conducted

 Details of any perform a nce or O& M issues that require attention

Detailed rev i ew instructions are prov ided in Chapter 10 of this docum ent.

7.9 O&M AND OTHER ENERGY-RELATED SAVINGS O&M and other energy-related cost savings are allowable in f e de ral ESPCs, and are defined as reduction in expenses (other than energy cost savings) related to ener gy and water consum ing equipm ent. Energy-related cost savings can re sult from avoided expenditures for operations,

m aintenance, equipm ent repair, or eq uipm ent replacem ent due to the ESP C project. T h is includes cap ital funds for projects (e. g ., equipm e n t rep l acem ent) that, because of the ESPC project, will not be necessary. Sour ces of energy-related savings include:

 Avoided current or planned capital expense

 Transfer of responsibility for O&M and/or equipm ent repair and replacem e nt (R&R) to the ESCO

 Avoided renovation, renewal, or rep a ir cos t s as a re sult of replacing old and unreliable equipm ent Specific guidance on docum e nting and verifying O&M savings in federal ESPCs was developed by a industry-governm e nt working g r oup. The resulting do cu m e nt, How To Determ ine and Verify Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Savi ngs in Federal Energy Savings Perform a nce Contracts, is included as Appendix C.
The genera l rule to f o llo w is that any savings c l aim ed f r om O&M ac tivities m u st result in a rea l decrease in expenditures. O&M budget baselines cannot be based on what the agency should be spending for proper O&M; baseline expenditures m ust be based on what the agency is spending. The agency’s O&M exp enditu res after im plem enta tion need to decrease for savings to be considered real. “Sav ing s” due to red i rected labor or O&M efforts that do not reduce real expenditures cannot be claim e d as savings under the Super ESPC program

. For exam ple, labor reductions for agency staff m a y not qualify as “real savings” if labor expenditures do not decrease.

7-12 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPThe approach for calculating energy-related co st savings m i rrors the concepts used for determ ining energy savings—performance-period la bor and eq uipm ent costs are subtracted from baseline values, plus or m i nus any adjustm e nts required. S i milarly, determ ining the appropriate level of ef f

o rt to inves t in th e M&V of energy-related cost saving is th e s am e as for energy cost savings—th e level of M&V rigor will vary acco rd ing to 1) th e value of th e project an d its expected b e nefits, and (b) the risk in not ach ieving the benef its. A graded approach towards

m easuring and verifying O&M a nd R&R savings is advised.

Baseline O & M and R&R costs should be base d on actual budgets and ex penditu res to the greatest ex tent practical. This essentially “m easures” the baseline consum ption of these parts or services. Th e use of estim a ted e xpenditures should be avoided if at all po ssible. Perform a nce period or baseline adjustm e nts are used to reflect a ny site-specific factors th at would affect costs.

Som e additional key points to keep in m i nd are as follows.

 An agency’s decision to comm it ongoi ng funds from O&M budgets towards ESPC project paym ents has a long-term impact and must be docum ented adequately for future agency staff in both the M& V plan and the annual reports.

 Agencies sh ould m aintain O&M cost records tha t will be ne e d ed to docu m ent baseline O&M costs. These records should be included in the Super ESPC proposal.

 ESCOs should include detailed inform ati on in annual reports to clearly convey the source of O&M saving s as well as s u fficient data to verify any savings calculations perform e d.

 Escrow acco unts can help allev i ate R&R risk for both the ES CO and agency.

 Using an Option B or continuous m easur em ent approach to tracking ongoing O&M savings can be cum b ersom e to the agency b ecaus e of the requ ired record k eeping and accounting for ongoing changes at the site.
More specific guidance on how to determ ine and verify energy related savings, including

exam ples, is included in Appendix C.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 7-137-14 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 8 Commissioning

8.1 OVERVIEW
Comm issioning of installed equipm ent and system s is considered industry best-practice and is required on projects im plem ented under DOE’s Super Energy Savings Perfor m ance Contract (Super ESPC) . Comm i ssioning ensures that system s are designed, installed, functionally tested in all m odes of operation, and are capable of be in g operated a nd m aintain ed in conf or m ity with the design intent (i.e., appropria te lig hting levels, cooling c ap acity, com f ortab l e tem p eratur es, etc.). Benefits of comm i ssioning include in creased building com f ort, reduced operational problem s, lower installation costs, fewer contractor call-backs, and im proved energy perform ance. The comm i ssioning req u irem ents outlin ed herein have been adapted fro m industry standard procedures detailed in ASHRAE’s comm issioning guidelines. 35

Comm issioning (Cx) is a process that begins at project c onception and typically ends after projec t acc e p tance. Key activ ities in the com m i ssioning process include docum e ntation of design intent, design reviews, execution of constructio n checklists, s y stem atic functional testing of equipm ent and system s, oversight of training fo r operations and m a intenance staff, and follow-up on any warranty issues.

Comm issioning usually requires ta k i ng perform a nce m easurem ents to ensure that sys t em s are working pro p erly. Becau se of the overlap in comm issioning and post-in stallation m easurem ent and verification (M&V) activities, som e people m a y confuse the two. Th e dif f

erence is tha t
comm issioning ensures that system s are functio ning properly; post-inst allation M&V quantifies how well the system s are working from an energy standpoint.
Following the com m issioning proce ss will he lp realize the f u ll potenti al of the energ y conservation m easures (ECMs), but key issues m u st be an ticipated and p l anned. Thes e issues are discussed in this se ction, and include:

 Allocating adequate resources and ti m e to the commissioning process

 Appointing a comm issioning agent (CxA), and/or prescrib ing the affiliation and qualif ica tion s required

 Providing an overview of roles and respons ibilities for CxA, agency, and ESCO

 Making pro v isions to do cum ent the design in ten t for each sy stem or ECM

 Incorpor atin g a process f o r design re views and s u bm ittal app r ovals

 Specify comm issioning reporting requirem ents.

8.2 COMMISSIONING PROCESS FOR ESPCS Because of the design-b uild nature o f ESPCs, the details of th e comm issioning activities are developed along with the project sc ope, rather than being explici tly defined at the beginning of the pro j ect. In an ESPC, the comm issioning activities are:

35

ASHRAE Guide l i ne 1- 19 96 T he HV AC Commis s

i o

n in

g Proc es

s and AS HRAE Guidel ine 0

- 200 5 Th e Co mmi s s

i oning Proc es

s

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 8-1 Specified in the contract

 Def i ned explic itly af ter design

 Im ple m ented during construction

 Com p leted prior to f i nal projec t acc e p tance

 Reviewed after pro j ect acceptan ce. The sections below outline the key comm issioning ac tiv ities and conside r ations in an ESPC. The

com plete commissioning process is described in ASHR AE Guideline 0 36

. 8.2.1 Specifying Commissioning Re quirements in the Contract The scope of work for a n ESPC project usually evolves from an investm e nt grade energy audit, which includes descriptions of energy conserva tion m easures (ECMs), an alyses of en ergy and cost im pacts, and the basis for a savings or pe rform a nce guarantee. The contract negotiations and scope are completed based on the conceptual desi gn presen ted in the en er gy audit. For com plex projects, the design is ty pically abou t 30% com p lete a t the ti m e of contract award. Since the detailed design of the project often o ccurs after the contract is in pl a ce, it is im practic al to def i ne all details of the project’s comm issioning in the c ontrac t . I t is critica l , however, to include suf f i cient de tails on the c o m m issi oning process that will be fo llowed for the duration of the projec t to en sure the b en ef its of comm issioning are realized.
The contract should outline the project’s speci fic comm issioning requirements. The key item s that shou ld be specified include:

 The af f iliation and qualif i cations of the Com m issioning Agen t (CxA)

 Roles and responsibilities of CxA, ESCO and agency, including witnessing of Cx activ ities

 Process th at will be f o llo wed to docum ent the design intent or agency’s p r oject requirem e nts for each en ergy conservation m easure (ECM) o r system

 Requirem ents f o r agenc y or third-pa rty des i gn re views or sub m ittal appro v als

 Schedule for developing and approving a Cx plan , includ ing expected con t ent such

as:

− Pre-f unction al insp ection s

− Functional testing procedures

− Required use of m a nufa c tu rer start-up procedures

− Plan for seasonal testing and condi tional acceptance, if needed

 Contents and tim ing of the Final Cx Re port, System s Manual, and any periodic project reports

 Requirem e nts for CxA oversight of O&M training

36

ASHRAE Guide li ne 0- 20 05 T he C o mmis s

ion in g Proc es

s

8-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP Plan for warranty walk-though or other follow-up procedures
The contract should designate both the affiliatio n and qualification s of the CxA that will lead the

comm issioning process f or the project. The key res ponsibilities of the CxA are: 1) directing the

com m issioning team in the com p letion of the commissioning requirem e nt s; 2) overseeing or perform i ng the comm issioning tests; and 3) verifying the adequacy of the comm issioning results.

In the ideal scenar io, the CxA will be f r om an independent third par t y r e porting d i re ctly to the agency. In s o m e cases th e CxA m a y be a qualified m e m b er of the agency ’s staff, but sufficient tim e and res ources m u st be allo cated f o r f u lf illm en t of this ro le. Typically, it is a cha lle nge to sim p ly identif y an in-ho u se proje ct m anger, m u ch less a Cx A.

Of ten in ESPCs, the CxA m a y be f r om the ener gy servic e c o m p anies (E SCO). In this situa tion, the CxA should not be part of the design or constr uction m a nagem e nt team, but another individu al th at m eets the prescribed q u alific ations. In m a ny cases, how ever, utilizing project funds to engage a th ird p a rty CxA, rather than have the ESCO utilize in ternal resou r ces, is advisab l e. W h ile it is e ssential that contra ctor s verify and test the installed system s, for m al

comm issioning requires independent oversigh t which ensur es that the age n cy’s bes t in teres t s a r e
m aintained.
Key qualifications for the indi v i dual acting as CxA include o n site availab ility, expe rie n ce executing the Cx process, hands-on experience in testing and troubleshooting applicable system s, fa m iliarity with a variety of testing equipm ent, and detailed understand ing of the system s and equipm ent affected by the project.
In addition to identifying the affiliation and quali fications for the CxA, the agency s hould specify a representative to witnes s the Cx activities and to resolve any disputes that m i ght arise. The agency’s Cx repres enta tive will a l so be expected to provid e s o m e oversig ht and appro v al of the

com m issioning activ ities.
If not already included, the cont ract should m andate the developm ent of a written design intent for each system or ECM installed that docum ents the agency ’s project requ irem ents. Specific operational param e ters, design details, perform a n ce requ irem ents (cond i tions in addition to energy savings), or other pr ovision s that are estab lishe d by a design intent are:

 Operation al param eters, such as tem p eratu r e setback capab ilities or operator interface features

 Requirem e nts for design details or ancillar y item s, such as sensors, valv es, access, elec trical, ex isting equip m ent dem o lition, e t c.

 Perform a nce requirem e nts, such as equipm ent effi ciencies, or ton-hours of chilled water to b e delive r ed

8.2.2 Defining Commissioning Activ ities During Project Design
Once the ESPC contract has been aw arded, any rem a ining design and engineering of the project scope is completed. Commissioning related activi ties perform e d by the Cx team in the design phase include:

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 8-3 The ESCO c o m pletes the project design

 The agency and CxA review design a nd approve equipm ent subm ittals

 The ESCO and agency d o cum e nt the design in ten t for each E C M or system

 The CxA de velops a draft Cx Plan, incl uding the specifics of all pre-functional inspections and functional perform a nce tests

 The CxA de velops Cx specifications for the project (if needed)

 The agency and ESCO r e view and accept Cx do cum e nts

 The CxA issues Final Co mmissioni n g Plan and s p ecifications

8.2.3 Implementing Commissioning Activities During Construction After the design and commissioning plan have b een finalized, construction begins. Cx-related activ ities th a t occur du rin g the cons tr uction pha se include :

 Construction is observed by the agency ’s Cx rep r esentative and the CxA

 Periodic Cx m eetings are held with th e proje ct tea m ;

 Cx progress reports ar e s u bm itted by the CxA

 Pre-f unction al insp ection s are com p leted and ce rtif ied by the ESCO prior to equipm ent start-up and f unctional testing

 Manufacturer start-up proce dures are com pleted by the ESCO or m a nufa c turer’s repres entative

8.2.4 Completing Commissioning Activi ties Prior to Project Acceptan ce Once construction has b een com p leted and read y for acceptance by the agency, the f unctional perform ance tests are ex ecuted and the proced u r es are do cu m e nted by the CxA. The CxA docum ents the tes t resu lts, explicitly includ i ng how the agency’s project requirem e nts or design inten t pres cribed for each system were m et. Any item s that did not pass are tracked and presented to the pro j ect team in a deficien cy log. The ESCO t hen rectifies the item s and perform s a retest in th e presen ce o f the CxA to confirm that the item s have been fix e d. The deficiency log is then updated by the CxA, noting the date a nd corrective action taken. T he agency may choose to spec if y consequences f o r m u ltiple f ailed re tes t s to lim it the possibility o f excessive use of the CxA’s tim e.
It is comm on for the CxA to oversee and ensure the adequacy of the O&M training in order to ensure th at the ECMs and system s are properly maintained an d operated. Som e ECMs, such as natural ventilation, daylighting, night tim e flushi ng, and use of building therm al m ass, result in a building that behaves dif f

erently than a conve ntional building. It is im portant that the

comm issioning contractor, building m a intenan ce staff, and occupants understand how the building works. For example, an energy m a nagem e nt behavioral program for e m ployees is one way to educate building occupants.

8-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPDepending on the preference of the agency, the E S CO then assem b les the Final Commission ing Report or a System s Manual, as pres cribed in the contract. At a m i ni m u m, a Final Cx Report should be provided, whic h typically includes:

 Comm issioning summ ar y report

 ESCO-certif ied pre

- f unctiona l check lists

 Com p leted m anufactur ers startup sh eets

 Results of functional testing and ve rification of system perform a nce

 Detailed operating procedures /sequences of operations

 Closed-out deficiency log

 Overview of training provided to O&M staff.

Som e agencies m a y prefer to receive a m ore co mprehensive System s Manual, which is required for LEED 37 certif ic ation. A System s Manual typically brings together co mprehensive project docum entation, including:

 Agency’s project requirem e nts or design intent

 Schem atic system drawings

 Approved subm ittals

 Recommended record keeping procedures

 Maintenance procedures and schedules

 Test requirem ents for ongoing commissioning

8.2.5 Post-Accept ance Phas e Commissioning Activities
Comm issioning activities that typically extend b e yond Project Acceptance include d e ferred functional testing and wa rranty verification.
Often, som e functional testing m a y be postpone d until s eason al condition s are app r op riate to evaluate the system . W h en som e functional testing has been deferre d, acceptance of the project is conditional upon the success of the scheduled tests.
Most equip m ent installed will hav e a 1-yea r warranty p r ovided by the m a nuf acture r . A warranty check-out with the ESCO after 8 to 10 m onths of operation is a recomm e nded comm i ssioning activity. Reviewing the equipm ent warranties and perform i ng a si te walk-though at this tim e can identif y any problem s that m ay still be covered b y a m anuf acturer ’s or co ntrac t or ’s warran t y.

37

Lea ders h i p

i n

En ergy & Env iro

nm e n

tal Des ign

is

a Gr een B u il di ng Ra tin g Sy s tem, dev el op ed by t

he U.S . Gre en Bu ild in g Cou n c

il.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 8-58-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 9 Planning and Reporting for Operations & M a intenance

In perform a nce contracts, operation and m a inte nance (O&M ) is c r itica l to m aintain the perform a nce of the installed equipm ent, to ach iev e the guaran t eed energy savings, and to
m i ni m i ze the chance of unexpected repair and re placem ent is sues arising for the term of the contract. This chapter provides guidance on:

 Allocating O&M and repair and repl acem ent (R&R) respons ibilities; and

 Incorporating O&M reporting requirem e nts.

9.1 OVERVIEW
Either the E S CO or the governm ent (or the governm ent’s representative) m a y perfor m O&M activ ities on equipm ent installed as p art of an ESPC. However, the ESC O is ultim ately responsible for ensuring the perf orm a nce of new equipm ent installed as part of the ES PC throughout the duration of the ESPC contract term. The governm e nt is typically responsible for existing equ i pm ent.

In an ide al s cenar io, the ESCO will b o th ope ra te and perf orm all m ainten ance ac tivities on equipm ent installed in an ESPC project. In m a ny cases, however, it is no t practical for the ESCO to car ry out these a ctiv ities. Of ten, the site is accustom ed to perform i ng O&M and the cost of reallocating these respon sibilities is n o t be feasib le within the ESPC contract term , since serv ices must be paid from savings. In other instances , lim ited site ac ce ss or other issues m a y make governm e nt O&M preferable.

A critical factor in the s uccess of an ESPC is to ensure that the O&M plan for new equipm ent relates well to the O&M approach for existing equ i pm ent. This is especially true when new and existing equ i pm ent are located in the sam e facil ity or when existing equipm ent has a potential effect on the operation or savings achieved by ne w equipm ent. Clear definition of roles and responsibilities for O&M contribute toward prop er coordination of O&M activities for new and existing equ i pm ent

9.2 STEPS TO PLAN & REPORT ON O&M AND R&R ISSUES The activities required for ensuring proper pl anning and reporting for O&M and R&R are summarized in the Tab l e 9-1, a nd discussed in this section.

Table 9-1 Steps to Plan & Report on O&M and R&R Issues Step 1 : Dev e l o p ESPC con t ract Risk & Respon sib ility Matrix to all o cate ov erall respon sib ilities. Step 2 : Dev e l o p d e tail ed O&M resp on sib ilities and repo rting req u i rem e n t s in th e co n t ract. St ep 3: Devel o p p r ojec t-specific O&M chec klists. St ep 4: ESC O as sem b les O & M m a nual s & pr ovi des t r ai ni n g t o si t e st aff. St ep 5: Go ve rnm e nt (o r ESC O ) pe ri o d i cal l y rep o rt s on m a i n t e nanc e p r oce d ures p e rf orm e d. St ep 6: ESC O s u bm i t s A n n u al R e po r t on p r oject pe r f o r m a nce.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 9-19.2.1 Step 1: Develop ESPC Contract Risk & Responsibility Matrix Early in the Super ESPC project developm ent pha se, the agency and the ESCO allocate overall project responsibilities by com p leting the Risk & Responsibili ty Matrix. Key item s related to O&M and R&R are included in the Perform a nce s ection of the Risk & R e sponsibility Matrix, and cover four topics: Equipm ent Perfor m a nce, Operations, Maintenance, and Equipment Repair & Replacem ent. These s ection s are d etailed in th e table belo w.
The ESCO i s respons ible for the guaranteed savings of the contract and thus ultim ately responsible for all O&M related item s. The resp onsibility for hands-on perform a nce these item s
m a y be accomplished by the ESCO or the Govern m e nt, or shared, as ag reed upon for the specific project. Financial, security, or other f actor s m ay cause the gov ernm ent to decide to accept responsibility for conducti ng the O&M activities.

Table 9-2 Excerpt from R i sk & Respon sibility Matrix 38

3. Performa nce:

a. Equipment performa nce: The contractor has control over the selection of eq uipment and is responsible for it s proper installat i on, com m

ission ing, and performance. The contractor has responsibility t o demonstrate that the new improvements meet expected p erformance levels includ ing spe c

ified equi pment capacity, standar ds of service, an d efficiency. Clarify who is responsi b le for initial a nd l o ng-term perfor mance, how it will be verifie d, and wha t will be done if perfor mance does not mee t expectati o ns.

b. O p erati ons : Performance of the day-to-day operations activiti es is negotiab l e and can impact performance. However, the contractor bears the ultimate risk regardl ess of which party performs the activity. Clarify whic h party will perform equi pme n t ope rations, the i m plications of equipme n t c o ntro l, how cha nges i n operating pr ocedures will be handled, and how pr ope r operati ons wil l be assured.

c. Preventive Mainte nance : Performance of day-to-day maintenance activiti e s is negotiable an d can impact performance. However, the contractor bears th e ultimate risk re gardless of which party performs the activit y

. Clarify how l o ng-te r m preventive mai n te nance will be assured, especially if the pa rty responsible for long-ter m

performa nce is not responsi b le for maintena nce (e.g., contractor prov ides maintenance checkli s t and repor ting frequency )

. Clarify who is responsi b le f o r perf ormi ng l o n g

- t erm preve ntive main te na nce t o

mai n tai n operati onal pe rforma nce t h ro ug ho ut the c o ntract ter m

. Clarify wha t will be done if i n ade qua te prev entive mai n tenance impac t s performa nce.

d. Equi pme n t Repair and Re placement : Perf ormance of day-to-day repair an d replacement of contractor-installed equipment is ne gotiable, however it is often tied to project per formance. The contractor bears the ultimate risk reg ardless of which party performs the activit y

. Clarify who is responsi b le for perfor mi ng replacement of fa iled compone nts or equi pme n t repl acement throughout the term of the c o ntract. Specifically ad dress potential impacts on performance due to equipment failure. Specify exp ected equipment life and wa rranties for all insta lle d equipment. Discuss repla c em ent responsibility wh en equipment lif e is shorter than the term of the contract.

9.2.2 Step 2: Develop Det a iled O&M R espons ibilities and Reporting Require ments Once the ESCO and Governm e nt agree-upon O&M related responsibili ties in the Risk & Responsibility Matrix, the detailed requirem e nt s supporting these respon sibilities m u st be included in the contract. For Super ESPC proj ects, the allocation of O&M responsibilities is discussed in the Site Managem e nt Plan, and O&M reporting requirem e nts are defined in the

38

See c o

mpl e te

ES PC Ris k , Res pons ibil ity an d Per form anc e M a trix i n

Sec tion 3.

9-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPM&V Plan. Ensuring th at all related item s are a ppropriately defined requi res careful co ntract developm ent and review

.
W h en the governm ent elects to perfo r m O&M activ ities on n e w equipm e n t, several is sues will require careful rev i ew because th e ESCO m ay be com p ensated by the governm ent to take over the O&M ac tivitie s if ina d equate O& M threa t ens th e re alization of savings, equipm ent reliability or equipm ent life. These issues inclu d e:

 Provisions f o r ESCO to monitor Governm e nt perform a nce of O&M

 Specific O&M record k e eping / re porting requirem e nts by governm e nt

 Procedures f or ESCO review / verification of O&M records

 Im pact of O&M of old equipm ent on new equipm ent

 Define criteria for ESCO to take over operations

 Def i ne criter ia f o r ESCO to take ov er m aintenanc e (Prio r to e quipm ent f ailure)

 How does ESCO get paid for perf orm i ng Governm e nt ’s ac tivities ?

Table 9-3 Excerpt from M&V Plan & Savings Calcu l ations Outline
From W hole Pr oject Da ta / Gl obal Assumptions 2.4 Operations, Pre v

entive Mainten ance, R epair, and Replacement Reporting Requirements 2.4.1 Define Governm ent and ESCO reporting require ments: Summarize key verification a c tivities and reporting respons ibilities of government and ESCO on o perations, preventive maintenance, repair, and replacement items fr om details in ECM specific M&V Pla ns. Define content of reports and rep orting schedule. From E C M Spe c ific M&V Plan (for each ECM ) 3.7.8 Define opera tions, preventive maintena nce, repair, and re pla cement repor ti ng requireme n ts

. Detail verificat i o

n activit i es and r eporting responsibilit ies of go vernment and ESCO on operations, preventive mainte nance, repair, and repla c

ement items. Define contents of report and rep orting schedule, if different than in global sect ion 2.4.

9.2.3 Step 3: Develop Projec t-specific O&M Checklists For projects in which the governm e nt accepts some responsibility for O&M activ ities, the ESCO must define the required activitie s. Although checklists are not always required in the contract, it is a good idea to develop one for those ECMs th at m a y have extensive preventive m a intenance requirem e nts and/or where O&M res ponsibilities m a y be distributed. Typically, the E S CO will develop th e O&M check lists listing s p ecific O& M tasks, their frequency, and the party responsible for carrying out those activities.
For O&M checklists to be effective, both the ES COs and the agency m u st agree on th em and be

com m itted to perf orm i ng the O&M tasks on tim e. For this re ason, it is r e com m ended that the O&M check lists should be subm itted as part of the Final Pro posal. If including finalized checklists is not reasonable, pre lim inary checklists indi cative of the final scope of work should be included.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 9-3Checklists not only provide a good way for ensu ring that routine O&M activities are being perform ed on tim e but it also provides an effective m e thod of docum enting and tracking distributed responsibilities. Developing com prehe nsive O&M checklists that are consistent with the O&M manual is an excellent way to m a xi m i ze the perform a nce of ins t alled equipm ent and

ensure sav i n g s persisten ce over the term of the ESPC contract.

FEMP’s O&M Best Prac tice s Guide 39 has standard O&M checklists f o r chille rs, lightin g, f ans, pum p s, electric m o tors, a i r com p ressors, cooli ng towers, steam traps, and building control system s.
9.2.4 Step 4: ESCO Assembles O& M manuals & Provides Training
As detailed in the contra ct, the ESC O will prepa r e the O&M m a nuals an d provide r e lated tra i ning to the site staf f

. Of ten, the O&M m anuals will be com e the bas i s f o r proper O & M of installed equipm ent and should include any projec t specific O&M checklist s that will be used. Further, the responsibilities of the tw o parties detailed in the O& M m a nuals should be consistent with the contract. Once the O&M m a nual is subm itted by the ESCO, it is the government’s responsibility to check that the O&M m a nuals m eet the requirem en ts specified in the contract and are ad eq uate for gov ernm ent records.
Generally, O&M m a nuals (ASHRAE 1993, 40 1996 41 ) should include a m a ster list of installed equipm ent, including all inform ation pertin ent to proper operations and m a intenance. Inform ation on each piece of m ajor equipm ent typically inclu d es:

 Names and contact in fo rmation for the equipm ent reps, vendors or m a nufacturers;

 Model and siz e and its location in the cam pus/building ;

 Operating instructions including start-up, shut down, e m ergency conditions, safety precau tions, and troub le shooting sug g estions;

 List proced ures that m u st be follow e d while operating equipm ent;

 Preventive maintenance instructio ns including m a intenance, overhaul, and lubrication instructions;

 Checklist th at will be us ed as the b a s i s to perform the O&M procedures. Preventive

m aintenance action s shall preferab ly be categorized by recom m e nded frequencies.

9.2.5 Step 5: Government (or ESCO) P e riodi cally R e ports on Maintenance Performed
Since the ES CO is respo n sible for th e perfor m a nce of new equipm ent for the term of t h e contract, it is often appropriate for the gove rnment to docum ent the completion of any O&M procedures perform e d. The O&M checklists devel oped in S t ep 3 should be utilized to record these a ctiv ities.

39 Operati ons a nd M a int e n

anc e (O&M) Bes t Prac tic

e

s Gu ide - A Gui de T o A c hiev ing

Opera tio nal E ffic ie n

c y V 2. 0 is av ai lab le at http:// www1.eere .energ y .gov/fem p/operations_mai ntenance/om_bp guide.html
40 ASHRAE Guidel in e 4: Pr ep

arati on of Operat ing

an d M a inte na nc e Doc u m enta tio n f

o

r Bui l di n g Sy s tems . Atl ant a, GA: ASHRAE, 199 3.

41 ASHRAE Guidel in e 1: The HVAC Co mmis s

i on in g Proc es

s

. Atlant a, GA: ASHRAE, 199 6.

9-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPAlthough the ESCO is required to subm it annua l reports that include a summary of O&M activ ities, de scribed b elo w, there a r e instan ces when additional reporting on O&M m a y be required. These reporting requirem e nts were id e n tif ied in the Final Propo sal and shou ld be included in the contracted M&V plan.

9.2.6 Step 6: ESCO Submits Annual Report
A m i ni m u m of annual perform a nce reporting is required for Super ESPC projects. The Annual Report Outline provides sufficient O&M repo rting provisions for m ost ECMs. These requirem e nts should be reviewed during contract developm ent. The portions related to O&M in Annual Report Outline are detailed in Table 5.
This step will only provide value if appropriate actions are taken to a ddress issues that are identified during the perf orm a nce period. Fo llowing-up on problem s iden tified in the Annual Report is an im portant key to savings persistence.

Table 9-4 Excerpts from Annual Repo rt Outline for Each ECM 1. Executive Summary 1.5 Performa nce and O&M I ssues

• Note impact of operating deficien c

ies or enhance ments on generation of saving s

• Note impact of maintenance def iciencies on gen eration of saving s

• Detail any deficiencies needed t o be addressed by ESCO or Gov ernment 2. Details for E C M 2.5 O&M a nd Ot her Activi ties 2.5.1 Operating requirements:

• State organizati on(s) responsible for equipment operations . If appropriate, detail how responsibilit ies are shared.

• Summarize key operating procedures and any related verificat i o

n activit i es.

• Detail any deficiencies needed t o be addressed by ESCO or Gov ernment

• Note impact of operating deficien c

ies or enhance ments on generation of saving s 2.5.2 Preventive maint enance requirements:

• State organizati on(s) responsible for performing maintenanc e. If appropriate, detail how responsi bilitie s are shared.

• Verification of scheduled mainten ance items com pleted by ESCO or Government

• Detail any deficiencies needed t o be addressed by ESCO or Gov ernment

• Note impact of maintenance def iciencies on gen eration of saving s 2.5.3 Repair & replacement requireme nts:

• State organization(s) responsible for repair and replacemen t. If a ppropriate, detail how responsibilities are shared.

• Summary of activities conducted this period by ESCO or Govern ment

• Detail any deficiencies needed t o be addressed by ESCO or Gov ernment

• Note impact of equipment deficie ncies on generat ion of saving s

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 9-59-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 10 Review and Oversight of M&V Activities

The purpose of agency oversight and review of M&V activities is to :

 Verify that all M&V activities are conduc ted in accordance with the M&V plan;

 Conf irm that the repor te d resu lts of inspections and m easurem ents are accurate and represent actual operation of the equipm ent or system s involved;

 Confir m contractor paym ents are based on verified savings;

 Ensure that M&V activities are p r op erly docum ented; and

 Follow-up on any outstanding issues identified.

Governm e nt agencies are expected to witness ba seline, post-installation, first-year, and annual

m easure m ent and verification (M&V ) inspections and comm is sioning of installed ECMs, and approve r eq u ired subm ittals in writin g. This requ ires tha t th e a g encies d esignate ind i vidual(s ) to observe th es e inspec tion s, review th e resulting M&V reports by the ESCO, and certify in writing that those re ports a r e ac c eptable to th e agency . D etailed requirem ents for each pro j ect will be included in the project sp ecific M & V Plan.
Depending on available resources, the agency m a y s eek outs i de assis t ance in the review of M&V reports, analyses, and results. The governm e nt repr esentative who is respon sible for oversight of M&V activities and rev i ew a nd acceptance of reported findings should h a ve sign ificant experience in the analysis, design, commissioning or m easurem ent and verification of energy ef

f i ciency pr ojects, and b e f a m iliar with both th e s ite and the d etails of the ESPC project. Recommended qualifications for th e representatives conducting thes e activities are provided in Guide to Government Witnessing and Revi ew of P ost-Installation and Annual M&V. 42

10.1 GOVERNMENT WITNESSING OF M&V ACTIVITIES
W itnessing of M&V activities by kn owledgeable agency rep r esenta tive ( s) is recom m ended prim arily to :

 Assure that both agency and ESCO fully understand the m easurem ent and verification of savings th at jus tif ies p a ym ents being m a de to the ESCO,

 Provide increased confiden ce that savings expected under the ESPC are being achieved, and

 Make a direct link betw een paym ents m a de to the ESCO and the verification that savings are being achieved.

Active invo lvem ent by agency perso nnel in th e verification of savings is recomm ende d by federal oversight agencies, and is re quired to m e et the legisl ative requirem e nts, including the Federal Acq uisition Reg ulations (FAR). FAR provis ions generally require ag encies to verify in

42 Guide to Gov e r

n m

ent W itn

es

s

ing a n d Rev iew o f Pos t-I ns tall ati on and An nua l M&V, Se pte m ber 7, 200 6 by A genc y Witn es

s

ing Work ing Group o f t

he F ede ral ESPC St eeri n g Comm itte

e.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 10-1writing that applicable procurem ent term s and cond itions have been m e t by a contractor, prior to paym ent by the governm ent. Active participation in the M&V process by agency staff can reduce the num b er and intens ity of disputes abo u t perf orm ance, as well as f u lf ill th e legis l ative r equirem ents

. Additiona l guidance on these issu es is presented in Guide to Government Witnessing and Review of Post-Installation and Annual M&V. 43

10.2 USING THE REVIEW CHECKLIST S AND REPORT TEMPLAT E S
Review che cklis ts and tem p lates f o r written rev i ews of M&V Plans, Post-Ins t a lla tion Reports, and Annual Reports are included in Appendix D. These checklists and templates should be utilized to com p lete a th orough evaluation by an agency rep r esentative p r ior to accep ting the subm itted M&V plan, Post-In stallatio n Report, or Annual Report.

10.2.1 Project Documentation Needed
Prior to con ducting the review, ensure that a ll related project docum entation is on-hand. At a

m i ni m u m for any ESPC project report or M&V plan rev i ew, the M&V plan, the final cost schedules, and any contract m odifi cations should be available. Fo r review of Annual Reports, the Post-Installation Report and any previous Annua l Reports are needed. Savings calculations should be carefully scrutinized, a nd will often need to be reviewed in their electron ic form at. Missing docum e ntation can cau se confusion and lead to incorrect conclus i ons.
10.2.2 Using the Checklists The layout o f the checklists follows the prescribed outlin es for M&V Plan s, Post-In stallation and Annual Reports (Appendix C) and each one has two parts - Project Level item s and ECM Level item s. Prior to beginn ing the rev i ew, determ ine th e percen t co ntribu tion of cost sav i ngs for each ECM in the projec t (f ro m cost schedule TO-4 Task Order P e rform a nce Period First Year Estim ated Annual Cost S a vings by E C M), and priori tize the m easures that will save the m o st. The reviewer should custom ize the review checklists found in Appendix D and available electronically 44

. Principal review efforts should be focused on th e m easures providing the largest portion of the cost savings for the project. This strategy of re viewing the principal cost saving m easures first will help the reviewer sp end the sm allest am ount of tim e whil e m axi m i zing the valu e of the review, and is especially helpful when review time is lim ited. Provide a detailed review of the M&V strategy for each m easure if possible.
Read throug h the M&V subm ittal (P lan, Post- i ns tall, or Annu al Report) while ch eckin g of f topics and making notes in the cu s t om ized che cklists. Note th e location of key item s in the f i rs t colum n of the checklists (labeled “Reference Pag e”) so th ey can be eas ily cross-referenced. The inability to comm ent on an item suggests th at re levant information m a y be m i ssing or not in

com p lete form. Item s in the checklist that require follow-up s hould be flagged by placing an

43 Guide to Gov e r

n m

ent W itn

es

s

ing a n d Rev iew o f Pos t-I ns tall ati on and An nua l M&V, Se pte m ber 7, 200 6 by A genc y Witn es

s

ing Work ing Group o f t

he F ede ral ESPC St eeri n g Comm itte

e.
44

Elec tron ic v

e rs ion

s of th e rev iew c h ec

k lis

ts

are av ail a ble at http://www1.eere. energy.gov/fem p/financing/superesp cs_mvresour ces.html

10-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP“X” in the la st colum n of the check lis t (labeled “Follow-Up ?”) a nd noting the deficiency or issue identified in the adjacent colum n . Som e of the item s in the check lists are m arked “Evaluation”. This indicates that additional qua litative assessment is n ecess a ry . These q u alitative is s u es are discussed fo r each individual M&V s u bm ittal typ e in subsequ e nt sec tions of this chapter.

10.2.3 Summarize Findings in Evaluation Report
After readin g the M&V subm ittal (P lan, Post-I ns tallation or Annual Report), filling out the Review Checklists, and evaluating the qualitative issues, the findings from the review should be summarized in a written report. The written review should follow the form at in the appropriate Review Template and include the com pleted Review Checklists. The form at of the report can b e modified as needed to m eet th e specific projec t n eeds. Com p lete a ll th e se ctions and c u stom ize placeho l der text included in the Rev i ew Tem p late, and delete any instructions once co mpleted.

The written review of th e M&V sub m ittal should be provided to the ag ency staff, as well the DOE representative, wh o will archiv e it for pro j ect records. T h e agency s hould follo w up on any questions or action-item s identifi ed through the review, including the ESCO as appropriate, and docum ent any subsequent actions taken.

10.3 REVIEWING M&V PLAN S Evaluating M&V plans is an in exact science that requires technical expertise and exp e rien ce. Ideally, the reviewer will have been involved in the project developm ent phase and has an intim ate understanding of the agen cy’s goals, the agree-upon alloca tion of project risks, site specific issu es, as well as the objectiv es and constraints for each ECM.

The M&V Plan deserves careful evaluation as it def i nes the r equirem ents f o r all f u tur e M&V activ ities. Discussion with the agency on the fi ndings from the M&V plan review is usually warranted, and m a y result in revisi on s to the M & V plan. Of ten, the rev i e w process is ite rative. After an initial review, subseque nt revisions of the M& V plan m ust be asse ssed to de te rm ine if adequate m odif i cations h ave been m ade. W r itten evalua tions of these sub sequent M & V plans are needed to docum e nt follow-up actions taken.

10.3.1 Prescriptive and Qualitative Evaluation Items
The first s t ep in evalu a ting an M&V plan is to co mplete the M&V Plan Review Checklis ts. The inclus ion of all item s on the check lis ts does not indicate the appropr ia tene s s of the M& V approach, only that the required inform ation is in cluded. Each m easure requires ex ten sive qualitative assessm ent, and tips for evaluating th e M&V approach are included therein . All findings resulting from review, including com p leted checklists, should be included in the evaluation report, as discussed in Section 10.2.3.

Evaluate ov erall pro j ec t leve l items :

 Do all M&V strategies included in P l an support the concepts included in Risk & Responsibility Matrix?

 Are contracted energy rates based on actua l ra tes, includ ing tim e-of

- use ra tes and peak dem and ratch ets ? Are m arginal (not blended) energy rates used?

 Are proposed escalation rates based on la test NIST data (see Section 7.5.1)?

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 10-3 Are M&V costs reasonable? Do cost s align with planned activities?

− See TO-2 for Initial M&V cost for each m easure. See TO-4 for perform ance period M&V costs

 Are ancillary paym ents required to m a ke the project cash-flow?

 Is the level of savings pred icted reasonable? W e re projec t lev el sav i ngs c o m p ared to overall site usage? (optional)

 Were all objectives and constrai nts o f the project considered ?

Assess each ECM:

 Review agreed-upon Responsibility Matrix fo r the project. E nsure the M&V strategy for each m e asure conform s to th e agreed-upon risk allo cation

.

 Note the sou r ce(s ) of cos t savings for each m easure (O&M, electricity, dem a nd, natura l gas, water, e t c.). Ensure M& V activities are adequ ate f o r all s i gnif i cant sources of savings.

 What is the likelihood for success for this m easure? More rig o rous M&V strategies

are warr ante d f o r ECMs with substan tia l uncer ta inty and/o r te chnica l com p lexity.

 Is the level of savings pred icted reasonable? W e re ECM savings com pared to system usage?

 W e re key variab les affecting energy use m easured for each ECM (e.g. watts/fix ture and hours/yr)?

 Do the m easurem ents include th e param eters that are the sou r ce of the savings (e.g. reduction in watts/fixture or hours/yr)?

 Are M&V costs reasonable? Do cost s align with planned activities?

 See TO-2 for Initial M&V cost for each m easure. See TO-4 for perform a nce period M&V costs.

Consider th e adequacy of baseline developed :

 Are all assumptions / stipulations re asonable, and includes source of data?

 W e re system perfor m a nce characteristics reco r d ed (e.g. lig h ting in tens ities, tem p erature set poin t s)?

 W h ere energy calcu lations closely reviewed ?

 Are savings estim ates sound & reasonable?

 Were utility or weather based m odels validated?

Evaluate th e quality of pe rformance period activities:

 Is m eaningful ongoing perform a nce period data going to be used to calculate savings?

 What is being verified? Is this su fficient to support the guarantee?

 W ill key variable s af f

ecting energy u se be m easured f o r this ECM? How of ten?

10-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP W ill single post-in sta lla tion m easurem ents apply to all year s in the p erf orm ance period ? If so, how valuable are the d ata used ?

 How likely is this da ta to cha nge over the perform a nce period?

 Based on which party h a s accep ted ongoing responsibility f o r each item , is this approach appropriate?

Review the s t rateg y for c o nducting O&M for th is ECM:

 Are O&M a ctiv ities suf f i cien tly de ta iled to dem o nstra t e level of eff o rt?

 Are responsibilities allocated as suggested by R&R Matrix?

 Are reporting requirem e nts adequately defined?

10.4 REVIEWING POST-INSTALLATI ON AND ANNUAL REPORTS Evaluating the Post-Installation a nd Annual Reports is m o re stra ight forward than reviewing M&V plans, as the level of qualitativ e asse ssm ent and engin e ering judgment requ ired is consider ably less. These reports docu m ent the res u lts of the a ctiv ities def i ned in the M & V plan

The Post-Installation Report docum ents the results of veri fication activities conducted by the ESCO af ter projec t ins t a lla tion but p r ior to pro j e ct acc eptan c e. This repo r t docum ents any changes in the project scope and energy sa vings that m a y have occurred since the Final Proposal, an d reports the expected Y ear 1 energy and cost savings. Keep in m i nd that m a ny applications of M&V Option A m e thods, m easurem ents are only taken once following insta lla tion. Subsequent activ ities m ay be lim ited to inspe ctio ns to ver i f y ‘poten tia l to perf orm

. ’ The Post-Ins t allation Report is therefore a crit ical docum ent for projects using an Option A approach.

Sim ilarly, each year during the perfor m a nce period the contractor subm its an Annual Report which docum ents the execution and results of th e period ic M & V activ itie s presc r ibed in the M&V plan (i.e. m easurem ents, inspections, s avin g s calcu latio n s, O&M activities), as well as any item s that may require addition a l follow-up. Th e Annual Report is the ba s i s for determining if the annual savings guarantee has been m e t, and for determ ining if any “true-up” of paym ents is required.
M&V for Super ESPC projects needs to show th at the overall savings gua rantee has been m e t, and does not necessarily need to determ ine the actual s a vings fo r each ECM. The total level of cost sav i ngs for the project m u st m eet or exceed the guaran t eed cost sav i n g s for that p e rform a nce year. If the contractor fails to m eet the gua ranteed annual savings as verified by the M&V docum ents, the agency s h all ad just the paym ent sc hedule, as necessary, to recover th e agency’s overpaym e nts in the previous year and to reflec t the lower p e rf orm ance level in to the curren t year.
10.4.1 Prescriptive and Qualitative Evaluation Items
The f i rst s t e p in evalu ating an M&V report is to c o m p lete the appropriate Review Checklis ts, as discussed in Section 10.2. The in clusion of all item s on the check lists indicates the prescribed inform ation is included. A through evaluation of each m easure, however, also requ ires som e

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 10-5qualitative and engineering judgm ent as well, as discussed below. All findings resulting from review, including com pleted checklists, should be in cluded in the evaluation report, as discussed in Section 1 0.2.3.
Answer the following key questions :

 W ere all a ctivities requ ir ed by the M & V Plan f o llowed?

 W a s the con t ent of the s u bm itted r e p o rt com p lete ?

 W ere the gu aranteed sav i ngs f o r the projec t m et? If the guara ntee is not f u lf illed f o r the perform a nce year, is the explanation adequate?
Understand any changes in the project’s performance:

 Have any ECMs whose savings levels increas ed or decreased significan tly from year to year? Is explanation o f why changes occu rred in savings values sufficient? If not, why not and what corr ec tive a c tion s w ill or shou ld be taken ? By whom ?

− Note any changes in scope or perform a nce, or results that d i f f

er f r omthe PostInstallation or previous year’s report

− Note that E C Ms using Option A methods m a y not show a change even if there are perform ance problem s.

 Did the repo rt prov ide us eful feedback on the perf orm ance of each m easure?

 Did the report verify the potential of the ECMs to save in f u tur e?

 Are there an y perform ance problem s, O&M issu es, or deficiencies that need to be addressed? By whom ?

Review the s avings calculations:

 W ere calcu lations subm itted in ele ctr onic f o rm at?

 Was the prescribed savings calculation m e thodology used? Did the reviewer verify the m ath in the savings c alculation s ?

 Were rates shown in the fina l proposal used, and were rate adjustm e nt factors applied correctly ?

 If savings result from rate changes, have the ba se line and n ew rates b een r eported ?

 Is the basis f o r any adjustm e nt valid, and ha ve the adjustm e nts been consistently and uniform ly a pplied?

10-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP

## Section 11 T e

chnology Applications

This section provides a guide for the applica tion of M&V m e thods to a variety of common energy conservation m e asures, including:

1. Lighting Efficien cy 2. Lighting Controls 3. Constant Speed Motors 4. Variable Speed Motors 5. Chille rs 6. Wa t e r 7. Geotherm al Heat Pum p s 8. Renewable Technologies 9. New Construction

11.1 LIGHTING EFFICIENCY One of the most common energy conservation m easures im plem ented in ESPCs is lighting efficiency improvem e nt s due to equipm ent retrof its or replacem ents. The source of savings in lighting efficiency projects is reduced lighting dem a nd and ener gy use due to higher efficiency lighting equipm ent. Key considerations related to M&V of lighting efficiency projects include:

 Ascertaining existing equipm ent inventory

 Determ ining operating hours and a peak diversity factor

 Establishing baseline equipm ent perfor m a nce

 Determ ining perform a nc e of new equipm ent

 Accounting for interactive effects.
Energy savings from lighting retrofits can be accurately predicted using short-term

m easurem ents. For th is reason, energ y savings ar e often determ ined and verified using an Option A approach. The recomm ended approach for fe deral projects is described below and is dem onstrated in the Stan dard M&V Plan fo r Lighting Retrofits included in Appendix J.

11.1.1 Equipment Inventory Equipm ent inventories, typically on a per-room basis, shou ld include co unts of each fixture, lam p , and ballast com b ination. Additional details that should be included are counts of nonoperating fixtures, usage area description, contro l type (including dual sw itching arrangem ents), existing ligh ting levels, and if space-is heated and / or air cond itioned. If a significan t nu mber of lam ps or fixtures are not operati ng, the baseline energy use may need to be adjusted to account for burned-out fixtures that are intended for repa ir. Fixtures that have been purposely de-lam ped should be accounted for in their own equipm ent category.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 11-111.1.2 Operating Hours and Diversity Factor In ligh ting e f f i ciency pr ojects witho u t control modifications, baseline and perform a nce period operating ho urs are assu m e d to be the sam e since they are un affected by the retrofit. T h e operating ho urs are a critical com ponent in calc u l ating the sav i ngs and need to be accu rately estim ated. The recomm e nded approach is to m easur e the operating hours of a sa m ple of fixtures and subsequently stipulate the operating hour s based on the m onitoring in the contract. Com paring m easured operating hours to occupanc y schedules provided by the agency can be useful to identify any schedule adjustm e nts that s hort-term measurem ents m ay m i ss.
When m easuring operating hours, it is appropriate to use statistically valid sam ples and to verify the statistical characteris tics of the sa m p le, as dis cussed in Se c tion 7.4.4 and in Appendix B.

For m easurem ent of oper a ting hours, the fixture i nventory is divided into usage groups based on sim ilar operating cond itions. Random sa m ples of fixtures are selected fro m each usag e group, the size of which is based on a prescribed conf idence and precision (80% and 20%, respectively, are often used). Portable on-off data loggers are th en installed in the select ed fixtures to m easure on/off tim es, and/or the dem a nd fr om dedicated lighting circuits is m easured using short term monitoring. Current, along with spot-m easured pow er factor and voltage m a y be (and is often) used as a proxy for power. Measurem ents are ty pically conducted for 3 weeks during regular non-holiday operations. The m easured operating hour s are analyzed to determ ine the operating profile, which is extrapolated to a full year. Multiple m e tering periods m a y be warranted if significan t o p erational v aria tions exist.
For projects that claim peak dem a nd savings, a di versity factor m u st be determ ined and applied to baseline and perform a nce period dem a nd to avoid over-counting dem a nd reductions. At any f

acility, only a portion of the lighting will be on w h en the building’s peak dem and charges ar e set. Som e tim es, m easur ed tim e-stamped operating da ta collected to determ ine run hours are used to dete rm ine the per cent of lights in o p eration during the peak period, a nd on other occasions the diversity factor is estim a ted. Th e div ersity factor can be an ov eral l weighted factor of all lighting included in the project, o r it can be d eterm ined for each usage group. Agencies shou ld be wary of any approach that blends peak dem a nd (kW ) savings with consum ption (kWh) savings. De m a nd savings should be reported inde pendently and the cost im pac t s ca lculated separately f r om energy savings.

11.1.3 Equipment Performance As discussed in Section 4.2, when applying an O ption A approach, the key param e ter must be

m easured. For ligh ting efficiency projects, the key param e ter is fixture power. For lighting projects to be com pliant with IPMVP, both the power of baseline and perform a nce period fixtures should be m easured.
Another perfor m ance metric that should be docum ented is the ba seline and performance period lighting levels. In m ost cases, light levels are not expected to cha nge significantly as a result of the re trof it. Any change in ligh t lev els f r om the baseline condition shou ld be specified by the agency. Representative pre- and post-retrofit light levels should be recorded. Specific procedures need to be specified in conducting lighting level m easure m ents, an exam ple of which is included in the Stand a rd M&V Plan for Light ing Retrofits shown in Appendix J.

11-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP_ _ _ _ In best practice applications, both the baseli ne and perform a nce period dem a nd on the various fixture types should be m easured. Sam pling strategies outlined for operating hours (above) should be separately applied to fixture powers in both the base line as perf orm ance period cases. When m easuring fixture power , one should use either 1) true root-m ean-squared (RMS)

m easurem ents, or 2) current as a p r ox y for power when com b ined with spo t -m easured volts and power factor. Meters with accuracy at or appr o aching ±2% of readings sh ould be em ployed. Using lighting circuit m easurem ents requires dedi cated lighting circuits with known loads. Non lighting loads should not be included in the m easured circuits, but if there are any , they m ust be constan t and accounted f o r in th e analysis. Measu r em ents for each fixture type are averaged to determ ine fixture dem a nd. For new lighting equipm ent, m easurem ents should be m ade after at least 100 hours of use.

For sm aller projects, m easuring the fixture pow ers before and after the retrofit m a y not be practica l . In these c ases, it is im portant to f o cu s m easurem ents on the m o st uncertain param eters. In lighting projects, the existi ng stock of lighting equipm ent te nds to be the least well-known item
, as various equipm ent types m ay have been installed over tim e. The newly installed lighting equipm ent will be sp ecif i ed, and is typically m u ch m o re predictab l e. W h ere m easure m ents are not practical, fixture po wers can be estim ated from a table o f standard fixtures, su ch as those used in utility program s. W h ile this approach m a y be accep table on som e ESPC projects, it is no t IPMVP-compliant. A conservative a pproach is to estab lish b a seli ne fixtu r e wattages on curren t
m i ni m u m efficiency s t an dards.

11.1.4 Interactive E ffects For spaces that are heated and cooled , there will b e interaction s between th e ligh ting eq uipm ent and HVAC system s. A lighting retrofit will decrea se cooling loads in the summ er and increase heating load s in the win t er. The general app r oach to dealing with interactive effects is presented in Section 7.3.
Methodologies for determ ining some of the m or e common interactions, such as lighting and HVAC, have been developed. 45 These effects are som e tim es ignored, however, becau se the cooling bon us and the h eating p e nalty can som e wh at cancel each other. Pr ojects im plem ented in extrem e clim ates m ay wish to quan tify these intera ctive effects, as they m a y be significant. If these effects are to b e ig nored, th is p r ovision sho u ld be inclu d ed in the contract and agreed to by both parties.

11.1.5 Savings Calculations The equations used for calculating energy and de m a nd savings for lighting efficiency projects are shown below. These equations do not include any interactive effects. Equation 11-1: Total Energy Savings
kW h Savings Tot a l = ( kWh Sav ings 1 ) + ( kW h Savings 2 ) +

... + ( k W h Sav ings
n )

45 See Ru ndq uis t, et. al., Calc ul ati ng Li ghti ng an d HVAC I n terac ti ons , ASHR AE J ourna l, Nov e mber 19 93, or Sez gen, Os man et . al.
, In terac ti ons B e twee n L i gh tin

g a nd Sp ac

e Co ndit io

n in

g En ergy Us e i n Com m

erc i a l Bu il din g

s , L B NL -39 795
, Ap ri l 19 98

.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-3_ _ _ _

_

_ _ Equation 11-2: Total Demand Savings
kW Savings Tot a l = ( k W Sav i ngs 1 ) + ( k W Sav i ngs 2 ) +

... + ( kW Savings
n ) As shown above, the to tal energy an d dem a nd sa vings will b e the sum of the sav i ngs from each usage group or piece of equipm ent, 1 through n. T he energy and dem a nd sa vings for each usage group should be calculated separately, as shown in Equation 11-3 and Equation 11-4. One should keep in m i nd that the usage groups assigned to determ ine fixture powers m a y be diffe r ent from those used to m easure operating hours, and th e equations m ust be carefully applied. Equation 11-3: Energy Savings for E ach Usage Group or Piece of Equipment
kW h Savings = ( kW Ba seline × H our s B a seline )

− ( k W P ost × H ours P ost )
Equation 11-4: Demand Savings for Each Li ghting Usage Grou p or Piece of Equipment
kW Savings = kW Bas e line )

− ( k W × Div e rsit y Factor ) {( P ost ) } (

where:
kWh Saving s = Kilowatt-hour savings realized d uring the performance period time period kW Saving s = Demand savings realized during the performance per iod time period, typically calcu l ated for each month or utility b ill ing perio d kW b a s

e lin

e = Total baseline d emand for a usage group or piece of equipment (1 through n) kW po

st = Total performan ce period demand for a usage group or piece of equipment (1 thro ugh n) Hours = Number of operating hours during the performan ce period time period for the usage group or piece of equipm ent (1 through n) Diver s

ity Factor = Percentage of lighting load on d uring the buildin g’s peak deman d for the usage group or piece of equipm ent (1 through n)

11.1.6 Ongoing Verification Using an Option A approach for lighting retrof its typica lly p r e cludes the n eed for savings adjustm ents, except for n on-routine adjustm ents (see Section 7.2). Since the connected load and run-tim e s of each fixture shoul d not change over tim e, additio nal m easurem ents during the perform a nce period are typically not warranted.

It is im portant however, to periodi ca lly ver i f y the retrof it’s po tential to per f o rm . This m eans that equipm ent types, quantities, and condition are verified. Often , a di fferent portion of the insta lla tion is inspec ted e ach year to verif y th at the proper equipm ent has been installed and is operating as expected. L i ghting levels m a y be spot-checked, and specifications of rep l acem ent lighting equipm ent kept on site m ay be verified. In order to ensure overall perform a nce, som e sites m ay need to spec if y a m axim u m allowable n u m b er of burn-outs in the perform a nce period.

11.2 LIGHTING CONTROLS
A comm on energy conservation m e as ure is lighting controls. The source of savings in these lighting controls projects is reduced energy us e du e to decreas ed run-tim es (or redu ced load factor if dual switching or dimm ing is em ployed) of the lighti ng equipm ent due to day-lighting or occupancy controls.

11-4 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPKey issues related to lighting controls projects include:

 Ascertaining existing equipm ent inventory

 Establishing equipm ent perform a nce

 Determ ining baseline operating hours

 Determ ining perform a nc e period operating hours

Several of th e issues p ertaining to lig hting con t ro ls are the s a m e as f o r lig hting r etrof its. Specifically, establishing equipm ent inventories and determ ining fixture energy use are the sam e as ligh ting r e trof its (disc u ssed in se ction A.1) . In lighting controls projects, baseline and perform a nce period fixture powers are assum e d to be the sam e since they are unaffected by the retrofit.

Baseline an d perform a nce period op erating hours can usually be accurately pred icted using short- term m easurem ents. For th is r eason, ene r g y savings can often be determ ined and verified using an Option A approach. An Option B appr oach that includes ongoing m easurements of operating hours throughout the term of the contract m a y be wa rranted in som e cases. When using Option A, addition al an nual verifica tion ac tiv itie s are ne eded to accoun t for the poss i b ility of changes in the controls duri ng the perform a nce period.

11.2.1 Operating Hours Operating hours are the key performance param e te r in lighting c ontrols projects, and should be

m easured before and after retrof it to quantify change in operati ng hours. The statistical sam pling and m easurem ent strategies described for lighting efficiency projects can also app l y to lighting control projects to determ ine operating hours. The prim ary difference in the m e thodology is the

m easure m ents that m u st be conducted both before and after the retrofit.

11.2.2 Equipment Performance Although fixture dem a nd is not expected to change , it is an important param e ter used in the savings calculations. Accurately es tim a ting the electrical dem a nd (kW ) from the various fixture types is critical for sav i n g s estim ates to be valid. In best practice applications, the fixture powers

are m easured. Sa m p ling strategies ou tlin ed for operating hours for lightin g efficiency projects should also be applied to fixtur e powers. Typically, these m easurem ents are m a de in the baseline period. In som e cases, fixture wattages m a y be based on current lighting efficiency standards, which can be a conservative m e thod as it ensure s the baseline energy use is not overstated.

11.2.3 Savings Calculations The equations used for calculating energy savings fr om lighting controls projects are the sam e as those for lighting efficiency projects shown in Equation 11-1 through Equation 11-4. These equation s, h o wever, can be sim p lif ied m athem ati cally if the baseline and perform a nce period dem and are the sam e. The tota l ene r gy savings will be the s u m of the savings f r om each usage group or piece of equipm ent. There is typically no dem a nd savings associated with ligh tin g contro l projects. Perform a nce period dem a nd is the sam e as baseline dem a nd unless reduced operation coincidence with

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-5building peak dem a nd is dem onstrated. Interactiv e effects between the lig hting and H VAC system s should be accou n ted for as d escrib ed for lighting efficiency p r ojects above.

If controls are im plem ented in conjunction with a lighting retrof it, the baseline dem a nd should be based on the post-retrofit equipm ent. Using a sing le savings equation to calculate eith er energy or dem a nd s a vings (such as Equation 11-3) for bo th re trof its c an ensure th at sav i ngs are not double-counted. Dem a nd and energy savi ngs require separate calculations.

11.2.4 Ongoing Verification
It is n ecess a ry to periodically v e rify the retrof it’s potential to perform

. As is the case w ith lighting efficiency projects, equipm e nt types, quantities, and the condi tion of the controls equipm ent should be verified. Control set points must also be checked. It is comm on practice to have a different portion o f the installation insp ect ed each year to verify that proper equ i pm ent has been installed and is operating as expected . T h e perform a nce of th e controls should be verified through field testing. For occupancy controls, sensitivity a nd delay tim e should be checked. For day-lighting controls, illum ination thre shold set points should be verified to ensure proper operation. Som e m a nufacturers m a y have recomm ended testing procedures.

11.3 CONSTA NT-SPEED MOTORS One of the most common energy conservation m easures is motor efficiency im provem ents resulting fro m m o tor replacem ents serving cons tant loads. Th e source of s a vings in these projects is reduced dem a nd and e nergy use due to higher efficiency m o tors. Key considerations related to m o tor efficiency projects includ e:

 Ascertaining existing equipm ent inventory

 Establishing baseline equipm ent perfor m a nce

 Determ ining perform a nc e of new equipm ent

 Determ ining operating hours
The issues pertaining to motor replacem ent proj ects are relatively sim p le, and energy savings can be accurately predicted using short-term m easurem ents. Therefore, energ y savings from constan t -lo a d m o tors are norm ally determ ined and verified using an Option A approach.

11.3.1 Equipment Inventory Equipm ent inventories are typically provided on a room -by-room or system -by-system basis. Survey data that should be collected for the ba seline and after installa tion and should include the motor application, location, loads served, ope rating schedule, and nam e plate data. Nam e plate data co llected for each motor should include th e motor tag or other identifier, m a nufa c turer, enclosure type, horsepower, se rvice voltage, no m i nal efficiency, and rated m o tor speed. Additional nam e plate data can be helpful, and should be recorded, as shown in Table 11-1.
The party responsible fo r defining th e baseline w ill also identify any non-operating motors, and adjust the baselin e acco rdingly.

11-6 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPTable 11-1 Example Motor Survey Data Form 46
Item Baseline Post-I nstalla tion Survey complete d by Motor ID o r Tag # Applicat ion Manufacturer Model Number Enclosure or Fra me Type Horsepower (hp) Rated Motor Sp eed (rpm ) Voltage Phase and Frequency (Hz) Full Load Amps Service Factor Power Factor Insulation Class Serial Number Duty Rating Design Code Letter or Locked Ro tor Amps Weekday Operating Hours Weekend Opera ting Hours Physical and En vironmental Conditions

11.3.2 Equipment Performance
In m otor effi ciency projects, the key perform a n ce factor is m o tor power. B est practice requires that both the baseline and post-installation m o tor powers are m easured. W h en m easuring m o tor power, true root-m ean-squared power m easurem ents should be used, and/or current, volts, and power factor should be m easured to calculate de m a nd. Motor speed, m easured in revolutions per

m i nute (RPM), should be reco rded based on sp ot m e tering of each m ot or to be replaced. Power

m eters with accuracy at or appr oaching ±2% of readings sho uld be used. The sam e meter and

m easure m ent procedures should be used in both the baseline and performance period scenarios.
The power draw of a m otor depe nds upon its load fact or, which can be determ ined only through

m easurem ents. A load factor is th e ra tio of the lo a d actua lly dr aw n com p ared with what could be drawn under full-load co nditions. In addition to impacting th e power req u ired, load factor also affects both the power factor and e fficiency of a motor. For most m o tors , efficiency varies b ased on load factor, with the efficien cy peaking at about 75% load and decreasing substantially under 50% load 47 . Sim ilarly, overloaded m o tors experience decreased efficiency. Since load f actors and corresponding m otor power can vary substantially, it is impor tant to m easure rather than estim ate the load on m o tors. This is why replaci ng undersized or oversized m otors with correctly sized m o tors can be an ef fective energy conservation m easure.

46 A us er-frie ndly dat a c

o

ll ec tion for m

f

o

r mo tors is

inc l ud

ed i n Det e rmi n i ng Elec tric

Mo tor L o a d

an d Eff i c

i enc y

, US DOE Motor C h alle ng e Fac t Sheet , available at www1.eer e. energy.gov/indus try/bes tpractices/p dfs/10097517.pdf

47 Determ ini ng E lec tr

ic

Mot o

r Lo ad an d Effic ienc y

, US DOE Mot o

r Cha lle ng e Fac t Sh eet, av ail a ble at www1.eere. ener gy.gov/industry/bes tpractices/pdfs/10097517.pdf

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-7In projects where m any m o tors on s i m ilar appl ications are being rep l aced , a sam p ling strategy can be appropriate to determ ine perform a nce pa ram e ters. The appropriate use of statistically valid s am p les is dis cusse d in S ection 7.4.4 and in Appendix B.
For certain applications, such as m o tors lo cated in a conditio ned air s t ream, additional

m easurem ents m ay be needed to cap ture in teractiv e effects produced by the heat of th e m otor. In these cases, tem p erature m easurem ents of the wo rking fluid may be taken on either side of the motor and docum e nted so the baseline and pe rform ance period m easurement location s are identical. Th ese m easurem ents, however, m ay be im practical since the temperature d i fference

m ay be sm al l and could be determ ined only by a very accu rate m e ter. As an alternativ e, ASHRAE pr esents a sim p lified m ethod for estim ati ng the heat gain form motors in a conditioned air-stream 48 . Estim ating these interactive effects usi ng other methods (such as whole-building modeling) m a y be appropriate.

11.3.2.1 Verify Constant Loading When categorizing m ot ors as constant-load devi ces, perform ance m easurem ents should be m ade over a period of tim e. The period of tim e require d to confirm constant loading varies depending on the application. Confirm i ng that a m otor ope rates under constant-loa d conditions is easily

accom p lished if m easurem ents m ade to determ in e run-tim es use an amm et er or power m eter rathe r than a device that determ ines only if a m o tor is on or off.
To verify th at a lo ad is constant, on e com p ares the averag e of the m easured values with all hourly non-zero values. An application m a y be c onsidered constant if 90% of all non-zero observations are within ±10% of the average am perage or pow er. If any application cannot be verified for constant load, the data should be analyzed to determ ine whether the load for the

m o tor varies system atica lly and p r edictably, wh ether the constant load was changed during the test period, or whether there is som e system anom aly. If the load varies s y stem atically, the m o tor is treated as a variable lo ad. If a system anom aly occurs or th e load chang es during th e shortterm m onitoring period, spot-m etering and short- term m onitoring tes t s sho u ld be rep ea t ed. In

som e cases it is app r opriate to select a conserv ati ve load f actor to sim p lif y M&V eve n if the load is not truly constant. Each c onstant-speed m o tor application should be supported by schem a tic system drawings and con t rol s equenc es. Once a load has bee n conf irm ed constan t , ad dition al verification should not b e necessary.
11.3.2.2 Accounting for Motor S lip
For induction m otors, the synchronous (unloaded) speed of a m o tor is greater than the actual speed of a lo aded m o tor. The difference between the actual and rated (unloaded) speeds is called slip. The s l ip is a cha r ac ter i stic of a particul ar motor and describes how much the motor slows down as it g ets lo aded. Because th e slip ch aracteristics of pre a nd post retrofit m o tors with the

sam e synchronous speed m a y be different, sta ndard-efficiency m otors and high-efficiency

m o tors m ay rota te at d i fferent rates when servi ng the sam e load. Such differences in ro tational speed m a y increase the am ount of work done, and result in sm aller savings than expected.

48 ASHRAE Fund am enta ls Hand bo ok

200 5, Sec t ion

30 - Nonres id

ent ial Co olin g a nd H eat ing Loa d Calc u lati ons

.

11-8 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPDifferences in either the m easured load factor or rotation speed (rpm ) between the existing m otor and a new high-efficiency m o tor can im pact savin g s. Changes in load facto r or speed of m o re than 10% m ay occur if the new m o tor is sm aller th an the b as eline m o tor. If the load f actor o r speed lies outside the expected range, the ESCO should provide an expl anation, with supporting calculations and docum e ntation. La rge differences in lo ad factor be twee n the existin g m o tor and the replacem e nt high-efficiency m o tor point to operational problem s or m i sunderstanding of the insta lla tion.

For m o tors where it is d eterm ined th at end- use has not changed, the baseline and postinstallation motor speed should be the sam e . For belt-driven m otors, re-sheaving the motor can be an effective way to eq ualize system perfor m ance for chan ges in m o tor slip.

11.3.3 Operating Hours
On m o tor efficiency projects, baseline and perform a nce period operating hours are assum e d to be the sam e if they are unaf f

ected by the retrof it. The operating hours are a m ajor com p onent in calcu lating the savings, however, an d need to be accurately estim ated. The m o st common approach is to m easure the opera ting hours on all or a sam p le of m o tors with short-term or longterm m onitoring during the baseline period and stipulate the operating ho urs in th e co ntrac t

. Monitoring should provide an estim a te of annua l equipm ent operating hours, and m u st be of suf f i cient du ration to cap ture a ll ope r ating c onditions. For projects where post-in sta lla tion operating ho urs will b e d i fferent, post-instal lation m easure m ents should be included.
On projects where m any m o tors with sim ila r operating pattern s are being replaced, sampling strategies can be an appropria te way to ascertain operating ho urs. Exam ples of such motor groupings are supply fan m otors, exhaust fan m ot o rs, and boiler circulating pum p m ot ors. Each group type should have sim ilar use patterns and com parable average operating hours. The appropriate use of statistically valid sam ples is discussed in S ection 7.4.4 and in Appendix B.

When m easurem ents of operating hours are no t supported by the project value, operating hours can be determ ined from schedules u s ed in en ergy m a nagem e nt system s, operational logs, or docum ented operating schedules provided by th e federal agency. Operating hours can be estim ated for each individual m o tor or for groups of m o tors with sim ilar ap plications an d schedules.

11.3.4 Savings Calculations The overall equation s us ed for calcu lating en er gy and dem a nd savings are Equation 11-1 and Equation 11-2, the sam e basic equations used fo r lighting efficiency p r ojects. The to tal energy and dem a nd savings will be the sum of the savings from each usage group o r piece of equipm ent. Sim ilarly, Equation 11 -3 can be applied to determine the energy savings from each piece of equipm ent for each operating s cenario.

Dem a nd savings from motor effi cien cy im provem ents accrue only if the motors operating hours coincide with the building’s utility peak dem a nd. In som e cases, only a su bset of the motors installed m a y contribute to dem a nd savings. The dem a nd savings are calculated from the tim e period in which the m i nimum de m a nd savings ar e achieved during the building’s utility peak period. Operating schedules should be closely consid ered to ensure that only the m otors that are

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-9_ operating during the building’s peak hours are included in calculating dem a nd savings using Equation 11-5, below. Adjustm e nts to the ba seline dem a nd may be re quired for non-operating

m o tors tha t are norm ally opera ting or intended for operation. Equation 11-5: Peak Demand Savings for E ach Usage Group or Piece of Equipment
kW Savings = M i nimum { ( k W Ba s e li ne )

− ( k W Po s t ) } t

− p e a k

where:
kW Saving s = Peak demand savings reali z ed at the utility met er during the performance period peak time period t-peak, typical l y calculated for ea ch month or utilit y bill ing period kW po

st = Performance period demand for motor or usage group during time interval t-peak kW b a s

e lin

e = Baseline deman d predicted for motor or usage group (1 through n) during same time interval

11.4 VARIAB LE-SPEED MOTORS Variable-speed-driv e (V SD) efficiency projects involve the replacem ent of existing motor or load controllers with VS D m otor controllers. These projects reduce dem a nd and energy use, but do not neces sarily redu c e utility d e mand charge s. VSD retrofits often inc l ude the in sta lla tion of new, high-efficiency m otors. Typical VSD appli cations include HVAC fa ns as well as boiler and chiller circulating pum ps. Key considerations related to vari able speed m o tor projects include:

 Ascertaining existing equipm ent inventory

 Establishing baseline eq uipm ent pe rfor m a nce for each operating scenario

 Determ ining operating hours for each operating scenario

 Determ ining perform a nce of new e quipm ent for each operating scenario
Many of the issues pertaining to variable-speed mo tors are the sam e as for constan t -speed m o tor replacem ents. There are, however, so m e add itional considerations. Establishing equipm ent inventories and determ i n ing baseline equipm ent pe rform ance for variab le-speed m o tors are the

sam e as for constan t -speed m o tors, which are d i scu ssed in the previous sec tion. In ad dition to the equipm ent inventory item s identified for consta nt-speed m otors, surveys should also docum ent the base line m o tor contr o ls (e.g., m o tor star ters, inlet van e da m p ers, and VSDs).

11.4.1 Establish Baseline Equipment Performance and Operating Hours For projects whose baseline lo ad s are constan t , as describ e d in Section 11.3.2, the baseline dem a nd should be established by following the pr ocedures outlined in Section 11.1.3 above. For projects where loads are not c onstant, additional short-term metering is required during the baseline. Metering should be perform e d on all base line m o tors or on a random l y selected sam p le of m otors with the sam e app lication and/or operating hours.
For applications where th e baseli ne is variab le, sh ort-term m e asurem ents of electrical dem and are required. The length of m e tering should capture all norm a l operating scenarios, and the

11-10 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPbaseline power usages should co rrespond to specific ope rating scenarios or to other independent variables.

De m a nd m e tering should be of suffi cient duration to determ ine operating hours for each different motor operating scenario. For system s where varia tions are predictable, shorter term monitoring

m ay be suffi cient. Som etim es, spot measurem ents m ade while the m o tors’ applic able s y stem s are modulated over their norm al operating range (i .e., m easure pump m o tor dem a nd in cooling mode, econom izer m ode, and heat ing m ode) are adequate.

Short-term monitoring f or variable-load, baseline m otors should be done to characterize baseline usage. Two approaches to evaluating baseline en ergy use are as follows:

 Develop a schedule of motor kW , e .g., 4, 380 hours per year at 40 kW and 4,380 hours per year at 20 kW

 Define the relationship between m o tor kW a nd the appropriate independent variables, such as outd oor air tem p eratu r e or sy stem pressure for a varia b le air-vo l u m e system

11.4.2 Post-Installa tion Performance After VSDs are installed, short- term or long-term m etering should be conducted on all m otors or a sta tis tica l s am p le of sim ilar m o tors if appr opriate. Post-installation m etering is in te nded to determ ine th e actua l oper ati on of the VSDs, including:

 Power used by new equipm ent in each opera ting scenario, or as a function of a

m easurable variab le(s).

 The hours of operation for each operating scenario
The performance period perform a nce of the new equipm ent can be predicted prior to im ple m entation, but m u st be confirm ed. This is especially a concern for VSD projects that claim dem a nd savings, as VSDs can go to 100% speed u nder full-load conditions, elim inating any peak dem a nd savings. Ongoing m easurements are requir ed for applications that are not easily predictable, such as HVAC uses.

The duratio n of the perform ance period m etering will depend upon the predictability of the perform a nce of the new equipm ent. At a m i ni m u m, the m etering should capture all norm al operating scenarios. For m a ny appli cations, continuous m etering for at least the first year of the perform a nce period will be required to c onfirm operations under all conditions.
Measuring dem a nd or a direct proxy such as the speed of the drive, captures the perform a nce and operating ho urs of the sy stem . The power draw of the m o tors with VSDs will va ry de pending on the speed of the m otor being controlled and the efficiency of the VSD. Although m a ny VSDs display m o tor power, these readings m u st be verified before they can be deem ed reliable. A calibrated power m e ter should be used to correl ate VSD speed with actual kW . Direct m otor rpm
m easurem ents can be m ade or readin gs can be r e ad f r om the VSD control panel. Accu rate ly

corre lating m o tor dem a nd (kW ) to the m o tor speed allows the rpm ’ s to be tracked and act as a proxy for dem a nd. In addition, o t her factors, such as downstream pressure contro ls, can affect the power draw and m a y need to be consider ed. If routin e adju stm ents are planned, th e

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-11_ _ _ _

_ _ _ _

_ appropriate independent variables sh ould also b e m easured so they m ay be correlated with the perform a nce period dem a nd readings.
For system s whose variations are p r edictab l e and le vel of savings is too low to warrant the cost of long-term m easurem e n ts, short-term m onitori ng m a y be utilized. Sp ot m easure m ents m a de while the m o tors’ applicable system s are m odul ated over their norm a l operating range can be used to valid ate sav i ngs estim ates.

11.4.3 Savings Calculations The overall equation s us ed for calcu lating en er gy and dem a nd savings fro m VSD projects are Equation 11-1 and Equation 11-2, the sam e basic e quations used for lighting efficiency projects, which are restated here as Equation 11-6 and Equation 11-7. The total energy and dem a nd savings will be the s u m of the savings from each usag e g r oup or piece of equipm ent (1 th roug h n). Equation 11-6: Total Energy Savings
kW h Savings Tot a l = ( kWh Sav ings 1 ) + ( kW h Savings 2 ) +

... + ( k W h Sav ings
n )
Equation 11-7: Total Demand Savings
kW Savings Tot a l = ( k W Sav i ngs 1 ) + ( k W Sav i ngs 2 ) +

... + ( kW Savings
n )

In order to d eterm ine the savings fro m each pi ece of equipment, the b a seline (and perfor m ance period) ener gy m u st f i rst be dete rm ined using Eq uation 11 -8. The energy use will b e the sum of the energy used in each operating scenario (d enoted as a through z). If dem a nd (kW ) i s a function of an independent variable (such as speed), then the dem and at each value of the independent variable m u st first be calculated. Equation 11-8: Baseline (or Performa nce period) Energy Used by Each Usage Group or Piece of Equipment
kW h ,1 = ( k W B a se li n e a × H ours B ase l ine a , ) + ( k W

, × H ours B aseline b
, ) +

... + ( k W × H ours

, ) B a se li n e , B a se l i ne b z B ase l i n e z The savings from each piece of equip m ent (1 t hough n) can th en be determ ined using Equation 11-9. These values are th en sum m ed, as show n in Equation 11 -6, to de ter m ine total e n ergy savings. Equation 11-9: Energy Savings for Each Piece of Equipment
kW h Savings 1 = k W h

base l i n e , 1 − k Wh post , 1

Where:
kW Ba

se lin e = Baseline deman d for a usage group or piece of equipment (1 thro ugh n) kW Post = Performance period demand for a usage group or piece of equip ment under the same operating conditions a s th

e baseline (1 through n) kWh Post = Energy required by the new motor encountered fo r interval t in the performance period (1 throug h n) kWh Ba se lin e = Energy that the baseline motor would have use d under the under the same conditions en co

untered for the s ame interval t in the performance period (1

11-12 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP_ through n) Hours Post = Number of operating hours during the performan ce time period for a specific group or piece of equipment Hours Ba

s e lin

e = Number of operating hours during the bas eline time period for a specific group or piece of equip ment

Dem and savings from VS D projects accrue on ly if the VSD does not operate at 100% speed during th e h ours tha t ar e coincid e w i th the bu ild ing’s utility peak dem a nd. The level of dem a nd savings achieved is calculated from the tim e in terval in which the m i ni mum de m a nd savings are achieved during the building’s utility peak period . For this re ason, it is im portan t tha t the

m easurem ent interva l of the post installa tion co n d itions acco m m odate the utility ’s ac tual b illing interval. The dem a nd savings achieved by m a ny VSD projects are dim i nished during peak cooling loads.
As shown in Equation 11-10, dem a nd savings ar e based on the kW m easured before new m o tors are ins t alled m i nus the kW m easured after the n e w m o tors ar e installed th e sam e inter v al dur ing the building’s peak period when the m i nim u m dem a nd savings are achieved. Equation 11-10: Peak Demand Saving s kW Savings = M i nimum { ( k W Ba s e l i ne )

− ( k W Po s t ) } t

− p e a k

where:
Time period (t-p eak) is defined a s the ti me interval during the building’s peak period for that billing month during which the mini mum demand savings are achieved. Billing months are defined by the serving electric utility. kW Saving s = Peak demand savings reali z ed at the utility met er during the performance period peak time period t-peak, typical l y calculated for ea ch month or utilit y bill ing period kW b a s

e lin

e = Baseline deman d for motor o r usage group predi cted during time t kW po

st = Performance de mand for motor or usage group during the same interval

11.4.4 Ongoing Verification
A s is the ca s e in othe r pr ojects, it is n ecessa ry to period ically verif y th e re trof it’s pote n tia l to perform by verifying equipm ent types, quantities, and condition of the equipm ent. If the VSD is continuously m onitored, data should be inspected periodi cally to ensure that the VSDs are still working pro p erly. Sin ce VSDs can easily b e overr idden in the field, the perform a nce of each VSD should be verified.

11.5 CHILLERS
A com m on energy cons ervation m e as ure is chiller rep l acem ent pro j ects. The source of savings on these pro j ects is redu ced chiller d em and and en ergy use due to higher e fficiency eq uipm ent. Key considerations related to chi ller efficiency projects includ e:

 Establishing existing equipm ent perfor m a nce and plant operating conditions

 Determ ining cooling loads and chiller sizing

 Confir m i ng perform a nce of new equipm ent

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-13The issues p erta i ning to chille r replacem ent projects tend to be relatively com p lex and require short- o r lon g -term m easurem ents. For these re asons, energy savings are typically determ ined and verified using an Option B approach. The recomm ended appro ach is described below and is detailed in the Standard M&V Plan for Chiller R eplacem ents , which is in cluded as A ppendix K.

11.5.1 Baseline M&V Activities
The baseline M&V activities for a chille r replacem ent project are intended to:

 D ef i ne the e x isting chillers’ efficien cies (i.e., k W /ton)

 Determ ine the cooling loads experien ced by the plant based on outdoor air tem p eratures and other variables as needed

 Determ ine key operating conditions of the ch iller plant (e.g., condenser w ater supply tem p erature s, chilled w a ter supp ly te m p erature s, chiller s eque ncing).
The first step in establishing a baseline is to docum e nt the existing cond itions. The inform ation needed includes nam e plate data, seasonal operati ng schedules, chiller ages and condition, loads served, locations, condition of peri pheral equipment, and m o nth and tim e of day of pe ak building dem a nd.

Short-term m easure m ents are required to de termine baseline conditions across the expected range of operating conditions (e.g ., lo ad, outsid e air tem p erature and hum idity), and the m e tering period should include both shoul der and peak m o nths. Param ete rs that should be m easured include :

 C h ille r ele ctric dem and (kW ) and energy use (kW h )

 C h illed w ate r load ( e.g., tons), calcula ted f r om coincident m easurem ents of chilled

w ater f l ow ( g pm ), chille d w ater supp ly, and re tur n tem p eratur es ( o F)

 Condenser water supply and re turn tem peratures (o F)

 Pum p and cooling tower dem a nd (kW ) and energy use (kW h ) (if affected )

 Outdoor air tem p erature and hum idity

For a chille r projec t, the m o st im portant m easur em ents are th e chilled water tem p eratu r es, which are used to calculate coo l ing loads an d equipm en t efficiencies. The sensors used for bas eline and perform ance m easurem e n ts should m eet m i nim u m accuracy requirem e nts and m u st be properly calib rated. A m i ni m u m accuracy of ±0.3 o F is recommended, and identical sensors for supply and retu rn are preferred. If the accu racy of any instrum ent is less than p r es cribed, the

m easurem ents m ay not be suitable, as they will introduce un acceptable levels of erro r into the energy calcu l ations. Exam ples of the error introd u ced by these sensors are given in Section 5.4.1.
Baseline m easured data are used to d eterm ine existing load profiles. Correlating the m easured loads with independent variables su ch as outdoo r air tem p erature w i ll a llo w the load p r of ile to b e adjusted to typical conditions, which is often ap p r opriate. To account for interaction s (reductions in load) from other m ea sures, th ese reductions in load should be estim ated and the load profile should be ad justed accordingly.

11-14 FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0Metered data should also be used to calculate existing chiller perfor m ance (kW /ton), which varies with operating conditions (e.g., load, chilled water temp erature, and condenser water tem p erature). In addition, the m e tered data are us ed to determ ine the key operating conditions of the chiller plant, such as coo ling tower perform ance, chilled and condenser water set points, chiller sequencing, and other baseline pa ram e ters, all of which should be thoroughly docum ented.

11.5.2 Post-Installa tion Performance
After the ne w chille rs ha ve been ins t alled, short-term or long-term m etering should be conducted to determ ine the actual o p erating efficiencies of the chillers and any affected equipm ent. The post-installation performa nce of the new equipment can be pr edicted, and m a y also be factorytested, but should be confirm e d afte r installation. The power us e of any peripheral equipm ent that was affected, such as pum p s and c ooling towers, should also be m easured.
Typically, p erm anent m etering equipm ent is ins t alled with th e new chillers. The accu racy and calibration of all m e ters should be confirm e d prio r to data collection. Depending on the project, the m etering can either b e continuou s or pe riod ic. Continuous m eteri ng can accurately track operations a nd of f

ers addition al opp ortunitie s to im prove overall perf orm ance of the c h iller plant. The down-side of continuous m e tering is th e challenge of keeping the data continuous and accurate. One approach is to m e ter continuously for info r m ational purposes, but calculate savings using periodic equipm ent perform a nce tests. This appro ach lends itself to pro j e cts th at have a w ell defined cooling load profile and the perform a n ce of the chille rs them selve s is the p r im ary concern. C h ille r projects, how ever, w ill of ten include contro ls or other m easures that m ay require continuous monitoring.

Param eters typically m e asured in clu d e:

 C h ille r ele ctric dem and (kW ) and energy use (kW h )

 C h illed w ate r load ( t ons) , calcu lated f r om coincident m easurem ents of chilled w ater flow (gpm ), chilled water supply, and return tem peratures (o F)

 Condenser water supply and re turn tem peratures (o F)

 Pum ps and cooling tower fans (if affe ct ed) d em and (kW ) and energy use (kW h )

 Outdoor air tem p erature and hum idity

Data collected can be us ed to calculate chille r perfor m ance (kW /ton) and actual cooling loads. These data should be used to calcu late savings or at least com p ared with the expected values to ensure continued perform a nce. Periodically repea ting these tests is r eco m m ended, and this a l so requires recalibration of instrum e ntation.

11.5.3 Savings Calculations The overall equation s us ed for calcu lating en er gy and dem and savings fro m chille r rep l acem ent projects are Equation 11-1 a nd Equation 11-2, the sam e basic equations used for lighting

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-15_ efficiency projects. The total en ergy and dem a nd savings will be the sum of the savings from each piece o f equipm ent. Equation 11 -8 can be ap plied to determ ine th e energy saving s from each piece of equipm ent, although it m ay need to be applied for a num ber of operating scenarios. Another way to state this equation, w h ich is m o re suitable to hourly calculations, is show n in Equation 11-11. Equation 11-11: Energy Savings for Each Piece of Equipment Energy ( ) = 

## ∑ ( k Wh Baseline − k W h

P os t ) t Sav i ngs k W h

t Where:
kWh Po s t, t = Energy required by the new chille r encountered fo r interval t in the performance period kWh Ba se lin e , t = Energy that the baseline ch iller would have use d under the under the same conditions en co

untered for the s ame interval t in the performance period The utility p eak dem and savings f r o m m any chiller pro j ec ts are es tablish ed during pe ak cooling loads when dem a nd savings are at their m i nim u m. De m a nd savings resulti ng in cost reductions f r om chiller projec ts can occur only d u ring th e ho ur s tha t ar e coincid e w i th the buildin g’s utility peak dem and. The level of de m a nd s a vings achieved is calculated f o r the interva l dur ing this tim e period in which the m i ni m u m de m a nd savings are achieved, which typically occurs under peak cooling conditions, and can be calculated using Equation 11-10. For this reason, the

m easurem ent interval us ed to m easure the pos t in stallation co nditions sho u ld accom m odate th e utility ’s ac tu al billing interval.

11.6 WATER
W a ter conservation projects are often included on ESPC projects. The sour ce of savings in these projects is reduced water use due to in creas ed perf orm a nce of t h e water using equipm e n t, fixtures, or controls. Savings can also result from reduced wate r supply charges, sewer charges, and/or energy costs. Energy sa vings are comm only achieved from reduced water heating, and additional energy savings m a y be realized for facil ities that use pum ps t o boost water pressure or to irrigate w ith groundw ater, or at facilities with their own water treatm ent system s.

K ey issues r elated to w ater conservation projects include:

 Ascertaining equipm ent inventory for both the baseline a nd po st-in s ta lla tio n

 Establishing existing equ i pm ent perform ance for each type of device

 Determ ining usage characteristics of each type of device

 D eterm ining post-in sta l lation equ i p m ent perform a nce for e ach type of device

 Accounting for interactive effects

Several of th e issues p ertaining to w ater r etrof its are sim ilar to those aff ecting lighting efficiency projects. Th ere are, however, som e differen ces in im plem entation pro cedu r es. Since th e perform a nce of m a ny common wate r conservation projects can be accounted for through shortterm m easurem ents, and usage factors can be es ti m ated, water savings ar e m o st often verified using Option A. All M&V options, however , can be applied to water projects.

11-16 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPThere are several circum stances that would indicate that another M&V approach should be considered. Projects that save m o re than 15% of the total water usage at a single m e ter should use an Optio n C approach. W hen an Option C appr oach is u s ed, the quality and accu racy of the water m e ters should be verified. If existing water m eters are used, historic water m eter data m ay not provid e an accurate baseline, an d additional m e ters should be installed. One difficulty using whole-building consum ption data is that outdoor water use can be so variable that desegregating that end u se f r om a f acility’s w ate r lo ad, w h ich is also variab le in use, can be problem atic.
Option B may be warranted for projects where 1) the water consum ing devices do not have constant flows; 2) operating sc h edules are erratic and require m easurem ent; 3) sub

- m eters already exis t or can easily be installed, such as individual buildings on a cam pus, cooling towers, irrigation, or gray water system s; or 4) m eteri ng costs are sm all in com p a r ison to other project costs.

11.6.1 Typical Measures A partial list of water conserva tion m easures that federal ag en cies can consider includes the f

o llow i ng:

 Replacing com ponents of olde r plumbing system s with wa ter-saving equipm ent such as ultra–low

- f l ow toile ts, w aterless ur inal s, h i gh-efficiency sh owerheads, aerators, and self-closing valves

 Elim inating continuously flowing urinals, lab drains, drinking fountains, and other sim ilar devices

 Replacing once-through cooling devices for space cooling, ice m aking, and other purposes with closed-loop or air-coo l ed system s

 Im proving technologies and m a nage m e nt techniques for boilers, dishwashing, laundry, and other special purposes

 Maintaining proper pressure through th e use of pressure regulating valves

 Decreas ing the use of water for lands caping by installing drought-tolerant landscaping or im ple m enting m o re effici ent irrigation system s and practices

 Installing gray water, rainwater, and reclaim ed water-recy cling technology for flushing and/or irrigation

11.6.2 Equipment Inventory Equipm ent inventories are typical ly provided on a room -by-room ba sis. Survey data that should be collected include the type of device/fixture, location, num ber in each location, and nam e plate data. The inventory should characterize both ex isting and post-installatio n equipm ent, and should be updated after installation to ensure accuracy.

11.6.3 Equipment Performance
On water efficien cy projects, the key perform anc e factor is water consumption on a per use basis (i.e., gallons per flush). In best practice appli cations, both the baseline and perform a nc e period water consumption is measured. Sampling strategies for sim ilar fixture t ypes are appropriate, and

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-17confidence and precision of 80% and 20%, resp ectively, are recommended. Typically, spot

m easurem ent of flows is sufficien t to characterize the perform an ce of various fixture types.
The average flow rates for each type of fixture m easured sho u ld be used. Flow rates m ay vary, depending o n the spec if ic equipm ent, w ater pr ess u re, and con d ition of the f ittings. Me asurem ent strategies include m aking volum etri c m easurem e n ts or using a porta b l e f l ow m eter. Suitab l e f l ow
m e ters should be selected for appropriate accu racy and should have flow ra tings that confor m to field conditions. Several flow m easurem ent t echniques are included in A S HRAE Gui deline 14 Section A5.6. Spot m e a s urem ents are useful, not only to quantify water consum ption, but also to verify that all devices assigned to any sam p ling groups have sim ilar perform ance characteristics.
ESCOs and agencies sho uld exerci se caution if th ey rely on n am eplate data to determ ine w ater use. The water consum ed by m a ny water fixtures can be eas ily adjusted to go well abo v e or below nam e plate specification. Actu al use for ex is ting fixtures can be determ ined by short-term

m etering or other techniques. A ll newly installed equipm ent shoul d be tested and adjusted as needed.

11.6.4 Usage Ch aracteristics
On water efficien cy projects, bas elin e and perform a nce period use of the water consum ing equipm ent (i.e., flushes per day) are assum e d to be the sam e since th ey are unaffected by the retrofit. The frequency with whic h the equipm ent is used is a m ajor f actor in calcula ting the savings, ho wever, and needs to be accurately estim ated. The m o st com m on approach is to estim ate the usage of fixtures and s tip ulate th ese o p erating characteristics in the contract. Projects quantifying outdoor water use using Op tion B or C m e thods wo uld need to develop regression models based on param e te rs that d r iv e water us e, such as ra inf all, so that r outine adjustm ents can be m ade.

Once a com p lete inventory and perf orm ance character istics o f the fixtures have been d eterm ined, the num ber of uses per day m u st be determ ined. Sin ce th is pa r am eter is no t easy to m e asure, it is typically estim a ted. For m a ny fixt ure types, the only usage item to quantify is the frequency of use. For others, such as showers and sinks, bot h the frequency and duration of use must be determ ined. The overall fixture usag e is typ i cally determ ined from published studies and historic data on th e actual bu ild in g’s occupan cy. Because of the differences in p erform ance of t o ilets and urinals, the daily per fixture use is often segregated by m e n and wom e n.
Units of m easure should be cons istent with the fixt ure type, but all should be expressed in a

com m on volum etric m easure (usu ally gallons ) so that those totals can be aggregated easily. For

exam ple, wa ter consum ption for water closets m i ght be expressed in gallons per flush, while showers consum ption m i ght be e xpressed in gallons per m i nute. W ater consum ption per unit of

m easure m u st then b e qu antif ied in th e sam e units , and periods of service m u st be exp r essed in consistent term s (such as flushes per day, or m i nutes per shower and show ers per day). In facilities wh ere th e usag e changes seasonally (e .g ., a school summ er vaca tion period), separate data will be needed for each season.

Once the fix t ure invento r y, perform ance charact eristics, and usage param e ters have been estim ated, th e data shou ld be com p ared to his t or ic w ater con s um ption at the f acility to ensure that the consum ption and savi ngs values are reas onable.

11-18 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP11.6.5 Ongoing Verification Using an Option A approach for water retrofits typically precludes the need for savings adjustm ents, except for n on-routine adjustm ents (see Section 7.2). Since the perform a nce of each fixture or end use should not change over tim e , a nd usage pa ram eters are typical ly stipulated in the contract, additional m easur e m ents during the perform a nc e period are not warranted.

It is im portant, however, to peri odica lly ve rif y th e retrof it’ s p o tential to p erf orm

. This m eans equipm ent types, quantities, and condition of the in stalled equipm ent have to be verified. Often, a different p o rtion of the installation is inspecte d each year to verify th at the proper eq uipm ent has been ins t alled and is operating as expected . C onfirm i ng the type of eq uipm ent replacem ent stock that may be kept on site is a l so advisab l e.
11.6.6 Other Issues
There are several additional issues that should be consid ered when im ple m enting water

conserva tion projec ts. So m e of these issues a r e ou tlin ed below

.

 Som e water m easures m ay actually increas e energy use, such as switch i n g from a once-through cooling system to a closed-l oop cooling system. It is im portant that these en ergy im pacts are quantified.

 W ater conservation m ea sures m ay reduce the en e r gy used f o r w ater hea tin g, the lev el of

w h ich w ill depend up on the ef f i ciency of the existing w ater hea t er.

 W a ter utilities can have dem a nd cha r ges based on the size of the utility meter. Typically, the m e ter would have to be dow nsized to realize dem and cost savings.

 W ater and s ew er ra tes v ary consid erably, and th e actual rate structure should be applied. Fo r locations th a t do not charge on the basis of consumption for water or

sew er, w ater cost sav i ngs w ill be m o re dif f i cult to genera te. M o st are as, ho w ever, bill for w ater an d sew er serv ice from m et er re ad ings, and a large percen tage o f charges

are consum ption-based.

 W h en evaluating outdoor water use that is no t su b-m etered, the usual f i rs t step is to evaluate sev eral y ears of water consu m pti on data to com p are seasonal irrigation use with non-seasonal irrigation use. The difference can be used for a baseline, but should be adjus t ed for changes in tem p erature, rainfall, evapotranspiration, and/or other relev ant f actors, if possible. If the w ater u t ility s epara tely m eters ou tdoo r w ater us e, then establishing base lin e use is relatively s i m p le, ex cept for concerns reg arding the accuracy of older u tility m eters.

 Irrigation technologies increas e the delivery efficiency of the water (e.g., drip irrigation or more efficient sp rinkler technologies) or include other changes that result in low er ev a porative los s es. The savings f r om these retrof its d epend on loc al clim ate and evapotranspiration rate as well as plant sp ecies.

 Most dom estic water use is for cleaning a nd trans porting was t e. These are sanitary functions that em ploy equipm ent and syst em s designed to co m p ly w ith c aref u lly crafted sanitary codes and st andards. Saving water by usi ng methods that com p rom i se system perform ance is unacceptable.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-1911.7 GEOTHERM AL HEAT PUMPS In general, geotherm al heat pum p (GHP) proj ects face the sam e issues as any HVAC system repla cem ent, but w ith so m e additional item s rela te d to sys t em specific features. Geo t herm al heat pum p s, sometim es called ground sour ce heat pumps, are categorized as either closed- or openloop system s. The m o st typical re trofit involving GHP system s at federal sites involves replacing custom ary HVAC system s with GHP system s usi ng vertical-bore ground h eat exchangers, and this discussion focuses specifically o n that system type. For closed-loop system s, heat pum ps absorb heat from and reject heat to a piping loop that contains water or water/antifreeze solution. The loop includes a borefield consisting of an array of pipes buried in the ground. The borefield acts as a heat exchanger, absorbing heat from and reje cting h e at to the solution.
Key issues related GHP projects include:

 A scerta ining heating and cooling loa d s

 Establishing baseline equipm ent effi ciencies

 Predicting p e rform a nce of the GHP system s

 Verifying the perform a nce of the installed GHP system

The last two issues listed above involve challenges that are un ique to GHP projects, and are discussed b e low. Estim ating the en ergy use of such equipm ent is difficult becaus e bo th the cooling efficiency (EER) and th e heating effectiveness (COP) of the heat pum p s depend on the tem p erature of the fluid received fr o m the groun d heat exch anger. Th is fluid tem p erature, in turn, depends on the property of the soil form ation at th e site, and on the build ing heating and cooling loads.
For this reason, energy savings from GHP retrofit projects are usually es tim ated using an Option D approach. A s-built d r a w ings, on-site m easurem ents, and m odels of the e x isting H V A C equipm ent are used to develop a baseline sim u lation m odel of the building using a building energy analysis program s such as DOE-2, TR ACE 700, TRNSYS, or another program that includes subcom ponent models for geotherm al h eat pum ps and vertical-bore heat exchanger arrays. As discussed in Section 4.5, outputs from the m o del ar e com p ared w ith s ite -m onitored building energy use d ata (u tility b ills o r tem p orary m ete rin g ) to ensu re adequate calibra tion. O n ce the

m odel has b een deem ed to be of sufficien t accu racy, it is typ i cally d r iven with typical

m eteorological year (T MY) weather f o r the site to dete rm ine the average baseline ann u al energy use. The baseline m odels of the existing HVAC equipm ent are then updated with GHP m odels that m atch the rated perf orm ance of t h e equipm en t to be installed. A bor ef ield m odel is also included. Defining param e ters include soil fo rm ation therm al conductivity and deep-earth tem p erature (which are m easur ed at the site us in g an in situ test), borehole depth, pipe dim e nsions, and the therm a l properties of any gr outing m a terial. The syst em model is driven by TMY weather to es tim ate averag e po st-retrofit an nual energy use. The proposed energy savings are then the difference between the post-retrofit and the ba seline annual energy use.

11-20 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPSince the savings estim a tes depend on the m a nuf acturer’s rated perform a nce of the new GHPs, the recommended M&V approach calls for annual verification of the perform a nce of t he new system s. The two perform ance areas that shou ld be verified are: 1) e quip m ent efficiency and system perform ance; and 2) borefield perform ance.
11.7.1 Equipment Efficiency and System Performance
For site s w i th m u ltiple in stallations, m easur em ents can be m ade on a portion of the G H P s installed each year to ens u re tha t they are still m e eting the spe cif ied perf or m ance and the resulting guaranteed savings. If for exam ple, th e agency selects a random sam p le of 20% of the heat pum ps that w ere installed, then a ll units will be verifi ed every 5 years.
Since ground source heat pum ps provide both he ating and co oling, th e efficiency of the dom i nant function should be tested. For a coolin g dom i nated facility, duri ng a specified period in peak coolin g season such as July of each year (t his could b e in January at a heating-d o m i nated site) data are collected from sel ected heat pum ps. The following da ta should be collected at 5­

m i nute inter v als:

 W ater tem p eratu r es en tering and leaving the heat pum p

 Am bient outdoor air tem p erature,

 Supply and return dry-bulb air tem p eratur es for w a ter-to-air GHP units; supply and return load w ater tem p eratur es f o r w ater

- to -w ate r G H P system s

 Heat pum p unit input kW

The m easured input kW readings are com p ared with m a nufa c ture r’s perform ance data for the

sam e operating conditions (rated gpm , rated cubic feet per m i nute, entering water tem p erature, leaving water tem p erature). Since the m a nufacturer’s data will be lim ited to f u ll-load c onditions, the data m u s t be m anipulated to elim inate part-l oad conditions and to avoi d com p aring part load conditions against full-load data. Once the data se t has been selected, logged input dem a nd (kW ) readings are com p ared to m anufacturer’s pe rfor m ance publish ed data a t th e given cond itions.
If the overall average m e asured dem a nd (kW ) is less than 110 % of m a nufacturer’s published data, th e m o deled energ y savings are considered to be true and accurate. If the averag e kW is greater than 110%, the energy savi ngs are recalculated using th e original building simulation model. The GHP perfor m a nce profile is changed to ref l ec t th e sam p led kW readings, and the

m odel is re r un to dete rm ine the actua l energy consum ption and revised savings estim a tes. In addition, heat pum ps used in air distribution system s typically require a gr eater volum e of air than conventional system s due to the m o re m o derate supply tem p eratures. For retrofit application s, the dis t ribution system m ay require m odification to accom m odate th e increased volum e of ai r required to heat and co ol the facility. The overa ll ab ility of the system to adequately heat and cool the facility should be verified.

11.7.2 Borefield Performance The long-term perfor m a nce of a GHP system de pe nds on the design of the vertical borefield, which acts as a heat exchanger between the g r ound and the fluid. System designers choose a design tem p erature for th e fluid (usually around 95 o F for cooling-dom inated system s, around

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-2140 o F for heating-dom inated system s) and use estim a ted peak load conditions to size the system

. If the borefield is correctly de signed, the tem p erature of the fl uid supplied to the heat pum ps from the borefield should only rarely exceed th e design tem p eratu r e in th e cooling m ode (or should rarely fall below it in the case of a heating-dom inated system ).
Because borefield perform a nce m a y change over tim e, the perfor m an ce of at least a sam ple of units should be verified each y ear. If m easured data collected to verify equipm ent perform ance (water tem p eratu r e en tering the he at pum p ) are u sed, the percenta ge of readings in which the entering fluid tem p erature exceeded the design temperature should be determ ined. If more than 10% of the tem p eratures during full-load conditio n s exceeded the design temperature, it is lik ely that the borefield is undersized for the current buildi ng loads. Higher enteri ng water temperatures in cooling mode (or lower tem p er atures in heating dom i nated s y stem s) reduce system efficiency.

In such a s i tuation it m ay be necess a ry to inv e stigate whether build ing lo ads have changed since the project was installed (e.g., additional interior loads, in creased operating hours). If it is ultim ately d eterm ined th at the loads have not ch a nged, the ES C O m ay be requir ed to a d just th e model to account for the higher entering fluid temperatures, an d to recalculate the savings accord ingly.

11.8 RENEW ABL E ENERGY PROJECTS Federal agencies are allowed to use energy service perform a nce c ontracts (ESPC s) for installation of renewable energy p r o j ects that red u ce facility energy cos t s and related operation and m a intenance expens es. The term “renewable energy” refers to sou r ces of energy th at are regenerated by nature an d sustainable in supply.
Renewable energy projects covere d by this section involve the in stallation of devices and/or system s that generate en ergy (e.g ., electricity or h eat) o r disp lace energy u s e thorough the use of renewable energy resources. Exam ples of technol ogies include: photovolt aics (PV), active or passive so la r system s for space cond ition i ng or p r oduction of dom estic ho t water, b i o m ass conversion s y stem s (e.g., landfill g as m ethane r ecovery projec ts), and win d system s. For additional infor m ation on the m easurem ent and ve rification of renewable energy projects, refer to IPMV P for renew a b l es 49

. The m o st notable difference between renewabl e energy projects and oth er EC Ms is tha t renewable projects supply energy rather than reduce the am ount of energy used. Measuring the energy supp lied a llow s f o r a sim p lif ied approach to m easuring savi ngs that is not possible with energy efficiency projects. Option B deserves spe cial conside r ati on when evaluating M & V options for renewable energy projects.

Like m a ny projects, the perfor m a nce of m o st renewable energy technologies depends on the environm ental conditions, such as solar radiation or wind speed. The use of long-term averages of these values is reliable, but any M & V Plan shoul d be stru ctured in such a way as to allocate the risk due to short-term variations in e nvironmental conditions. Therefore, it m a y be appropriate to stipulate these conditions and verify the perform a nce of the equipm ent using

49

Inter nat io

nal P e rf orma nc e M eas ure m ent

& Ver ific

a t

io

n Prot oc

ol: Co nc

e p

ts

an d Prac tic

e

s f

o

r Deter m

in in g En ergy Sav in

g

s in R enewa bl e Energy Tec h no log ies App lic

ati ons , V o lu me I I, Au gus t 2

003.

11-22 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMP_ _ short-term m easure m ents (e.g., the efficiency of a solar hot wate r heater). Long-term perform a nce typically needs to be verified.

11.8.1 Savings Calculations
There are tw o general ap proaches for calcu lating energy sav i n g s from renewable energ y projects:

 Net energy use

 Nor m alized savings based on typical environm ental conditions and actual perform ance characteristics
For all renewable energy projec ts, consideration should be give n to the impact of parasitic energy use b y the ren ewable system and to incr eased operations and m a intenance costs due to the addition of new equipm ent. De mand savings from renewable energy technologies m a y occur, but, depending on the electric util ity ’s ra te struc t ure, the en ergy m u st be available and uninterrupted during all peak periods. Accounting for de m a nd savings requires m ore sophisticated m e tering that al igns measurem ent intervals with the utility interval.

11.8.1.1 Net Energy Use The first app r oach invo lv es directly m easur ing the energy output from the system and quantifying any additional costs in cu rred or savin g s realized. This approach is suitable for wind, PV, and other electricity genera ting equipm ent. The m easurem ent concept assum es that energy (electrical and/or thermal) produ ced by the ren e wable system is used at the pro j ect s ite, and displaces energy that would have been provided b y an exis ting source. Sav i ngs are d eterm ined by m easuring the net amount of en ergy produced by the renewable syst em and used at the project site v alued a t presc r ib ed utility rate s. This approa ch elim inate s the need fo r a baseline and places the risk of weather va riations on the ESCO.

U tility sav i n g s f r om renew able m easures tha t sup p ly the r m al energy ( e.g., solar ho t w ater h eate r) are determ ined by dividing the energy delivered by the efficiency of the or igin al equ i pm ent (e.g., conventional water heater). For projects that m ay sell excess energy or store energy on-site, additional costs and savings m a y nee d to be consid ered. Cost savings us in g this app r o ach can be calculated using Equation 11-12. Equation 11-12: Cost Savings Determinati on Utilizing Net Energy Use Approach

Cost Sav i ngs = ( k W h D e l i v ere d ) ( Rate kW h ) + { ( The rm a lEne rgy ) } × Effi c i enc y Displace dEqui pm ent 1 kW h × ( ) ( } { $

− × Rate k W h ) + { $ E

ner

g yS ol d − P arasiti c L o ads } { $ New O & M C os t s } 3, 4 1 3 BTU Where:
kWh Delivered = Electrical energy delivered by the system and use d at the facilit y Rate kW

h = Specified cost of electrical energ y Thermal Energy = Thermal ener gy delivered by the system in Btu du ring the performance period Efficien cy Disp la ced = Operating efficiency of the equip ment that would have been used Equipment 1kWh/3,414 Btu = Conversion between thermal energy (Btu) and ele c

trical energy (kWh)

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-23_ 

### _ _ _ $

Ene r gy S o ld $

Par

asi t

i c Lo ads
$

New O&M Costs =

=

= Funds received through the sale of energy produ ced Cost of operating systems and e quipment related to renewable technology Additional cost o f operations and maintenance du e to renewable technology

11.8.1.2 Normalized Savings The second prim ary approach involves calculatin g norm a lized savings based on typical environm ental conditions and actual perform ance characteristics of the system . Savings are determ ined by calculating the difference between baseline energy and dem a nd and predicted or

m e tered energy and demand, with both sets of da ta adjusted to a prescribed set of conditions. Depending on the type of system , t h is stra tegy can use any of the four M&V options.

Nor m alizing savings in this m anor places th e risk of weather fluctuations on the federal agency, and requires that the ESCO periodically dem onstr ate that specified perform a nce characteristics have been m et. These pe rform ance charac terist ic s and how they will be d eterm ined s hould be specified in the project-specifi c M & V Plan. Perform a nce param e te rs that should be specified include efficiency of PV m odules, m i nim u m hot-w ater tem p eratures, and the content in landfill gases. The basic energy savings equation (E quation 2-1) can be m o dified to determ ine cost savings, as shown in Equation 11-13. Equation 11-13: General Savings Equa tion for Renewable Energy Projects
Cost Sav ings = [{ 

### ( Basel i ne Ene r gy )

− ( Perf ormance Peri o d Energy ) ± Adjust ment s } 

### × ( R ate E

n e r

gy 

### ) ]

− { $ Pa rasiti c L oa ds } { $ New O & M C os t s }

−

W h ere:

Baseline Energy = The calculated o r measur ed energy use of a piece of equipment prior to the implementation of the project Performance = The calculated o r measured energy use of a piece of equipment after Period Energy the implementation of the project

Adjustments = Routine and non-routine changes made to the baseline or performance period energy use t o account for expected and unexpected variations in cond itio ns Rate kW

h = Specified cost of electrical energ y Thermal Energy = Thermal energy deliver ed by the system in Btu du ring the postinstallat i on perio d $

Par

a sitic Lo ads = Cost of operating systems and e quipment related to renewable technology $

New O&M Costs = Additional cost o f operations and maintenance du e to renewable technology

11.8.2 Energy Metering
Determ ining the electrical output of system s is relatively straightforward. This is because electrical ou tput and parasitic lo ads can be si m p ly m easured with m any com m ercially available

m eters. Measuring therm al output (e.g., hot wate r from a dom estic hot-water so lar sy stem

11-24 FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0displacing an electric water heating s y stem ) is als o straightforward, but no t necess arily inexpensive, using comm ercial Btu m e ters, wate r flow m eters, tem p eratu r e transducers, etc. However, all of the therm a l and electrical ou tput from a system does not necessarily displace an equivalent amount of load. This is due to storag e, system losses, and differences in tim e between when useful energy is p r oduced and when it is n e eded.

11.8.2.1 Electrical Metering Electricity m easurem ents associat ed w ith system output, pa ra sitic load s, p o w er to the projec t site, and po w er to th ird parties and the utility m a y be needed. A ll ele ctr ic al m eters (a nd rela ted equipm ent) are usually provided, installed, owne d , and m aintained by the ESC O or the servic ing utility.

W h en a net m etering approach is u s ed, m eter(s) w ill typ i ca lly show the m easure’s gross outpu t (in kW and kW h) less parasitic use (e.g., pum p mo tors) and sales to th ir d parties or th e loca l utility, a s w ell a s any lo cal transf or m ation and transm ission and battery storage losses. The goal with this m ethod is usually to m easure net gene ration delivered to the project site. M e tering, interconnection (including safety provisions), reporting, and other related issues are to be in accordan ce with current elec trical s t andards and the requirem e nts of the s e rvicing el ectric utility.

W ith the net energy-use M&V approach, deliveries to and from the facility should be separately record ed an d treated as separate tran sactions. For purposes of power de liv ered to the s ite, a single m eter that record s energy supp lied to the s i te is p r eferred. If a calcu lated transform e r loss value is used, it should be based on certified factory test data fo r that particular transform er. The following are som e suggested m etering requirem ents:

 kW h and dem a nd metering at the point of delivery

 Tim e of-delivery m eterin g

 Provisions f o r rem o te m eter read ing

11.8.2.2 Thermal Metering
Therm al m e ters (e.g., B t u m eters) are required fo r m easuring the net therm al output of certain renewable energy system s (e.g., hot water genera ted by an a ctive sola r s y stem ). N o te that

m etering of therm al energy requires a “net” m eas urem ent of flows and enthalpy to and from a system . Measurem ents of therm al flows m ay need to take into account any vented or wasted energy that is produced by the system but not used at the site, as well as distribution and storage losses. Also note that sm all erro rs in en thalpy m easurem ents (usually d eterm ined by tem p erature) can introdu ce large erro rs in th e energy calculations; hence, m eter precis i on, accuracy, an d calib ration are esp ecially im portant.

11.8.3 Notes on Some Renewable Energy Technologies 11.8.3.1 Active Solar Thermal Systems
Active solar therm al system s incl ude system s for producing industrial process heat, dom e stic hot water, and s p ace heating and cooling . Useful m o nitoring includes 1) site inspections and brief

FEMP M&V Guidelines 11-25tem p erature and system monitori ng f o r diagnostics, 2) spot, shor t-term , or long-term monitoring of system key param eters such as tem p eratures, energy flows, and control status, and 3) utility billing ana l y ses.

11.8.3.2 Passive Solar Systems Passive solar system s usually i nvolve the perform a nce of a whol e building with architectural features such as overhang design and use of ther m a l m a ss. As such, this technology is different from other renewable energy m easures in that m echanical devices with identifiable energy inputs and outputs are not involved. Thus, passive solar M&V typically involves the analysis of a whole building, an d thus it is b est to us e utility b i lling a n alyses o r c alib rated sim u lation tec hniques, i. e., Options C or D.

11.8.3.3 Wind, PV, and Other Renewable Generation Projec ts W ith these types of system s, the perfor m ance ch aracteristics of the co m p onents are usually well defined, suc h as the con v ersion effic i ency of the PV m odules or the Btu c ontent of lan d fill gas. In addition, the electrical or th erm al flows can usually be easily m easured and Option B is typically utilized. The complexity of these projec ts lies in projecting long-term perfor mance due to var i ation in the resou r ces (e.g., so lar inso lati on, wind resource, or reserve of m e thane gas in a landfill) and accounting for any vari ations between when the resour ce is available and when it is needed (i.e., the in teraction of stor ag e system s and their inefficiencies).

11.9 NEW CONST RUCTION
Perform ance contracting projects are not only applied to existi ng buildings, but are som e ti m e s used to supp lem ent the c apita l requ ir ed f o r ne w-construction projects. The ESPC part of the project provides added budget for the im ple m enta tion of energy saving features that would not have been otherwise included in the project. Financing for thes e item s is provided by the ESCO, and the ongoing perform a nce of the m easures is guaranteed

.
Exam ples of ESPC new- construction projects use d to lim it en ergy-r ela ted costs in clud e im prove m e nts in the building’s glazing, lighting, heating and cooling, pu mping, and air handling system s, as well as efficiency upgrades of other equipm ent that were originally planned for the building.
Savings from new-construction ESPCs are m easur ed and verified using an Option D calibrated sim u lation approach, which is de tailed in Section 4.5. The m e t hodology detailed, however, is for projects conducted in existing buildings. One prim ary difference between the m e thods used for existing and new buildings is that for new construction the perfor m ance period m odel is calibrated and the baseline m odel is based on m i nim u m code standards or the original building plans. The m e thodology followed for new construc tion projects is som e wh at different and is detailed in IPMV P V o lum e III. 50

50 Inter nati o n a l P e rfo r manc e Me as

ure m ents and Veri fic a tion Prot oc

ol: Co n c epts and Opti ons for Det e rmi n i ng E nergy Sav i ngs in New Constructio n , Vo lu me II I, A p ril 20 03.

11-26 FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0

## Appendix A Definition of Terms

Note: This is not intended to be a comprehensive listing of te rm s used in federa l ESPC s. If ther e is any discrepancy between the definitions in this document and those in the ESCO / Federal agency contract or ta sk order, the d e fin ition s in the contract or task orde r prevail.
Definition of Terms

TERM DEFINI TION Adjus t me nts, N o nrouti n e & Ro uti n e Changes made to the baseline a nd/or the performance period energy use to acco unt for changes. Routine adjustm ents are used to account for ex pe

cted variations in independent variables; NonRoutine adjustm ents are used to compensate for unexpected cha nges unrelated to the ECMs. Annual Re por t A report issued annually, typ i ca lly on the anniver s

ar

y of project acceptance, which documents the execution and re sults of the M&V activit i es prescr ibed in the M&V Plan. This docu m entation verifie s the continued op eration of the ECMS, provides the associated e nergy savings e s

timates, demonstrates proper maintenance, and provides M&V results. The energy saving s documented in the report serves as the basis for the ESCO’s invoice after the regular interval report has been reviewed and approved by the federal agency. Avoide d Ener g

y

Use The reductions in energy use that occurred during t he performan ce period relative to what would have been used during the baseline p e riod, using actu al operating con d itions experien c

ed during that period. This may require baseline energy use to be adjusted to act ual condition s. This approach is different than calculating normalized saving s. Baseline Condi t ions Physical cond itio ns that existed p r ior to the im plementation of the ESPC project (such as equipme n t inventory and co nditions, occupa ncy, nameplate data, energy consumption rate, and control strategies), which are determine d through surveys, inspect i ons, spot measurements, and short-term metering activit i es. Baseline con d itions are esta b lished for the purpose of estimating savings and are also used to account for any changes that may o ccur during the performance peri od, which may require adjustments to baseline e nergy use. Baseline Ener gy or Demand The calculated o r measured energy usage or demand by a piece o f equipment or a site prior to the implementation of the project. Commissioning (Cx ) The process of documenting and verifying through adjusting/remedying the performance of building facilit y systems so that they operate in conformi ty with the design i n tent. An indepe ndent party may complete syste m/equipment commissioning. Th e Americ an Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning En gineers’ (ASHRAE) Guideline 0-2005 can be the basis for commissioning a c tivitie s

. Contract The executed document between a Federal agen cy and the ESC O and any appendices, as amen ded from time to time, which outline p r ovisions of the project. CxA Commissioning Agent or Commi ssioning Authority are equivalent terms used to describe the designated individual in charge of l eading the com m

ission ing process. Energy Conser vation Measure (ECM ) The individual components or sub-projects which save energy tha t comprise an ESPC project.
Energy Services Company (ESCO) An organization that designs, fin ances, procures, in stalls, and possibly ma intains o ne or more ECM s or systems at a Federal facility o r facilitie s. Expected Savi ngs For a Super ES PC project, expected saving s are thos e reported in the Post-Installation Report. Th ey are based on as-built condition s and post-installa ti on verificat i on activit i es, and ar e the savings expected for Year 1 of the proje c

t. Inde pen d en t Variable A parameter that is expected to change regularly and have a measurable impact o n the energy use of a building or system. Insolation A measure of solar radiation energy received on a given surface area in a given time. Interactive E ffe cts Energy impacts t o

one system resulting from cha nges made to another building system. Investme nt Gra d e Audi t (I GA ) A comprehensive assessment of a facilit y’ s energy and water usage characteristics, identifying an d analyzing energ y conservation measures.

FEMP M&V Guidelines 3.0 A-1TERM DEFINI TION Measureme nt a nd Verificatio n (M &V) Appr oach An evaluation pr ocedure for dete r mining energy and co st savings. M&V techniques discussed in th is document includ e engineering ca lculation s

, metering, utilit y bi lling analysi s, and co mputer simulatio n

.
M&V O p ti on One of four gen eric M&V approaches (A, B, C, and D) defined for ESPC projects. These options are defined in the IPMVP and in Chapter 2 of this document. M&V Plan The Measureme n

t and Verificatio n (M&V) Plan is a document that defines project-specific M&V methods and techniques that will be used to determine saving s resulting from a sp ecific performance contracting project. Measureme nts, Con t in uo us Measurements repeated at regular intervals ov er the baseline period or contract term.

Measureme nts, LongTerm Measurements taken over a period of several ye ars.

Measureme nts, Short

- Ter m Measurements taken for several hours, weeks, or months.

Measureme nts, Spot Measurements taken one-time; snap-shot measurements. Normalized Sav i ngs The reductions in energy use that occurred during t he performan ce period relative to what would have been used during the baseline p e riod, but adjust ed to a normal set of conditions ( s

uch as typ i ca l weather conditions). Performa nce Period The time period spanning from approval of the project insta llat i on to the end of the contract, or for a specific time-frame such as 1-ye ar within that period. Performa nce Period Energy Use or Demand The calculated e nergy usage (or demand) by a piece of equipmen t or a site after implementation of the project. The ESCO and the Federal agency veri fy the perform ance period energy use, the installat i on of th e proper equipment components or systems, the correct operation of the components and systems, an d their potential t o

generate the predicted saving s. Post-I nstalla tio n Con d iti ons The physical an d operational co nditions present duri ng the time period following t he installat i on of an ESPC project. Post-I nstalla tio n Repor t The report that p r ovides results o f post-installa t i o

n M&V activities, documents any changes in the project scope ha t may have occu rred du ring projec t implementatio n, and provides energy savings estimates for the first year of performance. Project The implementation of energy effi ciency service s at a Federal facility or group of facilit ies. Project-S pecifi c M&V Plan Plan providing d e

tails on how a specific proje c

t’s savings will be verified based on the general M&V options describe d

in this docume n t. Propose d

Savi ngs For a Super ES PC project, proposed saving s are thos e estimate d in the contract prior to project implementation determined from metering and/or calculat ions per formed in accordance with the provisions of the Federal agencies’ appr oved measurement and verification plan. Regression Analysis A technique use d

to develop a m a thematical mod e l from a set of data that describe s the correlation of measured variables. Sampling A process of selecting random pieces of sim ilar e quipment for monitoring in order to characterize some feature of an entire population of equipment . Th is strategy is used when it is unrealistic to measure all affected equipment. Standar d

M&V Plan FEMP has developed two Standard M&V Plans, both of which are included in the Appendix. These are complete M&V Plans, which use the Super ESPC M&V Plan f o

rmat, that need to be customize d for an individual project. These plans represent a best-practice approach developed through industrygovernment working groups. Usage Gr oup A colle ction of e quipment (e.g., motors or rooms with light fixture s ) with similar ch aracteristics (e.g

., operating sched ule). Verified Savings For a Super ES PC project, verified savings are t hose reported in the Annual Report. They are ba sed on verification a c tivit i es conduct ed during the perfo rmance perio d, and are the savings ca lcu l ate d

for that year of the project.

A-2 M&V Guidelines 3.0 FEMPE n t i r e

P

opul a t i o n

X X

X

X X

X X X

X X

X X X

X

X X X

X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X

X X S

a mp le d me mb e r , t

y p i c a l

M

e m

b e r of

popu l a

t i on 

## Appendix B Sampling Guidelines

B.1 INTRODUCTI O N This appendix introduces the statistical backgro und, theory and for m ulas used to select, analyze and validate sam p les for projec t m onitoring and evaluation. It also provides guidelines and procedures for the design and im plem entation of sam p ling.

B.1.1 Sampling The purpose of m onitoring a sam p le, as an altern ative to m o nitoring an entire population is to; (a) characterize particular attrib utes of a population from whic h a sam p le is drawn with adequate

accura cy an d reliability, while (b) re ducing m onitoring costs and effort.
As shown in Figure B-1, sam p ling involves sele cting several m e mbers from a population for monitoring and evaluation. The m e a s ur ed characteristics or behavior of the sam p le group is then used to infer the characteristics and/or behavior of the enti re population. As expected, the

assum p tion is that the sample is representative of the population. To ensure that the sample is indeed representative, calculations m u st be pe rform e d to assess and quantify the statistical validity of the sam p led data. These calculati ons are presented later in this Appendix.

E n t

i r e

P

opul a t i o n

X X

X

X X

X X X

X X

X X X

X

X X X

X X X

X

X X X X

X

X X

X X S

a mp le d me mb e r , t

y p i c a l

M

e m

b e r of

popu l a

t i on

Figure B-1 P opulation and Sample

Sam p ling is applicable to projec ts su ch as lightin g retrofits, energy efficient m o tor replacem ents, HVAC unit replacem ent, steam -trap monitoring, or any other project in w h ich a num ber of sim ilar pieces of equipm ent are affected by the sam e type of ECM. In the m o st common applications, sam p ling strategies are used to characterize the hours of operation and the instantaneous power draw of a constant-load devi ce. A separate sam p le set is required for each item evaluated.
When selecting a sam p le from a population to determ ine hours of operati on, it is necessary to ensure th at the load is or device being sam p led is m onitored at or down-stream of its last point of

FEMP Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s B-1control (LP C ). The last point of co ntrol (LPC) is th e po rtio n of an electri ca l circuit (or othe r source of energy), that serves a set of equipm ent that is controlled on a si ngle switch. As a result, all of the fixtures or pieces of equipm ent on that LPC are typically operated the sam e num b er of hours per year. For m e tering purposes, it is assum e d that m easurem ents taken of a single piece of equipm ent on an LPC captures the operating hours for all of the equipm ent served on the sam e circu it.

B.2 MATHEMATI CAL METHO D S FOR SAMPLING
Sa m p ling must be condu cted using accepted m e t hods and use an approp ri ate level of care to ensure th at the M&V res u lts th at rely on the sam p ling and an a l ysis a r e suf f i cien tly a ccu rate. Th is section provides a summary of the concep ts, m e thods and equations to be used.
Although various assumptions regarding the distri bution of the sam p led data can be m a de, the large m a jority of sam p ling statistica l analys is ass u m e s that th e data is normally distributed about the mean and in this Appendix, th is assum p tion is m a de.
Statistical validity requires that the sam p les be random l y selected. Use of a random number generator, such as that found in MS ExcelTM is convenient for ensuring the sam p le is random ly selected.

B.2.1 Point Estimation – Confidence and Precision
When we us e sam p ling to estim ate an average va lue of an entire population, we are perform i ng an activity k now as point estimation. A value or ‘point’ that is es tim ated based on a sample is not the actual av erage value but ra ther, is a value that is “re a sonab l y clos e” to the actual av erage value. The question, then, for the M&V practi tioner is: “W hat do we m ean when we say ‘reason ably close’?” The question is answer ed using the following statistical term s.

 Confidence: Confidence is f undam e ntally the same as probability, except that conf idence r e f e rs to da ta alre ady obtained, wh ile probability ref e rs to a f u ture va lue. A confidence of 90% is commonly used in M&V

. So, using our 90% example, when we refer to a confidence leve l, we are saying “I am 90% confident that the m easured value is with in m y stated confiden ce interva l .”

 Confidence Interv al (or Preci s i on): Because the value es tim ated by sam p ling can not be expected to be the actual va lu e, it is useful to s t ate an interval in which we have confidence the true v a lu e lies. Confidence in terval is also often referred to as precision . An M&V practitioner m a y state that they know the value has a precision of 10%, which would m ean that the “The estim a ted is within 10 % of the tru e value.”
Confidence and precisio n, then, are the values referred to when a 90/10 (or 80/20 or any other) criteria is sp ecified. Example
Im agine that we wish to m easure the run-hours of a sam p le of equipm ent for a m onth. Im agine now that we m easure 200 ‘on’ hours. If we are hoping to m eet a 90/10 criteria, we are hoping that we can say, with a 90% probability, that our estim ate is within 10% of the actual average run hours – that is, we are 9/10th sure the actual runtim e is between 180 and 220 hours.

B-2 Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s FEMPTo graphically illustrate the concepts of nor m a l distribution, confidence, and precision, Figure B2 shows a norm a l distribution with a conf idence inte rval. No te tha t the c onf idence in terva l in the figure is defined by the error (+/- E). This error figure is discu ssed further below and is defined in Equation 1.

Figure B-2 N o rmal distributi on with confidence interval
The confidence interval (or precis ion ) and the confidence level are positively linked; for any

sam p le, as the confiden ce interval increas es (th a t is, the pr e c ision is r e duced, and the range of possible values of the true m ean increases) th e confidence level increases. Or, looking at it another way
, as the confidence in terv al is reduced , the confidence level is also redu ced

. B.2.2 Sample size calculation
When sa m p ling, it is the M&V professional’s job to m eet certain levels of confidence and precis i on an d to calculate the ac tual confidence and precis i on th at resulted from a sampling exercise. In order to accom plish th is analys is, it is helpf u l to star t with Eq uation 1, the statistica l equation for calculating the maximum error in the result. This value is also depicted as ‘E’ in Figure B-2.

E z s

= E q u a t i o n 1 n
Where: E = m a xim u m value of error s = the standard deviation of the sample 1

n = sam p le size

1 Calc ula t in

g th e s

t and ard dev iat

i o

n i s

not d e

fi ned h

e rei n

.

FEMP Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s B-3

### n , z = the z

- sta tistic 2 , typically denoted as z α /2 . Alpha ( α ), is equal to 1 – % c onfidence, and is used in m o st statistical references becau s e it repr esen ts the top an d bottom tails of the norm a l distribution, which together bound the confidence level.


### x

− μ The z statis tic is a variab le th at is calculated such that the f o llo w ing equation is tru e : 

### z = s / where μ is the population m ean (unknown) and x is the sam p le m ean. Although the true m e an, μ, is unknown, values of z, at various levels of confidence (1 – alpha) are known and are tabulated in m a ny statistics books 3 . Values of z, assum i ng that the num ber of sa m p les, n, is greater than 30 are 1.645 for 90% c onfidence and 1.282 for 80% confidence.
Rearranging Equation 1 we can solv e for the nu mber of samples need ed to ensure we are with in a certain con f idence interval:

2

⋅ 2 zs n = E q u a t i o n 2 E 2 Note in Equ a tion 2 that the st andard deviation of the sam p le, s, and the m a xim u m allowable error, E, are in the units of m easurem ent, (i.e.: hours or kW ). The standard deviation, s, of the

sam p le can be expressed as the co effic ient o f

var i ation (or C v ), which is a fraction of the m e an, as shown in Equation 3.

C
v = s E q u a t i o n 3 x Where:

x is the s a m p le m ean

In lik e m a nner the m a ximum error, E can also b e express e d as a fraction of the m ean, (precision ), as shown in Equation 4.

E P = Equation 4 x

Substitu ting C v and P into Equation 2, we get a unitless expression, as shown in Equation 5.

z 2

⋅ (/ ) s x 2 n = E q u a t i o n 5 ( / ) 2 E x Or expressed another w a y,

2 A s i mil a r s t atis tic

, k

nown as th

e t-s t a t

is

tic

, whic h as s u mes a ' t -d is tribu t io

n' rath er th an a n o

r mal dis t rib

u ti on, a nd is a

f

u n

c t io

n of the num ber of s a m p

les

c

a n

be s

ubs titut ed for t h e z

s

t atic is

a m o

re c o

rrec t appr oac h. Altho u g h

pr

efera b l e , for s

m

al l p opu la tions a nd w h ic

h ex hibi t m o

re

' s

pread' tha n , f o

r s

a mp les

lar ge tha n 30, us e of th

e n o

r m

al dis t ri buti on giv e

s a g ood ap prox i m

ati on of t he t-dis t ribut ion

. At s ma l l e r sa m p

le
s

i z e

s s

lightly lar g

e r

s

a mpl e s tha n ar

e ind i c a te d us in

g t

h e nor ma l dis t ri but i on s h o

u ld

be tak e n. 3 For ex am pl e: St ati s tic

s

, 5

th Editio n , b y Robert S. Witt e and J o hn S

. Wit t e or Prob abi lity a nd Statis tic

s for E ngi n eers , by Iwrin Mi lle r and J ohn E. Freu nd

B-4 Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s FEMPz 2

⋅ ( ) 2 C n = v E q u a t i o n 6 ( ) 2

P

where Z = Z-statistic, 1.645 for 90% conf idence, 1.282 for 80% confidence. P = Precision required, t ypically 10% or 20%
Equation 6 is the basic equation used in sam p le group sizing. For sm all populations the sam p le size should be m odified using the finite population correction shown in Equation 7. Typically, this correction is required when the population is less than 500. The finite population adjustm e nt calculation gives n * , which is the new sa m p le si ze corrected for population size.

Nn n * = E q u a t i o n 7 n + N
W h ere
n * = sam p le size corrected for population size

n = sam p le size for infinite population N

= population size
A critical step, that is often not com p leted, is th e post-m onitoring calculation of the actual standard deviation
, coeffic ient o f

var i ation , and subsequent calculation of precision at various levels of con fidence usin g the above equation s . Ultim at ely, th e m a xi m u m error (E) us ing Equation 1 s hould be calculated for various levels of confidence. No job is com p lete until these post-m onitoring calculations are completed and reported.

B.3 APPLICATION OF SAMPLING TO PROJECTS
In the nex t s ection s cons idera tions f o r the design and application of sam p l i ng are explored. The analys is steps to b e used in conducting sam p ling are as f o llows:
1. Compile and analyze the project, E C M and M&V Plan Information
2. Designate sampling groups
3. Select Samples
4. Collect and analyze sam p le data
5. Extrapolate the result from the sa mple over the entire population These steps are dis c ussed below.

B.3.1 Compile Project/ECM and M&V Plan In formation In this step, the goal is to fully understand se veral things, including: the m easure scope, the savings calculations quantifying the intended perfor m ance, the M&V m e thod to be used and the data to be collected. Once the project is understood, an M&V practit ioner can identify the calculation m e thod and select variables to be sampled.

FEMP Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s B-5In m a ny energy conservation projects, it is of ten necessary to conduc t both pre and post insta lla tion s a m p ling. Regardles s of whether th e sam p ling is f o r evaluatin g the base lin e or the post-retrofit conditions, the follo wing inform ation is typically required to properly assign usage groups and determ ine sample sizes.

 Number of circuits, devices or LPC s. Identify and docum ent the LPCs that are affected by the installation of ECMs . This should be provided in the form of an equipm ent inventory su rvey in which each line in the survey repres ents an LPC that includes descriptions of affected and pr oposed E C M na m e plate data and quantity as well as location inf o rm ation.

 Actual or ch ange in load or wattage. Using the equipm ent inve ntory su rve y , the to tal change in load or wattage of the affected equipment by usage group can be com puted.

 Hours of operation

. Sampling can be used to estim ate the average hou rs of operatio n of

the equip m ent. Af ter the f i rs t sam p ling pe riod (whether it is a year, m onth or week) of

m onitorin g , the sam p ling resu lt (a ctual C v , Equation 3) should be used to com pute the sam p le size. If it is e xpected that the equipm ent will b e us ed in a s i gnif i cantly different in the current p e riod than it was in the previous period, the estim a te m a y be adjusted.

B.3.2 Designate Sampling Groups Each device or LPC should be assigned to a us age group based on sim ilari ties in the param e ter being determ ined, such as operating hours or conn ected load. If differen ces are expected, but there are too few usage groups, the resulting v a ri ance of the d a ta m a y result in uns atisfactory confidence and precision levels. However, if t oo m a ny usage groups are cr eated, then excessive monitoring and too sm all of populations m a y occ u r. So, while considering the tradeoffs, usage groups should be developed from criteria such as:

 Area type (for exam ple; office, hallway, m eeting room )

 Annual operating hours

 Tim i ng / usage patterns of the operati ng hours, load, or other variable

 Variability of operating hours, load, o r other v a riable

 Sim ilar functional use
Usage groups should be selected so that equipm ent or LPC’s ar e sim ilar in that the sampled value (for exam ple, hours or kW or kW /unit) is clustered around a specific estim ate. When possible, avoid designating usage groups with populations that wi ll yield less than 10 sam p le points. Examples of standard usage groups for fan m o tors with sim ilar operating hours are HVAC ventilation supply fans, return fans, and exha ust fans. Exam ples of standard u s age groups to determ ine lighting operating hours are fixtures with sim ilar opera ting characteristics in offices, laboratories, hallways, stai rwells, co mmon areas, perim e te rs, storage areas, etc.
Usage groups m a y be defined for the population on a building-by-buildi ng basis or across a

num b er of buildings w i th sim ilar usage areas. M onitoring can be done for a sing le or multiple buildings provided the u s age groups are sim ilar. Defining populations for m u ltiple bu ildings is

B-6 Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s FEMPacceptable and usually results in fewer m onitorin g points than if each building were considered separa tely.

B.3.3 Select Samples Select desired confidence and precision leve ls. A 90/10 confidence/preci sion level is comm only used in M&V and is suggested.

Establish i ng the Coefficient of Var i ation . Prior to selec ting a s a m p le, an estim ate of the sam p led coefficient o f variation (C v ) mu s t b e ma d e

. A C v of 0.5 has been historically recomm e nded, and

num e rous projects have shown this to be reason ab le guess f o r m o st applic a tions. Af ter the f i rst year of m oni toring, the coefficient of variati on fo r each usage group can b e projected f r om the results of the m e tering in the prev io us year. Having selected a confidence and precision level (90/10) and a C v (perhaps 0.5), use Equation 6 and 7, above, to calculate a sam p le size for each sam p ling group. Then, random l y select that

num b er of sam p les from the population. It is strongly recom m e nded that oversam pling (at a 10% or grea ter le vel) be inclu d ed in cas e of data collection dev i ce fa ilure or unexpectedly high data scatter.

Table B-1 illustrates the eff ect of confidence interval and precision on sam p le size.

Table B-1 First-Year (C v =0.5) Sample Size Table based on Usage Group Sampling 4

Precision 20 %

20 %

10 % Confidence 80 %

90 %

90 % Z-Statistic 1.282 1.645 1.645 Popula t io n Size, N Sample Size, n* 4 3 4 4 8 5 6 8 12 6 8 11 16 7 9 13 20 8 10 16 25 8 11 19 30 9 11 21 35 9 12 24 40 9 12 26 45 9 13 28 50 10 13 29 60 10 14 32 70 10 14 35 90 10 15 39 100 10 15 41 125 11 15 45

Tabl e d oes n

o

t re fl ec t ov ers a mp lin

g. Howev e r, bec a u

s e dat a c

o

ll ec tio

n pr

obl ems are v

e ry , v

e ry

c

o

mmo n a nd b e

c aus e of th

e d e p

a r

ture fro m norm a l dis t rib

u ti on for s m

a ll s a mpl e s (les s tha n 3

0 ), ov er-s ampl in g is c

r iti c

al.

FEMP Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s B-7 4Precision 20 %

20 %

10 % Confidence 80 %

90 %

90 % Z-Statistic 1.282 1.645 1.645 Popula t io n Size, N Sample Size, n* 200 11 16 51 300 11 17 56 400 11 17 59 500 11 17 60 infinite 11 17 68

The sam p les in each usage group sh ould be drawn at rando m 5 , so that each m e mber has an equal probability of being sele cted.

If

there is re ason to be lie ve that ther e are sign if ic ant season al varia tions in the oper a tio n of the equipm ent, sufficient m o nitoring will need to be conducted to capture these variations.

B.4 COLLECT AND ANALYZ E SAMPLE DATA
After m e tering has been com p leted, calcu late m ean, standard deviation and C v (Equation 3) of the collected data for each usage grou p. If the actu a l C v is equ a l to or less than the C v o r igin ally

assum e d to calcu late the sam p le size , then th e co nfidence interval will have been m e t. Using Equation 1, calculate the m a ximum error and confidence interval (precis i on) at the selected con f idence level. The confidence in terv al is then e i ther acc epted or, if it is to o large, additional sampling (and possible sampling redesign) m a y be requi red. Once a sample has been selected and m onitoring is done, the engineer has no say over the results, but can rather only report their findings and the level of confidence in the findings.

B.5 EXTRAPOLATE THE RESULT FROM THE SA MPL E OVER THE ENTIRE POPU LATION Once the sample m ean a nd standard deviation are know, the result can be applied to the entire population by assum i ng the m ean of t h e sam p le is true for the entire popula tion. For exam ple, if the m ean of the sam p le is Y kW per unit, m u ltiplying the m ean of sam p le by the num ber of units in the entire populati on gives the total kW

. Example Usage group sam p ling can be applied to one, or nu m e rous, buildings that ar e sim ilar in function, layout, and operation.
Suppose that an ESCO is retrofitting lighting fi xtures in a large office complex containing six buildings that have sim ilar floor plans, functions, a nd operating schedules. As shown in Table B2, usage gro up sam p ling is applied to each of th e four usage groups that appear in th e six buildings, and the sam p le size is 76 points.

5 Rando m s e l e

c t io

n of m oni tori ng poi nt s is

c

r itic

al to av oi d bi as in the s

a mp le. S p rea d s

hee t or oth e r c o

m

put er s o

ftware s

hou ld be us ed t o gen erat e a lis t o

f r

and om nu mbers t

hat may b

e us e

d t

o pl ac e l ogg ers

on a g i v en L P C.

B-8 Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s FEMPTable B-2 Example Inputs for Calcula t i on of Monitoring Sample for Comple x A

Us age Group s for Complex A Number of Lighting LPCs ( N) Sa mple Size ( 90/ 20)

n * +10% (rounded) BUILDING A-1 A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 All Offices 40 0 35 0 45 0 44 0 35 0 45 0 2,4 40 19 Hal l w a

ys 60 0 55 0 45 0 44 0 55 0 45 0 3,0 40 19 Meet in

g R o o

m

s 15 0 20 0 20 0 16 0 20 0 20 0 1,1 10 19 Other 20 0 22 0 18 0 18 0 22 0 18 0 1,1 80 19 Total 1,3 50 1,3 20 1,2 8

0 1,2 2

0 1,3 2

0 1,2 8

0 7,7 70 76 Note: S a mp le po in

ts

(19 for eac h us a ge gr ou p, as s

how n ab ov

e) s h o

u ld

b

e dis t ri but ed r and o

m

ly

ac ros

s the s i t e

s

. The sam p ling procedure varies depending on if it is the f i rst m onitor i ng pe riod (no p r io r
sam p ling data ava ilab l e) or if it is in subsequent monitoring periods:

 First Monitoring Perio d : Using Table B-2 or E quations 6 and 7, assum i ng C v of the hours = 0.5) to determ ine the sam p le size based on num b er of lighting areas ( N ) in each usage g r oup, one ob tains a total sam p le size of 76, as shown in Table B-3.

 Subsequent Monitoring Periods: In the second and subsequent years, the sam e procedur e will b e used to calcu late the sam p le size, excep t th e actua l valu e of C v fro m the data collected in the previous year’s sam p le.
Suppose that the ESCO obtains useful m e tered da ta for the required num ber of sam p le points and

com putes the standard errors of the actual m easured operating hours for each usage group, where the ac tual va lues ar e pre s ented in Tab l e B-3. Usin g Equation 1
, the standar d error of th e tota l estim ated savings for each usage gro up can be calculated. Th e calcu lated values are s hown in Table B-3. F o r two of the four usage groups, (h allways and meeting room s), the actual m e tered standard error is greater than th e allo wable am ount; thus the r e liab i lity r e q u irem ent is not m e t f o r each usage g r oup in th e p r oject.

Table B-3 Monitoring Results Based on Usage Group Sampling in the Firs t P e rformance Period

Us age Group s for Complex A Number of Sa mples Metered Measured Annual Op Hours Standard De viation Maxi mum Error Allowable Error Actu al Precision

at 9 0

% Confidence Reliability Requirement Met?
Offices 19 5,25 6 1,3 1 4 495.9 1051.2 9.4% Yes Hallways 19 7,00 8 5,6 0

5 2115.3 1401.6 30.2% No Meet in

g R o o

m

s 19 2,62 8 1,5 6

8 591.74 525.6 22.5% No Other 19 1,75 2 70 1 264.5 350.4 15.1% Yes Total 76

For the subsequent m onitoring periods a revised sa m p le size is ca lcula t ed f r om the m e ter e d data. The actual coefficients o f variati on (Equation 3) can be calculated from the standard deviation of

FEMP Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s B-9operating hours in each usage group divided by th e average measured hours. These values for C v are used in Equations 6 and 7 to ca lc ulate a rev i s e d tota l sam p le size and allocation across usage groups. In this exam ple, the revised rounded tota l sam p le size is 92. The allocation by usage group is presented in Table B-4.

Table B-4 Revised Sample Requi rements Using Usage Group Sampling

Us age Group s for Complex A N Original Sample Size Measu red hours Actu al C v New S a mpl e Size New S a mpl e Size n* + 10% Offices 2,4 40 19 5,2 56 0.2 5 4 5 Hal l w a

ys 3,0 40 19 7,0 08 0.8 43 48 Meet in

g R o o

m

s 1,1 10 19 2,6 28 0.6 24 27 Other 1,1 80 19 1,7 52 0.4 11 12 Total 7,7 70 76 92

B.5 FINAL NOTE The purpose of sa m p ling is to m onitor a representa tive sam p le of points ra ther than the entire population. The end result is to obtain reliabl e estim ates within a specified precision and statistical co nfidence. M onitoring th e specified n u m b er of points does not necessarily m ean that

com p liance with project requirem e nts has been obtained. Again, the job is not done until postmonitoring calculations are completed and reported.

Sa m p le problem s m a y include im properly desi gnated usage groups, incorrect sam p le design

assum p tions, or selection of nonra ndom points, all of which m a y lead to sam p le-based estim ates that are biased and/or unreliable within specif ied levels. Data logger failure is comm on, and therefore, over-sam pling is usuall y necessary and recomm ended. It is critical to take care during the in itial de velopm ental stages to de sign a sam p le that tru l y reflects the p r oject site. In any case, the M&V practitioner sh ould use whatever reliab l e data is av ailab l e.

B-10 Appendix B – Sa mpling Guideline s FEMP

## Appendix C O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Perfor mance Contr acts

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts C-1C-2 Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP

# How to Determine and Verify Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts

November 2007

Prepared by: Operati ons and Maintenanc e Saving Determi nation Worki n g Group

Approved by: Federal ESPC Steering Committee

### Table of Contents

1. INTR OD U C TION

................................................................................................................... ........................... 1
1. 1 B ACKGROU ND

............................................................................................................................... .............. 1 1. 2 E XISTI NG G UI DANCE

............................................................................................................................... .... 2
2. M& V A P P R OA CH

................................................................................................................... ......................... 3
2. 1 C ALCU LAT I ON M ETH OD

.............................................................................................................................. 3
3. COST SC HE DULES

................................................................................................................. ......................... 4
3. 1 S CHEDUL E DO-3 – P ERFORM ANCE P ER IOD C ASH F LO W

............................................................................. 4 3. 2 S CHEDUL E DO-4 – F IRST Y EA R E NERGY AND C OST S AVI NG S BY ECM

...................................................... 4
4. M& V PL AN

....................................................................................................................... ................................. 4
4. 1 D EFININ G & D OCUME N T I NG T H E B ASE L IN E

................................................................................................ 5 4. 2 M ANAG ING R EP A I R & R EPL A CEME NT C OST S AND S AVIN G S

....................................................................... 6 4. 3 C ALCU LAT I NG S AVINGS AN D A DJUSTING B A S ELI NES

................................................................................. 6 4. 4 D EFININ G O NG OING V ERIFICA T ION A CTIV ITI E S

.......................................................................................... 7
5. AN N UAL RE PORTS

................................................................................................................. ........................ 7
5. 1 V ERIFYIN G AN D R EP ORTI NG S AVINGS

........................................................................................................ 8
6. E X A M PLE S C EN AR IOS

.............................................................................................................. ................... 8
6. 1 E XAMP LE 1: O& M SAVI NGS I S DUE T O E L I M I NATI ON OF A M A INT E NA NCE C ONTRAC T

. ............................... 8 6. 2 E XAMP LE 2: O&M SAVI NGS I S DUE T O RE DU CTION IN GO VE RNMEN T ’ S O&M STA F F

................................. 9 6. 3 E XAMP LE 3: O&M SAVI NGS D U E D E CREA S ED NE ED F O R REP L ACE M EN T EQ UIPM EN T

............................... 10
7. LESSON S LE AR NED

................................................................................................................ ..................... 13

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts iiiiv Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP

### 1. Introducti on This document was developed by the Oper ations and Maintenance (O&M) Savings Determ ination W o rking Group of th e Federal ES PC Steering Comm ittee, 1 and provides guidance on docum enting and verifying O&M savings in fe deral Energy Savings Perform a nce Contracts (ESPCs).

A recent an alysis of annu al m easurement a nd verification (M&V) reports from 100 ongoing Super ESPC projects showed that 21% of the re ported savings were due to reductions in O&M costs. These energy-related cost savings, whic h can also include savings on repair and replacem ent (R&R) costs, can constitute a substa ntial portion of a proj ect’s savings, yet O&M and R&R cost saving s ar e of ten not a s dilig entl y verif i ed o r r e viewed as e n ergy savin g s. To support the Super ESPC program’s integrity, new projects m u st stre ngthen the basis for O&M cost s a vings. Doc u m e nting an d verif y ing O& M or oth e r ene r gy-r e lated saving s will he lp ensure persistence of the savings for the contra ct term , avoid conflicts , and address oversight agency concerns. Key item s identified for enhancem ent in new projects are baseline docum entation, savings calculation m e thods, and verification of O&M and R&R savings. This docum ent provides guidance in these areas for reo ccurring energy-related co st savings, including the f o llowin g.

 An agency’s decision to comm it ongoing f unds from O&M budgets towards ESPC project paym ents has long-term impacts and must be doc um ented adequately for f u ture agency staff and oversight agencies.

 The expecta tions r e gard ing inf o rm ation requir e d in Super ESPC project su bm ittals is clarified, including cost schedules, M& V plans, and annual M&V reports.

 “Savings” due to redirected la bor or O&M efforts that do not reduce real expenses cannot be claim e d as savings under the Super ESPC program

.

 Agencies sh ould m a intain O&M cost records tha t will be ne e d ed to docu m ent baselin e O&M costs for a S uper ESPC project.

 Energy services com p anies (ESCOs) should in clude detailed infor m ation in annual M&V reports to clearly convey the sour ce of O&M savings as well as sufficient data to verif y any savings calculations perf orm e d.

 Escrow acco unts can help allev i ate repair a nd replacem ent risk for both the ESCO and the agency.

 Variable an nual sav i ngs and cost s t ream s can be accomm odated, and will need to be addressed in the financing arra ngem e n t and reflected in the de livery order (DO) schedules.


### 1.1 Background O&M and other energy-related cost savings are allowable in f e de ral ESPCs, and are defined as reduction in expenses (other th an energy cost savings) related to energy and water consum ing equipm ent:

1 In fo rm atio n on th e ESPC Steering co mmit t e e is av ailab l e at h ttp ://g aia.lb l.g o v / fed e ral

- esp c /

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 110 CFR § 43 6.31. 2 Energy cost savings means a reducti on in the cost of energy and related operation and maintenance expenses, from a b ase cost established through a m e t hodol ogy set forth in an energy savings performance contract, utili zed in an existing federall y owned buil d i ng or buil d ings or other federally owned facilities as a result of— (1) The lease or purchase of operating equipm ent, i m p r ovements, al tered operation and m a intena nce, or technical servic es, or... Energy-related cost savings can result from a voided expenditures for operations, m a intenance, equipm ent repair, or equipm ent replacem ent due to the ESPC project. This includes capital funds for projects (e.g., equip m ent replacem ent) that , because of the ESPC project, will n o t be necessary. Sources of ener gy-related savings include:

 avoided current or planned capital expense,

 transfer of responsibility for O& M and/or R&R to the ESCO, and

 avoided renovation, renewal, or repair costs as a result of replacing old and unreliable equipm ent.

Methods for estim ating O&M savings resulting from changes to equipm ent have not been developed f o r the FEMP or IPMVP M&V Guidelines. 3 However, th e ge neral rule to f o llow is that any savings claim e d from O& M activ ities must resu lt in a rea l decr ea se in expend itur e s. O&M budget baselines cannot be based on what the agency should be spending for proper O&M; baseline expenditures must be based on what the agency is spending. The agency’s O&M expenditures after im plem entation need to decr ease for savings to be considered real.


### 1.2 Existing Guidance Preceding th e work of this group was the develop m ent of the DOE-FEMP Guidelines Regarding One-Time Savings Payments and One-Time Savings in ESP C s, 4 dated 10/5/06, which was developed f o r the Federal ESPC Steering Co mmittee. This docum e nt provides guidance regarding allowable one-tim e paym e n ts from age n cies to contractors in federal ESPCs.
The guidance allows avoided costs of programm e d expenditures that becom e unnecessary due to im ple m entation of an ESPC project , or savings that ex ceed contractually guaranteed savings, to be claim e d a s savings. S u ch savings must com e from real and verifiable budgets, not f r om the perceived value that the agency receives for th e reduction in O&M effort s. “Savings” due to redirected labor or O&M effort s that do not reduce real expenditures cannot be claim e d as savings under the Super ESPC program . This gui dance applies to recu rring O&M savings as well.

2 Title 1 0 , C o d e of Fed e ral regu latio n p a rt 436 Sub p a rt B – Meth od s an d Pro c edu r es fo r En erg y Sav i ngs Perform a nce Cont racting. 3 In fo r m atio n on FEMP M&V Gu id e lines: M easurem ent and Verification fo r Fe de ral En ergy Pr ojects a n d Int e r n at i o nal P e rf orm a nce M easurem ent Pr ot ocol i s avai l a bl e t h r o ug h h ttp ://w ww 1.eere.en e rg y.gov/fem p /fin an cing /sup eresp c s_m v reso urces.h tml

. 4 h ttp ://w ww1 .eere.en erg y .gov/fem p /fin an cing /sup eresp c s_ esp c b a sics.h tml

Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP 2This working group (WG) follows a for m er O&M W G that produced Planning and Reporting for Operatio ns & Main te nance in Fe dera l Energy Saving Performance Contracts. 5 That guidance docum e nt covers the related topics of:

 Properly allocating O&M and R& R responsibilities, and

 Defining project-specific O& M reporting requirem e nts.

The FEMP M&V Guidelines v2.2 (C hapter 33) and Detailed Guide to Option A (Section 5.10) provide som e discussion of issues associated with O&M and R&R saving s, whereas the IPMVP does not. The Practical Guide to Savings and P a yments describes a few related example scenarios. W ithin the current ( 2004) Super ESPC indefinite-deliv ery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, the risk and responsib ility m a trix provides an overvie w of key issues. The important relevant concepts from these documents have been incorporated herein.



### 2. M&V Approach
Determ ining the appropriate level of effort to in v e st in the M & V of ener gy-related cost saving is the sam e as f o r energy c o st saving s: The level of M&V rigor will va ry ac cording to (a ) the va lue of the project and its exp ected benefits, and (b) the risk in not achieving the benefits. A graded approach towards m eas uring and verifying O& M and R&R savings is advised. There is one prim ary m e thod for calculating O&M sa vings, which is detailed below.


### 2.1 Calculation M ethod The m o st common approach for calculating ener gy-related cost saving s involves the sam e concepts as those used for determ ining energy sa vings: Perform a nce-period labor and equipm ent costs are sub t racted from adjusted baselin e values, as shown in the equation below.
O&M Cost Savings = {Adjusted Baselin e O&M Costs} – {Actual O&M Costs}

This m e thod is appropriate for m o st projects, and is especially sim p le to apply to those that include elim ination of a m a intenance contract or reduction in governm e nt staff. For other projects, cos t s for replacem en t parts can often be determ in ed from purchase reco rds and averaged to arrive at an annual baseline value. Labor costs for pa rticular services m a y be m o re difficult to quantify since service records m a y not be representative or m a y lack sufficient detail. For exam ple, parts co sts for replac ement light bulbs, ballasts, or steam tra p s are r e la tively easy to quantify from purchase records. L a b o r costs to re place lam p s, ballasts, o r steam traps are m o re dif f i cult to q u antif y beca use tim e spent on thes e specific tasks m a y not be well documented. Additionally, labor reductions on th es e specific tasks m a y not qualif y as “real savings” if labor expenditures do not decrease. Although the agency r ece ives v a lue in the s e nse tha t lab o r is f r eed up to perform other useful tasks, this value m a y not resu lt in cost sav i ngs that c a n be p a id to the ESCO.

Baseline O & M and R&R costs should be base d on actual budgets and expenditures to the greatest ex tent practical. This essentially “m easures” the baseline consum ption of these parts or services. Estim a ted expenditures should be avoi d e d if at all p o ssible. In cases where s u ch inform ation is not available and m u st be estim a ted, parts and labor costs can be derived from

5 h ttp ://w ww1 .eere.en erg y .gov/fem p /fin an cing /sup eresp c s_m v reso urces.h tml

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 3resources su ch as R.S. Means 6 or other m e thods. Estim ated expenditures should be adjusted to reflect any s ite-specific factor s that would affect costs.

Exam ple applications of this m e thod are dem ons trated in Examples 1, 2, and 3 in Section 6.



### 3. Cost Schedules O&M and R&R savings and costs are found in two places in the financial schedu les for a Super ESPC project: perform a nce-peri od ESCO expe nses in schedule DO-3, and first year energy and cost savings by energy conservation m easure (ECM) in schedule DO-4.



### 3.1 Schedule DO-3 — Performance-Period Cash Flow Schedule DO-3 presents the cash flow for the Supe r ESPC project and includes the details of all perform a nce-period expenses incurred by the ESCO over the course of the project.

Perform a nce

- period expenses are delineated by co ntrac t yea r in the f o llowing line item s : Managem e nt/Adm inistration; Operation; Mainte n a nce; Repair and Replacem ent; Measurem ent and Verification; Perm its and Licenses; Insuranc e; and Property Taxes. S c hedule DO-3 shows all perform a nce-period costs incurred by the ESCO , whereas bas e lines and Agency savin g s are found in DO-4.



### 3.2 Schedule DO-4 — First Year Ene r gy and Cost Savings by ECM Schedule DO-4 presents a summ ary of the estim ated annual cost savings th at will be achieved by each of the ECMs inclu d ed in a Sup e r ESPC pr oject. Th is sc hedule docu m ents the changes in costs to the Agency during the firs t y ear. Costs fo r subsequent contract years can be determ ined by applying the appropriate es calation rates, if used.
First year savings (or increase in use or costs ) due to each EC M are quan t ified for all energy and commodity sources along with thei r individual cost im pacts. Li ne item s for each EC M includ e electric energy savings, electr ic cost savings, dem a nd savings , dem a nd c o st savings, other energy-related and O&M cost savings, and others . Savings in this table are positive, while additional costs are reco rded as neg a tive values.



### 4. M&V Pl an The M&V Plan Outline for Super ESPCs contains the following section for docum enting O&M and other co st saving s for each ECM:
Excerpt fro m SuperESPC M&V Pla n Outline fo r each ECM:

6 Mean s Faciliti es Main ten a n c e & Rep a ir 20 07 B o ok is av ailab l e throug h h ttp ://www.rsmean s.co m / b o o k s t o re/ d etail.asp ? sk u = 60 307

.

Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP 43.4 Operations and Mainte nance and Other Cost Savings 3.4.1 Provide justification for O&M cost savings, if applicable.

 Describe how savings are generated

 Detail cost savings calculations.

 Provide perf orm a nce period O&M cost savi ngs adjustm e nt factors, if different from in W h ole Project Data / Global Assum p tions section. 3.4.2 Provide justification for other cost savings, if applicable.

 Describe how savings are generated.

 Detail cost savings calculations.

 Provide perf orm a nce period adjustment factor s, if different from in W hole Project Data / Global Assum p tions section. Already req u ired in the M&V plan is inform ation on how the O&M and other cost savings (including R & R) are g e n e rated and calculate d. Although not explicitly called out in the M&V plan outline, this inform ation should include baseline docum entation, savings calculation

m e thods, and a plan for verifica tion of savings. The M&V plan s hould clearly indicate how the agency’s ex penditu res will be d i rec tly r e duced.



### 4.1 Defining and Documenting the Baseline In general, the baseline labor and equipm ent costs can be determ ined from the following:

• Historical data on cost of e quipm ent parts and consum ables

• Records of historical labor hours based on work orders and tim e sheet system s

• Labor rates, including benefits and overhead as well as any part-tim e or tem porary labor services

• Existing service con t racts for O&M services

Adequate do cum e ntation in the M & V plan will include th e f o llowing:

• Identification of key variables aff ecting the realization of savings

• Specif i catio n of how the Agency’s e xpend itu res will direc tly be reduced b y the im ple m entation of the measure or O&M contract

• Definition of the O&M perform a nce standard (e.g., annual chiller tube cleaning or lamp replacem ents within 48 hours of burnouts)

An issue in defining the baseli ne is establishing the tim e period for analysis. How far back do you go to define the O&M baseline? What if equi pm ent has needed an atypically high level of

m a intenance during the last years of service? This decision requires en gineering judgm e nt, and will depend on the availabili ty of historic data. Th e funda m e ntal goal is to provide tran sparency in the decision m a king process by thoroughly docum e nting why a specific m e thod was chosen, what data w a s available and used, an d how cost savings were determ ined.
In general, it is recomm ended to use as m u ch historical data as possible when defining the baseline conditions. Ideally, m a intenance parts and/ or labor should be determ ined for the life of the equipm ent, and then an average annual cost can be calculated. If the O&M savings vary dram atically from year to year, it m a y not be appr opriate to u s e an averag e cost. This is a site-byFEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 5site decision since overall savings from the E SPC m u st cover paym ents every year. The key is

m a king sure that h i sto r ic costs would continue if not for the p r ojec t. Conducting a “reality check” on historic O&M costs using RS M eans Facility M a in tenance and Cost Data 7 or other data is recommended to ensure that site data ar e realistic. Actual site data should be used wherever po ssible.

For sites that do not have detailed O & M record s and where the ESCO wi ll be assum i ng som e O&M respo n sibility, the Agency can allocate a portion of their O&M budget for m a terials to cover ESCO services. This a pproach requires a long-term co mmit m ent from the Agency, and could be regretted in subsequent years.

Another situ ation that so m e tim e arises is when baseline O&M procedures are unacceptable or substandard. Projects can increase O & M costs over the baseline conditions by adding new equipm ent or by requiring certain preventative ma inten a nce a c tiv ities tha t were not pr eviously conducted. Since only real budgetary savings can be claim e d, O&M “savings” can som e ti m e s be negativ e if addition a l co sts are incu rred. The neg a tive saving s should be shown in cost schedu le DO-4, just as savings would be.



### 4.2 M a naging Repair & Replacement Costs and Savings
In som e cases, a site’s O & M budget m a y include general funding for em e r gency R&R

. Som e tim es this is the only R&R budget, and it is not allocated for specific equipm ent (e.g., boiler X will be replaced in year Y). F o r Agen cies with a sufficient unsp ecified R&R fund, it

m a y be poss i ble to claim one-tim e or periodic av oided m a terial costs and/or subcontracted labor f

ees. Alterna tive l y, if the ESCO is assum i ng respo n sibility f o r som e f r actio n of the inf r astruc tur e , a justified portion of the budget attributed to m a terial replacem ent and contracted labor cost could be allocated as an annual savings. In both cas es, the rationale for clai m i ng the cost savings, the source of savings, and the specific year(s) of implem e ntation m u st be carefully docum ented.

In som e cases an escrow account is establis hed to cover future R&R costs for the new equipm ent. Use of an escrow accoun t can reduce risks to both the agency and ESCO r e lated to future R&R. An ESCO can allo cate a predeter m i ned portion of the paym e n t stream (DO-3 line item ) into a dedicated R&R fund. Use of this f und m u st be related to the equipm ent installed under the E SPC, and the funds return to the gover nm ent if they are not used. Draw-downs of funds can be m u tually determ ined by the ESCO and agency as repairs are required. Use of an

escrow acco unt lim its th e financial exposure to the party accepting ove rall responsib ility for R&R of the new equipment.



### 4.3 Calculating Savings and Adjusting Baselines
Docum e ntation of calculation m e thods should in clude how the baseline and actual O&M and R&R budgets will be establish e d and calcu lated, including co s t s for labor and m a terials for

7 Mean s Facilities Main ten a n c e & Rep a ir 20 07 B o ok is av ailab l e throug h h ttp ://www.rsmean s.co m / b o o k s t o re/ d etail.asp ? sk u = 60 307

Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP 6equipm ent replacem ent, equipm ent m a intenance and repairs, and conseq uentia l items such as lost energy savings or other eff ects. Additional details should be included such as hourly labor costs, labor inflation rates, hours required per specific task, and equipm e n t lifetim es.
The M&V plan should also describe how adjustm e nts will be m a de to savings calculations to account for changes at the facility. F actors such as changes in operating hours, occupancy, loads, and equipment lif e will af f

ect HVAC system mainte n a nce c o sts. If base line cos t data will be adjusted, the reasoning and m e thodology should be included.

It is n ecessary to define how actual costs wi ll be accounted f o r duri ng th e perform a nce period. Specify what, if any, add ition a l m a nagem e nt oversi ght or logs will be m a intained, the nature and frequency of entries, and how the results will be interpreted. E x am ples include logging of equipm ent failures and f r equencies, equipm ent down tim e, a nd com p laints.
Best practice is to use standa rd accounting procedures that allow for direct com p arison of baseline to perform a nce period co sts (apples to apples). Another option m a y be to use a “control group” facility which is sim ilar to the project si te to determ ine what the O&M costs would have been in th e absence of th e ECM.



### 4.4 Defining Ongoing Verification Activities The M&V plan defines all ongoing verification activities and should include the following:

• How savings persistenc e will be en su red

• How com p liance with pe rf orm a nce standards f o r the f acility will b e ver i f i e d

• W h at will o ccur if perf o r m a nce standards ar e no t m e t

• How savings will be cou n ted if site b e havior cha nges, and what will occ u r if actua l O&M costs in crease

• How long O&M saving s will last. (Often, cost sa vings should only be sch e duled for p a rt of the contract period.)



### 5. Annual Reports O&M and R&R savings must be ad equately verif i ed and reported during the perform a nce period. The Annual Report outline for Super ESPC pr ojects contains the following section for docum enting the O&M savings for each ECM:
Excerpt fro m SuperESPC Annual Report Outline for each EC M: 2.4 Details of O&M and Other Savings (if applicable) 2.4.1 Describe source of savings, if applicable.

 Describe verification activities.

 Provide perf orm a nce period O&M savings adjustm e nt factors, if applicable. 2.4.2 Describe source of other savings, if applicable.

 Describe verification activities.

 Provide perf orm a nce period adjust ment factors, if applicable.

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 7

### 5.1 Verifying and Reporting Sa vings Although not explicitly called

- out in the Annual Report ou tlin e, adequate d o cum e ntation should include the f o llowing:

• Dates and tim es of on-site verification activ ities (including governm e nt witnessing if appropriate)

• Review of key variables affec ting the realization of savings

• Verification that standards of perform a nce have been m e t
Baseline budgets and service cont ract fees m a y be escalated to account for inflation during the contract term. Escalation rates n eed to be documented and should com e fr om sources such as the National Ins titu te of Standards and Technology, which estimates such factors for life-cycle costing. Guidance on perfor m ance period adjustm e nt factors, which are in tended to account for inflation, are provided through FEMP. 8



### 6. Exam ple Scenari os Three exam ple scen ario s are prov id ed to illus t ra te som e of t h e common sources of O&M savings in ESPC projects: 1. Elim ination of a m a intenance contract 2. Reduction in governm e nt’s staff 3. Decreased need for replacem ent equipm ent



### 6.1 Example 1: O&M savings from elimination of a maintenance contract Prior to the implem e ntation of the ESPC, sp ace condition i ng at the facility was provided by aging boilers and chillers that were m a intain ed by a third party under a m a intenance contract. The ESPC r e places the aging equipm ent with newe r, m o re efficient equ i p m ent, which the ESCO

m a intains f o r the lif e of the contr act.
This is probably the easiest type of O&M saving s to verify, and the least controversial. Since a

m a intenance contract will be elim inated, O&M cost savings can be claim e d. The annual O&M savings will the cost of the m a intenance contract during the baseline year , inflated by a constant

am ount each year to acco unt for price inflation, as outlin ed in the elim inated service co ntract. There can b e little disag r eem ent that these cos t savings are achieved, since the form er equipm ent is no longer in service and no l onger requires m a intenance. O & M savings are calculated using the f o llowin g equation : O&M Cost Savings = {Adjusted Baselin e O&M Costs} – {Actual O&M Costs}

8 NIST i n clud es th e rates in t w o too l s it p r o duces fo r FE MP an nu ally ev ery Ap ril, t h e Bu il d i ng Life-Cycle Co st (B LC C ) t o ol a n d t h e Ene r gy Escal at i on R a t e C a l c ul at or (E ER C ) . B o t h B L C C an d t h e E E R C can be d o w nl oade d fro m th e FEMP web s ite, listed u n d e r so ft ware too l s (h ttp ://ww w 1

. eere.en e rg y.gov/fem p /in fo rm at io n / dow n l o a d_b lcc.h t m l ).

Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP 8The O&M savings is then the difference between th e annual cost of the old contract, adjusted for inflation, an d the actual m a intenan ce costs, which will be zero. The first s t ep is to determ ine the site ’s cur r en t costs f o r th e service co ntrac t th a t will b e elim inated. A rev i ew of the service contract showed costs of $22,250 in the baseline y ear, with an annual incr ease in fees of 1.5%.
During the perform a nce period, the adjusted baselin e costs will be the current costs inflated by a constan t amount each year (1.5%). T h e actual O& M costs for these staff in the perform a nce period are expected to be zero. Th e savings stream from these sa vings for a ten-year period is shown in Error! Reference source not found. Table 1.

Table 1: O& M Main ten a n ce Sa vin g s fr om Eliminated Service Contr a ct Annu al Sy stem Mainten a nce Co st

Year Existing Co s t Post-In s tall Cos t Net Sav i ngs

0 $22,25 0 1 $22,80 6 $0 $ 22,806 2 $23,37 6 $0 $ 23,376 3 $23,96 1 $0 $ 23,961 4 $24,56 0 $0 $ 24,560 5 $25,17 4 $0 $ 25,174 6 $25,80 3 $0 $ 25,803 7 $26,44 8 $0 $ 26,448 8 $27,10 9 $0 $ 27,109 9 $27,78 7 $0 $ 27,787 10 $28,48 2 $0 $ 28,482 $255,5 07
Verification of these savings incl udes confirm a tion that the eq uipm ent and re lated O&M contract was elim inated in the po s t -ins ta lla tion or year 1 report. All following perform a nce reports will thoroughly docum ent the source of savings.



### 6.2 Example 2: O&M savings from reduction in government’s O&M staff Prior to the implem e ntation of the ESPC, sp ace condition i ng at the facility was provided by aging boilers and chillers that were m a inta ined by government em ployees. The ESPC replaces the aging eq uipm ent with newer, m o re ef f i cient e quipm ent, which the ES CO will m a intain. As a result of this retrof it, th re e of the Agency’s m a intenance s t af f m e mbers will no long er be requir e d. T w o staf f m e mbers will b e taking retir e m e nt, while one othe r will be trans f erred to another division within the Agency.

Since there will be a red u ction in the governm e nt’s m a intenance staff, O&M saving s can be claim e d. O&M saving s are calculat ed using the following equation:
O&M Cost Savings = {Adjusted Baselin e O&M Costs} – {Actual O&M Costs}

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 9The f i rst s t e p is to de ter m ine the site ’s cur r ent co sts f o r the s t af f m e mbers that will be elim inated. A review of the site’s accounti ng records indicates that the sala ries and benefits of the three elim inated employees cost the agency $200,500 the last year. This is the baseline costs for year 0. During th e perform a nce period, th e adjus t ed b a seline cos t s will be the s u m of the annual salaries and benefits of the st aff m e mbers who will be elim inated inflated by a constant am ount each year (2 % in th is cas e ). The actu al O&M co s t s for these s t aff in the perform a nce period are expected to be zero.
The savings stream from these sav i ng s for a ten- year period is shown in Table 2, which assum e s that a 2 % an nual salary in crease would have occurred.

T a bl e 2 : L a b o r Cos t Sa vi n g s for 1 0 Ye ar C o ntr a c t Annu al Sy stem Labor Co sts Year Existing Co s t Post-In s tall Cos t Net Sav i ngs

0 $200,5 00 1 $204,5 10 $0 $204,5 10 2 $208,6 00 $0 $208,6 00 3 $217,0 28 $0 $217,0 28 4 $221,3 68 $0 $221,3 68 5 $225,7 96 $0 $225,7 96 6 $230,3 11 $0 $230,3 11 7 $234,9 18 $0 $234,9 18 8 $239,6 16 $0 $239,6 16 9 $244,4 08 $0 $244,4 08 10 $249,2 97 $0 $249,2 97 $2,275,8 52

The f i rst-y e ar or pos t-in stalla tion verification of the O&M savi ngs will confirm maintenance staff reductions and that the ESCO has assum e d prescribed O&M activ ities. All f o llowing perform a nce reports will thoroughly docum ent the source of savings and confirm that the ESCO is continuing to perform the O&M activities.
A problem c ould arise if the m a intenance staff is not reduced. Then it would be necessary to determ ine what new O&M respons ibilities the facility has taken on, or savings should not be claim e d. For exam ple, it could be that a new building was constructed. During the perfor m ance period, it is important to establis h that any increased m a intenan ce was not due to the equipm ent insta lled un der the ESP C . In som e cases th is m a y require exam ination of service call records from before and after the im ple m entation of the E SPC.



### 6.3 Example 3: O&M savings from decreased need for replacement equipment Material-related savings frequen tly r e sult f r om lighting and lighti ng controls projects. In this

exam ple, the agency is responsible for m a in tenance both before and after the equipm ent

10 Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMPinstallation. Although th ere is no reduction in staff for which to claim labor savings, there will be cost savings on replacement m a terials.
For this project, lighting m a intenance sa vings will result from the following:

1. Reduced m a terial requirem e nts (e.g., lam p s, ballasts)

• Reduced operating tim e — Control m easur es increas e equip m ent life by reducing the burn time of lam p s a nd ballasts. 2. Warranty-related savings — Newly installed la mps, ballasts, and fixtures com e with a

m a nufacturer warranty of 3 years.
The reduction in equipm ent costs is determ in ed by calcu lating the difference between what replacem ent parts for the baseline would cost and what parts f o r the new lighting system cost.
O&M Cost Savings = {Adjusted Baselin e O&M Costs} – {Actual O&M Costs}
For this project, the following assumptions apply: 1. Lam p and ballast costs and expected lifetim es are defined in Table 3.

Table 3: Costs and Life times for Lighting Equipment

Equipment Rated Life (hour s) Cos t per uni t 4' T12 lamp (existing) 20,000 $ 1.98 2 lamp EE magneti c balla st (ex i sting ) 100,00 0 $ 15.63 2 lamp RO el ectro n ic b a lla st (ne w ) 75,000 $ 12.30 4' T8 lamp (n ew) 24,000 $ 2.19

2. Increased cycling of the lights resulting fr om the occupancy sensors has a negligible ef

f

ect on la mp/ballas t lif e. 3. The entire project (including all other m easures) has a perf orm a nce period of 10 years. 4. Escalation of m a terials cost s will be 2.5% per year.

The first s t ep is to determ ine the site’s costs for replacem ent lighting equipm ent. A review of the site’s records indicated that replacem e nt lighting equipm ent fo r the f l uor escent T12s tota led $5100 and $5450 the last two years, with an av erage of $5275. A reality check based on the expected useful service life of the equipm ent and known operati ng hours was then conducted to conf irm that this va lue is r easonable, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 : Predicted Baseline Material Costs Bas e line Qt y Cos t Lighting e qui pment (2 -La m p T-1 2 fixtures w/ EE magnetic balla st): 5,000 Run Hou r s: 3,000 Lamp repla c e m ents pe r ye ar: 1,500 $ 2,970 Ballast re pla c ements p e r y ear: 150 $ 2,345 Annual Cost: $ 5,315

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 11The third step is to es tim ate th e expected repl acem ent equipm ent costs for the pos t-installation scenario. Th ese calculations are sho w n in Table 5.

Table 5: Predi c ted P o s t-I nst a llati on M a ter i al C o sts Post-In s tall Qt y Cos t Lighting e qui pment (2 -La m p T-8 fixtures w/ Electro n ic b a l l ast): 5,000 Run Hou r s (with occupa ncy control s ): 2,250 Lamp repla c e m ents pe r ye ar: 938 $ 2,051 Ballast re pla c ements p e r y ear: 150 $ 1,845 Annual Cost: $ 3,896
Next, the cash-flow from the m a terial savings are determ ined, account ing for the lamp and ballast warranty that com e s with the new lightin g system . Under this warranty, all replacem ent lam p s and ballasts will be provided by the equipm en t m a nufacturer at no co st f o r the f i rst th ree years. Using the inf l a tion rate of 2.5 % f o r m a terial cos t s, the m a terial m a intenance co st saving s for the 10-year project term would vary year to year, as show n in Table 6.

Annual verif i cation of th e O&M savings will incl ude the Agency reportin g the actual num b er and cost of replacem ent lighting equipm ent to the ESCO, who will com p are the da ta to what would have been required in the baseline case.

12 Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMPTable 6: Annual Cos t Savi ngs on Re plac ement Par t s Annu al Sy stem Equipment Co st

Note Year Existing Cos t PostInstall Cos t Net Sa v i ngs 0 $5,275 Wa rra nty Period 1 $5,407 $0 $5,407 Wa rra nty Period 2 $5,542 $0 $5,542 Wa rra nty Period 3 $5,681 $0 $5,681 Yr 0 co sts ($ 3,896) e s cala ted to Year 4 4 $5,823 $4,300 $1,522 5 $5,968 $4,408 $1,560 6 $6,117 $4,518 $1,599 7 $6,270 $4,631 $1,639 8 $6,427 $4,747 $1,680 9 $6,588 $4,865 $1,722 10 $6,752 $4,987 $1,766 $ 28,120



### 7. Lessons Learned
Som e lessons learned from other projects pr ovide som e key points to keep in m i nd:

 An agency’s decision to comm it ongoing f unds from O&M budgets towards ESPC project paym ents has a long-term i m pact and m u st be docum ented adequately for future agency staff in both the M&V plan and th e annual reports. Inf o rm ation should include why a specific

m e thod was chosen, what data was availabl e and used, and how cost savings were determ ined.

 Operations & m a intenance budget baseline s cannot be based on what the agency sho u ld be spending for proper O&M; baseline expenditures must be based on what the agency is spending. T h e agency’s O&M expenditures afte r im ple m entation need to decrease for savings to be considered real.

 A graded approach towards m easuring and verif y ing O&M and R&R savings is advised accord ing to (a) th e valu e of the project and its expected ben e fits, and (b ) the risk in n o t achieving the benefits.

 Agencies sh ould m a intain O&M cost records tha t will be ne e d ed to docu m ent baselin e O&M costs. These records should be included in the S uper ESPC proposal.

 ESCOs should include detailed inform ation in annual reports to clearl y convey the source of O&M savin g s as well a s suf f i cient d a ta to verify any savings ca lculations perform e d.

 Escrow acco unts can help allev i ate R&R risk for both the ES CO and agency.

 Variable an nual sav i ngs and cost s t ream s can be accomm odated and will n eed to be reflected in the DO schedules.

 Using an Option B or continuous m easurem en t approach to tracking ongoing O&M savings can be cum b ersom e to the agency because of the required record keeping and accounting for ongoing changes at the site.

FEMP Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts 1314 Appendix C – O&M Savings in Federal Energy Savings Performance Contracts FEMP

## Appendix D M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-1D-2 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMPM&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods Outlinev.1.0, Nov.2004[Note:All content calledfor inthis outline is required (ifapplicable), except items noted as optional.]1.Executive Summary / M&V Overview& Proposed Savings Calculations1.1Proposed Annual Savings OverviewTable 1.Proposed Annual Savings Overview[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]ECMTotalenergysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gassavings(MBtu/yr)Water savings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Totalenergy&water costsavings, Year 1($/yr)Other energyrelated O&Mcost savings,Year 1($/yr)Totalcostsavings, Year 1($/yr)Total savingsFirst YearGuaranteed Cost Savings:$Notes*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.MBtu=106Btu.If energyisreportedin units other than MBtu,provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor linktodeliveryorder schedules (e.g., 0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-3Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP1.1.1Site Use and Savings Overview (Optional)•Fill in Table1A or provide equivalent information.Table 1A.Site Use and Savings Overview (Optional)Totalenergy(MBtu/yr)Electricenergy(kWh/yr)Electricdemand(kW/yr)*Natural gas(MBtu/yr)Water (gallons/yr)Other energy(MBtu/yr)Total proposed project savingsUsage for entire site**% Total siteusage savedProject squarefootage(KSF)Total site square footage(KSF)% Total site area affectedNotesMBtu=106Btu*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.**Define usageperiod.KSF=103square feet.If energyisreportedin units other than MBtu,provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor linktodeliveryorder schedules (e.g., 0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-4Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP1.2 M& V Plan Sum m a ry

Table 2. M & V Plan Summary

ECM. ECM Desc ription M & V Opti on Used * Sum m ary of M & V Plan

* M&V op tio ns in clud e A
, B, C, an d D. G u i d elin es i n clud e M & V Gu id eli n es: Mea s uremen t & Verifica t io n f o r Feder a l E n ergy Projects, V e rsio n 2. 2 ( w w w

. eere.e n er gy

. g o v / f em p/ fi nanci ng/ s u peres p cs

_ m vresou rces.c f m ); and In tern a tiona l Perfo r man ce Mea s uremen t & Verifica tio n Proto c o l (IPMVP), Vo lu m e I , Mar c h 200 2 (w ww .i pm vp. o r g )

.


### 2. Whole Project Data / Global Assumptions

2.1 Risk & Resp onsibility

2.1.1 Summarize allocation of re sponsibilit y f o r ke y item s related to M&V.

• Referen ce location of Risk & Responsibilit y Matrix 1 (if required).

2.2 Energy, Water, and Operation s & Maintenance (O&M) Rate Data

2.2.1 Detail bas e line energy and water rat es.

2.2.2 Provide perfo rm ance perio d rate adjustme nt factors f o r energy , water, and O&M cost savings, if us ed.

2.3 Schedule & R e porting for Verification Activities

2.3.1 Define require m e nts for wi tnessing of measure ments during:

• Baseline developm ent

• Post-installation verification activities

• Perfor m ance period

2.3.2 Define sched ule of verification reportin g activities.

Table 3. Schedule of Veri fication Reporting Activities

Item a Recommende d t i m e of s u bm i ssi on a Ow ner ’ s re vi ew a n d acceptance pe riod Post-Installation Re port 30 to 60 days a f ter acce ptance 30 days A nnu al Repo r t 3 0 to 60 d a ys af ter an nu al p e rf or m a n ce per i od 30 day s

a Tim e s are rec o m m e nded b a s e d on i n du st ry pract i ce; m odi f y as nee d e d

.

1 Th e Risk /Resp o n s i b ility Mat r ix is Attach m e n t 5 of t h e Sup e r ESPC IDIQ co n t ract and is also av ailab l e on FEMP’s web si t e at w w w .ee r e.e n er gy

. g o v / f em p/ fi na nci n g/ su pere sp cs_m vreso u rce s .cfm

.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-52.3.3 Define content and form at of reports:

• Post-installation report.
Use Post-Inst allation Report Outline 1

.

• Annual M&V reports. Use Annual Report Outline 1

.

• Interval M&V reports Develop report outline if needed.

2.4 Operations, Preventive Maintenance, Re pair, and Replacemen t Reporting Requiremen t s

2.4.1 Define Government a nd ESCO reporting requirements:

• Summarize key verification activities and reporting responsibilities of governm e nt and ESCO on operations, p r eventive mainte nance, repair, and replacement item s from det a ils i n ECM specific M&V Plan s.

• Define content of reports a nd reporti ng s c hedule.

2.5 Constructio n Period Savings

2.5.1 Provide overview of how construction peri od savings will be calculated, if appl icable.

2.6 Status of Rebates

• Include if applicable.

2.6.1 Provide a su mmary of t h e source of any th ird- part y rebates or incentives provi ded on t h is project.

2.6.2 Provide statu s of an y thir d

- party rebates or incentives.

2.7 Dispute Resolution

2.7.1 Desc ribe plan for resolving disputes regarding issues such as baseli n e, baseline adjust m e nt, e n ergy savings calculation, and the use of periodic m e as ure m ents.

1 Electronic c o pies of Po st-In s t a lla tio n Rep o rt Ou tlin e and An nua l Rep o r t Ou tlin e a r e a v a ilable at www.

eere.e n er gy .g o v / f em p/ fi nanci ng/ s u peres p cs

_ m vresou rces.c f m

.

D-6 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMP

### 3. ECM [Name / #] M&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods

• Develop secti on for each ECM.

3.1 Overview of ECM, M&V Plan, and S a vings Calculation for ECM

3.1.1 Summarize the scope of work, location, a nd h o w cost savings are generated.

• Desc ribe source of all savings including energy , water, O&M, and other (if applicable).

3.1.2 Specify t h e M&V guideline and opti o n used 1

.
3.1.3 Provide an o v e rview of M&V Activities for ECM.

• Explain inten t of M&V plan, includ ing what is being verified.

3.1.4 Provide an o v e rview of sav ings calculations m e thods for ECM.

• Provide a general descripti on of anal y s is methods used for savings calculations.

3.2 Energy and Water Baseli n e Development

3.2.1 Describe in g e neral terms how th e baseline for this E C M is defined.

3.2.2 Desc ribe variables affe cting baseline energy or water use.

• Include variables such as weather, oper a ting hours, set point changes, etc.

• Describe how each variable will be quant ified, i.e. m easurem ents, monitoring,

assu m p tions, manufacturer data, m a inten a nce logs, engineering resources, etc.

3.2.3 Define key s y ste m perfor m ance factors c h aracterizing the baseline c onditions.

• Include factors such as co mfort conditions, lighting intensities, te m p erature set points, etc.

3.2.4 Define requirem e nts for government witnessi ng of m e asurements if different than whole project data requirem e nts included in Se ction 2.3

.
3.2.5 Provide detail s of baseline data collected , includi ng:

• Parameters monitored/m e asured

• Details of eq uipm ent m o n itored, i.e. loc a tion, t ype, model, quanti t y , etc.

• Sam p ling plan, including details of usage groups and sam p le si zes

• Duration, frequenc y , interval, and seasonal or other require m e nts of measure ments

• Personnel, dates, and times of m e asurements

• Proof of gove rnment witnessing of m e asurem ents (if r e quired)

1 Gui d elines i n clude M & V Guid elin es: Mea su remen t & Ver ifica tio n fo r Fed e ra l En erg y Pro j ects, Versi o n 2. 2 ( www.eere

. ene r gy.gov/fem p /financing / s upe r e spcs _m vreso u r ces.c fm ); and In tern a tiona l Perfo r man ce Mea s uremen t & Verif i c at i on Prot oc ol ( I

PM VP) , V o lu m e I , Mar c h 200 2 (w ww .i p m v p

. org ) . M&V o p tion s i n clud e A
, B, C, an d D.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-7• Monitorin g e quipm ent used

• Installation requirements for m onitoring equipm ents (test plug for te m p erature sensors, strai ght pipe for flow mea s ure m ent, etc.)

• Certification of calibration / calibration procedures followed

• Expected acc uracy of m e a s ure m ents/ m onitoring equipment

• Quality contr o l procedures used

• Form of data (.xls, .cvs, etc.)

• Results of m e asure ments (a ttach appendix and electronic forma as necess ary )

• Co m p leted data collection forms, if used

3.2.6 Provide detail s of baseline data analy s is performed, including:

• Analy s is using results of measure ments

• Weather normalized regressions

• Weather data used and sour ce of data

3.3 Proposed Energy & Water Savings Ca lculations an d Methodolo gy

3.3.1 Provide detail ed description of anal y s is methodology used.

• Describe any data m a nipulation or anal ys is that was conducted prio r to appl y i ng savings calcu lations.

3.3.2 Detail all a s s u m p tions and sources of data , including all stipulated values used in calculations.

3.3.3 Include equations and tech nical details of all calculations m a de. (Use appendix and electronic format as ne ces s a ry .) Include descrip tion of data format ( h eadings, units, etc.).

3.3.4 Details of an y savings or baseline adjustm e nts that may be requir e d.

3.3.5 Detail energy and water rat es used to cal culate cost sa vings.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d energy and water rat e adjust m e nt facto r s, if different from in section 2.2

. 2.

3.3.6 Detail proposed annual savings for this e n erg y conservation m e asure for performance period.

• Summarize information in Table 4.

3.4 Operations and Maintenance and Oth er Cost Savings

3.4.1 Provide justif ication for O&M cost savings, if applic able.

• Describe how savings are generated

• Detail cost s a vings calculations.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d O&M cost savings adjust m e nt factors, if different from in section 2.2

. 2.

D-8 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMP3.4.2 Provide justif ication for ot her cost savings, if applicable.

• Describe how savings are generated.

• Detail cost s a vings calculations.

• Provide perfo rm ance perio d adjustm e nt factors, if different fro m in section 2.2.2.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-93.5Proposed Annual Savings For ECMTable 4.Proposed Annual Savings For ECM[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]Totalenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Electricenergyuse(kWh/yr)Electricenergycost, Year1 ($/yr)Electricdemand*(kW/yr)Electricdemandcost, Year1 ($/yr)Natural gasuse(MBtu/yr)*Natural gascost, Year1 ($/yr)Water use(gallons/yr)Water cost,Year 1($/yr)Otherenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Otherenergycost, Year1 ($/yr)OtherenergyrelatedO&Mcosts,Year1 ($/yr)Total costs,Year 1($/yr)BaselineusePostinstallationuseSavingsNotes*Annual electric demand savings (kW/yr)isthe sum of the monthlydemandsavings.MBtu =106Btu.If energyisreportedin units other thanMBtu,provideaconversion factorto MBtu for linktodeliveryorder schedules (e.g., 0.003413 MBtu/kWh).D-10Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP3.6 Post-Installation M&V Activities

3.6.1 Describe the intent of post-installation verification act ivities, including what will be verified.

3.6.2 Desc ribe variables affe cting post-installation energy or water use.

• Include variables such as weather, oper a ting hours, set point changes, etc.

• Describe how each variable will be quant ified, i.e. m easurem ents, monitoring,

assu m p tions, manufacturer data, m a inten a nce logs, engineering resources, etc.

3.6.3 Define key s y stem performance factors characterizing the post-installation condi ti ons such as lighting intensities, te m p erature set points, etc.

3.6.4 Define requirem e nts for government witnessi ng of m e asurements if different than whole project data requirem e nts included in Se ction 2.3

.
3.6.5 Provide detail s of post-inst alla tion data to be collected, includi ng:

• Parameters to be m onitored

• Details of eq uipm ent to be m onitored (location, t y pe, m odel, quantity, etc.)

• Sam p ling plan, including details of usage groups and sam p le si zes

• Duration, frequenc y , interval, and seasonal or other require m e nts of measure ments

• Monitorin g e quipm ent to b e used

• Installation requirements for m onitoring equipm ent

• Calibration requirements / procedures

• Expected acc uracy of m e a s ure m ents/ m onitoring equipment

• Quality contr o l procedures to be used

• Form of data to be collected (.xls, .cvs, e t c.)

• Sam p le data collection for m s (optional)

3.6.6 Detail data an aly s is to be perform ed.

3.7 Perfor mance Period Verif i cation Activities

3.7.1 Describe variables affecting perfo rm anc e period energy or water use.

• Include variables such as weather, oper a ting hours, set point changes, etc.

• Describe how each variable will be quant ified, i.e. m easurem ents, monitoring,

assu m p tions, manufacturer data, m a inten a nce logs, engineering resources, etc.

3.7.2 Define key s y stem performance factors characterizing the performance period conditions.

• Include factors such as co mfort conditions, lighting intensities, te m p erature set points, etc.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-113.7.3 Describe the intent of perform ance perio d verification activities – what will be verified.

3.7.4 Provide detail ed schedule of performance period verif i cation activities and inspections.

3.7.5 Define requirem e nts for government witnessi ng of m e asurements if different than whole project data requirem e nts included in Se ction 2.3

.
3.7.6 Provide detail s of performance pe riod da ta to be collected, includi ng :

• Parameters to be m onitored

• Details of eq uipm ent to be m onitored (location, t y pe, m odel, quantity, etc.)

• Sam p ling plan, including details of usage groups and sam p le si zes

• Duration, frequenc y , interval, and seasonal or other require m e nts of measure ments

• Monitorin g e quipm ent to b e used

• Installation requirements for m onitoring equipm ent

• Calibration requirements/procedures

• Expected acc uracy of m e a s ure m ents/ m onitoring equipment

• Quality contr o l procedures to be used

• Form of data to be collected (.xls, .cvs, e t c.)

• Sam p le data collection for m s (optional)

3.7.7 Detail data an aly s is to be perform ed.

3.7.8 Define operations, preventi ve mainte nance, repair, an d replacement reporting requirem e nts.

• Detail verification activities and reportin g responsibili ties of govern ment and ESCO

on o p erations, preventive maintenan ce, repair, and replacement items.

• Define contents of report a nd reporti ng s c he dule, if dif f erent than in global section 2.4.

D-12 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMP

## Post-Inst a llation Report Outline

v

. 1.0, Nov

. 2004

[ N ote: All c ontent c a lle d f o r in this outlin e is re quired ( i f ap plicab le), except item s noted as optional.]
Contract # / Delivery Or der # / Task #/ Modification #: (i nclu de as appropriate)
Perfor mance Period Dates Covered:

_ ____ ___ ___ t o___

___ ___ _

___



### 1. Executive Summary

1.1 Project Back ground

1.1.1 Provide an o v e rview of project background, inclu d in g:

• Contract # / Delivery Ord e r # / Task # / Modification # (as approp riate)

• Dates of relevant deliver y order m odifications

• Perform ance period dates covered

• Project acc eptance date (ac t ual or expected)

1.2 Brief Proje c t and ECM Descriptions

1.2.1 Provide an o v e rview what was done and how savings are generated

.
1.2.2 Note any cha nges in proje c t scope between the Final Proposal (incl uding an y rel e vant delivery orde r m odificatio ns) and as-built conditi ons.

1.3 Proposed and expected e n ergy and cost s avings for Year 1 of the perfor mance period

1.3.1 Co m p are exp ected savings for first perfo rmance y ear to first y ear guaranteed cost savings. State whether guarantee is expected to be fulf illed for first y ear. If not, provide detailed explanation.

1.3.2 Summarize information in Table 1 and T a ble 2.

Note: Expected savings are prediction for firs t y ear based on post-installation M&V activities. Verified savings for first year of performance period will be documented in annual report. T h e proposed savings for each ECM are incl uded in schedule DO-4 of the delivery order.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-13Table 1.Proposed Annual Savings Overview[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]ECMTotalenergysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gas savings(MBtu/yr)Water savings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Totalenergy&water costsavings, Year 1($/yr)Other energyrelated O&Mcost savings,Year 1($/yr)Totalcostsavings, Year 1($/yr)TotalsavingsFirst yearguaranteedsavings:$NotesMBtu=106Btu.*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedin units other than MBtu,provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor linktodeliveryorder schedules (e.g., 0.003413MBtu/kWh).Guaranteedcost savings for project aredefinedin scheduleDO-1indelivery order.Theproposed savingsfor each ECM are includedinscheduleDO-4indeliveryorder.Table 2.Expected Savings Overviewfor First Performance Year[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]ECMTotalenergysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gas savings(MBtu/yr)Water savings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Totalenergy&water costsavings, Year 1($/yr)Other energyrelated O&Mcost savings,Year 1($/yr)Totalcostsavings, Year 1($/yr)TotalsavingsNotesMBtu=106Btu.*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedinunitsother thanMBtu, provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor link todeliveryorderschedules (e.g.,0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-14Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP1.4 Energy, Water, and O&M Rate Data

1.4.1 Detail energy and water rat es used to cal culate cost sa vings for this period.

1.4.2 Provide perfo rm ance perio d rate adjustme nt factors f o r energy , water, and O&M cost savings, if us ed.

1.4.3 Report actual energy and water rates at site for same period (optional).

1.5 Savings Adjustment s

1.5.1 Provide summary of an y e n erg y and/or cost savings adjustments required between Final Proposal (incl uding any rel e vant delivery order m odifications) and as-built condi tions.

1.5.2 Desc ribe the im p act in cha nges between the Final Pro posal (includi ng an y releva nt delivery orde r m odificatio ns) and as-built conditi ons based on post

- installation M&V results.

1.6 Constructio n Period Savings

1.6.1 Provide a su mmary of co nstruction per i od savings, i f applicable.

1.6.2 Provide o v erview of how constr uction period saving s are calculated.

1.7 Status of Rebates

• Include if applicable.

1.7.1 Provide a su mmary of t h e source of any th ird- part y rebates or incentives provi ded on t h is project.

1.7.2 Provide statu s of an y thir d

- party rebates or incentives.



### 2. ECM [Name / #] M&V Activities and Expected First Year Savings

• Develop secti on for each ECM.

2.1 Overview of ECM, M&V Plan, and S a vings Calculation for ECM

2.1.1 Summarize the scope of work, location, a nd h o w cost savings are generated.

• Desc ribe source of all savings including energy , water, O&M, and other (if applicable).

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-152.1.2 State M&V g u ideline and option used 1

.
2.1.3 Provide an overview of M&V activities for ECM.

• Explain the i n tent of M&V plan, inclu d ing what is being verified

.
2.1.4 Provide an o v e rview of sav ings calculation m e thods for ECM.

• Provide a general descripti on of anal y s is methods used for savings calculations.

2.2 Installation Verification

2.2.1 Detail any ch anges between Final Prop o sal (including any relevant delivery orde r
m odifications) and as-built conditions.

2.2.2 Provide detail s of energ y and cost savin gs im pa ct from changes be tween Final Proposal (including any relevant delivery order m odifications) and as-built conditi ons based on post-installation M&V results. Summa rize information in Table 4.

2.2.3 Describe construction peri od savings (if app licable). Include date ECM was in ef fect, and reference acceptance documentation.

2.2.4 Detail savings calculations for construct i on perio d savings.

1 M&V options include A, B
, C
, and D. Guidelin es include M & V Guidelin es: Mea s urement & Veri ficat ion for F e de ral Energy Projec ts, Versio n 2.2 ( www.eere.energ y .gov/f e mp/finan ci ng/superespcs_mvresources.cfm ); and International Perfo r mance Measurement & Ver ifi cation Prot ocol (IPMVP), Volume I, Mar c h 2002 ( www. ipmvp. org ).

D-16 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMPTable 4.Impact to energy and cost savings from changes between final proposal andas-built conditions for ECMTotalenergysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricenergycostsavings,Year 1($/yr)Electricdemandsavings*(kW/yr)Electricdemandcostsavings,Year 1($/yr)Natural gassavings(MBtu/yr)**Natural gascostsavings,Year 1($/yr)Watersavings(gallons/yr)Water costsavings,Year 1($/yr)Otherenergysavings(MBtu/yr)Otherenergycostsavings,Year 1($/yr)OtherenergyrelatedO&M costsavings,Year 1($/yr)Totalcostsavings,Year 1($/yr)ProposedExpectedVarianceNotesMBtu =106Btu.*Annual electric demand savings (kW/yr)isthe sum of the monthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedin units other thanMBtu, provideaconversion factorto MBtufor linkto deliveryorder schedules (e.g.0.003413 MBtu/kWh).Note:Expectedsavings arepredictionfor first yearbasedonpost-installationM&V activities. Verified savingsfor first year ofperformance periodwill bedocumented inannualreport.Theproposedsavingsfor eachECMare includedinscheduleDO-4ofthedeliveryorder.D-17Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP2.3 Post-Installation M&V Activities Conducted

• Detail measur e m e nts, m oni toring, and inspec tions conducted in accordance with M&V plan:

2.3.1 Measure ment equipm ent used

2.3.2 Equipm ent calibration d o cu mentation

2.3.3 Dates/times of data collection or i n spec tions, nam e s of personnel, an d docum entation of governm e nt witnessing

2.3.4 Details to confirm adherence to sam p ling plan

2.3.5 Include all po st-installation measured valu es. Include p e riods of m onitoring an d d u rations and frequency of m e asurements . (Us e a ppendix and electronic format as ne ces s a ry ). Include description of data format (headi ngs, units, etc

. ).

2.3.6 Describe how performance criteria have been met.

2.3.7 Detail any pe rformance de ficiencies that n eed to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

2.3.8 Note i m pact of perform an ce deficienci e s or enhancements on generation of savings.

2.4 Expected Savings Calculations and Methodolog y

2.4.1 Provide detail ed description of anal y s is methodology used.

• Describe any data m a nipulation or anal ys is that was conducted prio r to appl y i ng savings calcu lations.

2.4.2 Detail all a s s u m p tions and sources of data , including all stipulated values used in calculations.

2.4.3 Include equations and tech nical details of all calculations m a de. (Use appendix and electronic format as ne ces s a ry .) Include descrip tion of data format ( h eadings, units, etc.).

2.4.4 Details of an y baseline or savings adjustm e nts made.

2.4.5 Detail energy and water rat es used to cal culate cost sa vings.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d energy and water rat e adjust m e nt facto r s, if used.

• Report actual energy and water rat es at site for same period (optional).

2.4.6 Detail expect ed savings for this ener g y conservation measure for first y ear.

• Summarize information in Table 5.

D-18 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMP2.5 Details of O& M and Other Savings (if applicable)

2.5.1 Describe source of O&M savings, if app licable.

• Desc ribe verification activities.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d O&M cost savings adjust m e nt factors, if applicable.

2.5.2 Describe source of other savings, if ap pli cable.

• Desc ribe verification activities.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d adjustm e nt factors, if applicable.

Note: Expected savings are prediction for first y ear based on post-installation M&V activities. Verified savings for fi rst y ear of per f ormance period will be docu m ented in the annual report. The proposed savings for each ECM are i n cluded in sc hedule DO-4 of the delivery order.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-19Table 5.Expected Year1 Savings for ECM[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]Totalenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Electricenergyuse(kWh/yr)Electricenergycost ($/yr)Electricdemand*(kW/yr)Electricdemandcost ($/yr)Naturalgas use(MBtu/yr)Naturalgas cost($/yr)Water use(gallons/yr)Water cost($/yr)Otherenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Otherenergycost ($/yr)OtherenergyrelatedO&Mcosts($/yr)Total costs($/yr)BaselineusePost-installationuseSavingsNotesMBtu= 106Btu.*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedinunitsother thanMBtu, provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor link todeliveryorderschedules (e.g.0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-20Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP

## Annual Report Outline

v

. 1.0, Nov

. 2004

[ N ote: All c ontent c a lle d f o r in this outlin e is re quired ( i f ap plicab le), except item s noted as optional.]
Contract # / Delivery Or der # / Task #: (include a s appropriate)
Perfor mance Period Dates Covered:

_ ____ ___ ___ t o___

___ ___ _

___ Contract year #:

___ ___ _

____



### 1. Executive Summary

1.1 Project Back ground

1.1.1 Provide an o v e rview of project background, inclu d in g:

• Contract # / Delivery Ord e r # / Task # / Modification # (as approp riate)

• Dates of relevant deliver y order m odifications

• Perform ance period dates covered

• Project acc eptance date

1.2 Brief Proje c t and ECM Descriptions

1.2.1 Provide an o v e rview what was done and how savings are generated

.
1.2.2 Note any cha nges in proje c t scope between the Final Proposal (incl uding an y rel e vant delivery orde r m odificatio ns) and as-built c onditi ons as recorded in post-install a tion report.

1.3 Summary of Proposed and Verified E n ergy and Cost Savings

1.3.1 Co m p are veri fied savings for Performance Ye ar # to Guaranteed C o st Savings for Year #. State whether guarantee is fulfilled for y ear. If not, provide detailed explanation.

1.3.2 Define performance period

.
1.3.3 Summarize information in Table 1 and T a ble 2.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-21Table 1.Proposed Annual Savings Overview[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]ECMTotal energysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gassavings(MBtu/yr)Water savings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Total energy& watercostsavings, Year# ($/yr)Other energyrelatedO&Mcost savings,Year #($/yr)Total costsavings, Year #($/yr)TotalSavingsYear[#]guaranteed costsavings:$NotesMBtu =106Btu.*Annual electric demand savings (kW/yr)isthe sum of the monthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedinunitsother thanMBtu, provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor link todeliveryorderschedules (e.g.,0.003413MBtu/kWh).Guaranteed costsavingsforproject aredefinedincost schedule DO-1 in deliveryorder.The proposedsavings for eachECM areincludedin schedule DO-4 inthe deliveryorder.Table 2.Verified Savingsfor Performance Year [# ][Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]ECMTotal energysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gassavings(MBtu/yr)Water savings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Total energy& watercostsavings, Year #($/yr)Other energyrelatedO&Mcost savings,Year #($/yr)Total costsavings, Year #($/yr)TotalsavingsNotesMBtu =106Btu.*Annual electric demand savings (kW/yr)isthe sum of the monthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedin units other thanMBtu, provideaconversion factorto MBtufor linkto deliveryorder schedules (e.g.0.003413 MBtu/kWh).D-22Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP1.4 Savings Adjustment s

• Provide summary of an y e n erg y and/or cost savings adjustments required.

1.5 Perfor mance and O&M I ssues

• Note i m pact of operating deficiencies o r enhancem en ts on generation of savin gs.

• Note im pact of maintenance defi ciencies on generation of savin gs.

• Detail any de ficiencies that need to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

1.6 Energy, Water, and O&M Rate Data

1.6.1 Detail energy and water rat es used to cal culate cost sa vings for this period.

1.6.2 Provide perfor m ance perio d rate adjustment factors f o r energy , water and O&M cost savings, if us ed.

1.6.3 Report actual energy and water rates at site for same period (optional).

1.7 Verified Savings To Date

• Summarize information in Table 3.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-23Table 3.Verified Savingsfor Performance Period To Date[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]Year #Total energysavings(MBtu/yr)Electricenergysavings(kWh/yr)Electricdemandsavings(kW/yr)*Natural gassavings(MBtu/yr)Watersavings(gallons/yr)Other energysavings(MBtu/yr)Total energy&water costsavings($/yr)Other energyrelatedO&Mcost savings($/yr)Total costsavings($/yr)Guaranteedcostsavings foryearTotalsavingsNotesMBtu= 106Btu.*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedinunitsother thanMBtu, provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor link tocostschedules (e.g.,0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-24Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP

### 2. Details for ECM [name / #]

• Develop secti on for each ECM.

2.1 Overview of ECM, M&V Plan, and S a vings Calculation for ECM

2.1.1 Summarize the scope of work, location, a nd h o w cost savings are generated.

• Desc ribe source of all savings including energy , water, O&M, and other (if applicable).

2.1.2 Discuss any c h anges in scope / results recorded in post-installation M&V report.

2.1.3 State M&V g u ideline and option used 1

.
2.1.4 Provide an overview of M&V activities for ECM.

• Explain the i n tent of M&V plan, inclu d ing what is being verified

.
2.1.5 Provide an o v e rview of sav ings calculation m e thods for ECM.

• Provide a general descripti on of anal y s is methods used for savings calculations.

2.2 M&V Activities Conducted This Peri od

• Detail measur e m e nts, m oni toring, and inspec tions conducted this reporting period in accordance w ith M&V plan.

2.2.1 Measure ment equipm ent used

2.2.2 Equipm ent calibration d o cu mentation

2.2.3 Dates/times of data collection or i n spec tions, nam e s of personnel, an d docum entation of governm e nt witnessing

2.2.4 Details to confirm adherence to sam p ling plan

2.2.5 Include all measured value s for this peri od. Include periods of m onitoring and durations and frequency of m e asurements . (Us e a ppendix and electronic format as ne ces s a ry ). Include description of data format (headi ngs, units, etc

. ).

2.2.6 Describe how performance criteria have been met.

2.2.7 Detail any pe rformance de ficiencies that n eed to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

2.2.8 Note i m pact of perform an ce deficienci e s or enhancements on generation of savings.

1 M&V op tions in clud e A, B, C & D. Gu id el in es in cl u d e M& V Gu id elin es: Mea s u r emen t & Verif i ca tio n fo r Feder a l E n ergy Projects , V e rsio n 2.2 ( ww w

. eere.e n er gy

. g o v / f em p/ fi nanci ng/ s u peres p cs

_ m vresou rces.c f m ); and In tern a tiona l Perfo r man ce Mea s uremen t & Verifica tio n Proto c o l (IPM V P ) , V o lum e I, M a rch 2 0 0 2 ( ww w. ip m v p

. or g ).

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-252.3 Verified Savings Calculations and Methodolog y

2.3.1 Provide detail ed description of anal y s is methodology used.

• Describe any data m a nipulation or anal ys is that was conducted prio r to appl y i ng savings calcu lations.

2.3.2 Detail all a s s u m p tions and sources of data , including all stipulated values used in calculations.

2.3.3 Include equations and tech nical details of all calculations m a de. (Use appendix and electronic format as ne ces s a ry .) Include descrip tion of data format ( h eadings, units, etc.).

2.3.4 Details of an y baseline or savings adjustm e nts made.

2.3.5 Detail energy and water rat es used to cal culate cost sa vings.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d energy & water rate adju st m e nt factor s, if used.

• Report actual energy and water rat es at site for same period (optional).

2.3.6 Detail verified savings for this energy conservation measure for perform ance year.

• Include Table 4.

2.4 Details of O& M and Other Savings (if applicable)

2.4.1 Describe source of savings, if applicable.

• Desc ribe verification activities.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d O&M savings adjustment factors, if applicable.

2.4.1 Describe source of other savings, if ap pli cable.

• Desc ribe verification activities.

• Provide perfor m ance perio d adjustm e nt factors, if applicable.

D-26 Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines FEMPTable 4.Verified Annual Savings ForECM for Performance Year #[Include all applicable fuels / commodities for project, e.g., electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water, etc.]Totalenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Electricenergyuse(kWh/yr)Electricenergycost, Year# ($/yr)Electricdemand*(kW/yr)Electricdemandcost, Year# ($/yr)Natural gas(MBtu/yr)*Natural gascost, Year# ($/yr)Water use(gallons/yr)Water cost,Year #($/yr)Otherenergyuse(MBtu/yr)Otherenergycost, Year# ($/yr)OtherenergyrelatedO&Mcosts,Year# ($/yr)Total costs,Year #($/yr)BaselineusePerformanceYear # useSavingsNotesMBtu= 106Btu.*Annualelectric demand savings(kW/yr) isthe sumof themonthlydemandsavings.If energyisreportedinunitsother thanMBtu, provide a conversionfactor toMBtufor link tocostschedules (e.g.,0.003413MBtu/kWh).D-27Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting OutlinesFEMP2.5 O&M and Other Activiti es

2.5.1 Operating requirem e nts:

• State organization(s) responsible for equ i pment operations. If appro p riate, detail how responsibiliti es are shared.

• Summarize key o p erating procedures and any related verification activities.

• Detail any de ficiencies that need to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

• Note i m pact of operating deficiencies o r enhancem en ts on generation of savin gs.

2.5.2 Preventive maintenance requirements:

• State organization(s) responsible for per f orm i ng m a in tenance. If appropriate, det a il how responsibilities are sh ared.

• Verification of scheduled maintenance it em s co m p leted b y ESCO or Governm e nt.

• Detail any de ficiencies that need to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

• Note im pact of maintenance defi ciencies on generation of savin gs.

2.5.3 Repair and replacement requirements:

• State organization(s) responsible for rep a ir and replacem e nt. If appropriate, detail how responsibilities are sh ared.

• Summary of activities conducted this pe riod b y ESCO or Government.

• Detail any de ficiencies that need to be addressed by ESCO or Government.

• Note im pact of equipm ent deficiencies o n generation of savings.

FEMP Appendix D – M&V Plan and Reporting Outlines D-28

## Appendix E Reviewing Measurement & Verification Plans

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans E-1E-2 Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans FEMP

## Reviewing Measurement & Verification Plans for Federal ESPC Projects

8 October 2007 Version 3.0 DRAFT FOR REVIEW

Federal Energy Managemen t Program (FEMP) Office of Energy Effici ency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy

This do cu me nt was d e velo ped for the U. S. Depar tme n t of Energy’s Federal Energy Manage m ent Program by Nexant, Inc., and La wren ce Berk eley National La boratory. This do cume nt WILL BE posted on FEMP’s web site at www.eere.ene rg y.gov/femp/finan cing/ sup e r es pc s_ mv re sou r c e s. cf m

. Comm ents should b e su b m itted to DASartor@lbl.g o v

## Contents

Section Page

Section 1 Measurement and Verification Plan Checklist

...................................................... 1 1.1 Step 1– Prepare Custom Report and Checklist from Te m p late

...................................... 1 1.2 Step 2– Review Project Docum e ntation

......................................................................... 1 1.3 Step 3– Determ ine Level of Savings for Each ECM

...................................................... 1 1.4 Step 4 – Complete Content Checklist

............................................................................. 2 1.5 Step 5 – Evaluate M&V Approach

................................................................................. 2 1.6 Step 6 – Finalize Report

.................................................................................................. 3 1.7 Step 7 – Pro v ide W r itten Review to Agency and DOE

.................................................. 4 1.8 Step 8 – Ensure Action T a ken on Key Issues

................................................................. 4 Section 2 Review of Measurement and Verification (M&V) Plan

........................................ 5 2.1 Section 1: Executive Summary

....................................................................................... 5 2.2 Section 2: Background

.................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Section 3: Summ ary of Findings

..................................................................................... 6 2.4 Section 4: M&V Plan a nd Savings Calculation Met hods - C h ecklists (v. 2.0)

.............. 8

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans iiiiv Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans FEMP

## Section 1 Measur ement and V e rifi cation Plan Checklist

The purpose of this docum ent is to provide a framework for implem enting uniform a nd consistent reviews m eas urem ent and verification (M&V) plans for Federal ESPC projects. These procedures will help pro v ide uniform review ap proaches, M & V plans, p r oduce stand a rdized reviews, and enable centralized tracking of project m e trics.
Evaluating M&V plans is an in exact science that requires technical expe rtise and exp e rien ce. Ideally, the reviewer will have been involved in the project developm ent phase and has an intim ate und erstand i ng o f the Agency’s goals, th e agree-upon allocation of project risks, site specific issu es, as well as the objec tives and constraints for each ECM.

1.1 STEP 1– PREPARE CUSTOM REPORT AND CHECKLIST FROM TEMPLATE Create a cop y of the M&V Plan Review Tem p la te and custom ize by adding project specific inform ation in the Tables provided:

 Table 1: Summary of Pr oject Data

 Table 2: Distribution List of Review

 Table 3: Summary of Savings from Proposed ECMs

Custom ize the M&V Plan Content Review Checklis ts. The checklists have 2 parts: M&V Plan – Project Level Checklist and M&V Plan – ECM Level Checklist
Add an ECM level checklist for each Energy C onservation Measure (E CM). A placeholder for one ECM has been provided. Make a copy for each ECM.

1.2 STEP 2– R E VIEW PROJECT DOCUMENTATION Acquire and review project docum ents. Make note of relevant docum entation that is available during the review. Generally, th e entire Final Pro posal, in clud ing the Detailed Energy Survey (DES) and all technical appendices, is require d to thoroughly review an M&V plan and the associated savings calculations.

1.3 STEP 3– DETERMINE LEVEL OF SAVI NGS FOR EACH ECM
Determ ine the % of overall cost savings cont ribu ted by each ECM in the project (fro m cost schedule D O -4). Determ ine the % of energy and water cost savings (not including O&M cost savings) contributed by each ECM.

Evaluate sav i ngs stream s from each ECM, notin g th e sourc e (s) of cost s a vings for each m e asure (O&M, electricity, dem a nd, natural gas, water, etc. ) in the appropriate sections of the M&V Plan Review Template. O&M cost sav i n g s are gen e rally determ ined and verified separately from energy & w a ter savings.
Principal review efforts should be focused on th e m easures providing the largest portion of the cost savings for the project. This strategy of re viewing the principal cost saving m easures first will help the reviewer sp end the sm allest am ount of tim e whil e m a xi m i zing the valu e of the

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans 1review, and is especially helpful when review ti me is lim ited. Provide a detailed review of the M&V strategy for each m easure if possible.

1.4 STEP 4 – CO MPLETE CO NTENT CHECKLIST Read through the M&V Plan while checking off topics and m a king notes in the customized M&V Plan Checklis ts. Note the lo c a tion of key item s in the f i rst co lum n of the check lists (labeled “Reference page”). The inab ility to comment on an item suggests that relevan t inform ation m a y be m i ss ing or not in com p lete form

. Som e of the item s in the checklist are m a rked “Evaluation”. T h is indicates that additional qualitative assessm ent is necessa ry. These item s are posed as que stions, where as the required content item s are s t atements.

Item s in the checklist that re quire follow-up should be flagge d by placing an “X” in the last colum n of the checklist (labeled “Fo l low-Up?”).

Include the com p leted Checklists as part of the w r itten review

. The inclus io n of all items on the che c klis t doe s not indicate the appropriateness of the M&V approach. E ach item requires qua lita tive a ssessm ent, and tips f o r evaluatin g the M&V approach is discussed in the next step.

1.5 STEP 5 – EVALUAT E M&V APPROA C H Note source(s) of savings from m easure. Ensure M&V activities are ad eq uate for all s i gnifican t savings stream s. Review Risk & Responsibility m a trix (R&R). E n sure M&V strategy for each m easure conform s to agreed-upon risk allocation
Evaluate quality of baseline developed:

 Were key variab les affecting energy use m easured for each ECM (e.g. watts/fix ture and hours/yr)?

 Are all assumptions / stipulations re asonable, and includes source of data?

 Were system perfor m a nce characteristics recorded (e.g. ligh ting intensities, tem p erature set poin t s) Are savings estim ates sound & reasonable?

 Where energy calcu lations closely reviewed ?

 Were utility or weather based m odels validated?

 Were ECM savings com p ared to system usage?

 Were project level sav i n g s com p ared to overall site usage? (optional)

Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans FEMP 2Evaluate quality of perf orm a nce period activities:

 What is the likelihood for success for this m easure? More rig o rous M&V strategies

are warr ante d f o r ECMs with substan tia l uncer ta inty and/o r te chnica l complexity.

 Is m eaningful ongoing perform a nce period data going to be used to calculate savings?

− What is being verified? Is this su fficient to support the guarantee?

− W ill key variable s affecting energy u s e be m easured for each ECM? How often?

 W ill single post-in sta lla tion m easurem ents apply to all year s in the p e rf orm a nce period? If so, how valuab le are the d a ta used ?

− How likely is this data to change ove r the perform a nce period? Based on which party has accepted ongoing responsibility for each item
, is this approach appropriate? Do the M&V strategies allocated support the concepts included in Risk & Responsibility Matrix? Were all objectives and constrai nts o f the project considered ? Were all objectives and constr aints o f the ECM considered ? Review the strategy for conducting O&M for ECMs. W ho is going to perform the routine O&M tasks, and how often.

 Are O&M a c tiv ities suf f i cien tly de ta iled to dem o nstra t e level of eff o rt?

 Are responsibilities allocated as suggested by R&R Matrix?

 Are reporting requirem e nts adequately defined?

Evaluate ov erall pro j ect assum p tions:

 Are contracted energy rates based on actual rates, incl uding tim e -of-use rates and peak dem a nd ratch e ts ? Are m a rginal (not blended) energy rates used?

 Are proposed escalation rates based on latest NIST data?

Are M&V costs reasonable? Do cost s align with pla nned activities?

 See DO-2 for Initial M&V cost for each m easure

 See DO-4 for perform a nce period M&V costs

1.6 STEP 6 – FIN A LIZE REPO RT
The written review should follow the for m at of the M&V Plan Review Template and include the

com p leted M&V Plan Content Che c klis ts. The f o rm at of the report can be m odified as needed to
m eet the specific pro j ect needs.

 Section 1 : Executiv e su mmary

 Section 2: Background

 Section 3: Summ ary of Findings

 Section 4 : M&V Plan Checklis ts

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans 3Af ter readin g the M&V Plan and f illing out th e p r ojec t spec if ic M&V Pla n Checklis ts , summarize the findings from the review in th e appropriate sections of the Report.

Instru ctions, placeho l der text to be custom ized, as well as fin a l repo rt text are in cluded within th e Report Review Tem p late. Placeho l d e r tex t that n eed to be cu stom ized are underlined italics
, while ins t ru ctions to the reviewe r ar e in red italics

. Com p lete all the s ection s and custo m ize pl aceholder text included in th e Report Re view Tem p late. Delete any ins t ruc tions af ter a section has been adequately completed.

Include the com p leted Checklists as part of the w r itten review

1.7 STEP 7 – PROVIDE WRITTEN RE VIEW TO AGENCY AND DOE
Once com p l e ted, the review of the M&V plan should be provided to the Agency staff, as well the DOE representative, wh o will a r chiv e it f o r pro j e c t re cords. Discussion with the Ag ency on the review is usually warranted.

1.8 STEP 8 – EN SURE A C TION TAKEN ON KEY ISSUES
Af ter the rev i ew is subm itted, it is CRITICAL to en sure adequ a te ac tion is taken to im plem ent or address the recomm endat i ons. Often, the review proces s is iterativ e. After an initial review, subsequent revisions of the M&V plan m u st be assessed to determ ine if adequate m odif i cations h a ve been m a de. W r itten evaluations of these subsequent M&V plans ar e needed to docum e nt follow-up actions taken.
M&V Plan Review Template starts on the next page.

Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans FEMP 4

## Section 2 Review of Measurement and V e rification (M&V) Plan

<DATED> for ESPC <AGENC Y, SI TE NAME, DO#>

2.1 SECTION 1: EXEC UTIVE SUMMARY

• Provide a short summary of the key findings, including:

• Overall adequacy of the M&V plan review ed, including techni cal qua lity of the baseline and performanc e period activities

• Overall risk allocation of project and M&V plan’s adhe rence to description in Risk & Resp onsibility M a trix for pro j ect

• Bullet chie f action items on M&V Pla n

2.2 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND This review of the M&V plan for this ESPC project was perform e d to ensure:

 M&V conform s to agreed-upon risk allocation;

 M&V is ade quate f o r all si gnificant savings stream s;

 The baseline is adequately defined;

 The savings estim ates are sound & reasonable;

 Perform a nce period activities are m e a n ingful and adequate to support the guarantee;
Overall p r oject assum p tions are reas onable. Table 1: Summary of Project Data Project name: Location: Deliv ery Order #: Date of proposal:

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans 5Table 2: Distributi on List of Review

Revie w

er: Reviewer Contact Information: Date of Review: Agency Cont act info: Date review was provided to Agency contact: DOE Contact info: Date review was provided to DOE contact:

Table 3: Summary of Savings from Proposed ECMs

ECM # ECM Name / De scription Annual Ener gy & Water Cos t Savings ($ ) Annual O&M Cost Savings ($ ) % T o tal Savin g s % Total Ener gy

& Water Savings

2.3 SECTION 3: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

• Include all recommendations re sulting from review. Summari ze where appropriate using referen ces to completed checklists.

• Note any missing or deficient items from the Project level Ch ecklist.

o Discuss reasonableness of o verall project assumptions

• Discuss the overall risk a llocation, and the level of co rrespondence to the risk and responsibility matrix

• Are initial and ongoing M&V costs for this proj ect reasonable? Do costs align with planned activ ities?

• Make a sub-section for each ECM if needed. Su mmarize any issues for ea ch ECM identified during review. Evaluate all items listed in Step 5 for all ECMs. Note any missing or deficient items from the ECM Checklists

• For each measure, provide a qualitative assessment of

o Measurement and verification approach;

o General risk allocation and if supported by the concepts included in Risk & Responsibility Matrix;

Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans FEMP 6o Adequacy of the baseline defined;

o If savings calculation met hods are sound & reasonable;

o Accuracy of energy savings computations;

o Meaningfulness of the perf ormance period activities ;

o Adequacy of M&V activities fo r all sources of savings

o strategy for conducting O&M

o Are Initial M&V costs for this ECM re asonable? Do costs align with planned activ ities?

FEMP Appendix E – R e viewing Measu r ement & Verification Plans 72.4SECTION 4: M&V PLAN AND SAVINGS CALCULATION METHODS - CHECKLISTS (V. 2.0)M&V Plan - Project Level ChecklistReferencePageProject level ItemIncluded? Noteany deficienciesFollow-up?1.Executive Summary / M&V Overview & Proposed SavingsCalculations1.1ProposedAnnual Savings OverviewTable showing the projected savings by ECM broken out by O&M savings, energyunits, energy cost, andother savings values as applicable. Include all applicable fuels /commodities for project, such as:electricenergy, electricdemand, natural gas, fuel oil,coal, water, etc.First Year Guaranteed Cost SavingsSite Use and Savings Overview- Include approximate%total siteusage saved (foryear 1) by energysource type for site (optional)EvaluationWere project level savings compared tooverall site usage? Are savings levels reasonable?1.2M&V Plan SummaryTable presenting M&V Option (from M&V guideline) used and summary of M&V approach for each ECM2.Whole ProjectData / Global Assumptions2.1Risk & ResponsibilitySummarize allocation of responsibility for key items related to M&V.Reference location of Risk& Responsibility MatrixEvaluationDo all M&V strategies included inPlan support the concepts included in Risk & Responsibility Matrix?2.2Energy, Water,andOperations& Maintenance(O&M)Rate DataDetails of baseline energy and water rates includedEvaluationAre contracted energy rates based on actual rates,including time-of-use rates and peak demand ratchets?Are marginal (notblended) energyrates used?Provide performance period rate adjustment factors for energy, water, and O&M cost savings, if used.EvaluationAre proposed escalation rates based on latest NIST data?2.3Schedule& Reportingfor Verification ActivitiesDefine requirements for witnessing of measurements during:Baseline developmentPost-installation verificationactivitiesPerformance periodDefine scheduleof verification reporting activities,including:Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMP8ReferencePageProject level ItemIncluded? Noteany deficienciesFollow-up?Post-Installation ReportAnnual ReportDefine content and format of reports:Post-installationreport(Use Post-Installation Report Outline.)Annual M&V reports (Use Annual Report Outline)Interval M&V reports (Develop report outline if needed)EvaluationAre M&V costs reasonable? Do costs align withplanned activities?See DO-2 for Initial M&V cost for each measureSee DO-4 for performance period M&V costs2.4Operations, Preventive Maintenance, Repair,and Replacement Reporting RequirementsDefine Government and ESCO reporting requirements:Summarize keyverification activities and reporting responsibilities of government and ESCO on operations,preventive maintenance, repair, and replacement items from details in ECM specific M&V Plans.Define content of reports and reporting schedule.2.5Construction Period SavingsProvide overviewof how construction periodsavings will be calculated, if applicable.2.6Status of RebatesProvide a summary of the source of any third-partyrebates or incentives providedon this project.Provide status ofany third-party rebates or incentives2.7DisputeResolutionDescribe plan for resolving disputes regarding issuessuch as baseline, baseline adjustment, energysavingscalculation, and the use of periodic measurements.Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMP9M&V Plan - ECM Level Checklist #1 (Copy for each ECM)ReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%3.ECM [Name /#]M&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods3.1Overviewof ECM, M&V Plan, and Savings Calculationfor ECMSummarize the scope of work, location, and how cost savings are generated.Describe source of all savingsincluding energy,water, O&M, and other (if applicable).Specify the M&V guideline and option usedEvaluationDo M&V activitiesmatch declared M&V option?Provide an overview of M&V Activitiesfor ECM.Explainintent ofM&V plan, including what is beingverified.Provide an overview of savingscalculations methods for ECM.Provide a general description ofanalysis methods used for savings calculations.3.2Energy and Water BaselineDevelopmentDescribe in general terms how the baseline for this ECM is defined.Describe variables affecting baseline energy or water use.Include variablessuch as weather, operating hours, set point changes, etc.Describe how each variable will bequantified, i.e.measurements, monitoring, assumptions,manufacturer data, maintenancelogs, engineering resources, etc.Define key systemperformance factors characterizingthe baseline conditionssuch as comfort conditions,lighting intensities, temperature set points, etcDefine requirements for government witnessingof measurements if different thanwhole project datarequirements included in Section2.3.Provide details ofbaseline data collected, including:Parameters monitored/measuredDetails of equipment monitored, i.e. location, type, model, quantity, etc.Sampling plan, including detailsof usage groups and sample sizesDuration, frequency, interval, and seasonal or other requirements of measurementsPersonnel, dates, and times ofmeasurementsProof of government witnessingofmeasurements (if required)10Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMPReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%Monitoring equipment usedInstallation requirements for monitoring equipments (test plug for temperature sensors, straight pipeforflow measurement, etc.)Certification of calibration / calibration procedures followedExpected accuracy of measurements/monitoring equipmentQuality control procedures usedFormof data(.xls, .cvs, etc.)Results of measurements (attach appendix andelectronic format as necessary)Completed data collection forms,if usedProvide details ofbaseline data analysis performed, including:Analysis using results of measurementsWeather normalized regressionsWeather data used and source of dataEvaluationEvaluate qualityof baseline developed:Were key variables affecting energy use measured for each ECM (e.g. watts/fixture and hours/yr)?Are all assumptions / stipulationsreasonable, and includessourceof data?Were system performance characteristics recorded (e.g.lighting intensities, temperature set points)3.3ProposedEnergy & Water Savings Calculations and MethodologyProvide detaileddescription of analysis methodology used.Describe any data manipulationor analysis thatwasconductedprior to applying savingscalculations.Detail all assumptions and sources of data, including all stipulatedvalues usedincalculations.Include equationsand technicaldetails of all calculations made. (Use appendix and electronic format asnecessary.) Include descriptionof data format (headings, units, etc.).Details of any savings or baseline adjustments that may be requiredDetail energy and water rates used to calculatecost savings.Provide performance period energy and water rate adjustmentfactors, if different from in section 2.2.2.EvaluationAre savings estimates sound & reasonable?Where energy calculation methodologies closelyreviewed?Did the reviewer check the mathin the energy calculations?11Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMPReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%Were utility or weather based models validated?Were ECM savings compared to system usage?Are they reasonable?3.4Operations and Maintenance andOther CostSavingsProvide justification for O&M cost savings,if applicableDescribe how savings are generatedDetail cost savings calculations.Provide performance period O&M cost savings adjustmentfactors, if different from in section 2.2.2.Provide justification for other cost savings,if applicable.Describe how savings are generated.Detail cost savings calculations.Provide performance period adjustment factors,ifdifferent from in section 2.2.2.EvaluationReview the strategy for conducting O&M for this ECM.Are O&M activities sufficiently detailed to demonstrate level of effort?Are responsibilities allocated assuggested by R&R Matrix?Are reporting requirements adequately defined?3.5ProposedAnnual Savings ForECMTable detailing proposed annual savings for thisenergyconservation measure for performance period:including the baseline energy use, post-install energyuse, and projected savings for ECM. Detail energyunits, energy cost, O&M savings, and other savings values asapplicable. Includeall applicable fuels /commodities forproject, such as:electric energy,electric demand,natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water,etc.3.6Post-InstallationM&V ActivitiesDescribe the intent of post-installation verificationactivities,including what will beverified.Describe variables affecting post-installation energy or water use.Include variablessuch as weather, operating hours, set point changes, etc.Describe how each variable will bequantified, i.e.measurements, monitoring, assumptions,manufacturer data, maintenancelogs, engineering resources, etc.Define key systemperformance factors characterizingthe post-installation conditions such aslightingintensities, temperature set points, etc.12Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMPReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%Define requirements for government witnessingof measurements if different thanwhole project datarequirements included in Section2.3.Provide details ofpost-installationdata to be collected, including:Parameters to bemonitoredDetails of equipment to be monitored (location, type, model, quantity, etc.)Sampling plan, including detailsof usage groups and sample sizesDuration, frequency, interval, and seasonal or other requirements of measurementsMonitoring equipment to be usedInstallation requirements for monitoring equipmentCalibration requirements / proceduresExpected accuracy of measurements/monitoring equipmentQuality control procedures to be usedFormof data tobe collected (.xls,.cvs, etc.)Sample data collection forms (optional)Detail data analysis to be performed3.7Performance Period Verification ActivitiesDescribe variables affecting performance period energy or wateruse.Include variablessuch as weather, operating hours, set point changes, etc.Describe how each variable will bequantified, i.e.measurements, monitoring, assumptions,manufacturer data, maintenancelogs, engineering resources, etc.Define key systemperformance factors characterizingthe performance period conditions such ascomfortconditions,lighting intensities, temperature set points, etcDescribe the intent of performance period verification activities–what will be verified.Provide detailedschedule of performance periodverification activities and inspections.Define requirements for government witnessingof measurements if different thanwhole project datarequirements included in Section2.3.13Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMPReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%Provide details ofperformance period data to be collected,including:Parameters to bemonitoredDetails of equipment to be monitored(location, type, model, quantity, etc.)Sampling plan, including detailsof usage groups and sample sizesDuration, frequency, interval, and seasonal or other requirements of measurementsMonitoring equipment to be usedInstallation requirements for monitoring equipmentCalibration requirements/proceduresExpected accuracy of measurements/monitoring equipmentQuality control procedures to be usedFormof data tobe collected (.xls,.cvs, etc.)Sample data collection forms (optional)Detail data analysis to be performedDefine operations, preventive maintenance, repair,and replacement reporting requirements.Detail verificationactivities and reporting responsibilities of government and ESCO on operations,preventive maintenance, repair, and replacement items.Define contentsof report and reporting schedule,if different than in global section2.4.Evaluate qualityof performanceperiod activities:What is the likelihood for success for this measure?Is there substantial uncertainty and/or technical complexity? Ifso,is M&V robust?EvaluationIs meaningful ongoing performance period data going to be used tocalculatesavings?What is being verified? Is thissufficient to supportthe guarantee?Will key variablesaffecting energyuse be measured for this ECM?How often?Will single post-installation measurements apply to all years in theperformance period? If so, howvaluable are thedata used?How likely is this data to change over the performance period?14Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMPReferenceIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowup?PageECM LEVEL ITEMECM # / Name%ProjectTotal Cost Savings:X%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:Y%Based on whichparty has accepted ongoing responsibility for each item, is this approach appropriate?EvaluationAre M&V costs shown in DO-2 reasonable for this ECM? Do costs align with planned activities?EvaluationNote all source(s) of savings frommeasure.EvaluationAre M&V activities are adequate for all significantsavingsstreams?EvaluationReview Risk & Responsibility matrix (R&R).Does M&Vstrategy for this measure conform to agreed-upon riskallocation?15Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMP16Appendix E – Reviewing Measurement & Verification PlansFEMP

## Appendix F Reviewing Post-Ins tallation and Annual Reports

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports F-1F-2 Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports FEMP

## Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual Reports For Federal ESPC Projects

8 October 2007 Version 3.0

Federal Energy Managemen t Program (FEMP) Office of Energy Effici ency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy

This do cu me nt was d e velo ped for the U. S. Depar tme n t of Energy’s Federal Energy Manage m ent Program by Nexant, Inc., and La wren ce Berk eley National La boratory. This do cume nt WILL BE posted on FEMP’s web site at www.eere.ene rg y.gov/femp/finan cing/ sup e r es pc s_ mv re sou r c e s. cf m

.

## Contents

Section Page

Section 1 Post-Installation Report Review Checklist

............................................................ 1 1.1 Step 1– Prepare Custom Report and Checklists from Te m p late

..................................... 1 1.2 Step 2– Review Project Docum e ntation

......................................................................... 2 1.3 Step 3 – Complete Checklists

......................................................................................... 2 1.4 Step 4 – Finalize Report

.................................................................................................. 3 1.5 Step 5 – Pro v ide W r itten Review to Agency and DOE

.................................................. 3 1.6 Step 6 – Ensure Action T a ken on Key Issues

................................................................. 3 Section 2 Review of ESPC Annual Report # or Po st-Installation Report # <DATED> for <AGENCY, SITE NAME, DO #>

.......................................................................................... 4 2.1 Section 1: Executive Summary

....................................................................................... 4 2.2 Section 2: Background

.................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Section 3: Summ ary of Findings

..................................................................................... 6 2.4 Section 4: ESPC Perfor m a nce Report Checklists (v 2.0)

............................................... 7 2.5 Post-Installation Report Checklists

................................................................................. 8 2.5.1 Post-Installation Report

- Project Level Checklist

................................................ 8 2.5.2 Post-Installation Report - ECM Level Checklist #1 (Copy for Each ECM )

.......... 9 2.6 Annual Report Checklists

............................................................................................. 12 2.6.1 Annual Report Project L e vel Checklist

................................................................ 12 2.6.2 Annual Report - ECM L e vel Checklist #1 (Copy for Each ECM)

....................... 13

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports iAppendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports FEMP ii

## Section 1 Post-Installation Report Review Checklist

The purpose of this docum ent is to provide a framework for implem enting uniform a nd consistent reviews of Post-Inst allation and Annual Reports for Federal ESP C projects. These procedures will allow for consis ten t evaluations of perfor m a n ce repo rts, produce stan dardized reviews, and enable centralized tr acking of ongoing project perfor m ance. This document lays out a seven-step process, an d includes content ch eck lists and a standard report tem p late f o r written reviews. The steps in cl ude instructions and tips to the rev i ewer, and there are s a mple and placeholder te xt in th e rep o rt tem p late. These rev i e w s are inten d ed to provide assurance that F e deral E SPC projects are m eeting contract ual obligations and continue to perform

. The reviews should summ a r ize im por tant results and reco mm endations, including identifying m i ssing or incom p lete infor m ation.
The Report Review Template applies to bot h P o st-Installation a nd Annual Reports. The difference in content of these reports is cap tured in the Report Content Checklists. PostInstallation Reports confirm proper installation and estim ate the savi ngs expected to be realized in Contract Year 1, whereas Annual Reports detail the actual savings realized during the

com p leted contract year.
Adequate review of the Post-Installation Repor t is especially critical for ensuring th e perform a nce of projects using M&V Option A. These m e thods take m easurem ents only once following installation. S ubsequent activities m a y be lim ited to inspections to verify ‘potential to perform

. ’

An i m portan t note to rev i ewers: Thes e reviews ar e intended to ensure a ll parties have com p lied with the con t rac t requ ire m ents f o r the Supe rESPC project. Judgm e nts about the m e asurem ent and verification (M&V) strategies that have been agreed upon in the Delivery Order contribute little and us ually de tra c t f r om the purpose and clarity of the review.

1.1 STEP 1– PREPARE CUSTOM REPORT AND CHECKLISTS FRO M TEMPLAT E Create a cop y of the repo rt rev i ew template a nd custom ize by adding project specific infor m ation in the Tables provided:

 Table 1: Summary of Pr oject Data

 Table 2: Distribution Li st of Report Review

 Table 3: Docum e nts Available During Review

 Table 4: Ov erall Project Savings Summary for Perform a nce Year <NUMBER>

 Table 5: Overview of Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs)

Custom ize the appropriate set of Review Checklists (eith er for a Post-Installation Report or an Annual Report) and delete thos e that are not applicable:

 Post-Ins t alla tion Repor t Checklis ts:

− Post-Ins t alla tion - Pro j ec t Level Chec klist

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports 1− Post-Ins t alla tion - ECM Level Check lists

 Annual Report Checklists:

− Annual Report - Project Level Checklist

− Annual Report - ECM L e vel Checklists

Create an E C M Level Checklist for each Ener gy Conservatio n Measure (ECM) by copying & pasting a blank ECM Level Checklist. Checklist s for one ECM has been provided. Make a copy for each ECM.

Determ ine the scheduled cost sav i n g s for each ECM in the project (fro m cost schedule DO-4), and com p are to the repo rted values. Determ in e the percentage of reported cost savings contributed by each ECM.
Principal review efforts should be focused on th e m easures providing the largest portion of the cost savings for the project, and on E C Ms th at m a y be having perform a nc e problem s.
This str a teg y of reviewing the pr incipal cos t saving m easures will he lp th e reviewer s p end the

sm allest amount of tim e while m a xim i zing the valu e of the review, and is especially helpful when revie w tim e is lim ited.

1.2 STEP 2– R E VIEW PROJECT DOCUMENTATION Acquire and review project docum ents. Make note of relevant docum entation that is available during the review in Table 3 of the Report Review Tem p late.
Generally, the entire Delivery Order, the Post-I nstallation Report, and previous Annual Reports are required to adequately review an Annual Re port. At a m i nim u m for any ESPC project report review, the M&V plan, the final cost schedules, any contract m odifications, and the P o stInstallation Report (for revi ew of Annual Reports) should be on hand. Missing documentation

can cause co nfusion and lead to incorrect conclusions.
Keep in m i nd that m a ny applications of M& V Option A m e thods, m easurem ents are only taken once following installation. Subsequent activitie s m a y be lim ited to inspections to verify ‘poten tia l to perf orm

. ’ The Post-In stalla tion Rep o rt is the r ef ore a c r itica l docum ent for projects using an Option A approach.

1.3 STEP 3 – CO MPLETE CHECKLIST S Read through the Post-Installation or Annual Re port while checking off topics and m a king notes in the cu sto m ized Review Checklists. Note the location of k e y item s in the f i rst co lu mn of the checklist (labeled “Reference Page”) for cross-re ferencing, and assess the ad equacy of each item

. The inability to comm e n t on an item suggests that relevant inform ation m a y be m i ss ing or not in

com p lete f o rm.

Som e of the item s in the checklist are m a rked “Evaluation”. T h is indicates that additional qualitative assessm ent is necessa ry. These item s are posed as que stions, where as the required content item s are s t atements.

Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports FEMP 2Item s in the checklist that re quire follow-up should be flagge d by placing an “X” in the last colum n of the checklist labeled “Fo l low-Up?”.
The M&V plan from the Delivery Order m u st be reviewed to ensure a ll a c tivitie s and r e porting requirem e nts were fulfilled.

1.4 STEP 4 – FIN A LIZE REPO RT
The written review shou ld f o llow the f o rm at of the Report Review Tem p l a te and include the

com p leted Report Check lists. The form at of the report can b e modified as needed to m eet th e specific project needs. The outline provided is:

 Section 1 : Executiv e Summary

 Section 2: Background

 Section 3: Summ ary of Findings

 Section 4: Review Checklists
After reading the Post-Installation or Annua l Report and filling out the project specific Checklists, summ arize the findings from the review in the appropriate sections of the report.

Instru ctions, placeho l der text to be custom ized, as well as fin a l repo rt text are in cluded within th e Report Review Tem p late. Placeho l d e r tex t that n eed to be cu stom ized are underlined italics
, while ins t ru ctions to the reviewe r ar e in red italics

. Com p lete all the s ection s and custo m ize pl aceholder text included in th e Report Re view Tem p late. Delete any ins t ruc tions af ter a section has been adequately completed.

Include the com p leted Checklists as part of the w r itten review

. 1.5 STEP 5 – PROVIDE WRITTEN RE VIEW TO AGENCY AND DOE
Once com p l e ted, the review of the M&V plan should be provided to the Agency staff, as well the DOE representative f o r projec t re cor d s. Additio n a l dis c ussio n with the A g ency is usu a lly warranted.

1.6 STEP 6 – EN SURE A C TION TAKEN ON KEY ISSUES
Af ter the rev i ew is subm itted, it is CRITICAL to en sure adequ a te ac tion is taken to im plem ent or address the recomm endat i ons.

Docum e nt follow-up actions taken.
Report Review Template starts on the next page.

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports 3

## Section 2 Review of ESPC Annual Report # or Post-Installation Report # <DA T ED> for <AGENCY , SITE NAM E, DO#>

2.1 SECTION 1: EXEC UTIVE SUMMARY Provide a short summary of the key findings, including:

 Overall adequacy of the report reviewed

 Overall financial & energy performance of project; note any ECMs whose savings levels have changed significantly

 Key items regarding the installation or ongoi ng performance of pr oject; Note any performance problems, O&M issues, or de ficiencies that need to be addressed

 Bullet chie f action items on M&V Pla n
2.2 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND Populate Tables 1 - 5 from data from the Repor t and other project docume nts. Modify by adding rows as needed.
This is a written review of the Post-Installation Report or A nnual Report f

o r the pro j ect de tailed in Table 1.

Table 1: Sum mar y of Proje c t Data Project Name: Location : Delivery Order #, Date: Report Date : Dates of Perfor m a nce Period: Project Acceptance Date: Perform a nce Year:
The goal of this r e view is to ver i f y th e subm itted ESPC perf orm a nce report inc l udes a l l key item s , and that any im portant issues are adequately addressed, including:

 Was the con t ent of the report com p lete?

 Were the gu aranteed sav i ngs for the project m e t?

 W e re the co rrec t utility and esca lation rates u s e d ?

 W e re all a c tivities requ ir ed by the M & V Plan f o llowed?

 Were variations between the es tim ated a nd the reported savings explained? If not, why not and what corr ec tive a c tion s will or shou ld be taken ? By whom ?

 Did the repo rt prov ide us eful feedback on the perf orm a nce of each m easure?

 Did the report verify the potential of the ECMs to save in future?

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports 4The distribution list for th e parties receiving this revi ew is included in Table 2.

Ta b l e 2 : D i s t rib u t io n Lis t of R e po rt Re v i ew Rev i ewer: Rev i e

w

er Co nt

act Inform ati o n : Dat e

of R e vi ew : Ag en cy Con t act: Dat e

rev i e

w

w

a

s pr ovi d ed to Age n cy Co nta c t: DOE C ont act: Dat e

rev i e

w

w

a

s pr ovi d ed to DOE co nta c t:

The project m a terials th at were av ailabl e to the reviewer are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Documents Avail a ble During Review Entire Delivery Order:

ECM Descripti ons M&V Plan DO Schedules Technical Appe ndices Post Installati on

Repor t Cx Report Performa nce Repor ts Ot her ( n ot e)

<YEAR #s>

Table 4: Over all Project Saving s Summary for Perfor mance Ye ar < NUMBER>

Savings To tal Energy Savings (MB T U/yr) Electric Energy (kWh ) Demand (kW/m o

) Natural Gas (MB T U/yr) Water (kG A L/yr) Other energy

related & O&M c o

st savings

($/yr) To tal Cos t Savings
Estimate d: $ $
Guara n tee d : $ Repor ted : $ $ ESPC Savings terms used:
Estimate d: Savi ngs originally est i mated for each ECM as listed in the Final Proposal Schedu le DO-4.
Guara n tee d : Co st saving s guaranteed for each performance year and s hown in the Final Proposal Schedule DO-1. Only the total cost sa ving s for the entire project are guara n teed. Guarante ed savings can only be adjusted through a Contract Modification. Repor ted : Actual saving s as de monstrated by M&V activities det ail ed in the Annu al Reports; or Expected saving s f

o

r the first performance year repo rted in the Post-Installatio n Report.

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports 5Determine what percentage these values have changed compared to those scheduled in DO-4. For Annual Reports, include a comparison to th e previous year’s report to ascertain any changes in performance*.

 Note that E C Ms using Option A methods may not show a change even if there are performance problems.
Table 5: Over view of Ener gy Conservation Me asures (ECMs )

ECM # ECM Description Estimate d C o st Savings Repor ted Cos t Savings % Cha nge from DO -4 % Rep o rte d

C o st Savings % Cha nge from Last

Year * 1 Lighting $425,345 $435,005 +2.2. % 80 % 2 EMCS $88,500 $87,005 -1.6 % 20 % TOTALS $513,845 $522010 + 1 .0 %

2.3 SECTION 3: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

 Include all recommendations resulting from review. Su mmari ze where appropriate, using references to com p leted Checklists.

 Discuss financial performance of project (b riefly)

. Have savings levels increased or decreased significantly from year to year?

 Comment on adequacy of report and the level of fulfillment of contract responsibilities as outlined in the M&V plan:

o Note any missing or deficient ite ms from the Review Checklis ts.

o Note any changes in scope or performance, or results that differ from the PostInstallation or previous year’s report.

 Summarize any issues fo r each ECM. Note any performance problems, O&M issues, or deficiencies that need to be addr essed. Make a sub-sec tion for each ECM if needed.

Post-Installation and Annual Report Review T e mplate starts on the next page.

Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports FEMP 62.4 SECTION 4: ESPC PERF ORMANCE R EPORT CH ECKLISTS (V 2.0) Customize and complete the appropriate checklis ts, and delete those that are not applicable. Checklis ts included in this sec tion a r e:

 Post-Installation Report Checklists:

o Post-Ins t allation - Pro j ect Level Checklist

o Post-Ins t allation -ECM Level Checklists

 Annual Report Checklists:

o Annual Report - Project Level Checklist

o Annual Report - ECM Level Checklists

FEMP Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Ann ual Reports 72.5POST-INSTALLATION REPORT CHECKLISTS[Note:All content is required (if applicable),except items noted as optional.]2.5.1Post-Installation Report-Project Level ChecklistReferencePageItemfrom Post-Installation ReportIncluded?Note any deficienciescomments.FollowUp?1.ExecutiveSummary1.1ProjectBackgroundContract #/Delivery Order#/Task #/ Modification #(as appropriate)Dates of relevant delivery order modificationsPerformance period dates coveredProject acceptance date (actual orexpected)1.2Brief Project and ECM DescriptionsProvide an overview what was doneand how savings are generated.Note any changes in project scope between the FinalProposal (including any relevant delivery ordermodifications) and as-built conditions.Summary ofProposedEnergy and Cost SavingsSummary ofExpectedEnergy and Cost SavingsGuaranteedcost savings for 1stPerformance Year1.3Summary of Proposedand VerifiedEnergy and Cost SavingsEvaluationIf guarantee is not expected to befulfilled for Year1, provide detailed explanation.Table showing theexpectedsavings for each ECM for theFirst Yearbased on post-installationM&V activities.Data should be presented by O&M cost savings, energy units, energy cost/unit,and other savings values asapplicable. Include all fuels /commodities for project, suchas: electric energy, electric demand, natural gas, fueloil, coal, water,etc.Table showing theproposedsavings for each ECM from the final proposal, as detailed above.1.4Energy,Water, and O&M Rate DataDetail energy and water rates used to calculatecost savings for this period.Provide performance period rate adjustment factors for energy, water, and O&M cost savings, if used.EvaluationWere rates shown in the final proposal used,and were rate adjustment factors applied correctly?EvaluationIf savings resultfrom rate changes, have the baseline and new rates been reported?Report actual energy and water rates at site for same period. (Optional content requirement)1.5SavingsAdjustmentsProvide summary of any energyand/or cost savings adjustments required betweenFinal Proposal (including anyrelevant delivery order modifications) and as-built conditions.Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMP8ReferencePageItemfrom Post-Installation ReportIncluded?Note any deficienciescomments.FollowUp?Describe the impact in changesbetween the Final Proposal(including any relevant delivery order modifications)and as-built conditions based onpost-installationM&V results.1.6ConstructionPeriod SavingsProvide a summary of construction period savings, if applicable.Provide overviewof how construction period savings are calculated.1.7Status of Rebates(ifapplicable)Provide a summary of the source of any third-partyrebates or incentives providedon this project.Provide status ofany third-party rebates or incentives.2.5.2Post-Installation Report -ECM Level Checklist #1(Copy for Each ECM)ReferencePageDetails shouldbe includedfor each ECMIncluded? Noteany deficienciesor issuesFollowUp?ECM # / Name% CostSavings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%2.M&V Activitiesand ExpectedFirst Year Savings2.1Overviewof ECM, M&V Plan, and Savings Calculationfor ECMSummarize the scope of work, location, and how cost savings are generated.Describe source of all savingsincluding energy,water, O&M, and other (if applicable).State M&V guideline and optionused.EvaluationDo M&V activitiesmatch declared M&V option?Provide an overview of M&V activities for ECM.Explain theintentof M&V plan, including what is being verified.Provide an overview of savingscalculation methods for ECM.Provide a general description ofanalysis methods used for savings calculations.2.2InstallationVerificationDetail any changes between Final Proposal (including anyrelevantdelivery order modifications) and as-builtconditions.Table showing details of energyand cost savings impacts from changes between Final Proposal (including anyrelevant delivery order modifications) and as-builtconditions based on post-installation M&V results.ProposedandExpectedenergy and cost savings broken out by commodity/saving sourceshould be included.EvaluationDoExpectedcost savings varyby10%ormorefromProposedsavings?EvaluationIs explanation ofwhy changes occurred in savings valuessufficient?Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMP9ReferencePageDetails shouldbe includedfor each ECMIncluded? Noteany deficienciesor issuesFollowUp?ECM # / Name% CostSavings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%Describe construction period savings (if applicable).Include dateECM was in effect, and reference acceptancedocumentation.Detail savings calculationsfor construction period savings.2.3Post-InstallationM&V ActivitiesConductedDetail measurements, monitoring, and inspections conducted inaccordance withM&V plan:Measurement equipment usedEquipment calibration documentationDates/times of data collection or inspections, names of personnel, and documentation of governmentwitnessingDetails to confirm adherence to sampling planInclude all post-installation measured values. Include periods of monitoring and durations and frequency ofmeasurements. (Use appendix and electronic format as necessary). Include description of data format(headings, units,etc.).EvaluationHave all activitiesprescribed in the Final Proposal been conducted?Describe how performance criteriahave been met.Detail any performance deficiencies that need to be addressed byESCO orGovernment.Note impact of performance deficiencies or enhancements on generation of savings.2.4Expected Savings Calculationsand MethodologyProvide detaileddescription of analysis methodology used.Describe any data manipulationor analysis thatwasconductedprior to applying savingscalculations.Detail all assumptions and sources of data, including all stipulatedvalues usedincalculations.Include equationsand technicaldetails of all calculations made. (Use appendix and electronic format asnecessary.) Include descriptionof data format (headings, units, etc.).Details of any baseline or savings adjustments made.EvaluationIs the basis for the adjustment valid, and have adjustment beenconsistently anduniformly applied?Detail energy and water rates used to calculatecost savings.Provide performance period energy and water rate adjustment factors, if used.Report actual energy and water rates at site for same period (Optional – not required content)EvaluationWere rates shown in the final proposal used,and were rate adjustment factors applied correctly?EvaluationIf savings resultfrom rate changes, have the baseline and new rates been reported?EvaluationDid the reviewer verify themath in the savingscalculations?Detail expectedsavings for thisenergy conservation measure for first year.10Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMPReferencePageDetails shouldbe includedfor each ECMIncluded? Noteany deficienciesor issuesFollowUp?ECM # / Name% CostSavings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%Table showing theexpectedsavings for ECM, including baseline andexpected first year usagesbased onpost-installationM&V results. Data should be detailed by O&M cost savings, energy units, energycost/unit,and other savings values asapplicable. Include all fuels/ commodities for project,such as: electricenergy,electric demand,natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water,etc.2.5DetailsofO&M and OtherSavings (ifapplicable)Describe source of O&M savings, if applicable.Describe verification activities.Provide performance period O&M cost savingsadjustment factors, if applicable.EvaluationHave the cost savings adjustmentfactors fromthe Final Proposal been used, and were they properly applied?11Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMP2.6ANNUAL REPORT CHECKLISTS[Note:All content isrequired (if applicable),except items noted as optional.]2.6.1Annual Report Project Level ChecklistReferencePageProject Level ItemIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowUp?1.ExecutiveSummary1.1ProjectBackgroundContract #/Delivery Order#/Task #/ Modification #(as appropriate)Dates of relevant delivery order modificationsPerformance period dates coveredProject acceptance dateContractyear #:___________1.2Brief Project and ECMDescriptionsProvide an overview what was doneand how savings are generated.Note any changes in projectscope betweenthe FinalProposal (includingany relevantdelivery ordermodifications) and as-built conditionsas recorded in post-installation report.Summary ofProposedEnergy and Cost SavingsSummary ofVerifiedEnergy andCost SavingsGuaranteedcost savings for this Performance Year1.3Summary of Proposedand VerifiedEnergy and Cost SavingsEvaluationIf guarantee is not fulfilled for year, provide detailed explanationTable showing theVerifiedsavings for each ECM, including baseline and performance yearusages. Datashould be detailed by O&M costsavings,energyunits, energy cost/unit, and other savingsvalues as applicable.Include all fuels/ commodities for project, such as: electric energy, electric demand, natural gas,fuel oil, coal,water, etc.Table showing theProposedsavings for each ECM from the final proposal, as detailed above.1.4SavingsAdjustmentsProvide summary of any energyand/orcost savings adjustments required.EvaluationIs the basis for the adjustment valid, andhave adjustment beenconsistently anduniformly applied?1.5Performance andO&M IssuesNote impact of operating deficiencies or enhancements on generation of savings.Note impact of maintenance deficiencies on generation of savings.Detail any deficiencies that needto be addressed by ESCO or Government.1.6Energy,Water, and O&M Rate DataDetail energy and water rates used to calculatecost savings for this period.Provide performance period rate adjustment factors for energy, water and O&M cost savings, if used.12Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMPReferencePageProject Level ItemIncluded?Note any deficienciesFollowUp?EvaluationWere rates shown in the final proposal used,and were rate adjustment factors applied correctly?EvaluationIf savings resultfrom rate changes, have the baseline and new rates been reported?Report actual energy and water rates at site for the same period. (Optional – Not required content)1.7Verified Savings To DateTable Summarizing verified savings for each year duringPerformance Period To Date. Includeenergy savings,water savings (gallons/yr), energy & water cost savings ($/yr), O&M cost savings ($/yr),Total cost savings ($/yr),and Guaranteedcost savings foryear.2.6.2Annual Report - ECM Level Checklist #1(Copy for Each ECM)ReferencePageECM Level ItemIncluded?Note any deficienciesECM # / NameFollowUp?% ProjectTotalCost Savings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%2.M&V Activitiesand VerifiedSavings for Year#___2.1Overviewof ECM, M&V Plan, and Savings Calculationfor ECMSummarize the scope of work, location, and how cost savings are generated.Describe source of all savingsincluding energy,water, O&M, and other (if applicable).Discuss any changes in scope / results recorded in post-installationM&V report.State M&V guideline and optionused.EvaluationDo M&V activitiesmatch declared M&V Option?Provide an overview of M&V activities for ECM.Explain theintentof M&V plan, including what is being verified.Provide an overview of savingscalculation methods for ECM.Provide a general description ofanalysis methods used for savings calculations.2.2M&VActivities Conducted ThisPeriodDetail measurements, monitoring, and inspections conducted this reporting period in accordancewith M&Vplan.Measurement equipment usedEquipment calibration documentationDates/times of data collection or inspections, names of personnel, and documentation of governmentwitnessingDetails to confirm adherence to sampling plan13Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMPReferencePageECM Level ItemIncluded?Note any deficienciesECM # / NameFollowUp?% ProjectTotalCost Savings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%Include all measured values for this period. Include periods of monitoring and durations and frequency ofmeasurements. (Use appendix and electronic format as necessary). Include description of data format(headings, units,etc.).EvaluationHave all activitiesprescribed in the Final Proposal been conducted?Describe how performance criteriahave been met.Detail any performance deficiencies that need to be addressed byESCO orGovernment.Note impact of performance deficiencies or enhancements on generation of savings.2.3Verified Savings Calculationsand MethodologyProvide detaileddescription of analysis methodology used.Describe any data manipulationor analysis thatwasconductedprior to applying savingscalculations.Detail all assumptions and sources of data, including all stipulatedvalues usedincalculations.Include equationsand technicaldetails of all calculations made. (Use appendix and electronic format asnecessary.) Include descriptionof data format (headings, units, etc.).EvaluationDid the reviewer verify themath in the savingscalculations?Details of any baseline or savings adjustments made.Detail energy and water rates used to calculatecost savings.Provide performance period energy & water rateadjustment factors, if used.EvaluationWere rates shown in the final proposal used,and were rate adjustment factors applied correctly?EvaluationIf savings resultfrom rate changes, have the baseline and new rates been reported?Report actual energy and water rates at site for same period (Optional –not required content)Detail verified savings for energy conservation measure for this performance year.Table detailing baseline and verified annual savings forthis energy conservationmeasure for theperformanceperiod:includingthe baseline energy use, post-install energy use, and projected savings for ECM.Detailenergy units, energy cost, O&M savings, and other savingsvaluesas applicable. Include all applicable fuels /commodities forproject, such as:electric energy,electric demand,natural gas, fuel oil, coal, water,etc.EvaluationDo verified savings vary by more than 10%when compared to last year’s savings?EvaluationIs sufficient explanation providedfor the change in savings?2.4DetailsofO&M and OtherSavings (ifapplicable)Describe source(s) of savingsDescribe verification activitiesProvide performance period savings adjustment factors, if applicable.EvaluationWere adjustment factors shown in the finalproposal used, and were the factors applied correctly?14Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMPReferencePageECM Level ItemIncluded?Note any deficienciesECM # / NameFollowUp?% ProjectTotalCost Savings:x%% Project Energy & WaterCostSavings:y%2.5O&M andOtherActivitiesOperating requirements:State organization(s) responsible for equipment operations. If appropriate, detail how responsibilities areshared.Summarize keyoperating procedures and any related verificationactivities.Detail any deficiencies that needto be addressed by ESCO or Government.Note impact of operating deficiencies or enhancements on generation of savings.EvaluationIs follow-up required by theAgency or ESCO on operating issues?Preventive maintenance requirements:State organization(s) responsible for performing maintenance. Ifappropriate, detail how responsibilities areshared.Verification of scheduled maintenance items completed by ESCO or Government.Detail any deficiencies that needto be addressed by ESCO or Government.Note impact of maintenance deficiencies on generation of savings.EvaluationIs follow-up required by the Agency or ESCO on preventive maintenance?Repair and replacement requirements:State organization(s) responsible for repair andreplacement. If appropriate, detail how responsibilities areshared.Summary of activitiesconductedthisperiod by ESCO orGovernment.Detail any deficiencies that needto be addressed by ESCO or Government.Note impact of equipment deficiencies on generation of savings.EvaluationIs follow-up required by the Agencyor ESCO on repair or replacement issues?15Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMP16Appendix F – Reviewing Post-Installation and Annual ReportsFEMP

## Appendix G Standard Measur ement & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retr of it or Replacement Projects

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects G-1G-2 Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects

## Standard Measurement & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects Conducted Under DOE’s Super ESPC Program

Revised January 15, 2007

Federal Ener gy Management Program (FEMP) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy

This document was developed for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Federal Ener gy Management Program by Nexant, Inc., and Lawrence Berkeley National Labo ratory. This document WILL BE posted on FEMP’s web site at http://www1.eere.energy. gov/femp/fina ncing/superespcs_ mvresources.html

. Comments should be sent to das artor@l b l.g

o v
.

## Contents

Section Page

Section 1 Background

........................................................................................................... .... 1 Section 2 How to use this Guide

............................................................................................... 2 2.1 User Notes

................................................................................................................. ...... 2 2.2 Risk and Responsibility Matrix

...................................................................................... 2 2.3 Instrum e ntation Requirem e nts

........................................................................................ 3 2.4 M&V Plan Summ ary

...................................................................................................... 3 Section 3 Lighting Retrofit M&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods

......................... 5 3.1 Overview of ECM, M&V Plan, and Savings Calculation

.............................................. 5 3.2 Energy and Water Baseline Developm ent

...................................................................... 6 3.2.1 Lighting Levels

....................................................................................................... 6 3.2.2 Fixture Pow e r Consum ption

................................................................................... 6 3.2.3 Usage Groups for Operating Hours

........................................................................ 7 3.2.4 Sa m p le Sizes

........................................................................................................... 8 3.2.5 Results

.................................................................................................................. . 11 3.3 Proposed Energy & Demand Savings Calculation Methodology

................................. 13 3.4 Operations and Maintenan ce and Other Cost Savings

.................................................. 14 3.5 Proposed Annual Savings for ECM

.............................................................................. 14 3.6 Post-Installation M&V Activities

................................................................................. 14 3.7 Perform a nce Period Verification Activities

.................................................................. 15

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verificati on Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects iii

## List of Tables

Table Page

Table 1 Example Instrum e ntation Specifications

.......................................................................... 3 Table 2 Summary of Key Elem ents in St andard M&V Plan for Lighting Retrofits

...................... 4 Table 3 Fixture Power Measurem ents – Types, Monitoring Points, Results

............................... 11 Table 4 Usage Group Descriptions , Monitoring Points & Results

.............................................. 12 Table 5 Example Calculation Table

............................................................................................. 13 Table 6 Proposed Annual Savings f o r ECM 1- Lighting

............................................................. 14

iv Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects

## Section 1 Background

This document provides a com p rehensive fram ew ork for a m easure m ent and verification (M&V ) Plan for lighting projects perf orm e d via an energy perform a nc e contract. A working group of industry and private sector part ies involved with DOE’s Super ESPC Program developed this docum ent. It should serve the following purposes:

 Provide a foundation for an M&V plan for a lighting retrofit utilizing a “best practice” ap proach, which considers risk allocation, engineering accu racy , and costeffectiveness. This docum ent provides a base docum e nt that must be custom ized for individual applications.

 Reduce developm ent and review times on individual projects.

 Provide guidance to Agencies on w h at is essential for robust M& V plan for lighting projects.

 Provides an exam ple of an M&V Plan for one of the m o st common m eas ures that

com p lies with the requir e m e nts set f o rth in the F E MP M&V guidelines, Version 2.2 1

, and

 Provides an exam ple of t h e for m at for M& V Plans for Federal ESPC projects, as detailed by the M&V Pla n Outline. 2
This document contains the basis for M&V Plan for lighting retrofit m easures, using Option A

m e thod LE- A-02 with som e m odifications. This m e thodology is recommended for most lighting retrofit projects, as outlined in Section 2.1.

1 FEMP M&V Guid e line V 2. 2 av aila bl e at http://www1.eere.ener gy. gov/femp/financi ng/superespcs_mvresources.html

2 Bas ed o n V1 .0 M &V Plan Outl ine fo

r FEMP Su per ES PC projec ts

is

av a i labl e a t http: //www1.eere. ener gy. gov/femp/ f i nancing/supere spcs_mvresources.html

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 1

## Section 2 How to use this G u ide

2.1 USER NOT E S The M&V approach outlined he rein contain s m a ny specific param e ters. T h e prescribed

m e thodologies were dev e loped with consideratio n for technical accu racy, cost effectiv eness, and appropriate risk allocation.
This draft plan is intended to be used as a starting point, a nd m u st be custom ized for each project. This plan only covers section three, M&V Plan and Savings Calculation Methods, of the M&V Plan Outline 3 , and m u st be used with the first two sections Executive Summary / M&V Overview & Proposed Savings Calculations and Whole Project Data / Global Assumptions.

All tex t highlighted in yellow indicates data that should be cu stom ized for the project. In som e locations, footnotes or text-boxe s are included to provide additi onal instructions. Instructions should not be included in the M&V plan.
For projects that deviate from the prescribed m e thodologies, the ESCO is expected to docum ent the deviations from the base plan, w h ich:

 Allows governm e nt staff to easily assess the M&V approach; and

 Helps to ensure a m i nimum level of rigor is m a intained on indivi dual projects in order to m a intain the integ r ity of the DOE program

. This approach is suitable for projects that:

 Consist of lighting fixture retr of its an d / or rep l ac em ents;

 Do not generate savings through reducti ons in operating hours (e.g., day lighting controls or occupancy sensors)

 Projects where lighting saving are more than $100,000 per year and lighting savings

com p rise more than 30 % of total project savings

 Projects where th e agen cy seeks rig o rous ve rification of savings regardless of savings

am ount.

2.2 RISK AND R ESPONSIBIL ITY MATRIX The risk and responsibility m a trix provides an overview of risk allocation in a Super E SPC contra ct. Sin ce the m a trix m u st align with the M&V plan, the following are key item s that need to be properly addressed in the Risk a nd Responsibility m a trix for this ECM: Operating Hours:

 Operating hours are based on m onitored base line data described in this plan. The post-retrofit period operating hours are stipulated to be the sam e as the baseline

3 op c i t
Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 2period. The Agency is responsible for any changes in operating hours, and the verified s a vings will be based on the baseline op erating hours.
Equipment Performance:

 ESCO is responsible for ensuring that the ne w lamps and ballasts are as specified, and

m eet the expected perform a nce param e te rs, which should be defined in the M&V plan

2.3 INSTRUMEN TATION REQUIREMENT S
The sam p le M&V plan s p ecifies the m i ni m u m accu racy requirem e nts of the instrum e ntation to be used for m easure m ents. Specific instrum e ntation identified in the s a m p le plan are p r ovided as

exam ples of the type of m easure m ent device which should be used. Include the actual specification s and m easurem ent accuracies of any equipm ent used. If the accuracy is much less than pres cribed, the m easurem ents from equi pm e n t m a y not be suitable as they introduce additional e r ror in to the energy calculations.

Table 1 Example Instru mentation Specifications Equipment Type Purpose Ac cur a c

y

of Mea s ur e m ent Exa m ple Br an d Nam e

s Li ght l e v

e l m e

ter Estab lis

h fu ncti on al perf o

rm anc e of bas el in e an d n e

w li ghti n g eq ui pm ent ± 5 %  Extec h

 Ampr ob e

 Gree nl ee

Power m e

ter Establis h

true RMS po we r dra w

of b a

s

e l i n e

a nd ne w lig hti ng eq ui pm ent ± 3 %  Fluk e 3 9

/4

1/4 1 B

 Extech 4KC20

 AEMC 39 10 Light on/off dat a lo

gg er Mea s ur

e ru n ti me of lig hti ng fi xtur es Time m e

a s

ur

e m ents are ±1 minute / week; Light thres h

o

l d ad ju

s

t ment r a n ge 10 – 1,0 0

0

lu m ens / m 2  Onset Com p

uter H o b

o Lo

gg ers

 De nt Instru me nts Sm artL og g

e r

 Omeg a OM- 5 3

2.4 M&V PLAN SUMMARY
Table 2 summ arizes the key elem ents presen t in this Standard M&V plan for Lighting Equipm ent Retrofits. The content is organized into four sections: Baselin e M&V Activities, PostInstallation M&V Activities, A nnual / Periodic M&V Activities , and Energy Use and Savings Calculations.

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 3Table 2 Summary of Key Elements in St andard M&V Plan for Lighting Retrofits ECM – Lighting Equipment Retrofit Brief ECM Description: Retr ofit ex isti ng fl u o

res c

e n t, inc a n des ce nt, an d H I D lig hti ng fi xtu r es w i th m o

re effici ent l a m p

s an d b a l l asts. S a vi ng s wi ll r

e

su lt from re du ce

d

fixture po wer c ons um pti on. O per ati ng ho urs are not aff e

cte d

by th is E C M M&V Option: Option A Protocol: FEMP M&V Guidelines V 2. 2 Baseline M&V Activities : (Summary of Me asurements Performed, Assumptions, Other S ources of Data, Baseline Energy Use Calculation Me thodology)

 Baseline f i xture power measured for lamp ballast combinations (L BC) rep r esenting a total of 75 % of the baseline connected load. Sampling p l an requires ±10% uncertainty at a confidence le vel of 90 %

.
 Baseline Operating Hours measured for us age groups representing at least 75 %

of the energy savings. Sampling plan requires ±20 %

uncertaint y at a confidence level of 80 %

.
 Operating hours for usage group s not measur ed are based on data provided by fa cilit y

 Fixture powers f o

r LBCs not measured are based on manufacturer’s data.

 HVAC interactions are negligible

 Fixture counts from lighting audit

 Baseline energy use based on product of the baseline fixture pow er consumption, operating hours, and fixture quantities for each line item in the lighting audit Baseline deman d based on product of the baseline fixture power consumption, de mand coinciden ce factor (based on operating hours and peak building demand period), and fixture quant ities for each line item in the inventory Post-I nstalla tio n M&V Ac tivitie s Summary of Inspections, Measu r ements to be per formed, Reporting Requirements and Submittals

 Lighting audit an d inspection to confirm final fixtur e counts

 Fixture power m easurements for lamp ballast co mbinations repres enting a total of 75 %

of the post

- installation con nected load. Sampling plan r equires ±10 %

u n certainty at a confidence leve l of 90 %

.
 Operating hours assumed to be t he same as baseline operating h ours

 Verified post-inst allation energy u s

e based on product of the veri fied post-installat i on fixture pow er consumption, op erating hours, and fixture quantities for e a ch line item in t he inventory

 Verified post-inst allation demand based on product of the veri fied p o

st-installat i on fixture power con s

umption, demand coinciden ce fact or (based on op erating hours and peak build ing demand period), and fixture quantities for each ite m in inventory

 Use Proposed Savings Calcu l ations methodolog y, using verif i ed post-installat i on fixture powers

 Post-Installation report in accordance with IDIQ Requirements. Annual or Periodic M&V Ac tivities: (Summary of Inspections, Measu r ements to be performed, Reporting Requirements and Submittals)

 Inspect approximately 1 % of the floor area ret r ofitted annually.

 Select areas to be inspected ran domly, and avoid inspecting sa me areas each year.

 No additional m easurements required

 Verified saving s based on post-in stallation M&V results

 Report deficienci e s that affect en ergy savings to f a cilit y w hen they are identified, a nd summarize issues and respon se in Annual Report

 O&M data to be provided by facility and included in Annual Report

 Annual Report in accordance wit h IDIQ Requi rements. Energy Use a n d Savings Calc ulati ons : (Summary of Sa vings Calcu l atio n Method)

 Proposed post-installation energ y use based on product of the pos t-installat i on fixture power con s

umption (based on postinstallat i on M&V results), operating hours, and fixt ur

e quantities for each line item in the inventory

 Proposed post-installation dema nd based on product of the post- installation f i xture power consumption (based on postinstallat i on M&V results), demand coinciden ce fact or (bas ed on op erating hours and peak building demand period), and fixture quantities for ea ch item in in vent ory

 Savings are the difference between the base line and post-installa tion energy use and demand.

Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 4

## Section 3 Lighting Retrofit M &

V Plan and Savings Calc ulation Methods

3.1 OVERVIEW OF ECM, M&V PLAN, AND SAVINGS CALCULATI ON
A com p lete retrof it of th e ligh ting eq uipm ent in the Federal Center is planned as a part of the ESPC agreem ent. The existing fix t u r es ( specify quantity ) will be r e tro fitted/rep l aced with m o re efficient equipm ent. Energy savings and dem a nd savings will result fr om t h is project.
Option A has been selected for this m easure du e to the high confidence with which th e f i xture dem a nd and operating ho urs m a y be determ ined. E quipm ent num b ers and locations will not v a ry and operating hours are not projected to ch ange after the project is im plem ented.

The Measurem ent and Verification P l an for the lighting efficiency re trof it at the Federal Center will follow FEMP M&V Option A, Method LE -A-02 (with modification s ) using DOE’s Standard M easurem ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Eq uipm ent Retrofit or Replacem ent Projects dated Decem be r 8, 2006. The m odifications to th e S t andard P l an include the following item s :

 No changes 4
The variables affecting savings from this light ing project are fixture power consum ptions, hours of operation, and level of coin cident operation (w hat portion of the connected lighting load is operating when the building peak dem a nd is set). Fixture pow er consum ptions were measured on

a sam p le of the m o st common fixture types. For less comm on fixture types, fixture powers were based on a table of standard fixture powers or m a nufacturer’s data. Ta bles and specifications used in this project are provided in the Appendix.
Operating h ours have been m easured on a sam p le of space typ e s during th e Detailed E n ergy Survey. The m easured h ours will b e used to es tim a te the energy and demand savings during perf orm a nce period and will not b e a d justed even if the actu a l operating sc hedules ch a nge.
The Measurem ent and Verification P l an for this retrofit assu m e s:

 Operating h ours will b e m easured during th e Detailed Ene r gy Survey, prior to contract s i g n ing. The ho urs for the lighting fixtu r es will b e th e sam e befor e and after the equipm ent retrofit for the purpose of energy savings calculations.

 Fixture pow er consum ptions before and af ter th e retrofits or replacem ents will be

m easured.

 Inter active e f f

ects on heating and coo ling equ i pment f r om the lighting re tr of it will no t be considered since heating and cooling interactio ns effectively cancel eac h other out 5

.

4 INSTRUCTIONS: If any changes have bee n made from the details in the templa te approach, det ail them her e.
5 INSTRUCTIONS: Energy i n ter

a ctions should be accounted for if t he eff e

ct of heating and cooling penalt ies are not of si mil a r m ag nitu des . I n s o

me e l ec tric

al ly h

eate d (or re-h eat e

d ) bu ild in gs

, the h

eati ng pe nalty c

a n

hav e a dr ama t ic

e

ffec t o

n e nergy us age an d s h o

u ld

be ac c ounte d for in th

e M&V pl a n

.

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 5 Lighting levels will not decrea se as a result of th e ligh ting equipm ent retrofit, unless explicitly specified for an individual area. Existing lighting levels have been

m easured and record ed for represen tative spaces and areas of concern. Results are included in the equipm ent inventory.

3.2 ENERGY A N D WATER B A SELIN E DEVELOPMENT During the Detailed Energy Survey, which took place du ring April 2006, a com p rehensive lighting audit was com p leted. A room -by-room inve ntory of fixture counts , types, and circuits

was m a de. This inventory of all existing lighting equipm ent, incl uding baseline lighting levels is provided in the Appendices.
In all cases, burned out fixtures and lam p s are noted in the room -by-room inventory. D u ring the survey, x% of fixtures had one or more burned o u t la m p s or ballasts. This was accou n ted for in the base line and in the savings calculations by [Describe actions or adjustments. ]

3.2.1 Lighting Levels Lighting lev e ls will not decrea se as a result of th e ligh ting eq uipm ent retr of it, unless e xplic itly specified for an indiv i du al area. Baseline lighti ng levels have been m easured and recorded for repres entative spaces an d areas of co ncern. The areas for which baseline and post-ins t allation lighting lev e ls will b e do cum e nted have been agreed upon and include the following:
Spac e Typ e Locations Note s Typic a l priv ate office One on eac h e x

po

sur e

N, E, S, W Typic a l ha ll way One per fl oo r Typic a l op en of fice Mec h

a n ic al eq ui pme n t sh o

p Bas e m ent Existi ng li ght l e vels are ins u

ffi cie n t Mai n co nfer e n c

e ro om 2 nd

fl oor, r oom 23 0
Lighting level m easurements were m a de so they are repeatab le before an d after the equipm ent replacem ent. The calib ra tion ce rtif ica t e f o r the A m probe lighting meter model xxyy (dated x/y/cccc) is included in the Appendix. At a m i nimum
, all lig ht leve l m easurem ents in clude th e following for each sp ace : 2 m easurem ents will be reco rded - 1 direc tly un dernea th a fixture, and one in between fixtures, both 30” off floor. If possible, m easurem ents will be m a de when the contribution from daylight is m i nim a l.

3.2.2 Fixture Power Consumption During the lighting survey, fixtur e ty pes (lam p/balla st com b inations o rL BCs) presen t in th is facility were identified, and are called ‘fixture type groups 6 .’ Sam p les of the m o st common fixture type groups were m easured to determ ine the fixture power consumption under actual operating conditions. The m easured fixtur e type groups represent m o re than 75% 7 of the affected baseline connected lighting load. A total of [number ] fixture type groups were identified, which include at least 75% of the affected lighting connected load, as shown in Table 3 Section 3.2.5.

6 Lam p / ba llas t c

o

mbi nat ion

or L B C i s ac c eptabl e t e rmi nol ogy as

wel l

. 7 INSTRUCTIONS: 75% is the recommen ded amount, but ther e may be s i tu ations where it is not pr acti cal to measur e sufficient fixtu re ty pes that r epr es

ent 75 % of the new loa d

. Suc h a s i t uat io

n may aris e w here t

here are nu mero u s fix

t ure ty pes , ea c h of whic h is

on ly a s m

a ll p o

rti on of th e c

o

n nec te

d l oad. If ap plic a b

le
, not e c h a nges ma de a nd w h y in 3.1 Ov erv i ew of ECM, M&V Pl an, an d S a v

i ngs Calc u l ati o n s

e

c t ion.
Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 6For the rem a ining fixture types that w e re not m easured, fixture powers were taken from a table of standard fixture powers or m a nuf a c ture’s data. The table of fixture powers to be used is from [ r eference d a ta source 8 ].

Af ter the f i x t ures a r e rep l aced, power m easurem ents will again be taken o n a sam p le of f

i xture type groups that represent m o re than 75% of the new connected load. For new equipment, power

m easure m ents will b e made after at least 100 hou rs of operation on each fixture. In all cases, fixtures will operate for at least one hour prio r to m easurem ent in or d e r to achieve typical operating temperature. F o r the rem a ining fixtur e types that are not m e asured, fixture power

consum ptions will be ta ken f r om a table of stand a rd f i xtur e p o wers or f r o m m a nuf acturer’ s specification s

. In all cases, the num ber of power m e asurem ents taken is suf f i cient to achieve a +10% precision at 90% confidence using a Usage Group Sa m p ling t echnique as discussed in Section 3.2.4. Since sim ilar fixtures have similar powers, norm a lly only a few m easurem ents would be necessary to achieve this high degree of precision. However
, som e buildings have fixt ure populations that are not hom oge neous due to lam p and ballast replac em ent over tim e or from localized remodeling. The assum p tion of a homogeneous population was not valid and additional m e asure m ents were required to achieve the d e sired accu racy level including [ s pec ify a ffec t ed fixture groups ]

. Where it is impractical to m easure p o wer directly at the fixture, fixture circuits m a y be m e asured if no other loads are on the circuit. T h e total power divided by the num be r of fixtures represents the ave r age f i xture powe r , but m u ltip le circuits must be m easured in ord e r to ca lculate the standard deviation of the m easur e m ent and thus show that confid ence and p r ecis i on criteria h a ve been m e t. The results of the baseline m easurem e n ts are presented in Table 4 in section 3.2.5. The results of th e post- installation m easurem ents will be included in the Pos t

- I nsta lla tion Report.

A Fluke Model 39 True RMS Power Meter was f o r all m easurem ents, which has a tru e RMS power m easurem ent accuracy of ±2 %. A Fluke M odel 80i-1 10s curren t probe with an accuracy of ±3% was used when m easuring power on indivi dual fixtures, or on groups of fixtures when the total current was less than 5A. A Fluke Model i200s current probe with an accuracy of ±2% was used when m easuring power on circuits wher e the curren t was at leas t 5 Am ps. The m o st
recen t calibration certificate for the F l uke equipm ent dated x/y/cccc is included in the Appendix. The power m e ter m easured tru e RMS power, acc ounting for Volts, Am peres, power factor, and total harm onic distortion 9

. 3.2.3 Usage Groups for Opera t ing Hours A separate s e t of lightin g usage grou ps we re iden tified bas e d on space functionality an d estim ated operating hours. For usage groups that represented more than 5% of the energy savings, fixture operating hours were m onitore d to determ ine the typical operating hours 10 using

8 INSTRUCTIONS: Reference specific source of dat a, such as a ut ili ty company’s li ght ing wat t age chart. Prov ide source data in A ppe ndix i f feas ib

le.

9 INSTRUCTIONS: True R M S power measur ements ar e required to ensure that the measur ements are accurate . This is a particular con ce rn where harm onic s may be pres e n

t. I t is not nec es

s a ry

to rec o

rd the THD, but t he me ter us e

d mus t be ab le t

o ac c u rately m

eas ur

e th e tru e RMS power whe n harm onic d i s t orti o n is

pres e n

t, w h ic

h may b

e th

e c

a

s e when meas ur

ing

e l ec tron ic bal las t s

. 10

INSTRUCTIONS: In the event ther e are a lar ge number of usage gr oups, each of which c o

mpr i ses onl y a small amount of the saving s

, it is
rec

o

mm end ed tha t the Bui l di ng Lev e l Sam p

li ng Appr oa c h (a.k .a. s t rat

i fi ed s

a mpl i ng) des c r ib

ed i n Ap pe ndix D. 3.1 of t he FE MP M&V

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 7a Usage Group Sa m p ling technique as discussed in Sec tion 3.2.4. Groups that represent 5% 11 or less th an the expected en ergy sa vings were not metered; operati ng hours were based on typical hours of occupancy. However, sufficient u s age gr oups were m onitored to account fo r at least 75% 12 of the total energy savings (kWh). A total of number of usage groups were iden tif i ed, which inclu d e X% of the affected lighting energy savi ngs, as shown in Table 4 in section 3.2.5.
During the audit, the operating hour s for a sam p le of lighting f i xtures in each usage group was

m easured over a three-week period. The m onitore d operating hours were used to estim a te the annual operating hou rs for each of th e usage grou ps with an intended precision of +2 0% at 80% confidence. The purpose of m onitoring the operati ng hours is to reduce uncer tainty in the final savings estim a te. However, the ESC O is not responsible for uncerta inty in or changes to the operating hours, so additional m onitoring will not be required if the intended precision criteria is not m e t. The m easured o p erating hou rs for each u s age group will be us ed as the annu al operating hours during the perform a nce period.
Hobo lighting loggers w e re installed inside the lighting fixt ures. These loggers record the tim e of the change-of-state between on and off. In add ition to the total operati ng hours recorded, logger data was evaluated to determ ine the num b er of hours that a fixture was operating during the building’s peak dem a nd period, between 1:00 and 4:00 PM 13 . This information was used to estim ate the probability that fixtures in each us age group would be operating coincid e nt with th e building peak load. This data was used to determ ine an overall peak co incidence factor for the lighting, which ensures dem a nd savings are not ov erestim a ted. The results of the m e as urem ents are presented in Tabl e 4 in Section 3.2.4.
The specification of the loggers us ed includes: light threshold ad justm e nt range from 10 to 100 lum e ns/m 2 (fluorescen t light) and record on-off tim es with an accura cy of ±1 m i nute per week). These new data loggers were calib rated by the manufacturer. The results of the m e tered data are summarized in Section 3.2.5 and all m e te red data are included in the Appendix.

3.2.4 Sample Sizes Appendix D.3.2 , Usage Group Sampling , in the F E MP M&V Guidelines (V 2.2, 2000) describes the details of the m e thod used to determ ine the sample size for each usag e group or fixture type

m easurem ent 14 . These procedures apply to groups used to determ ine operating hours and fixture powers. Precision and confiden ce criteria were selected based on experience with previous

Guide lin es

v

e rs ion

2.2 be us ed, rat h er th an t he Us ag

e Group s a m p

l i ng a ppro a c

h d

e

s c r ibed here i n. This wil l r e

s u lt i n a

tot a l s a m pl e s i z e muc h s

m

a ller th

an

us age gro up s a m p

lin

g, but w i th

out nec es

s a rily c

o

mpr o

mis i n

g t

he ov eral l unc ert

a i n

ty

. Des p

ite t he na me “ B uil d in g L e v e l Samp lin

g Ap pro a c

h ”
, it c an b e a p p

lie

d to c a mp us

es

an d bas es

wh ere diff erent bu ild in gs

ha v e s

i milar s

c hedu l e s

. 11 INSTRUCTIONS: It is recommend t h at operat ing hours for all usage groups that account for more than 5% of the ener gy savings s hould be
meas ur

ed. If t h is

i s

not pr ac

tic

a l, this s

houl d b e n

o

te

d i n Sec t io

n 3.1, an d a j u s t ific

at

ion

for t he d e v

i at

ion

prov i ded in S e c t io

n 3. 2. 3. Bu ild ing Lev el S a m p

li ng ( a l s

o c

a lle d Strat i fi ed Sam p

li ng) may b

e us ed

to r e

d u

c e t

he t o

ta l n u mb er o f s

a mpl e s req u ire d

. 12 INSTRUCTIONS: 75% of kW is t he r e

commended amount, but there may be sit uations where it is not practical to measure sufficien t us ag

e grou ps tha t repr es

ent 75 % of the lo

a d . Suc h a s i tu

ati o n may aris e wher e t

here are nu mero u s us age ty p e

s

, ea c h of whic h is

on ly a

s

m

a ll porti on of t he c o

nn

ec

ted l o a d . If a ppl i c able, not e c h a n

g

e

s mad e a nd w h y in Ov erv i ew of ECM, M&V Pla n , and Sav i ngs Ca lc ulat i on s ectio n

. 13 INSTRUCTIONS: Use the actual ti me frame t hat

corresponds to th e site’ s peak usage.

14 INSTRUCTIONS: If Bui l di ng Level S a mpling is used f o

r oper ati ng hour s, base t he sampl e size on 20 %

pr

ecision at 80% confidence an d ign

o

re t he s a mpl e s i z e

dis c u s s

i on c ontai ne d in th is s

e

c t ion. As s u me a C

v of 0. 5 f o

r e

a c

h gro up u n l e s s better in

forma t io

n is av a ila ble.
Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 8projects and represent a r easonable com p rom i se between desired precision and costeffectivenes s.

A sa m p le of m onitoring points for each us age groups was determ ined by the following procedure:
1. Define the desired precision and confidence fo r each m easured param e ter. For m easuring fixture powers, +10% precision at 90% confiden ce is desired. A high degree of precision is required because new fixture pow ers are subtracted from the existing fixture powers. B o th need to be known with a high degree of precisi on in order to reduce the un certainty in the difference. For m easuring usage group operati ng hours, +20% precisi on at 80% confidence was selected because: 1) the ESCO is not respons ible for usag e characteristics, and; 2) it is not cost-effective to redu ce uncertainty further.

2. Since sam p le size required to m eet stated pr ecision and confidence criteria is dependent on the ac tual m easurem ent results, assu m e an in itial coefficient of variation for each m e asured param e ter. For existing fixture power, use C v = 0.2; for new fixtures, use C v = 0.1; for operating hours, use C v = 0.5.

3. Using the stated assum p tions and Equation D.3 from the FEMP M&V Guidelines 15 , estim ate the sam p le size n for the power and operating hour m easurements. Given the assum e d large size of fixtures and usage group spaces, ignore the finite population co rrection and use the f

o llowing standard statis tica l equa tio n f o r estim ating sam p le sizes :
Z 2 C 2

v n = 2 Equation 1 p
where: Z = Z statistic for desired co nfidence interval p = desired precision C v = coefficient o f variation

n = sam p le size after roundi ng up to the next integer
The coefficient of variation (C v ) is simply the standard deviat ion of the measurem ent divided by the average m easurem ent value.

C
v = σ Equation 2
x where:

σ = standard deviation of the m easure m ent

σ = 

## ∑ ( x

− x ) 2 Equation 3 n

− 1

x = individual measured values

15

See A ppe nd ix D – Sa mpl i ng Guid el ines , p

a g

e

s 32 1 & 322 of M&V Gui d e lines : Me as

urem e n

t a nd V e rific a tio n for Fe dera l En ergy Proje cts, Vers ion 2.2.

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 9x = average m easured valu e of n sa m p les

Note: the standard deviation f unction is provided on all scientif ic calcu lato rs and spr e a d sheet software.

4. Using the stated precis i o n and confidence lev e ls f r om Step 1, determ ine the sam p le size for each fixture type and operati ng hour usage group as follows:

Measured Val u e Precision Confiden ce Z Assumed Cv Sample Size, n Pow e r, W (b as

eli n e) +10 % 90 % 1.6 45 0.2 11 Pow e r, W (n ew ) +10 % 90 % 1.6 45 0.1 3 Ho urs +20 % 80 % 1.2 82 0.5 0 11

The selection of assum e d C v for each m easurement type is b a sed on exp e rien ce with previous projects. Po wer m easurem ent sam p le size m a y be increased if field results indicate significan t v a riab ility in the m easurem ents. If a population of fixture types or usage gr oups is less than 100, refer to the FEMP Guidelines 2.2, Appendix D, equations D.3 and D.4 and Table D.2 for a discussion of how to adjust sam p les sizes for sm all populations.

5. When taking power m e asurem ents in the field, it is not expected that the m e tering technician will ca lculate the ac tual C v of the power m easurem ents. Inste a d, the m e tering technic i an will

com p are the lowest m easured valu e to the hi ghest for each fixture type. If the highe st
m easured value is m o re than twice th e lo west m easured value, the num ber of field

m easurem ents will b e do ubled f o r tha t f i xture typ e group 16

.
6. Using the actual C v , calculated using Equation 1, the re su ltant precis i on can be calcu l ated from the previous equations after som e si m p le algebraic m a nipulation. T h e m e asurem ent precision can be calculated as follows:
ZC p = v Equation 4
n 7. Fixture pow ers will be based on the average of the m easured values. Usage group operating hours will b e based on the averag e o f the m easured values. T h e coinciden ce factor (CF, portion of th at lighting o p eration tha t coincid e s with building peak) f o r ea ch usage gro up will be based on the operating hours between the building’s likely peak dem a nd period of 1:00 and 4:00 PM as f o llow s :

CF UsageGroup = Measured Operating Hours during Building Peak Period Equation 5 Number of hours in building Peak Period

16

This is

n

o

t a n ar

bi trary rule, b u t a n o

b s e rv atio n th at a p opu lati on w i th a C v of 0

. 2 has a r a n

g

e if ab out 2:1 be tween the hi gh es

t an d low e

s t
v a lues . If

th

e rat i o is great er t han 2: 1
, it is v

e ry

pr

oba bl e th at t he C v is

gre a ter t h a n

0. 2.

10 Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects8. Using the dem a nd savings and m easured opera ting hours, estim ate the annual energy savings from each usage group.

3.2.5 Results Fixture pow er m easurem ents are listed in Table 3 below. The num ber of fixtures in each group, the contribution to the total conne cted load (for baseline fixtur es only), power from standard table, power m easurem e n ts, sam p le si ze, and precision are all provided.
If a table of standard fixture powers is used for the non-m easured fixt ures, providing the table power and m easured power allows assessing the ab ility of the table to pro v ide re liab l e f i xture powers. If measured v a lu es are consis tent with ta b l e valu es, it can be assu m e d that the table is reliable. If there are sign ificant d i fferences be tween the table and the m easured valu es , they could be caused by fixture m i sidentification, m i xed fixture types, atyp ical operating conditions, over- or under-Voltage conditions, or other f acto r (s) th at shou ld be investigated.

Table 3 Fixture Power Measurements – Types, Monitoring Points, Results

Fixture Type Number of fixtures % of Ba seline Lighting kW Table Power,

W Number of Me as urem e n ts Av er

age Measured Power, W Std Dev, W Actu al C

v Precision at 90

% confidence F41E S 73 2% 48 11 52 8 0.1 5 8% F42E S 60 2% 82 11 86 10 0.1 2 6% F44E S 1,3 39 87 % 14 4 11 14 0 18 0.1 3 6% I75/1 10 3 4% 75 11 73 5 0.0 7 3%

Totals 1,5 75 97 % [codes and num bers are illustrati ve only]
The operating hours for the usage groups we re m o nitored for a three-week period in April – Ma y 2006 . The average annual operating hours for each us age group are show n in Table 4, along with the actual C v of each gro up. W h ere the reported C v is les s th an 0.2 (the o r igin ally ass u m e d value f

o r baselin e f i xtures), it is saf e to con c lude th at th e prec ision c r iterion h a s been m e t. If the C v is greater th an 0.2, the ac tu al pre c is ion will be g r eater than the intended va lue.

The dem a nd reduction listed in Tab l e 4 is based on a reduc tion in the co nnected load m u ltiplied by the coin cidence facto r for that g r o up. The coin cidence factor for each u s age group represen ts the fraction of fixtures operating when the buildi ng peak demand is set an d therefore represen ts that usage group’s contribution to the dem a nd re duction seen at the util ity m e ter. For groups where the h ours (and th erefore th e coinciden ce fact or) are un m easured, a coincid e nce factor will be estim a ted from the sam e schedule used to estim a te the operating hours.

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 11Table 4Usage Group Descriptions, Monitoring Points & ResultsUsageGroupNumberoffixturesCircuits(N)MeasuredPoints (n)Connectedloadreduction,(kW)AnnualoperatinghoursEnergysavings,kWh% of totalsavingsActualCvPrecisionat 80%confidencePeakCoincidenceFactor( 1 – 4 pm)DemandReduction,kW24 Hour-Exit692100.828,7607,1694%100%0.824 Hour-Misc30951.788,76015,5988%0.27.6%72%1.3ClosedOfficeAreas6732042222.961,90043,37723%0.6516.8%68%15.6Common5811761137.392,800104,34356%0.4316.1%86%32.2ConferenceRooms431302.751,6004,4362%50%1.4Halls andCommonareas1313701.563,0004,6332%86%1.3Storage,comp.closets2186605.571,2006,8504%50%2.8Totals17455263872.83186,406100%55.4OfficeAreas[groups and numbers are illustrative only]12Appendix G – Standard Measurement & Verification PlanFEMPfor Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects3.3 PROPOSED ENERGY & DEMAND SA VINGS CALCULATION METHODOLOGY 17 Lighting energy savings (kW h ) are based on the difference between th e baseline and post-retrofit power (W atts), the fixture quantities, and th e hours of operation. For this M&V plan, it is

assum e d that the operating hours rem a in consta nt during the perform a nc e period. F i xture dem a nd savings are calculated as the difference b e tween the b a seline a nd post-retrofit power (W atts) m u ltiplied by the coincid e nce f actor def i n e d in Sectio n 3.2.4.
The proposed lighting en ergy and dem a nd savings are calcu l ated for each line item in the lighting audit inventory usi ng Equations 6 and 7 below: 18
ES = [(FP Base x N Base ) - (FP Post x N Post )] x H Equation 6

DS = [(FP Base x N Base ) - (F P Post x N Post )] x CF x 12 Equation 7
W h ere: ES = Annual electric en ergy savings (in kWh) DS = Annual electric dem a nd savings (in kWh) FP Base = Baseline fixture power consum ption (in kW /fixture) FP Post = Post-installation fixture power consumptions (in kW /fixture) N Base = Num b er of baseline fixtures N Post = Num b er of post-installation fixtures

. H = Annual operating hours CF j = Coincidence factor

Table 5 Example Calculation Table

Line Item Ba seline Fixture Power (FP Base ) Number of baseline Fixtures

(N b ase ) PostInstallation

Fixture Power (FP Post ) Numberof PostInstall fixtures

(N pos t ) Annual Oper ating Hours (H) Coincident Factor

(CF) Annual Demand Saving s

(DS) Energ y Saving s

(ES)

1 0.100 10 0 0.0 85 10 0 32 00 0.7 5 13.5 4,800 2 0.075 10 0.0 25 10 87 60 1 6.0 4,380

17

INSTRUCTIONS: The approach described assumes a simple electric r a te. If t he r a te us es a time-of- use periods, t he appr oac h show n c

a n b e mod i fi ed by c

a lc

ul atin g t

he ener gy

a nd d e m a n

d s

a v

i ng

s s

eparate l y for ea c h tim e -of-us e per i od. More c

o

mp lex rates
, s

u c h as

d

e m an

d ratc hets
, m

a y req u i re a ddi tio nal c a lc

u l ati ons

. 18

The c a lc

ulat io

n m e

tho d s

how n h e re is bas ed on c a lc

ul atin g s

a v

i n

g

s for e a c

h li ne ite m s

e p

a r

ately

.

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 13Total energy and dem a nd savings are the sum of t h e energy and dem a nd sa vings for each line item

. The total annu al co st saving s will b e dete rm ined using E quation 8 : ECS Tot al = ES Tot al x ER + D S Tot al x DR Equation 8
W h ere: ECS To tal = Total annual energy cost savings (in dollars) ER = Electric en ergy rate (in $ / kW h) DR = Electric dem a nd rate (in $/kW )
The electric energy and dem a nd rates are outlin ed in Whole Project Data / Global Assumptions 19

. As described in the Responsibil ity Matrix, no alterations or re novations to the office spaces are planned. Should the Agency m a ke any changes, it assum e s the ri sk that the savings calculated by this plan m a y not m a terializ e.
3.4 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AND OTHER COST SAVINGS O&M savings are not being cla i m e d f o r this ECM.

3.5 PROPOSED ANNUAL SA VINGS FOR ECM The detailed lighting inventory a nd retrofit specif i cations are incl uded with the detailed savings calcu lations in the Appendices.

Table 6 Proposed Annual Savings for ECM 1- Lighting

Total energ y use (MegBtu/ yr)* Elect ric energy use

(kWh/yr) Elect ric demand (kW-yr) Elect ric
ene r gy cost, Y e a r

1 ($/yr) Elect ric demand cost, Y e a r 1 ($/y r) O&M cost s, Year 1 ($/yr) Total cost s, Year 1 ($/yr) Bas e li n e

us e NA Post-i nsta ll ati o n use NA Saving s $0

* 0.003413 MegBTU = 1 kWh

The unit of dem a nd reduction— kW -yr— is the sum of the m onthly dem a nd reductions.

3.6 POST-INSTA LLATION M&V ACTIVITIES Upon com p letion, an as-built invento r y of post-in stallation lig h ting fixtu r es will be sup p lied, includ ing th e ligh ting ba llas t s and la m p s actually in stalled, and lighting il lum i nation levels (foot– candles ) in the area s spe c if ied. Lighting leve l m e as urem ents will be m a de in the sam e f a shion as baseline m e asurem ents, and will be taken after at leas t 100 ho ur of fixture use. Curren t

19

INSTRUCTIONS: Utility rates are pr ovided in section 2 of t he M&V Plan outline, Whole Proj ect Data / Global Assumptions. This d

oc

um ent only a ddres s e

s th

e ECM S pec ific

M

&V Plan (Sec tio

n 3). If the rat e us es

a ti me- o

f-us e peri ods , th

e a ppr oac h s

hown c an be mo difi e d by
c a lc

ulati ng the en ergy an d d e m and s a v

i ngs s

epara t ely

for e a c

h ti me- o

f-u

s e peri od. Mor e c

o

mpl e x rates
, s

u c h as dem an

d ratc h e

t s

, may requir e a d d i tio n a l c a lc

ulati ons

.

14 Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projectscalib ration c e rtif icate s f o r the m e ter u s ed will b e p r ovided. Sav i ngs pred ictions will be c o rrec t ed based on as- built d a ta an d will be rep o rted in the Post-Ins t alla tion Repor t.

Im m e diately f o llowing installation, f i xtur e power consum ption will be m easured in a m a nner identical to that for the baseli ne fixtures, after the fixtures have burned for at least 100 hours. Sam p le sizes for m easurem ents and procedur es are described in Section 3.2.4. These

m easurem ents will b e us ed to ca lcula t e ac tual exp ected en ergy savings, an d will be de tailed in the Post- I nstalla tion Rep o rt.

3.7 PERFORMANCE PERIOD VERIFICATI O N ACTIVITIES Once per ye ar, for each year of the c ontrac t , ES CO will cond uct a s ite v i s it, during which the lighting sys t em will be inspected to verif y prope r opera tion, ensure th at it has been m a inta ined, and continues to have the potential to generate the expected savings.

A m i ni m u m of 1% of affected fl oor s p ace will be visually insp ected to ens u re pres ence of specified lighting equipm ent. Lighting replacement stock will be inspected during the annual site visit to ensu re that the p r oper rep l acem e nt equipm ent is available.
The Annual Report will detail the results of annu al inspections, noting significant problem s such as burned-out lam p s and ballasts an d deviations with the exp ected num ber of operating fixtures, etc. The following will b e data will b e includ ed in the annual report:

 Dates and tim es of site v i sits;

 ESCO and Agency Staff involved;

 Areas inspected and findings from i n spections;

 Evaluation o f lighting replacem ent inventor y an d purchase o r ders to determ ine if consistent w ith ESCO installed equ i p m ent;

 Num b er of l a m p and ballast replacem e nts m a de over the perform a nce year;

 Any proble m s identif ied with the li ghting system s by ESCO or Agency;

 Any m a jor changes in f a cility th at af f

ect this EC M;

 Any changes in usage of lighting system s
The Agency is requ ired to track and r e port to the ESCO the following items each year:

 Num b er of l a m p and ballast replacem e nts m a de over the perform a nce year;

 Any problem s identified with the lighting system s by Agency;

 Any m a jor changes in f a cility th at af f

ect this EC M;

 Any changes in usage of lighting system s

FEMP Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects 1516 Appendix G – Standard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Lighting Equipment Retrofit or Replacement Projects

## Appendix H Standard Measur ement & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects H-1H-2 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects

## Standard Measurement & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects Conducted Under DOE’s Super ESPC Program

FINAL DRAFT For Approval by ESPC Steering Committee
2/21/ 08

Federal Energ y Management Program (FEMP)
Office of Ene r gy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energ y

This docum ent was developed for the U. S. Departm e n t of Energ y ’s Federal Energ y Management Program by Nexant, Inc. This document will be posted on FE MP’s web site at http:// w w w 1

. e e r e.ener g y

. gov/f emp/fina ncin g/ super espcs_m v resourc e s.html

.

Co mments should be sent to lwebster@nexant.com

## Contents

1. BACK G R O U ND

..................................................................................................................... ............................ 1
2. HOW T O US E THIS GUI D E

.......................................................................................................... .................. 1
2.1 N OTES TO TH E U SE R

..................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 R ISK AND R E SPONSIBILITY M ATRIX

............................................................................................. 2 2.3 I NSTRUMENT A TION R EQUI REMENTS

............................................................................................. 3 2.4 M&V P LAN S UMMAR Y

................................................................................................................. 3
3. CHILLER RETROFIT M&V PL AN AND SAVI NGS CALCULAT ION METHODS

............................... 6
3.1 O VERVIEW O F ECM, M&V P LAN , AND S AVINGS C ALCULATION F O R ECM

................................ 6 3.2 E NERGY AND W ATER B ASELINE D EVE L O P M ENT

......................................................................... 7 3.3 P ROPOSE D E NERGY & W ATER S AVINGS C ALCULATIONS AND M ETHODOLO G Y

........................ 13 3.4 O PERATIONS AND M AINTENANCE AND O THER C OST S AVING S

................................................. 15 3.5 P ROPOSE D A NNUAL S AVI NGS F OR ECM

.................................................................................... 17 3.6 P OST -I NSTAL L ATION M&V A CTIVITIES

..................................................................................... 18 3.7 P ERFORMANCE P ERIOD V ERIFICATION A CTIVITIES

.................................................................... 19
4. APPE NDI X MATE RIAL S

............................................................................................................. .................. 22
E NGINEERING S UP P LEMENT T O FEMP ’ S S TANDARD M&V P LAN FOR C HILLER R EP LACEMENT P ROJECTS

............................................................................................................................... .................. 22

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verificati on Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects iiiiv Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects

### 1. BAC K G RO U N D

This docum e n t provides a co m p rehensi v e fra m e work fo r a measur e m e nt and verification (M&V) plan for chiller replacem ent project s perform ed via an energy s a vings perfor m ance contract. A working group of industr y and private-sector parties invol ved with DOE ’ s Super ESPC Program developed thi s docum ent. It should serve the following purposes:

 Provide a foundation f o r an M&V plan for a co mmo n chiller replacement project utilizing a “best practice” approach, which considers risk allocati on, engineering accuracy , and c o st-effectiven ess. This docum e n t provides a base docu m e n t that m u st be custo m ized for individual applications.

 Reduce developm ent and review tim e s on indi vidual p r ojects.

 Provide guida n ce to Federal agencies on what is essential for a robus t M&V plan for chiller replacement projects.

 For one of t h e m o st co mmon m e asures i n ESPCs, provide an example of an M&V Plan that

co m p lies wit h the require ments set fort h in the FEMP M&V guidelines.

 Provide an exam ple of the format for M&V plan s for Federal ESPC projects, as detailed in the M&V Plan Outline. 1 This M&V plan for chiller replacement projects relie s on an M&V Option A retrofit isolation approach using periodi c on-site m e asurem ents. This methodol ogy is recomme nded for m o st one-for-one chiller replacement projects, as outlined in this section. 

### 2. HO W T O USE THIS GUIDE

2.1 Notes to the User The M&V ap proach outli n e d herein con t ains m a ny sp ecific parameters. The prescribed methodologies were developed with considerati on for technical ac curacy , cost-effectiveness, an d appropriate risk allocation. This draft plan is intended to be used as a starting point and m u st be custo m ized for each project. This plan onl y cov e rs section th ree, M&V Plan an d Savin g s Calculation M e thods, of t h e M&V Plan Outline, and m u st be used in conjun ction the first two sections, Executive Su mmary / M&V Overview & P r oposed Savings Calc ulatio ns and W hole Project Data / Glob al Assumptio ns. All text highl ighted in yellow indicates data that should be custom i zed for the project. In some locations, footnotes or t e xt boxes are included to pr ovide additi o n al instructio ns. Instructio ns should not be included in the M&V plan. For projects that deviate from the prescribed m e thodologies, the ES CO is expected to docum ent the deviations from the base plan. This appr oach will ser ve the following purposes:

 Allow government staff to easily assess the M&V approach, and

 Help to ensure that a m i nim u m level of rigor is m a intained on in di vidual pr ojects in order to maintain the integrit y of t h e Super ESPC program

. The methodol og y i n cluded herein is suitable for the fol l owing pr ojects:

 Projects that consist of one -for-one replace ments of medium and large size chillers.

 Projects in which risks and responsibiliti es are to be allocated as indicated in Table 1.

1 Bas ed on v 1

. 0 M &V Plan Outl ine fo

r FEMP Su per ES PC projec ts

, av ail abl e at http: //www1.eere. ener gy. gov/femp/ f i nancing/supere spcs_mvresources.html

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 1 Projects wher e energy cost saving of approxim a t e ly $30,000 per y ear or m o re result from the chiller replacem ent. If savi ngs are less, econom ize on M&V activities. If savings are m o re, enhance M&V activities.

▫ These annual M&V activities are esti m at ed to am ount to about 80 hours of engi neering labor, with an additional 25 hours for annu al O&M activities (sensor calibrations or replacements).

▫ Most projects will also include additional in itial M&V costs for installing the per m anent instrumentation required t o conduct t h ese activities.

2.1.1 Companion Document : Engineering Supplemen t to the Standard Chiller M&V Plan
A co m p anion docum ent, Engineering S u pplement to F E MP’s Standard Chiller M&V Plan, is attached as an appendix. The Engineering Supplem e n t provides an outline of the analy ses required to imple m ent this M&V plan.

2.2 Risk and R e sponsi b ility Ma trix The Super ES PC Risk and Responsibility Matrix 2 prov ides an overv iew of risk allocation in a S uper ESPC contract. In order t o use this standard M&V plan, the pr oject m u st allocate risks and responsibiliti es that align with the plan. The risk allo cation herein is based on the typical arrangement for Super ESPC projects. Table 2-1 outl i nes the key items that need to be included i n the project ’s Risk and Responsibility Matrix for t h is ECM.
Table 2-1: S u mmary of Risk and Resp onsibility Matrix Items For This ECM

Item of Res p onsibility Descripti on of Allocati on 1. Fina ncial:

a. Interest rates: N/A b. Energy prices: ESCO is not responsible for cha nges in energy rates.

c. Construction costs: N/A d. M & V costs: Included in proje c

t costs. First ye ar M&V cost estimated at $6150.

e. Non-Energy Cos t Savings: Inclusion is opt io

nal based on project param eters. This example in cludes $2000 an nual cost savings for non-routine maintenance as a place holder.
f. Delays: N/A
g. Major changes i n facilit y: See Load, below
2. Opera t ional:

a. Operating hours: See Load, below b. Load: ESCO is not responsible for cha nges in load.

c. Weather: ESCO is not responsible for weather. d. User participation: See Operations, below
3. Performa nce:

a. Equipment performance: ESCO responsible fo r equipment performance, as defined by kW/t on

2 The S u per ESPC Energy Savings Contract Risk, Re sponsibility and P e rf ormance Matrix, available at http: //www1.eere. ener gy. gov/femp/ f i nancing/supere spcs_espcbas icsp2.html
Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects 2Item of Res p onsibility Descripti on of Allocati on

b. Operations: Customer must comply with ope rational sequence installed with ECM. ESCO is responsible for oversight.

c. Preventive Maint enance: Customer must comply with ESCO specification s for preventive maintenance an d manufacturer’s requirements. ESCO is responsible for oversight. d. Equipment Repair and Replacement: Responsibility fo r equipment rep a ir and repl acement is negotiable specific to Agen cy policy.

2.3 Instr u menta t ion R equir e m ents
For the use of this standard M&V pl an to be success ful, the sensors u sed for baseline and post-installation

mea s ure m ents m u st meet mini m u m a c c u racy require me nts and must be properl y calibrated, as shown in Table 2-2. If the accuracy of any instrument is less tha n prescribed, the measur e ments m a y not be suitable, as they will introduce unaccept a ble leve ls of error into the energy calculations.
The instrum e ntation accuracy requirements are desig n ed to ensure that overall energy and cos t esti m at es are reasonable. Although error analy s is i s not required b y Su per ES PC projects, it is im portant to keep in mind that the inaccuracies i n troduced by the inst rum e n t ation will likely be the greatest source o f uncertainty in calculated savings. F o r a chiller proj ect, the m o st i m portant m e asurem ents are the chilled water temper atures. Additional care should be take n t o ensure these sensors hav e the reco mmended

accura cies. Table 2-2: Required Inst rumentation Accuraci es 3

Equipment Type Purpose Accur a cy of Instrumentati on Flow m e

ter Chilled wat e r flow (GPM) ±2 % Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Chi l l ed wat e r temp er

atur es (o F) ±0. 3 oF Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Co nd

e n

ser wat e r tem per atur e

s

(oF) ±0. 5 oF Po we r me te rs Tru e

RMS Po we r ± 2 % Outd oor air r e l a tiv e humidity / wet-bulb temp er

atur e se nsor s Outd oor air w e

t-bul b tem p

erat ures ±3 % Outd oor air te mper at

ure s e n

s

ors Outd oor air dry

- bu lb te mp er

atures ±1. 0 oF

The actual specifications and m e asurement accuraci es of any equi pment used should be incl uded in t h e M&V plan. Specific instrumentation types identified herein are provided as exam pl es of the mea s ure m ent devices that should be used. Other im por tant factor s that m u st be considered in selecting proper instrumentation are locations, installation requireme nts, signal outp u ts, and calib ration requirements.

2.4 M&V Plan Summa r y The following table summarizes the key ele m ents pre sent in this standard M&V plan for chiller replace ments. The content is su mmarized in Table 2-3 into four sections: Baseline M&V Activi ties, PostInstallation M&V Activities, Annual / Periodic M&V Activities, and Energy U se and Savings Calculations.

3 See ASHRAE Gu i deli ne 14- 200 2 f

o

r add iti ona l i n for

m

a t

ion

on ins t ru me nt atio n s

e l e

c t ion

.
FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 3Table 2-3 : S u m m a ry of Key Elem ents in Standard M&V Plan for Chiller Replacement
ECM – Chille r Repl acement
Brief ECM Descriptio n:
M& V O p ti o n : Op ti on B Prot oc ol : IPM V P 2 0 0 7

Baseline M & V Acti vities : ( Sum m a ry of m e as ureme n t s p e rf orme d, a ssu mpt i o ns , s our c e s of d a t

a , b a s e l i n e ener gy us e cal c ul at i o n met h od ol o g y)

 Co nfirm b a selin e m e ter calib ratio n an d accu r acy

 Co llect b a seline d a ta acro ss ex p ected rang e o f op era ting con d ition s (e.g ., lo ad, o u t si d e air te m p erature an d hum i d i t y ), i n cl udi ng b o t h s h o u l d e r a n d pea k m ont hs (e ith er April – Ju ly o r Augu st – Octob e r). Param e te rs measured incl ude:

o Ch iller electric d e m a n d (kW) an d en erg y u s e (kWh )

o Ch illed water l o ad (t o n s ), calcu lated fro m co in cid e n t m easu r e m en ts o f ch ill ed water flow (gp m ), ch illed water sup p l y an d ret u rn tem p eratu r es ( o F),

o Co nd en ser w a t e r su pp ly an d return tem p eratures ( o F)
,
o Pum p an d c ool i ng t o we r dem a nd ( k W) a n d ener gy use (k Wh ) (i f a ffect e d )
, c ool i n g t o w e r fa n k

W s (i f af fecte d )
,
o Out d oor air te m p erature a n d hum idity.

 Calcu l ate ch illed p e rform a n ce (kW /ton ) acro ss exp ected ran g e of op erating co nd itio ns (e.g ., lo ad , ou tsi d e air tem p erature and hum idity)., ext r ap ol at e s h ort t e rm cool i n g l o a d m easure m ent s t o a n n u a l cool i n g l o a d p r o f ile for b a selin e con d ition s , and v e rify coo lin g to wer p e rform a n ce (Appro a ch and Rang e), ch illed water
an d cond enser water set p o i n t s , ch iller sequ en cing an d o t h e r b a selin e p a rameters

 Co llect b a seline do cu m e n t atio n : n a m e p l ate data, op erating sch e du les, ch iller ag es an d con d ition
, l o ad s
serv ed , lo cation

.

 Do cu m e n t assum p t i o n s i n cludin g : b a selin e weath e r con d ition s (b ased on TMY2 weat h e r d a ta fo r n e arest si t e wi t h si m i l a r w eat her co n d i t i ons), seas on al ope rat i n g sc hed u l e s, M o nt h a n d t i m e of d a y of pea k b u i l d i n g dem a nd
Pos t-In s t a llati on M& V Acti vities (S u mma ry o f i n spectio n s , mea s uremen ts t o b e p e rfo r med
, repo rtin g req u i remen t s and sub m itta ls)

 Co nfirm p o s t-i n stallatio n m e t e r accu r acy and calibratio n

 Co ndu ct po st-i n s tallatio n p e rfo rm an ce test fo r two week s. Param e ters to b e m easu r ed inclu d e :

o Ch iller electric d e m a n d (kW) an d en erg y u s e (kWh ),

o Ch illed water l o ad (t o n s ), calcu lated fro m co in cid e n t m easu r e m en ts o f ch ill ed water flow (gp m ), ch illed water sup p l y an d ret u rn tem p eratu r es (oF),

o Co nd en ser w a t e r su pp ly and re turn tem p eratures (oF),

o Pum p (if a ffect ed) an d c o olin g to we r fa n (if affected ) dem a nd ( k W) a n d e n er gy use (k W h )
,
o Out d oor air te m p erature a n d hum idity.

 M easure d p u m p dem a nd ( k W ) a n d ene r gy ( k Wh ) (i f a ffect e d )
, c ool i n g t o w e r fa n dem a nd (k W) an d e n e r gy
use (k Wh ) (if a ffected )

 Po st-Installatio n repo rt i n acco r d a n ce w ith ID IQ requirem ents

Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects 4Ann u al or Per i odi c M & V A c ti vi ti es (S u mma ry o f i n spectio n s , mea s uremen ts t o b e p e rfo r med
, repo rtin g req u i remen t s and sub m itta ls)

 Confirm m e ter accuracy and perform calibrations

 Perf o r m sy stem perfo rm ance test usin g p e rman en tly in stalled m e terin g

 Param e ters to b e m easu r ed inclu d e :

o Ch iller electric d e m a n d (kW) an d en erg y u s e (kWh ),

o Ch illed water l o ad (t o n s ), calcu lated fro m co in cid e n t m easu r e m en ts o f ch ill ed water flow (gp m ), ch illed water sup p l y an d ret u rn tem p eratu r es (oF),

o Co nd en ser w a t e r su pp ly and re turn tem p eratures (oF),

o Pum p (if a ffect ed) an d c o olin g to we r fa n (if affected ) dem a nd ( k W) a n d e n er gy use (k W h )
,
o Out d oor air te m p erature a n d hum idity.

 Calcu l ate ch iller p e rform a n ce (kW / To n) and co m p are to pro p o s ed ch iller p e rform a n ce valu es

 C a l c ul at e per f o r m a nce peri od ener gy use a n d savi ngs u s i n g m easured val u es ap pl i e d t o b a sel i n e l o a d pr ofi l e

 A nnu al Repo r t in acco r d a n ce with IDIQ re quirem ents.

 O&M d a ta to be prov id ed b y facility an d in cl u d e d i n Annu al Rep o rt

 Veri fy O&M h a s bee n pr o p erl y execut e d, i n c l udi n g pe ri o d i c cal i b rat i o n of i n st r u m e nt at i on t o presc r i b e d accuracies Energy Use and S a vings Calculations ( Sum m a ry of s a vi n g s c a l c ul at i on met h o d )

 Use b a selin e m easu r ed d a ta t o d e term in e ex istin g o p e ration a l efficien cy cu rv e an d lo ad p r o f iles.

 Determ in e b a selin e lo ad relat i o n t o o u t si d e air tem p eratu r e (assu m e lin ear relatio n s h i p). App l y to 87 60 typical m e teorological year (TMY) w eat her data to norm a lized ba seline.

 To accou n t for in teractio ns (red u c tion s in l o ad ) fro m o t h e r measu r es, lo ads sav e d will b e sub t racted to arrive at the adjusted baseline

.

 Each year, m easu r ed kW /t o n o f ch illers will b e ap p lied to ad ju sted b a seline lo ad to d e termin e en erg y an d dem a nd sa vi n g s

.

 Ap pl y st i p ul at ed dem a nd an d ener gy rat e s t o det e rm i n e cost savi n g s.

 There will be mini m a l savings from reduce d replacem ent parts. 

## CHILLER M&V PLAN STARTS ON THE NEXT PAGE

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 5

### 3. CHILLER RETR OFIT M & V PLAN AND SA VINGS CAL C ULA T ION METHODS

3.1 Ov er view of ECM, M&V Plan, and Sa vings Calcula t ion f o r ECM Three 225-ton centrifugal chillers using R-11 refrigerant will be replaced with t h ree high-efficiency 225­ ton centrifugal chillers using R-134a refrigerant. ECM sc ope incl udes recove ry of the R-11 refrigerant as well as demolition and removal of t h e ol d chillers. Related ECMs include ECM #1 - Light ing Retrofit and ECM#2 - EMCS (energy management control system upgrade). B o t h these ECMs will reduce the load on the central plant. All centr al plant peripheral equipm ent such as pumps, pipi ng, and cooling t o wers will be reused 4

. The chilled water plant uses a constant v o lume primary loop and a secondary variable flow pumping system to supply 46o F chil led water during the mont hs of April to October. The plant is off-li ne during November through March of each year. Existing cont rol sequences for the central plant will be maintained 5 . For example, both t h e new and old chille rs w ill use co ndenser water temperatures of down to 70oF when available, and will main tain chilled water temperatures at 46 o F. Chiller staging strategies will also remain the same. Capital i n vestment for this ECM is $1,215,0 00 ($ 1,8 00/ton) , an d f i rst year energy cost savings are estimated to be $35, 000/yr . O& M savings of $2 ,00 0 are being clai med based on documented replacement parts and pur chased R-11 t hat will be eli m inated. The SPB of 33 years is long, but necessary, due to the need to replace the aging c h illers and to convert refri gerant s. The other measures in this proj ect help to shorten the overall payback of the proje c t.
This measur e uses FEMP/IPMVP M&V Option B, retrofit isolation with all parameter mea s ur e m ent. This is an Option B approach since the energy use is meas ur ed periodic a lly and is us ed to directly calculate performance period savings. Perform ance period savi ngs will be normalized to average weat her conditions. The M&V plan for this ECM is based on thorough ba seline and post -installation data collecti on and analy s is. The purpose of collecting baseline ch iller data was to define three m odel s : 1) the cooling loads experienced by the plan t based on outdoor air tem p eratures a nd other variables as n eeded, and 2) the existing chillers’ eff i ciencies (i.e., kW/ton), 3) ke y operating conditions of the chiller plant (e .g. condenser water suppl y tem p eratures, chilled water supply tem p eratures, chiller sequencing).
Baseline metering was conducted for a p e riod of three m onths which covered bot h peak coolin g loads and swing m onth conditions. The baseline cooling load m ode l was applied to average weather dat a (Ty p ical Meteorological Year or TMY) for the site to determ ine the t y pical annual cooli ng load profil e for the facility

. I mmediately after installati on and commissioning is c o m p let e , the data fro m the post-installation performance t est shall be used to develop a perform ance m odel for each of the chillers. Once validated, these m odels will be applied to the hourl y load pr ofile and com p ared to the baseline conditions to predict the energy and dem a nd sav ings for perfor m ance Year 1.

4 INSTRUCTIONS: If peripheral equi pment will be modif i ed, include description here and expand all ot her secti ons to discuss relat e

d i m pa cts. 5 INSTRUCTIONS: If sequences of operat ion will be modif i ed , discuss sp ecific changes.
Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects 6During Au gust of each y ear in the contra ct period the ESCO will perform an annual chiller plant sensor calibration and chiller performance testing. The perfo rm ance t est period will start immediat ely after annual calibration is com p leted and will last for 2 to 8 weeks.

After the first y ear, m e asured data will be collected an d used to create chiller m odels for the current performance period. The new chiller performance m o dels will be validated and applied to the hourl y load profile to det e rm ine savings.
Key operating param e ters of the chiller plant will be r ecorded hourl y by t h e EM CS, and reviewed

m onthly by t h e ESCO. Data collected will include ch i lled water su ppl y and return tem p eratures, chiller status, condenser water suppl y tem p erature, and out d oor air tem p erature. Periodic verification is required to ensure the proper operating sequences conti nue to be i m plemented by facilities staff.

Energy and dem a nd savings calculations will be b ased on m e asured baseline chiller dem a nds, key plant operating par a m e t e rs, and the average co oling l o ad pr ofile for the site. The new chiller performance

m odel s , developed and verified usi ng m e asured values, will be appli e d to the average cooling l o ad profile. Baseline and post-installation m odel results are co m p ared for each hour of the y e ar, and energy and dem a nd savings are calculated from the coincident tim e periods. Th e annual energ y savings ar e the su m of the ho url y energy savin g s , and the peak dem a nd sav ings are determined for each m onth duri ng the tim e period which corresponds to the tim es when the buil d i n g ’ s peak de mand is typically set.

3.2 Ener g y and W a ter Baseline De v e lopment
Continu ous b aseline data collection occurred from April 3 to July 17, 2 006 . Data collected included each of the existing chillers’ power use and key operating param e t e rs, discussed below. The nam e plate data for the existing chillers is su mmarized in Table 3-1

. Table 3-1: Summary of Namepl ate D a ta for Baseline Chillers
Item Chiller #1 Chiller #2 Chiller #3 Bra nd Tran e C e trav a c Tran e C e trav a c Tran e C e trav a c Model Model F-G D 2-GO2 Model F-G D 2-GO2 Model F-G D 2-GO2 Capacity 22 5 to ns 22 5 to ns 22 5 to ns Rat ed kW 19 4 kW 19 4 kW 19 4 kW Serial # N/A N/A N/A

The key inde pendent variables affecting baseline ch iller efficiency and energy us e are total building cooling l o ad, chiller sequencing or staging, leaving ( o r suppl y ) chil l e d water temperature, entering (or suppl y ) condenser water tem p erature. Prim ary chilled water and co ndenser water flow rates affect the performance of the chillers but are essen tially constant for the existing chiller pla n t. The key s y stem perform an ce factors that character ize the baseline conditions are chilled water suppl y tem p erature and m a xi m u m chiller capaci ty. Baseline chill er plant metering util ized both the EMC S data and stand-alone lo gg ers. Prior to starting baseline data collection, the accura cy of the EMCS se nsors were ev aluated and were then calibrated or replaced with new calibrat e d sensors to ensure precisi on. The sensors used are sh own in Table 3-2 , and

co m p leted cal ibration form s and certific ates ar e included in the Appendix.

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 7Table 3-2: Chiller Baseli n e Data Coll ection Instru mentation A ccuracie s

Data p o in t Loca t io n o f Sensor(s ) Sensor Accuracy of Sensor Data Ac quisi tion & Stora g e Measureme nt Interval Chilled water supply temperature CH-1 CH-2, & CH-3 Precon STW-24 Thermister +0.3oF EMCS 15 minutes

Chilled water ret u rn temperature CH-1 CH-2, & CH-3 Precon STW-24 Thermister +0.3oF EMCS 15 minutes

Condenser wate r supply temperature Common supply header Veris TI HC1F2 +0.2oC EMCS 15 minutes

Condenser wate r retu rn temperature Common supply header Veris TI HC1F2 +0.2oC EMCS 15 minutes

Chilled water flow rate CH-1 CH-2, & CH-3 Siemens SITRANS FUP1010 +2.0% f

l ow rate Siemens SITRANS FUP1010 5 minutes

Chiller power an d energy use (kW & kWh) CH-1 CH-2, & CH-3 DENT ELITEpro PolyPhase Power Meters +2% DENT ELITEp ro Poly-Phase Power Meters 5 minutes

Outdoor air tem perature Roof JCI TE-6363 P-1 Outdoor Air Temperatu r e

Sensor +1.0oF EMCS 15 minutes
Outdoor air wet-bulb temperature Roof Veriteq Spectrum 200 +3% EMCS 15 minutes

An excerpt of the measured data is shown in Table 3-3, and all data we re subm i tted in spreadsheet for m at along with t h i s M&V plan. Require m e nts for government witnessing of m e a s ur e m ents ar e as defined in whole project data requirem e nts earlier in the M&V plan. The baseline measurements f o r the chiller were witnessed and certified by F a cilities Supervisor Don Wong on 7/ 17/ 06 , and d o cumentation is in cluded in the Appendix. Table 3-3 : Excerpt from Baseline Dat a Collected

O u tsi d e A i r C hi l l er 1 C hi l l er 2 C hi l l er 3 # C h ill

D a te /T im e T db Tw b ers On CWR T C W S T CH

- 1 On CH Flo w CH W S T CH

- 1 CHWRT CH-1 CH-1 kW CH-1 To ns CH-2 On CH Flow CHW S T CH-2 CHWRT CH-2 CH

- 2 kW CH-2 Ton s CH-3 On CH Fl ow CHWST CH-3 CHWR T CH

- 3 CH

- 3 kW CH-3 Tons 4/ 10 / 2 006 10 : 0 0 6 0 5 0 1 84. 2 75. 0 1 5 4 0 43. 0 46. 5 6 9

. 2 0 79

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0 4/ 10 / 2 006 10 : 1 5 5 7 4 9 1 84. 0 75. 0 1 5 4 1 43. 0 46. 5 6 8

. 9 0 79

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0 4/ 10 / 2 006 10 : 3 0 5 8 5 0 1 84. 2 75. 1 1 5 4 1 43. 2 46. 7 6 9

. 1 0 79

- - 4 3 .2 4 6

. 7

- 0

- - 4 3 .2 4 6

. 7

- 0 4/ 10 / 2 006 10 : 4 5 5 9 5 0 1 84. 0 75. 0 1 5 4 0 43. 0 46. 5 6 9

. 0 0 79

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0

- - 4 3 .0 4 6

. 5

- 0 The baseline data was an aly zed to determine 1) bu ild ing cooli ng l o ad profile, 2) performance of the existing chill ers, and 3) chiller plant ope rating parameters.

3.2.1 Building Cooling Load P r ofile
The baseline data was man i pulated to calculate tons of cooling for each chiller at each 15-m i n u te time interval, per Equation 1. Equation 1:
TONS t = (CHWF)(500)(C HWRT – CHWST) / (12, 0 00) Whe r e:
CHW F Ch illed water flo w i n g a llo ns p e r m i n u t e (GPM) for ch iller CHW R T En tering ch illed water tem p eratu r e (ret u rn tem p eratu r e, ° F)
Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects 8CHW S T Leav ing ch illed water tem p eratu r e (su p p l y te m p eratu r e, ° F) 5 00 Co nv ersion from G P M to Btu p e r h o u r-d egree Fahr en h e it 1 2 ,000 Co nv ersion from B t u h to ton s

The calculate d baseline cooling loads were co rrelated to m e asured outdo or air tem p erature 6 , as shown in Figure 1. Alt houg h the cor r elation of to ns to tem p erature had a coefficient of variation (R 2 ) less 0.5, this correlation is sufficient to predict the annual cooling loads. The load profile of t h e facility was then applied to h o u rl y TMY dat a fro m W B

AN 9472 8 7 weather site to determ ine annual loads. Figure 1: Measured Tons and Outdoor Air Te mper ature

M e a s ur ed C ool i ng L o a d a n d O A T

y = 8. 545 6x - 332. 75 R 2 = 0. 52 12

- 200 400 600 800

- 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 1 0 0
O u t s i d e A i r T e m p er at u r eTons

The cooling loads calculat e d to be saved from the other m e a s ures (ECM #1 - Lighting an d E C M

#2 - EMCS) included in this project were th en subtracted to determ ine t h e adjust ed cooling loads. The occupancy sc hedule of the facility was applied to the hourl y m odel, and loads during unoccupi ed hours were delet e d. The baseline adjust m e nts made and resulting m onthl y loads are in Table 3-4

. Table 3-4: Baseline TMY Loads and Adjustments Made

Month Baseline Cooli ng Loa d (t

on -h ours) ECM #1- Li gh ti ng Cooli ng To n- H ours Saved ECM #2- EMCS Cooli ng To nHours save d Total Cooling TonHours Adj u ste d Adjus t ed Basel ine Cooli ng Loa d (

T o n

Hours ) 1

- - - 2 3 4 30,022 1,382

- 1,382 28,640 5 139,150 1,382 685 2,067 137,082 6 200,709 1,382 992 2,374 198,335 7 240,920 1,382 1,192 2,574 238,346 8 220,390 1,382 1,090 2,472 217,918 9 181,667 1,382 897 2,279 179,388 10 81,881 1,382

- 1,382 80,499 11 12 Totals: 1,094,738 9,674 4,855 14,529 1,080,209

6 INSTRUCTIONS: If possible, use outdoor air conditi o ns (dry-bulb and w e

t-bulb t e mper atur es

) measur ed at a near by gover nment wea ther
s t ation for the s

a m e per iod

. A goo d s

ourc e of

weat her d a ta inc l u

des NOAA thro ugh htt p

://w ww.nc dc

.noaa .gov /oa/c l i m

at

e/s

t at

io

nl oc ator.h tml

. Weat her s t at

io

n d a ta s h oul d b e v

a li date d wit h s

i te

da t a to ens ur

e it is ap plic ab

le.
7 Site - New York C entra l Park; http ://r

redc.n re l.g o v/solar / old

_

d

a ta/ n srdb/t m

y2/State .ht m

l

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 9The monthly reduction in c ooling load due to ECM#1- Lighting Ret r ofit was estimated from monthly kW h savings. Based on R und qui st 8 method an d locatio n, 3 5 % of the lighting energy saved during cooling mo nt hs was attrib uted to t h e cooling l oad reduction. T h e cooling l oad reductions du e to ECM #2 - EM CS are detailed in the M& V plan fo r that measure.

3.2.2 Perfor mance of the Existing Chillers A chiller performance m o d e l was develo ped for each chiller using the meter e d data and applied to the following com ponent-based m odel 9 : Equation 2:
Power = A 0 + A 1 × T

CH W + A 2 × T

CH W 2 + A 3 × T

CW + A 4 × T

CW 2 + A 5 × PLR+ A 6 × PLR 2 + A 7 × T

CHW × T

CW + A 8 × T

CH W × PLR + A 9 × T

CW × PLR
Where : T

CHW = Ch illed Wa ter Su pp ly Temp era t u r e T

CW = C onde ns er Wat e r S u ppl y Tem p er at ure PLR = Pa rt- l oa d ra ti o (ra t ed to n s / a ctua l tons) A 0 - A 9 = C o efficien t s d e termined fro m mea s ured da ta

Metered data from was us e d to determ in e the coeffici ents A 0 throu gh A 9 for the existing chillers. Although the chillers are id entical and are opera ted in parallel, a per f ormance m o del for each chiller was developed. This approach ensures an y differences in the performance of the existing units are captured. The coefficients in Equati on 2 were determ ined us ing Micros oft Excel’s regression function. The c a lculated coef ficients A 0 – A 9 for each chiller are shown in Table 3-5

. Table 3-5: Baseline Chill er Model Coefficients
Coeffici ent CH 1 CH 2 CH 3 A0 456.0386 70.45294 15.51836 A1 -9.43391 -1.43935 -0.02565 A2 0.01412 0.004126 -0.00018 A3 -6.20574 -0.9671 -0.38504 A4 0.007466 0.002007 0.002305 A5 143.6792 0 0 A6 -55.2703 -55.1646 -33.4058 A7 0.107666 0.013987 0.000566 A8 0.360037 1.882767 1.531132 A9 0.499539 1.364763 1.38086

8 Rund quis t, et al. Calc ulat ing

Li ght in

g an d HVAC In ter

a c

t ions , ASHRAE J ournal 19 93.
9 INSTRUCTIONS: See E ngi neerin g Supplement for details on t he tw o ch i ller perf o

rmance mo dels recommended.

10 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsFigure 2 : Measured and Predicted k W for Chiller 1

M e as u r e d and P r e d i c t e d B a se l i n e C h i l l e r D e m a nd

50

. 0 75

. 0 10 0. 0 12 5. 0 15 0. 0 17 5. 0 20 0. 0 22 5. 0

5/9/ 0 4 4: 4 8 5/ 9 / 04 9:36 5/ 9 / 04 14 : 2 4 5 / 9/04 19 : 1 2 5/10/04 0: 0 0 5/ 1 0 / 0 4 4: 4 8
Da t eDemand(kW)

k W P r e d i c te d kW m e a s ur ed

Model Validation Procedur es Because the energy use of t h e chillers is fundam e ntal t o the savings guarantee, these m odels must be validated as sufficiently accurate. Four statisti cal pa ra m e t e rs ar e checked to verify that the

m odel s will not introduce an unacceptable level of uncertainty into the calculated saving. Data points excluded from this analy s is include all measurements within 30 m i nutes of a chiller start and any measurements taken after a chille r has been taken off-l ine. Four stati s tical param e t e rs will be checked to ve rify that the m odels will not in troduce an unacceptable level of uncertainty into the calculated saving. The para m e t e rs evaluated and the recommended accept a ble values for these chiller m o dels are shown in Table 3- 6Error! Reference source not found. . T h e calculation methodologies for these parameter s are detailed in the E ngineering Supplement in t h e Appendix.
Table 3-6 : S t atistical Validations Guidelines
Par a met e r ev aluat e

d Suggest ed a c cept a ble v a lu es Co effici ent of v a ri atio n (R 2 ) > 0.75 C

V (RSM E) < 15 % t-statistic > 2 Me an

bias e r ror < + 7%

Baseline Model Validation Results The para m e t e rs evaluated, the reco mmen d ed accep tabl e values, and the actual values deter m ine d for these baseline chiller models are shown in Table 3-7 . The calculation m e thodologies for t h ese param e ters are detailed in the Engin eering Supplement in the appendix.
These m odels have a close fit to m e asure d data, as shown in Figure 2 above. T h e detailed statistical r e sults of the analy ses of the baselin e chillers are included in the electronic Appendix materi als.

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 11Table 3-7: St atistical Validation Guidelines and Results 10

Par a met e r ev aluat e

d Suggest ed
ac cept a ble va lues Actu al valu e s CH- 1 CH- 2 CH- 3 Co effici ent of V a ri atio n (R 2 ) > 0.75 0.8 4 0.8 2 0.7 8 C

V (RSME) < 15 % 9.6 % 8.9 % 10. 6 % t-statistics

TCHW 10 2 18 TCHW^2 -10 -2 -3 TCW 3 3, -2 TCW^2 -9 2, -23 PLR A b so

lu

te

va lu e > 2 3 8 27 PLR^2 4 65 53 5 65 5 TCHW* T CW 19 3 -204 -581 TCHW*PLR 11 2 3 TCW*PLR 0.5 11 33 64 6 TCHW 7 34 86 9 Mean Bias Error < + 7% 4.2 % -5.5 % -6.4 %

3.2.3 Chiller Plant Operating Paramete rs Since the sequences of operation for the chiller plan t im p acts overal l plant efficiency and energy use, the basel ine m odel m u st include chilled a nd condenser wat e r tem p eratures and flows as well as the chiller staging sequences. Actual baselin e sequ e nces of operation were confirmed using meter e d data. The appropriate values for these para me ters wer e the n incorpor ated into the hourly chiller m odel, and baseline energy and dem a nd usage were then deter m ined. Table 3-8 shows the baseline operating parameters that we re determ ined and then ap pli e d. Table 3-8: Baseline Ope r a ting Param e ters
Item De sc ription of sequen c e

s Ba seline valu es us ed Chi l l ed wat e r temp er

atur es Chi l l ed wat e r s u p p

ly t e mp er

at

ure i s ke pt at a const ant 46oF. 46oF

Chi l l ed wat e r fl ow r a tes Chi l l ed wat e r fl ow r a tes bas e

d

on fl ow m e

a s

u r

eme n ts at
eac h c h il ler ~540 GPM / C h il ler up t o 16

20 GP M & fi el d testi ng Condenser wat e r temp er

atur es ( c

oo li ng tow e r p e rform a nce) Co oli n g tow e r ap pro a c

h

(o utd oor air w e

t-b u l b temp er

atur e — con d

e n

s

e r w a t

e r su pp ly tem p

erat ure)
was det ermi n e

d

to b e

7 oF. Mi nim u m te mp er

atur e all o w

e

d is 7 5 oF

. 7 5

o F to 83 oF ba sed on TMY wet-bulb temp er

atur es

Con den se r wa te r flow rates Co nsta nt co n

d

ens er w a ter fl o w

rate ba se d o n

d

e

si gn dat a a nd num b

e r of p u m p

s o p

e rati n g 675 GPM / Chiller up to 20 25 GP M C h il le r stag ing Chi l l e rs 1, 2, & 3 ar e rot a te d e v

en ly b a

s

ed on run-ti me. Add i ti on al c h i l l e rs ar e sta g ed on at a ma xim u m P L R of 0.8 0

a nd are t a ken off-li ne at a mi nim u m P L R of 0. 5.

10

See ASHRAE Gu i deli ne 14- 200 2 a n d IPMVP Vol u m e 1 (EVO 10 00

0-1. 2 007) for add iti ona l infor m

at

ion

on s

t at

is

tic

a l v a li dat io

n te c hni qu es

. 11 As the T-s t a t

is

tic

f

o

r this para m et

er i s low, it c o

uld

be e limi nat ed to hel p r educ e unc ert

a in

ty

. Sinc e i t

is

o

n ly

lo

w for o ne of t he c h illers
, and th

e v a lida t io

n c

r iter ia are m e

t, it has be e n k ept in all of the c

h iller mo dels

.
12 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects3.3 Pr oposed Ener g y & W a ter Sa vings Calcula t ions and Methodol og y As detailed in the previous section, a performan ce m o del of each chiller was developed from measured data, and the buildi n g’s cooling l o ads were determin ed under t y pic a l weather co nditions. The esti m ated savings were determ ined by com p aring energy used by the baseline chiller plan t t o the m a nufacturer’s published data on the energy use of the new chillers under the same conditions for each hour of the y ear

. The conditions assu med in both the baseline and post- installation cases include a ppropriate chiller plant operating con d itions and T M Y cooling l o ads. Based on the TMY cooling loads and pla n t operati ng c onditi ons, bas e line chiller plant demand use was calculated for each hour of the y ear. Using the sam e 8760 hour m odel, the post-ins t allation chill er plant dem a nd was esti m ated from manufacturer’ s data. De mand savings were deter m i n ed for each hour, and peak periods were identified. The peak dem a nd savings were calcul a te d for each utility billing m onth, and the y ear’ s total energy savings were esti m ated, as de s c ribed by Equations 3 & 4 below. Table 3-9: Data Calculation Excerpt

Exis t i n g Ne w

Da te w e ekday / Sa t u rday Pea k O c c ? TM Y d r y bulb (F) To ta l T ons T M Y Ton s CH -1 Ton s CH

- 2 T ons CH- 3 CH -1 kW CH -2 kW CH- 3 kW To t a l C h il ler kW CH -1 k W CH -2 kW CH- 3 kW To ta l Chille r kW Pe ak kW Sa v e d 10 /7/0 4 1 2 :0 0 1 FAL S E 1 62 197 9 9 9 8 0 8 5.1 88 .0

- 17 3. 1 54 .5 5 3 .8

- 108 .2

- 10 /7/0 4 1 3 :0 0 1 T R UE 1 6 5 222 11 1 11 0 0 9 5.6 99 .0

- 19 4. 6 61 .2 6 0 .5

- 121 .7 73. 0 10 /7/0 4 1 4 :0 0 1 T R UE 1 6 6 231 11 5 11 5 0 9 9.3 10 3.9

- 20 3. 2 63 .5 6 3 .5

- 127 .0 76. 2 10 /7/0 4 1 5 :0 0 1 T R UE 1 6 6 231 11 5 11 6 0 9 9.3 10 4.4

- 20 3. 7 63 .5 6 3 .8

- 127 .3 76. 4 10 /7/0 4 1 6 :0 0 1 T R UE 1 6 7 239 11 9 12 0 0 1 0 2 .3 10 8.4

- 21 0. 8 65 .5 6 6 .3

- 131 .7 79. 1 10 /7/0 4 1 7 :0 0 1 FAL S E 1 66 231 11 4 11 7 0 9 8.0 10 5.2

- 20 3. 3 62 .7 6 4 .3

- 127 .0

- 10 /7/0 4 1 8 :0 0 1 FAL S E 0 64 214

- - 0

- - - - - - - - - 10 /7/0 4 1 9 :0 0 1 FAL S E 0 63 205 0

- 0

- - - - - - - - -

An electronic version of t h e savings calculations we re subm itted wi th this report and are su mmarized in Table 3-10

. Table 3-10: Estimated Chiller Use an d Savings b y Month

Month Ton H ours Baseline Peak kW Baseline kW h PostInstallation Peak kW PostInstallation kW h Peak kW
sav ed

kW h Saved 1

- - - - - - - 2

- - - - - - - 3

- - - - - - - 4 28,640 262 21,38 9 160 13,64 7 102 7,742 5 137,0 82 349 104,2 62 212 66,525 137 37,73 8 6 198,3 35 372 153,6 29 222 98,023 150 55,60 6 7 238,3 46 393 186,3 70 238 118,9 14 155 67,45 6 8 217,9 18 345 168,7 66 201 107,6 81 144 61,08 5 9 179,3 88 312 137,5 62 185 87,771 127 49,79 0 10 80,499 264 59,88 1 159 38,207 105 21,67 4 11

- - - - - - - 12

- - - - - - - T

o t

als: 1,080,2 09 2,297 831,8 60 1,377 530,7 69 920 301,0 91

Key assu m p tions included in this approa ch are the following.

 Chilled water flow is measured individually for each chiller.

 Condenser water flows ar e based on design data.

 TMY weathe r data used ac curately depicts a “ty p ical” weather y e a r for the site.

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 13 The load prof ile that was determ ined fro m measured data during b aseline developm ent and applied to t h e TMY data accurately de pi cts the load profile for the facility

.

 The baseline chiller performances are accurately depicted in the mathem ati cal m odel s developed.

 After installat i on, new chill er perform an ce will be si milarly m odeled from periodic performance t est data. The manufacturer ’ s pub lished data accurat e l y esti m ated p e rfor m anc e of the new chillers.

 Cooling t o wer performance (approach and ra nge) m e asured during baseline development will

rem a in constant duri ng t h e performance period.

 Baseline chiller staging sequence as well as ch illed and condenser water temperatures are defined from meter e d basel ine data.

 Perform ance period chiller staging sequen ce as well as chilled and condenser water tem p eratures will be periodica lly confir med fro m metered data.

 Factory perform ance t esting will be performed on the new chillers.

 Building peak dem a nd is driven by t h e chiller plan t, a nd is coincide nt with the chillers’ peak usage.

The energy and dem a nd savings are cal culated using Equations 3 a nd 4. Equation 3: Energy Savi ngs (kWh) = Σ t (kWh t , baseline – kWh t , post )
Where:
kWh t, baseline = Energy that t h e baseline chillers would have used under the average TMY load conditi ons encou n tered for ho ur interval t in t h e post-installation period
kWh t, m easured, post = Energy requir e d by the new chillers under the average TMY load conditions encountered for hour interval t in the post-installation period Equation 4: Monthly Demand Savin g s (kW) = {(kW baseline ) – (kW post )} t-peak Where:
Tim e period (t-peak) is defined as the on e-hour interv al during t h e buildi n g ’ s pe ak period (between 1 and 4 PM on weekdays ) for that billing m onth during which the hi ghest baseline demand is set by t h e chillers. Billing m onths are defined by the serving electric unit y

. (kW baseline ) is the dem a nd for the baseline chillers predicted during tim e t (kW post ) is t h e demand of the new chillers predicted during the same interval t Annual cost savings will be calculated using Equation 5. Equation 5:

14 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsAnnual Cost Savings = E n ergy Savin g s (kWh) × Rate kW h + Σ mo n t h (Month ly Demand Savings × Rate kW ) Since the savings are normalized to average conditions, the chiller load and perform ance baseli n e is fixed for the duration of the contract and will not be adjuste d . These parameter s are defined in Table 3-4 and Table 3-5 . Pe rformance pe riod savings may vary from y ear to y ear if the m e asu red energy performance of the chillers varies significantly . I n itial savings est i m ates used manufacturer’s data to predict postinstallation chiller performance, whic h are included in the Appendi x. The energy and dem a nd rates used to calculate cost sa vings are based on actual utility cost structures, and discussed in the Whole Project Dat a / Global Assu m p tions section of this M&V plan. The peak demand charges apply to the m a ximum peak demand set for th e buildin g, w h ich corresponds to the chi ller peak load. Therefore, chiller demand savings will onl y be considered during those hours. These energy and dem a nd rates will be escalat ed at a r a te of 2.2 % per y ear as shown in Table 3

- 11.
Table 3-11: Perform a nce Period Energy and Dem a nd Rates12 Performance Year Energy $/kWh Peak Deman d $/kW 0 $ 0.0 725 $ 11. 25 1 $ 0.0 741 $ 11. 50 2 $ 0.0 757 $ 11. 75 3 $ 0.0 774 $ 12. 01 4 $ 0.0 791 $ 12. 27 5 $ 0.0 808 $ 12. 54 6 $ 0.0 826 $ 12. 82 7 $ 0.0 844 $ 13. 10 8 $ 0.0 863 $ 13. 39 9 $ 0.0 882 $ 13. 68 10 $ 0.0 901 $ 13. 98 11 $ 0.0 921 $ 14. 29 12 $ 0.0 941 $ 14. 61 13 $ 0.0 962 $ 14. 93 14 $ 0.0 983 $ 15. 26 15 $ 0.1 005 $ 15. 59 16 $ 0.1 027 $ 15. 94 17 $ 0.1 050 $ 16. 29 18 $ 0.1 073 $ 16. 64 19 $ 0.1 096 $ 17. 01 20 $ 0.1 120 $ 17. 38

The proposed annual savin gs for this EC M for the pe r f ormance period and cost s a vings for y e ar 1 are Summarize information in Table 10.

3.4 Oper a t ions and M a intenance and Other Cost Sa vings

O&M cost sa vings will result from the replacement of the chillers. The savings will be due to reduced replacement parts, specifically refrigerant R-11. The existing chillers all have small leaks in the evaporator bundles, which have made quarterly refri gerant recharges mandator y for the last 3 years. Refrigerant purchase data from the site from the last two years was review ed to determine act ual costs.

12

Energy ra tes ar

e t

y

pic

a lly inc l ude d i n th

e Wh ole

Proj e c t Data/Glo bal As s u mpt i o

n s s

e

c t ion of th e M &V pl an. It is

inc l u

ded her e fo r cl a r i t y.

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 15The historical costs and analysis are presented in Table 3-12. T h e total baseline costs that will be offset by the installation of the new chillers av eraged $2,315 per year.
Table 3-12: Baseline Chi ller Ref r iger ant Costs

Dat e Amount purchased (lb) Cost 1/1 2 /0

4 15 0 $9 22. 50 6/6/0 5 15 0 $9 34. 75 1/6/0 5 10 0 $6 22. 00 3/3 1 /0 5 10 0 $6 22. 00 7/1/0 5 10 0 $6 75. 00 12/ 15/ 05 10 0 $6 75. 00 3/2 2

/0

6 10 0 $6 88. 00 6/6/0 6 10 0 $6 88. 00 Total P u rc ha se d: 90 0 $5,8 2

7

.2

5 Amo unt r e ma in in g (7/30/06): 15 0 $9 71. 21 Total Used: 75 0 $4,8 5

6

.0

4

Aver ag e C o st / LB: $6.4 7 Num b

er of Mo nths: 28 Ave. C o st p e r Mont h $1 73. 43 Cost per y ear: $2,0 8

1 .1 6

Annual O&M savings adjustment factors will be calculated at a rate of 2.0 % per y ear, as detailed in the Whole Project Data / Global Assu m p tio ns section of t h is M&V plan. No other O&M cost savings will be generated by t h is measure.

16 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects3.5Proposed Annual Savings For ECMTable 3-13:Proposed Annual Savings for ECMTotalenergy use(MBtu/yr)Electricenergy use(kWh/yr)Electricenergycost, Year1 ($/yr)Electricdemand*(kW/yr)Electricdemandcost, Year1 ($/yr)Naturalgas use(MBtu/yr)*Naturalgas cost,Year 1($/yr)Water use(gallons/yr)Watercost, Year1 ($/yr)Otherenergy use(MBtu/yr)Otherenergycost, Year1 ($/yr)OtherenergyrelatedO&Mcosts,Year1 ($/yr)Totalcosts,Year1 ($/yr)Baseline use2,839831,860$61,6372,297$26,4100$­0$­0$2,315$-$90,361Post-installationuse1,812530,769$39,3271,377$15,8320$­0$­0$-$-$55,159Savings1,028301,091$22,309920$10,578-$­-$­-$2,315$-$35,202Notes*Annual electric demand savings (kW/yr)isthe sum of the monthlydemandsavings.MBtu=106Btu.If energyisreported inunitsotherthan MBtu,providea conversionfactorto MBtu for linktodeliveryorder schedules(e.g.,0.003413 MBtu/kWh).17Appendix H – Standard Measurement & Verification PlanFEMPfor Chiller Replacement Projects3.6 P o st-Installa tion M&V Activities
The intent of the post-installation verification activiti es is to verify that the ECM has been installed as intended and has the capacity to generate the expect ed savings. This will be confirm e d by developing post-installation perform an ce m odels of the chillers using m e asured chiller performance, and then using those m odels to calculate e xpected energy savings.
Included in t h e report will be a su mmary of the speci fications for the installed equipm ent as well as an inventory of installed control sensors, including their mea s ure m ent accura cy and confirmation of calibration. The Post-Installation report will follow IDIQ requirements and wi ll include factor y test results for the new chillers. A separate co mmissioning report will also be subm itted. The key inde pendent variables affecting post-insta llation chiller efficiency and e n ergy use are total buildi ng cool ing load, chill er sequencing, chilled wa ter tem p erature leaving the c h iller, and condenser water temperature entering the chiller. Prim ary chilled water and condenser water flow rates affect the performance of the chillers but will be e ssen tially constant for the new chiller plant. The key s y stem perform an ce factors that characteri z e the post-inst allation period conditi ons are chilled water supply tem p erature a nd m a xim u m chiller capacity. Require m e nts for government witnessing of post-installation meas ure m ents ar e the sa m e as t h e whole project data requirem e nts included in W hole Project Data / Global Assu m p tions section of thi s M&V plan.
Post-installation data collection for M& V purposes w ill focus on m odeling the perfor m ance of the new chillers and confirm i ng expected energy and dem a nd savings. Commissioning activities will be conducted and are reported separately

. The EMCS sy stem will be used to colle ct pos t-installation data, as all necessary calibrated instrumentation will be ins t alled with the new chille rs. Requirem e n t s for instrumentation are detailed in Table 3-14

. Table 3-14: Summary of Post-Installa tion Instrumentation Requirements

Equipment Type Purpose Accur a cy of Instrumentati on Flow m e

ter Chilled wat e r flow (GPM) ±2 % Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Chi l l ed wat e r temp er

atur es (o F) ±0. 3 oF Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Co nd

e n

ser wat e r tem per atur e

s

(oF) ±0. 5 oF Po we r me te rs Tru e

RMS Po we r ± 2 % Outd oor air r e l a tiv e humidity / wet-bulb temp er

atur e se nsor s Outd oor air w e

t-bul b tem p

erat ures ±3 % Outd oor air te mper at

ure s e n

s

ors Outd oor air dry

- bu lb te mp er

atures ±1. 0 oF

Coincident 15-m inute performance data, si m ilar to wh at was collected for the b aseline, will be collected for a period of at least two weeks aft e r commissioning is com p let e d. The data collection format will be the sa m e as u sed in the baseline (Table 3-3). New chiller p e rfor m ance models will be developed for each chiller using the m e t e red data using the sam e
co m ponent-based m odel used in the baseline: Equation 6:
Power = A 0 + A 1 × T

CH W + A 2 × T

CHW 2 + A 3 × T

CW + A 4 × T

CW 2 + A 5 × PLR+ A 6 × PLR 2 + A 7 × T

CHW × T

CW + A 8 × T

CHW × PLR + A 9 × T

CW × PLR

18 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsMetered data will be used to determ ine t h e coefficient s A 0 throu gh A 9 for the ne w chillers, following the same procedures used in developing the baseline.
The m odel validation procedures described for the b aseline chiller m odel will be use. Once validated, the

m odel s of the new chiller will be used to calculate ex pected energy and dem a nd use of the new sy stem

. The updated m odel s will be applied to t h e stipulated lo ad profile t h at is based on TMY data and com p ared hour-by-hour to the baseline m odel to calculate expect ed savings for the first performance y ear. If norm a l operating conditions for the chiller plant are not present at the tim e of p r oject co m p letion, the post-installation perform an ce testing and m odel devel opm ent may be deferred. In this case, the factory test results of the chillers’ perform ance should be used to calculate expected savings for y ear 1.

3.7 P e rf or mance P e riod V e rifica tion Activities The key inde pendent variables affecting performance period chiller efficiency and energy use are total buildi ng cool ing load, chill er sequencing, chilled wa ter tem p erature leaving the c h iller, and condenser water temperature entering the chiller. Prim ary chilled water and condenser water flow rates affect the performance of the chillers but are essen tially constant for the existing chiller pla n t. The key s y stem perform an ce factors that characteri z e the perform ance period conditions are chilled water suppl y tem p erature and maxim u m chiller capacity

.

The intent of performance period verification activities is to verif y t h at the new chillers are perform i ng properl y b y c o m p aring the measured performance to the expected perfor m anc e . Validated per f ormance
m odel s based on actual m e asured chiller performance w ill be used to calculate en ergy savings. For inform ational purposes only, the tota l m onthly ton-hours me asured during the pe rformance period will be reported and co m p ared to the stipulated cooling loads.
Field calibration and performance testing of the chiller s will occur in the last weeks of August

. The annual perfor m ance report will be subm itted by Septe m ber 30 each y ear. Require m e nts for government witnessing of perform a n ce period measure ments are the sa me as specifi ed in Whole Project Dat a / Global Assu m p tions section of this M&V plan. The annual report will include certification of the data by an appropriate Agency representative. The EMCS sy stem will be used to colle ct perform an ce period data, as all necessary instr u m e n t ation has been installed with the new chillers. Prior to collec ting any data for t h e annual per f ormance rep o rt, all related sensor s will be verified to be of s u fficien t accu racy and will be field calibrated by the ESCO. Equipm ent to be calibrated each y ear is listed in Table 3-15.
Table 3-15 : Summary of Annual Instrumentation Requiremen t s

Equipment Type Purpose Accur a cy of Instrumentati on Flow m e

ter Chilled wat e r flow (GPM) ±2 % Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Chi l l ed wat e r temp er

atur es (o F) ±0. 3 oF Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Co nd

e n

ser wat e r tem per atur e

s

(oF) ±0. 5 oF Po we r me te rs Tru e

RMS Po we r ± 2 % Outd oor air r e l a tiv e

h u mi dity / wet-b u l b tem p

erat ure sen s

ors Outd oor air w e

t-bul b tem p

erat ures ±3 % Outd oor air te mper at

ure s e n

s

ors Outd oor air dry

- bu lb te mp er

atures ±1. 0 oF

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 19Coincident 15-m inute performance data , si m ilar to what was collected in developing the baseline, will be collected ea c h y ear for a period covering two to ei ght weeks i mme diately after sensor calibrat i on has been

co m p leted. The data collection form at will be the same as used in th e baseline (Table 3-3). Each y ear, ne w chiller m odels shall be developed a nd validated, per the post-inst allation procedures. The accuracy of the new m odels will be validated by co mparing the kW predicted by the m odel to m e asured kW from each chiller, per the post-installation procedures. The updated m odel will be applied to t h e stipulated lo ad profile that is based on TMY data to calculate savings for th at perform ance period. The Agency or ESCO is responsible for preventive mai n tenance, repai r, and replacement as agreed upon in the project’s Risk & Responsibility m a trix. A part of this responsibility requires the Agency/ESCO to track and report all related activities conducted each performance year. Since the ESCO is responsible for equipment performance
, they must be sure that all operations and maintena nce activities ar e suitable and sufficient

.

 Detail verification activities and reporti ng res ponsibi lities of government and E S CO on operations, preventive mai n tenance, repair, and replacement items.

 Annual maint e nance reports from the Agency/ESCO will be submitt ed to the ESC O /Agency by August 1 of e a ch year. The maintenance reports shall document th e completion of all require d preventive maintenance as defined in t h e O&M manuals and summ arized below. The ESCO will report in the annu al report on the adequ acy of the chi ller maintenance performed.

Table 3-16: Summary of Required Chiller Maintenance Ite m s a nd Frequenc y

Quarterly Op eration & Main tenan ce Tasks for Chillers Organization responsible for the activit y Frequen cy Required

C h e

c

k va ne con t ro

l se ttin g

s Check settings per manufacturer’s specific ati o ns Agency Every 3 mont hs
Verify motor load limit control Check settings per manufacturer’s specific ati o ns Agency Every 3 mont hs
Verify l o ad ba l anc e o p

e rati o n Check settings per manufacturer’s specific ati o ns Agency Every 3 mont hs Check c h il led wat e r res e

t set t ings and functi o n C h e

c

k se tti ng s p e r

se qu en ce o f op erat io

n Agency Every 3 mont hs Annual Operation & Maintena nce Tasks for Chillers

Check c h il ler lo cko ut setp oi nt Check settings per manufacturer’s specific ati o ns Agency Every 12 mont hs

Clean cond en

se r tu be s Clean tub e

s a t lea s

t an nu ally a s

pa rt of sh utd o

w

n

pr oce d u re Agency Every 12 mont hs

Ed dy cu rren t test co nd

en

se r tu be s As re qu ire d , co nd uct e d

d

y

cur r ent test to assess t u be wall thickness Agency Every 12 mont hs

Cle a n

ev a por at

or tub e

s Clean tub e

s a t lea s

t an nu ally a s

pa rt of sh utd o

w

n

pr oce d u re Agency Every 12 mont hs
Eddy current test evaporator tubes As re qu ire d , co nd uct e d

d

y

cur r ent test to assess t u be wall thickness Agency Every 12 mont hs

C o mp re

s

s

o

r mo to

r and a

s

semb ly • Chec k al l a l i g nme n ts to spe c

ific ati on • Chec k al l se a l s, pro v

i de l u bri c ati on wh ere ne ces s

a r

y Agency Every 12 mont hs

20 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsQuarterly Op eration & Main tenan ce Tasks for Chillers Organization responsible for the activit y Frequen cy Required

Com p

r e

ss

or oil system • Con d u c

t an al ysis o n

o

il an d filter • Ch an ge

as req u ired • Chec k oi l p u m p a nd s e

als • Chec k oi l h e

a t

er an d th erm o

stat • Chec k all strainers, valves, etc. Agency Every 12 mont hs

Ele c

trical conne ctio n

s Ch eck all el ect r ica l
con n e

cti ons/t er

min a ls f o

r co nt

act
an d tig h tn

ess Agency Every 12 mont hs

Water flows Asses s

pr op er wat e r flo w

in
e

v

apo ra to r an d co nd

en

se r Agency Every 12 mont hs

Ch eck r e

frig er

ant l e v

e l a n d

c

o

n

d iti o n Add r e

fri ger a n t as re qu ire d . R e cor d
a m oun ts an d ad d r

e

ss lea k age issues. Agency Every 12 mont hs

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 21

### 4. APPENDIX MA TERI A LS
Instructions: The followin g are called fo r within th e M& V Plan and sho u ld be included in th e appendix:

 

### Baseline sensor calibration forms

 

### Statistical results for baseline chiller models

 

### Measured baseline chiller data

 

### Manufacturer’s performance data for new chillers

 

### Doc u m e ntation of Governm e nt Witn essing of Baseline Measurem ents
Engineer ing Supplement to FEMP’ s Standar d M&V Pla n f o r Chiller R eplacement Pr ojects This is a step-by

- step overview of the data collecti on and anal y s is th at is required to im plement FEMP’s Standard Chiller M&V Plan. Instructions are included for executing the M&V act ivities during the Baseline Phase, Post-Installation Phase, and Annua l M&V Phase. This overview is supplemental inform ation to help facilitate the proper use of the Standard Chiller M&V Plan.


### 1. Baseline Phase

Data Collecti on Baseline Step 1

Docu m e nt the m a ke, m odel, and locatio ns of existin g sensors. Ensure that sen sors are properly located and that m a n u facturer’ s rated accuraci e s of sensors a r e sufficient, per require m e nts below. If not, replace

sensors. Baseline Ste p 2 Verify and docu m e nt the ac curacy and calibration of all instrum e ntat ion. Table 4-1: Instrumentation Accuracy Require men t s

Equipment Type Purpose Accur a cy of Instrumentati on Flow m e

ter Chilled wat e r flow (GPM) ±2 % Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Chi l l ed wat e r temp er

atur es (o F) ±0. 3 oF Immersi o n tem per atur e s ens o

r s Co nd

e n

ser wat e r tem per atur e

s

(oF) ±0. 5 oF Po we r me te rs Tru e

RMS Po we r ± 2 % Outd oor air r e l a tiv e

h u mi dity / wet-b u l b tem p

erat ure sensors Outd oor air w e

t-bul b tem p

erat ures ±3 % Outd oor air te mper at

ure s e n

s

ors Outd oor air dry

- bu lb te mp er

atures ±1. 0 oF

22 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsBaseline Step 3 Ensure that all required data points are collected. In stall submeters or permanent metering, as a ppropriate, that adheres to accuracy requirements. Metered da ta should i n clude RMS power (kW) for each chiller, cooling t ons f o r each chiller (chilled water flow, chille d water supply and return t e m p eratures), condenser water supply and return te m p eratures, and o u tdo o r air dr y

- bul b an d wet-bulb te m p eratures. Flow and temperature m e asurem ents should be fro m each chiller to determ ine actual loads. Baseline Step 4
Perfor m basel ine data collection duri ng s houlder and peak m onths (either April – Jul y or August – October). Fifteen-m inute trends should b e used, w ith synchronized r eadings from data loggers and EMCS. (More frequent data logger readings, i.e. 5 m i nutes, can help.) Data collection shoul d be continuo us, and perio d ic v e rification of the data is strongl y recommended. Baseline Step 5

Docu m e nt ad ditional plant inform ation: nam e plate data, operating schedules, chiller age and condition, loads served, locations, and peripheral equipm ent details.


### Data An alysis
Baseline Step 6 Determine building co olin g load pr ofile. Correlate outdoor air temperatures with m e asured cooling loads using regression anal y s is. I f possible, us e outdoor air conditions measured at a n earby government weather st ation for the same period, as site- m easured outdoor air tem p eratures ca n be unreliable. Off-site weather data, however, should be verifie d as app licable to actual site conditions. A good source of weather data is NOAA through http:/ /www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/stationlocator.htm l

. It is typical fo r cooling l o ad m odels to ha ve rather poor statistical r e sults ( R 2 < 0. 75). 13 A non-li near relationship and/or additional variabl es may be included to define the load profi l e as needed, such as day of week or occupied status. Other sources of data (plant shut-down sc hedules, air-side/water-sid e econo m i zer use, etc.) should be considered to ensure that chille r plant load profile is accurate. Baseline Step 7

Deter m ine an d docum ent current chiller plant operatin g param e ter s and control s e quences, including chilled water setpoints, chil ler sequencing, condenser water setpoints, and actual tem p eratures. Actual operations should be verified from trend data , as they can vary from written seq uences. If condenser water setpoints are not maintained, dete rmine cooling tower approach (outd oor a i r wet-bulb tem p erature - condenser water return tem p erature) in order to pred ict condenser water temperatures fro m outdo or air wet-bulb tem p eratures. Confirm ope rations using trend g r aph or scatter plot. Baseline Step 8
Determine which calculation m e thod (Option 1 or Opti on 2 below) will be used. Initial selection of t h e appropriate option should be based on the level of vari ation expected in the operating paramet e rs of the chiller. There are sever al com ponent-based m odels th at work well with metered chiller data, and two

13

See ASHRAE Gu i deli ne 14- 200 2 a n d IPMVP Vol u m e 1 (EVO 10 00

0-1. 2 007) for add iti ona l infor m

at

ion

on s

t at

is

tic

a l v a li dat io

n te c hni qu es and r egr es

s

i on a n a ly

s

i s

.
FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 23options are presented herei n . For s y stems utilizi ng fairly constant chille d and condenser water tem p eratures, a sim p lified linear m odel (Option 1) m a y be appro p ri ate. For sy ste m s using m o re dynam i c operating con d itions, a temperature-dependent m odel (Option 2) sh o u ld be used.
If the results of the selecte d analy s is option do not m e et the statistic al criteria pre sented in Table 4-4, Statistical Validations Gui d elines and Results, then the other analy s is option should be evalua ted for viabilit y

. T h e option provi d ing t h e best statistical results should be used. Analysis Option 1 For sy stem s u s ing fairl y constant chilled and condens er water temp eratures, a sim p lified linear m odel is appropriate. Measured dat a should be u sed to deter m ine the coefficients C 1 to C 0 . The resulti ng equatio n can then be applied to the l o ad profile an d baseline op erating condit i ons (COP, Load).

1/COP = C 1 × (1/ L oad) + C 0 Where: COP =Coefficient of perfo rm ance (COP = 3.516 / kW /Ton)
Load = Cooli ng load i n to n s (12,00 0 Btu )
C 1 , C 0 = Coefficients deter m ined from mea s ured data This approach offers a si mplified regression techniqu e by using the reciprocal values of COP and Load. The coefficie n ts C 1 and C 0 can be determined from measured data . The final equation can b e m a nipulated and used to predict actual COP, and then kW/ton. Analysis Option 2 For sy stem s u s ing m o re dynam i c operating conditions
, a tem p erature-dependent m odel should be used. Measured dat a should be used to deter m ine the coefficients A 0 to A 9 . The resulting equation can then be applied to t h e load profile a nd baseline o p erating cond itions (T CHW , T CW , PLR).
Pow er = A 0 + A 1 × T CHW + A 2 × T CHW 2 + A 3 × T CW + A 4 × T CW 2 + A 5 × P L R+ A 6 × PLR 2 + A 7 × T CHW × T CW + A 8 × T CHW × PLR + A 9 × T CW × PLR
Where: T CHW = Chilled Water Suppl y Tem p erature T CW = Condenser Water Suppl y Tem p erature PLR = Part-load ratio (rated tons/actual tons) A 0 - A 9 = Coefficients deter m ined from mea s ured data Baseline Step 9 Appl y cooli n g load m odel to TMY weather data set to create hourly m odel of baseline chiller energy use, considering all of the chille r plant operating parameter s docum ented in Baseline Step 7. If using Option 2, the m odel will include addi tional parameters. Baseline Step 10 Quantify an y reductions in cooling l o ads from other EC Ms planned to ensure that post-installation loads are not overesti m ated. Adj u st hourl y T M Y cooling l o ad s used to predicted chille r energy use accordingly. Baseline Step 11 Build performance m odel ( s) of the existing chiller(s). An independent m odel of each chiller is required. The first step is to clean up the data set to re m ove trans i ent values. Data points that are within 30 m i nutes

24 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projectsof a chiller’ s startup shoul d be discarded. Sim ilarly
, all data point s after a chill er’ s stop should be eli m inated prior to perform ing the anal y s is for either option below.
1. Option 1
1/COP = C 1 × (1/Load) + C 0 Where: COP =Coefficient of perfo rm ance (COP=3.516 / kW/ T on) Load = Cooli ng load i n to n s (12,00 0 Btu ) C 1 , C 0 = Coefficients deter m ined from mea s ured data

▫ Set up a spreadsheet of the metered data for the chiller in question. Depending on instrumentation, indivi dual chiller loads ma y be calculated fro m total plant load and chiller sequencing.

▫ Calculate COP (COP = 3.516 / kW/T on) and load on chiller (tons = 500 × GPM × (T CH W r eturn - T CH W s upp ly )) for each metered interval

▫ Correlate (1/COP) to (1/Load). Use regression analysis to deter m i n e C 1 and C 0 . 2. Option 2
Power = A 0 + A 1 × T CHW + A 2 × T CHW 2 + A 3 × T CW + A 4 × T CW 2 + A 5 × PLR+ A 6 × PLR 2

+ A 7 × T CHW × T CW + A 8 × T CHW × PLR + A 9 × T CW × PLR
Where: T CHW = Chilled water supply tem p erature T CW = Condenser water suppl y tem p erature PLR = Part-load ratio (rated tons/actual tons) A 0 - A 9 = Coefficients deter m ined from mea s ured data

▫ Set up a spreadsheet of the metered data for the chiller in question.
Table 4-2: Exam ple Spreadsheet Layout for Raw Data

O u tsi d e A i r C hil l e r 1 C hi lle r 2 C h ill er 3

Da te / T ime T d b Tw b # Chil l
ers On CW R T C W S T CH

- 1 On CH Flo w CH W S T CH

- 1 CH W R T CH -1 C H -1 k W CH -1 To ns CH

- 2 On CH Flo w CH W S T CH

- 2 CH W R T CH -2 CH -2 kW CH

- 2 To ns CH

- 3 On CH Fl o w CH W S T CH -3 CHWRT CH

- 3 CH -3 kW CH

- 3 To ns 4/ 10 /2 006 10 :0 0 6 0 5 0 1 84 .2 7 5 .0 1 5 4 0 43. 0 4 6

. 5 6 9

. 2 0 79

- - 43 .0 46 .5 - 0

- - 43. 0 4 6

. 5 - 0 4/ 10 /2 006 10 :1 5 5 7 4 9 1 84 .0 7 5 .0 1 5 4 1 43. 0 4 6

. 5 6 8

. 9 0 79

- - 43 .0 46 .5 - 0

- - 43. 0 4 6

. 5 - 0 4/ 10 /2 006 10 :3 0 5 8 5 0 1 84 .2 7 5 .1 1 5 4 1 43. 2 4 6

. 7 6 9

. 1 0 79

- - 43 .2 46 .7 - 0

- - 43. 2 4 6

. 7 - 0 4/ 10 /2 006 10 :4 5 5 9 5 0 1 84 .0 7 5 .0 1 5 4 0 43. 0 4 6

. 5 6 9

. 0 0 79

- - 43 .0 46 .5 - 0

- - 43. 0 4 6

. 5 - 0

▫ Paste values from all rows with non-zer o energy usage into a new spreadsheet page. Arrange and m a nipulate data as shown in Table 4-3. U s e regression analysis, such as Microsoft Excel’s Regression Function, to determ ine coefficients A 0 to A 9 as well as som e sta tis tica l r e sults. Ex ample resu lts f r om Excel’s Regression Function are shown in Table 4-5. Table 4-3: Example Spreadsheet Layout for Data Analysis of One Chiller Tons (CH-1) TCHW TCHW^2 TCW TCW^2 PLR (CH-1) PLR^2 TCHW*TCW TCHW*PLR TCW*PLR 180.0 52 2704 80 6400 0.8 0.64 4160 41.6 64 180.0 52 2704 80 6400 0.8 0.64 4160 41.6 64 180.0 52 2704 75 5625 0.8 0.64 3900 41.6 60 180.0 52 2704 75 5625 0.8 0.64 3900 41.6 60

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 25Baseline Step 12 Verify that the perfor m ance m odels of the chillers ar e valid by eva l uating the statistical results for each

m odel. 14 Com p are the m e t e r e d kWs to those predicte d by the m odel(s ) created abo v e and perform statistical ana l y s is on the re sults.
Table 4-4: St atistical Validations Guidelines and Results

Par a met e r ev aluat e

d Suggest ed a c cept a ble v a lu es C

V (RSM E) < 15 % t-statistic > 2 Me an

bias e r ror < + 7%
The four statistical para met e rs that need to be evaluated for each m o del are:

 Coefficient of variation (R 2 ) — see re sults fro m regres sion analy s is. Lower R 2 values m a y indicates independent variables m a y be missing.

 t-statistic — See results fr om r e gressio n analy s is. The absolute value of the t-stat for each coefficient included shoul d be greater than 2 fo r the i ndependent v a riable to be considered significant.

 C V (RSME) — coefficient of variation of the r oot-m ean-squared error. This value is alway s positive.

 Mean bias err o r — Overall indicator of bias in regressi on estimate. Positive values indicate higher than a c tual values, while negative value indicates that regres sion under-predicts values.
Most regressi on analy s is tools will include some of the statistical parameters that need to be e v aluated, typicall y R 2 a nd t-statistic. Instructions f o r calculating C v (RMSE) and m ean bias error are deta iled below.

14

See ASHRAE Gu i deli ne 14- 200 2 a n d IPMVP Vol u m e 1 (EVO 10 00

0-1. 2 007) for add iti ona l infor m

at

ion

on s

t at

is

tic

a l a naly s

i s

an d v

a li dat ion tec

hni ques

.
26 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsTable 4-5: Example Resu lts from Excel’s Regressi on Function

SUMMARY OU T P U T

Re gressi on S t ati

s ti

cs Mul t ip l e R R S q u a re Ad j u sted R S q u a re Stan da r d E r r o r O b s e r v ati o n s 0 .84 468 91 22 0.84 437 83 42 0.84 437 77 02 1 .31 732 12 42 86 40

ANOV A d f S S M S F i gn ifi c an c e F Re gressi on 9 244 10 099 .47 271 22 33.2 7 4 1 5 629 45 0 Re sid u a l 87 50 151 84 .1 83 47 1.73 533 52 53 T o ta l 8 7 5 9 244 25 283 .65

Coeffi c i

e n ts S t an da r d E

r r o r t S t at P

- val u e L o w e r

95 % U pp er 9 5 % L ower 9 5 .0 % U

p

per 95 .0 % In te r c e p t 4 5 6 .038 55 94 42.7 705 35 83 10.6 624 46 72 2.21E -26 3 72 .1 98 3 5 3 9 .87 8 9 3 72.19 83 5 3 9

. 8 7 8 9 T CHW -9.43 390 77 62 0.89 446 19 66 -10

. 547 01 95 7.49E -26

- 1 1 .18 7 2 6 -7.68 0 5 5 2

- 1 1 .187 26

- 7 .680 55 2 T CHW ^ 2 0.01 411 99 31 0.00 44 43 51 3.17 765 24 52 0.001 49 0.00 54 1 0 .0 22 83 0.005 41 0.02 28 3 T C W

- 6.20 574 06 42 0.66 890 49 63 -9.2 774 62 39 2.15E -20

- 7

. 516 95 2

- 4

. 8 9 4 5 3

- 7

. 5 169 52 -4.89 4 5 3 T C W ^ 2 0 .00 746 56 09 0.00 274 10 32 2.72 364 88 85 0

. 0 064 69 0

. 002 09 3 0 .01 2 8 3 9 0 .0 020 93 0

. 012 83 9 PL R 1 4 3 .679 23 96 36.0 673 77 52 3.98 363 42 27 6.84E -05 7 2

. 9 7 8 7 21 4.37 98 72.97 87 2 1 4

. 3 7 9 8 PL R^ 2

- 5 5 .270 30 61 0.28 503 68 08 -19 3 .90 5 8 5 6 0

- 5 5.82 90 5

- 54 .7 11 57

- 5 5.829 05

- 5 4.71 15 7 T CHW *T CW 0.10 766 59 23 0.01 000 54 93 10.7 606 81 49 7.77E -27 0 .088 05 3 0 .12 7 2 7 9 0 .0 880 53 0

. 127 27 9 T CHW *P LR 0.36 003 72 24 0.67 273 28 72 0.53 518 60 14 0

. 5 925 35

- 0 .958 67 7 1 .67 8 7 5 2

- 0

. 9 586 77 1

. 678 75 2 T C W * P L R 0 .4 995 39 47 0.07 155 16 25 6.98 152 51 39 3.13E -12 0 .359 28 1 0 .63 9 7 9 7 0 .3 592 81 0

. 639 79 7

Note: The absolute value all of the t-stats are above 2 except for TCHW × PLR. This is accept a ble for this

exa m ple. An y coefficient that has a t-sta t out of accep table range ca n be dropped from the m o d e l, which may im prove the statistical results.

 Calculate C v (RMSE):

2 YY ) 

# ∑ ( ˆ i − i

− − Cv RM SE ( ) = np 1 Y Where: Y

i = Measured e n ergy value a t time i

Y ˆ i = Predicted energy value a t time i
Y = Mean m e a s ured energy value

n = num ber of data points
p = num ber of independent variables used

 Calculate Me an Bias Error:

YY ) 

## ∑ ( ˆ i − i MBE = n
Baseline Step 13

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 27Determine en ergy use of the baseline an d post-install a tion chillers: Calculate hourly baseline energy use of t h e ch iller plant: appl y the validated chiller perfor m an ce
m odel( s) to the hourl y cooling load m odel (TMY 8760 data, adjust ed in Baseline Step 10 for reductions in cooling l o ads) cons idering key operating param e t e rs determ ined in Baseline Step 7 to predict energy use of each chiller, and the tota l for all chillers, for each hour of t h e y ear. Using the same 8760 hour m odel, calculate the pos t-installation demand for the new chiller(s) from manufacturer’s data, consi d eri ng the ke y operating parameters of t h e new chiller plant. Baseline Step 14 Calculate proposed energ y and demand savings for y e ar 1:
Deter m ine kW savings (predicted basel ine kW – pr edicted post-install chiller energy use) for each hour of the y e ar. Identif y all data that falls within the uti lit y / bu ilding’ s peak period (defin ed in the M&V pla n ) and further delineate data by m onthl y utility billing periods. For each utility billing period, the “peak” period, t ypically the hi ghest one hour de mand for pr edicted for the baseline ch iller plant that occurs during the utility ’ s peak period. This assumes the bu ilding peak demand is coincident with the chiller plant’ s peak de m a nd use. Appl y saving s equations: Monthly Demand Savin g s (kW) = {(kW base lin e ) – ( k W post )} t-pe a k Where:
Tim e period (t-peak) is defined as the on e-hour interv al during t h e buildi n g ’ s pe ak period (between 1 and 4 PM on weekdays 15 ) for that billing m onth during which the highest baseline dem a nd is set by the chiller s . Billing m onths are defined by the serving electric unit y

. (kW ba se li ne ) is the demand for the baseline ch illers predicted during time t (kW po st ) is the dem a nd of the new chillers pr edicted during t h e same interval t Baseline Step 15 Calculate proposed cost savings for y ear 1: Annual Cost Savings = E n ergy Savin g s (kWh) × Rate kW h + Σ month(Monthly Demand Savings × Rate kW )



### 2. Post-Installati on M & V Acti viti es

Data Collecti on

Post-Insta ll Step 1
Data collection shoul d foll o w Baseline Step 1 th ro ugh Step 3 inclu d i ng sensor verification and calibration. Install submet ers or per m an ent me tering, as appropriate, that adhere to accuracy requirem e nts. T y picall y pe rm anent m e t e ring equi pm ent will be inst alled with the new chillers.

15

This is

d

e

fi ned in the proj ec t s

pec ific

M&V Pl an.

28 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsConduct m e tering immediately f o llowin g installation and commissioning . Collect data for a minim u m of two weeks, longer if possible. If chiller plant is off line or t y pical operating condit i ons are not present at time of project co m p letion, post-installation m e tering may be deferred. In this case, the expect ed y ear 1 savings esti m ates included in the Post-installation Re port will be ba sed on the Fa ctory Performance test results reported b y the m a nufacturer. Ensure that all required data points are collected. If peripheral equipment in the plant has been affect ed, additional poi n ts will be required. Table 4-6: Post-Installation Data Required for An alysis
Points Neede d for Analysis Chilled water flow (GPM) per chiller Condenser water suppl y tem p eratures (oF) Chilled water suppl y tem p eratures (o F)
Chilled water return tem p eratures (o F) True RMS Power (kW) per chiller
Chiller on/off Status
Synchronize r eadings from data loggers and EMCS to collect trends in 15-m i nute intervals. (More frequent data, i.e. 5 m i nute, logger readin gs can help .) Data collection shoul d be c ontinu ous, an d periodic verification o f the data is strongl y reco mmended.
Post-Insta ll Step 2

Docu m e nt ad ditional inf o r m ation on post-installati on conditions: nam e plat e data, operating schedules, chiller age and conditi on, l o ads served, loca tions, and peripheral equipm ent details. 

### Data Analysi s
Post-Insta ll Step 3
Follow Basel ine Step 7 to deter m ine post-installati on chiller plant operating param e t e rs and controls sequences. Document resu lts including: chilled wate r setpoints, chil ler sequencing, condenser water setpoints and actual tem p eratures. All operational parame ters should be verified with trended fi eld data.
Post-Insta ll Step 4
Follow Basel ine Step 11 to build a perfor m ance m odel of each of the new chillers. Ty pically , the performance calculation option selected in Baseline Step 8 shoul d be used.
Post-Insta ll Step 5
Follow Basel ine Step 12 to verify that pe rformance m odels of the new chillers ar e statistically valid.
Post-Insta ll Step 6 Appl y new chiller performance m odels developed in Post -Install Step 4 to t h e hourl y TMY c ooling loads developed and adjusted during Baseline Step 10. Use the new chiller operating parameters det e rm ined in Post-Install Step 3 to predi c t the hourl y post-installation chiller energy use. Post-Insta ll Step 7

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 29Calculate the expected de mand and energy savi ngs fo r y ear 1 b y fo llowing Baseline Step 14.
Post-Insta ll Step 8 Calculate exp ected cost sav ings for y ear 1 by following Baseline Step 15.
Post-Insta ll Step 9 Draft Post-Installation Report in accordance with IDIQ require m e n t s. Include all analy s is, m e t e red data, and Factory perform ance test results on the chiller(s) per the M&V plan.



### 3. Annual M&V A ctivi ties

Data Collection Annual Step 1
Collect m e t e r e d data to develop performance m odels of each chiller for this performance peri od. Data collection should follow Baseline Step 1 through Baseline Step 3 inc l uding sensor verification and calibration.
Collect data for a m i nim u m of two weeks and up to e i ght weeks if possible while cooling loa d s and typical operating conditions are present. Any variatio ns in operating conditions expected over the y ear should be used duri ng the t est period to ensure the models developed will adequately cover those conditions. T h is may requi re adjusti ng normal operating set point t o achie ve seasonal any var i ations, such as cooling tower te m p erat ures. 

### Data Analysi s Annual Step 2 Using the data collected, cr eate a chiller performance m odel for each chiller by following Baseline Step 11. Typically, the perform a n ce calculatio n option selected in Post-Installation Step 4 should be used. Verify the validity of the models by following Base line Step 12. If results fro m the statistic al a n aly ses are acceptable, th en the post-installation performance m o d e l(s) are still valid. If results are not acceptable, then new m o dels shall be developed usi ng Base line Step 11 and validated and Baseline Step 12. Annual Step 3 Using the data collected, verify t h at ke y operati ng par a m e ters documented dur ing the post-ins t allation phase are still valid by foll owing Baseline Step 7. Cu rrent operating conditi ons may be differ e nt than in the post-installation case. Annual Step 4 Using the validated chiller performance m odels and ke y operating conditions in the current performance period, devel op an hourl y ener gy use model of the chillers Appl y new chiller performance m odels developed in Annual Step 3 to the hourl y TMY cooli ng loads developed and adjusted during the baseline. Use th e new chiller operating para meters determi n ed in Annual Step 3 to predict t h e hourl y post- installation chiller energy use. Annual Step 5

30 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement ProjectsCalculate the verified dema nd and energy savings for y ear 1 by following Baseline Step 14. Annual Step 6
Calculate veri fied cost savings for y ear 1 by following Baseline Ste p 15. Annual Step 7 Verify that O & M activities have been pr operl y executed. Gather docu m entation from the party responsible, and com p are to O&M requi rem e nts sp ecified in the co ntract. Annual Step 8 Develop Annual Report in accordance with IDIQ Re quirem e nts an d M&V plan details. provi de all analy s is and metered data in electronic format. Data o n O&M activ ities should b e included in Annual Report.

FEMP Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan for Chiller Replacement Projects 3132 Appendix H – St andard Measure m

ent & Verification Plan FEMP for Chiller Replacement Projects

## Appendix I Including Re tro-Commissioning In Federal Energy Saving Performance Contr acts

The docum e n ts here-in were produced by the FE MP Retro-C o mm issioning W o rking Group in October 2003. The purpose of the group was to pr ovide guidance to the FEMP team to help facilitate retro-comm issioning in Federal ESPC s. The scope included identifying inherent dif f i cultie s in incorpor ating re tro- co mmissionin g into pe rf orm a nce contracts, as we ll as ways to

overcom e those barriers. The language used in re ference to the Super ESPC program in this docum ent may be outdated.

INCLUDING RETRO-COMMISSIONING IN FEDERA L ENERGY SAVING PERF O RMANCE CONTRACT S Retro-commissioning generally reduces operatin g and m a intenance costs, im proves building occupant comfort, and m eets changing operationa l needs. When retro-comm issioning (retro-Cx) is partnered with an energy saving perform a nce contract such as Super ESPC, which focuses on equipm ent replacem ent and other capital im provem e nts, a facility can g r eatly im prove overall operations and dram atically reduce operating costs.
Including retro-comm issioning in Federal perf orm a nce contracting projects can provide substantial benefits. Retro-Cx can sh orten the co ntra ct length of an ESPC by m a xim i z i ng the project’s cost savings. R e tro-Cx activities comm only discover low-cost energy saving m easures that m a y have otherwise been overlooked. Gene rally, retro-comm issioning requires data logging of equipm ent operations, which provides additiona l docum entation of the pre-retrofit baseline conditions and contributes to m o re robust M&V.
A project implem ented at a large Fed e ral f a c ility in Atlanta is one retro-commissioning success story. A retro-comm issioning project im ple m ented for a total cost of about $120,000 will generate annual cost savings of approxim a tely $250,000. Had this m easure been included in the average Fed e ral ESPC project ($3.1 m illion init ial investm e nt, 14 year co ntract) it wo uld effectively shortened the pr oject’s overall sim p le payb ack by more than 5 years.
When including retro-comm issioning with other f acility retrofits a graded approach should be used to determ ine the appropriate scope of retr o-comm issioning activities. An exa m ple scope of work for retro-comm issioning has been develope d for use in Federal ESP C projects. This Example Retro-Commissioning Scope of Work provides a comprehensive scope of work that can be m odified for use in individual projects, and is available through http://ateam .lbl.gov/m v /

.

ESPC Energy Saving Performance Contract
Exam ples of Federal ES PC contract m echanis m s include the Departm e nt of Energy’s Super ESPC and UESC contracts. The Air F o rce and Ar my also have sim ilar contract m echanism s

. ESCo Energy Services Company

FEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-1Commissioning
Comm issioning is a process for achieving and ve rifying perform a nce of building system s. Typically, comm issioning is a part of any new or retrofit constr uction project. The purpose of

comm issioning is to ensu re system s a r e design e d, installed, functionally tested, and capable of being operated and m a intained to perfor m in compliance with the design intent. More inform ation on comm issi oning is available at http://www.eere.energy.gov/fe m p /techassist/bldgcom gd.ht ml

. Retro-Commissioning
Retro-Comm issioning (Retro-Cx) is the comm is sioning of existing building system s to m e et current building operating criteria. The retro-C x process system atically reviews the condition of building system s and returns equipm ent that has fallen out of desired operating param e ters back into appropriate tolerances. Retro-comm i ssioning is the process of optim izing an existing building’s operation and m a intenance through th e im ple m entation of low

- cost and no-cost im prove m e nts, and does not involv e equipm ent replacem ent.

Retro-Cx focuses on energy using equipm ent su ch as m echanical system s, contro ls, an d

som e ti m e s lighting. These system s are functionally tested and adjusted to m eet the current needs of the building. In addition to adjusti ng for changing building cr iteria or operational goals, retro-Cx can also provide updated m a inte nance requ irem ents for building sy stem s. For additional in for m ation see “A Practical Guide for Comm issioning Existi ng Buildings” by PECI and ORNL a v ailable through http://eber.ed.ornl.gov/comm ercialproducts/retrocx.htm

.

TIMING OF R E TRO-CX WITH IN THE ESPC PROCESS Conducting retro-comm i ssioning as part of a Federal ESPC process can be accom p lished in a variety of ways, depending on the conditions presen t at the facility, the availability of funding, and the preferences of the Agency. The m o st likel y scena r io f o r incorpo r a ting r e tro

- Cx into th e FEMP Super ESPC process is outlined below. Com p rehensive explanations of the steps for im ple m enting retro-Cx in a Super ESPC are included in the Example Retro-Commissioning Scope of Work . Although the Super E S CP process is deta iled, a sim ilar pro cedure will apply to other Federal perform a nce contracting m echanis m s

. Initial Proposal (IP) Phase The Agency should inform the ESCo of their intere st in retro-comm issioning at the initial project kick-off m eeting prior to beginning the prelim in ary site survey for th e Initial Proposal. The ESCo would then gauge the level of retro-co mm is sioning opportunities at the site and report these in the Initial P r oposal. The Ag ency should consider providing the Example RetroCommissioning Scope of Work to the ESCo for modification and inclusion in the Initial Proposal. Detailed Energy Survey (DES) Phase
The m o st effective way to determ ine retro- Cx opportunities is to identify opportunities in conjunction with build in g system m e asurem ents fo r baseline d e term ination

. Inten t to proceed with the DE S from the Agency should include clear instructions to the ESCO to include retro-Cx

I-2 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance Contractsactiv ities ( s e e Example Retro-Commissioning Scope of Work ). This will en sure audit co sts associa t ed w ith th e iden tif i cation of r e tro-Cx pro j ects will be recoverable as a part of the project developm ent costs, even if the energ y conser vation m easure (ECM) is no t im plem ented. Af ter scoping, the cost savings and im pl e m entation costs for viable retr o-Cx m easures are included as an ECM. ECM Implementation Energy saving retro-Cx m easures identified can be established as an ECM. The project baseline would be unaffected by the retro-Cx activities. S a vings from the retro-Cx m easures are attributed to the project, and im plementation cos t s are in cluded in the tota l contra ct cos t

. Performance Period
Measurem ent and verification activities should in clude provisions to ensure the permanence of the savings during the perform a n ce period. Inclusion of ongoing retr o-Cx services or periodic system check-ups as pa rt of M&V activitie s will help ensur e the persisten ce of the sav i ngs generated, and can be funded by the annual savings of the ECM bundle.

MEASUREMENT & VERIFI CATION OF RETRO-CX
Measurem ent and verification strategies for retro- Cx projects m u st be de veloped on a project-by

project basis. In general, the energy savings from retro-comm i ssioning m easures can be determ ined using typical M&V strategies, such as developing calibrated engineering models of the affected system s. Ac counting for savings gene rated from retro-Cx wi ll be dependent on the scope of the retro-Cx work, as well as th e M&V strategies chosen for other ECMs.

In som e cases, the m odifications m a de during re tro-Cx activities m a y be reversed over tim e by building occupants and m a intenance staff. The persistence of the changes can be addressed through checking perform a nce benchm arks, conducti ng periodic tune-ups, or a m o re aggressive

comm issioning approach . This ongoing comm issi oni ng effort will im prove build ing p e rform a nce by optim izing building system s though ongoing tracking and adjustm e nt of system s r a ther than a one-tim e fix. Typically, system s are benchm arked through measurem ents, and continuous monitoring is used to ensure the syst em s continue to operate as expected.

PRICING & PAYMENT FO R RETRO-CX The cost of retro-Cx is depende nt on the scope of work and must be negotiated on a project-by

projec t bas i s

. Includ ing r e tro-Cx a c tivities as pa rt of the detailed energy su rvey (DES) will increase the cost of the survey. Developing a de tailed scope of work and a fixed price for this work is im portan t to e l im inate risk to the Ag ency and the ES Co. Including a detailed scope of work in the Initial P r opo sal e lim inate s am bigu ity in the retro-Cx work to be perform e d. Establishing a fixed price for the entire DES ensure s that th e increm ental cost for thes e retro-Cx services will be covered as a part of the developm ent costs for the overall project, whether or not viable m easures are iden tified and u l tim a tely im plem ented.

OTHER KEY ISSUES
Other im portant item s to consider, discuss, and agree upon when including retro-Cx with a Federal p e rf orm a nce contrac t ar e ou tlin ed below

.

FEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-3• Determ ine the leve l of retro- comm issioning se rv ices des i red and identify the system s / equipm ent to be included in retro-C x.

• Establish th e level of involvem e nt of facility s t aff and other contractor s in initial retro-Cx scoping activities.

• Develop appropriate M&V strate gies, including assessing the n eed for periodic tune-ups or a continuous comm is sioning approach.

• Ascerta in th e leve l of occupa nt and staff training needed.

• Assign on going service responsibilities.

I-4 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts

## Example Retro-Commissioning Scope of W o rk

T

o Include Services As Part of Super ESPC Det a iled Energy Survey

BACKGROUND Agency requests th at ES Co perform retro-comm issioning services 1 , as detailed herein, as a part of perfor m i ng the Detailed Energy Survey (DES) for site

. Th e increm ental cos t for th ese services will be covered as a pa rt of the project developm ent co st for the Super ESPC project, whether or n o t viab le m e asures a r e id entif ied and ultim ately implem e nted. It is the inte nt of the Agen cy to expand the work that wi ll be perform e d during the DES. Leveraging the DES to com p lete a thorough scop ing of retro-comm issioning opportunities will substantially enhance the value of the ESCO services by ensuring that fundam e ntal building system s are calibrated and operating as required to deliver functional and efficient perfor m ance. This work will also result in written s y stem operation sequ enc e f o r the inc l uded system s, which help train facility staff. Additional docum e nta tion of operating conditions prior to im plem enting retrofits will be valuable.

The cost effectiv e m easures iden tified it the Fi na l Re t r o- Commi s s i oni ng Re port shall be included in the Final Proposal for a Super ESPC Delivery Orde r. The Agency agrees to credit the verified savings identified from these m easures to th e overall project, even if the m easures are im ple m ented by Agency staff prior to award of the Delivery Order (DO).

OBJECTIVES The prim ary objectives f o r conducting these activities are:

o Enhance docum e ntation of the operational a nd mainten a nce ( O &M) requ irem ents f o r the equipm ent and system s included

o Docum e nt baseline operating conditions th rough trending of perform a nce m easurem e n ts

o Opti m i ze con t rol s y ste m s through calibration of critical sens ors, review m e tered data and trend logs, and functional equipm ent testing

o Identify operational and m a intenance enhancem ents that result in im provem e nts in energy efficiency, occupant com f ort, or indoor air quality.

o Identify O&M staff train i ng needs

SYST EMS TO BE INCLUDED (If it is not possible to include a ll m a jor building system s and equipm ent, selec t the c r itical item s for inclusion. Generally, the largest ener gy using equipm ent as well as system s known for

1 Bac k g roun d i n for

m

ati on on r e

tro-c o

mmis s

i on in g is av aila bl e i n A Prac tic

a l Gui de for Co m

m

is

s

i oni ng Ex is

ti n

g Bui l di ngs th ro ugh http: //e ber. ed. ornl. gov /c

omm e rc ial p r oduc ts

/retr o

c x

. htm

.
FEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-5having problem a tic controls, or operational and com f ort problem s should be included in the study. Refer to Continuous Commissioning Guidebook 2 for example m easures and tech nical guidance.) For all buildings included in the DE S, the following systems should be included:

o Building autom a tion system , including controlle d devices, sensors, control loops, and logic

o Cooling system s Æ Central cooling plant
Æ Prim ary air-handling units (AHUs)
Æ Term inal units
Æ DX system s

o Heating sys t em s Æ Central boiler plant
Æ Prim ary heating system s

o Fire safety / sm oke purg e aspects of the HVAC s y stem

o Lighting system s

o Dom e stic ho t water equipm ent

o Hum i dity control equipm ent

o Building pressurization controls

PROJECT STEPS OVERVIEW OF PROJEC T STEPS The following summarizes the p r oject steps, wh ich are detailed in the following sections. 1. Review existing system s and related docum entation
2. Develop Retro-Comm iss i oning Plan
3. Perform calibration and m a intenance checks
4. Im ple m ent diagnostic monitoring / trending
5. Perform functional tests

6. Analyze the monitoring / trending and test data

2 FEMP Co nti nuo u s Commis s

i on ing Guide book f

o

r Fe d

e ral E nergy Man g

e rs

by

Tex a

s A&M Univ ers i ty

, Oc tob e r 20 02 is av ail a b l e thr oug h http: //at e

a m .l bl. g o v /mv

.
I-6 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts7. Asses and docum e nt the current operating st rategies and sequences of operation for all system s and equipm e n t included
8. Docum e nt O&M im provem ent opportunities

9. Calculate energy im pacts and develop im plem entation co st es tim ates for O&M opportunities
10. Develop and deliver the Fina l Retro-Comm issioning Report
11. Include cost-effective measures in final pr oposal with other oppor tunities identified during the DES. DETAILED PROJECT ST EPS The following sections detail each o f the project steps. Review Existing Systems & Document ation

o Attending m eetings through out the proce ss including a retro-comm issioning kick-off

m eeting in preparation f o r the site investigation.

o Interview Agency support staff and revi ew the existing build ing docum entation to determ ine th e orig inal sp ecifica tions, design intent, and their relevance to current owner / user requirem ents. The following lists the doc um entation that needs to be gathered and reviewed :

Æ Sub-m e tered utility da ta and energy bill (el ectric and gas) inf o rm ation f o r at le ast 12 m onths along with rate schedules
Æ Drawings and specifications releva nt to the system s scheduled for

comm issioning, especially control dr awings and sequences of operation
Æ Existing con t rol po ints list for each b u ilding
Æ Operating s t rateg i es p r o g ramm ed into the Energy Managem e nt and Controls System (EM C S)
Æ Equipm ent list with nameplate inform ation for equipm ent controlled by the EMCS
Æ Existing O&M and system m a nuals for equipm ent
Æ Test and balance (TAB) reports; sensor calibration docum ent a tion Develop Retro-Commissioning Plan Develop a Retro-Comm i ssioning Plan for test ing and reporting on the pertinent system s, including docum e ntation stra tegies. The Retro-C o mm issioning Plan should include the following:

o Equipm ent , system s, or specific m easures to be included, or selection criteria for inclusion

o Plan for reviewing existing syst em s and related docum e ntation

FEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-7o Define current operational requirem ents from original design docum ents and interview s with Agency staff

o Detailed plan for equipm ent calib rations, including calibra tion f o rm s

o Maintenance checks to be perform e d

o Detailed plan for diagnostic m onitoring / trending, including data archival

o Functional tests to be perform e d

o Methods to be used in analyzi ng the m onitored / trended data

o Plan to asses and docum e n t the current opera ting strategies and sequences of operation for all sys t em s and equipm ent inclu d ed

o Strategies to be used in ca lculating energy im pacts and im plem entation cost estim a tes for opportunities identified

o Im ple m entation schedule

o Define the content the Fina l Retro-Comm issioning Report

Perform Calibration and Maintenance Checks
A list of sensors and actuators for calibration will be developed following a points list review. Using the trending capability of the control system for tr oubleshooting, testing and data gathering is a cost effective approach but only if the comm i ssioning provider and building staff is confident that the sensors ar e reading properly. The approp riate am ount of calibration work will depend on the lev e l of conf idence in the exis ti ng equipm ent and the h i story of pro b lem s with the controls equipm ent at an individual site. The calibration plan m a y include a com p ressive list of sensors and actuators, or crit ical com ponents for select system s can be chosen. Example of critical control sensors include st atic pressure, outside air temper atu r e, return air tem p eratu r es,
m i xed air temperature, d i scharg e tem p eratu r e, variable frequency drive (VFD) speed, flow

m e ters, damper actuato r s, valve actu ators, hum id ity senso r s, and space temperature s e nsors. Appropriate calibration procedures and required docum e ntation s hould be included in the RetroComm issioning Plan, includi ng the following items:

• Test equipm ent used for calib ration shoul d have traceab le calibration docu m entation provided in the final report.

• Docum e nt test equ i pm ent read i ngs versus the EMCS sensor r eadings prior to adjustm e nt.

• Docum e nt the adjustm e nts m a de to m a tch the EMCS sensor readings to the test equipm ent readings.

• A minimum of two points of calibrati on to check both slope and intercept is required for sensors seeing a wide range of conditions such as the outside air temperature sensors. Adjusting the off set may be sufficient for sensors seeing a narrow range of conditions.

• Docum e nt test equipm e n t readings versus the EMCS sensor readings following adjustm e nt (calibration) and note date and tim e of the adjustm e nts m a de.

I-8 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance ContractsTwo options for providing the needed labor and staffing to accom plishing the calibration procedures are outlined below, and summarized in Table 1. Both of the options require participation by Agency operating staff. Option A: Commissioning Provider (ESCO) & Agency Staff Conduct Calibrations Using for m s and procedures developed by the Commissioning Provider (E SCO), the ESCO and Agency operating staf f will inv e stig ate, docum ent, and rem e dy any m a intenance issu es and perform calibrations as specified in the Comm issioning Plan. Successful com p letion of the calibrations is re quired prior to starting any monitoring, trending, and functional testing. T h is option is the least cost, but its viability depends on the level of expertise of Agency staff as well as their av ailability. This option is recommended. It provides the highest assurance of qua lity control and will help educate agency staff. Option B: Controls Contractor and Agency Staff Conduct Calibrations Using for m s and procedures developed by the Co mmissioning Provider, the Controls Contractor and Agency staff would accom p lish the calibratio n tasks specified in the C o mm issioning Plan. The Agency would cover the cost of the Controls Contractor. This option m a y appear the m o st expensive (by hourly rate), but m a y actually take less tim e due to the Controls Contractor experience. Table 1: Op tions to Ac com p lis h Calibra t ion of Criti c a l S e ns or s Opti on Resp onsible P a rties Task Descrip t ion Cos t I m plication A Co mmissio n i ng Pr ov i d er (ESCO) as sisted by Age n cy st aff Using form s and procedure s devel ope d ES C O
, i n

- h o u se sup p o rt st a f f w oul d wo r k wi t h Co mmissio n i ng Pr ov i d er (ESC O ) t o acc om pl i s h t h e calib ratio n taskswou ld be p a rticip ating with staff Least cost de p e ndi ng o n l e ve l of k nowledg e o f staff an d ab ility to

m a ke com put e r a d j u st m e nt s. Prov i d es h i gh l e v e l of qu ality cont rol along with e ducati o n for Age n cy staff

B C ont r o l s C ont r act or as si st ed b y Age n cy staff Using form s and procedure s devel ope d C o m m i ssi oni n g Provi d er (ESC O), the Controls C ont ract or , a n d Age n cy st af f would accom p lish the tasks M o st ex pe nsi v e by ho u r l y rat e but m a y be o f f set by t a ki ng l e ss t i m e due t o C o nt r o l s C o nt ract or expe rience Implement Monitoring and Testing
The comm is sioning provider provides a detailed re quest for required trend logs from the EMCS to the Agency staff or to the Controls Vendor, who executes the trends an d provides the data to the comm issioning prov ider (ESCO) in the sp ecif i ed electronic for m at. If data loggers are requ ired, the com m i ssioning provider (E SCO) will provide and p r ogram the data logg ers, which will be installed with the a ssi stance of the f acility staf f

. Facility s t af f m a y actua lly in stall cu rren t tr ansf orm e rs and watt tra n sducers on wiring inside electrical cabinets. Facility staff m a y also be responsible for rem ovi ng the sensors and data loggers, packaging them and sending them back to the provider for an alysis after the end of the m o nitoring period. Functional Testing
The comm is sioning provider (ESCO) oversees and conducts functiona l tests on selected equipm ent as specified in the Commission ing Pla n, with the assistance of facility staff and Controls Vendor as required. Functional tests will be com p rise d of changing param e ters, setFEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-9points or conditions and observi ng and docum enting the actual system or equipm ent response through various m odes a nd conditions (both sim u late d and real). Tests should be developed on a case-by -cas e basis to ens u re function a lity across norm a l ope rating conditions. For equipm ent that is being m onitore d with suf f i cient po ints, m a nual testing m a y be

accom p lished by changing the param e ters, etc. duri ng th e monitored period. The m o nitored data is then examined and used to docum e n t and verify correct or inco rrect operation. Visual verification of equipm ent functi onality m a y be required in inst ances that f eedback fro m the control system is not available. Analyze Monitoring and Testing Data Once the data is gathered from m onitoring and testing, the commissioning provider analyzes the findings by com p aring actual equipm ent operation to appropriate operation and to the existing control sequences. Issues and potential im provements are iden tified and docum e nted. Energy calculations are performed for thos e operational m easures that appear to have the m o st im pact to comfort, energy, or indoor air qu ality. Im ple m entation costs for the m easures will be estim ated, and results will be p r ese n ted in the F i nal Comm issioning Re port. Assess an d Document Current Operating Strategies
Comm issioning provid e r will work with th e Agency staf f to develop a co mprehensive building operations plan for the equipm ent and system s in cluded in this scope of work, based on the original building specifications and cu rrent operational needs of the site. Document and Analyze O&M Improvements
The Comm i ssioning provider will docum e nt i m pr ovem e nt opportunities identified. For the m o st prom ising measures, ene r gy im pacts will be c a lcu l ated and implem entatio n cost es tim ates developed. Develop Final Retro- Commissioning Report
The Final R e tro-Comm i ssioning Report shall be issued once comm ission ing scoping activities

are com p leted. This will be a separate deliver able from DO proposal, docum enting the actions specified herein.
A Final Retr o-Comm issioning Repor t shall inc l u d e the f o llo wing inf o rmation :

o Executive s u mm ary

o Project background and scope of the comm issioning project

o Overview of activities conducted

o Details of all poten tia l improvem e nts iden tified and other fi ndings, including:

 Docum e ntation of equipm ent conditions

 Identify any needed facility staff training

 Missing critical docum entation

o The estim ated im plem entation costs and the energy im pacts for each im provem e nt

I-10 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance Contractso Current system operation sequences for all equ i p m ent and system s includ ed In Appendix:

o The Retro-C o mm issioning Plan

o The EMCS / data logger trended data, analys is, and annotated results. Electronic copies of the data should be provided.

o Com p leted c a lib ration worksheets

o Docum e ntation of governm e nt witnessing, as required

Include Reco mmended Measures in Final DES Pro posal
The Final R e tro-Comm i ssioning Re port will be presented on ce all activities are com p leted, and will precede the pres entation of the D E S or Fi nal Proposal. Th e cost effective m easures identif i ed it the Fina l Retro-Comm is sioning Report shall be include d in the Final Proposal for a Super ESPC Delivery Order, including a detailed m easure m ent and verification strategy for each one. Functional tests of all operational m odifications should be included as part of the final acceptance procedures for each m easure in the DO. The Agency agrees to credit verified savings id en tif ied f r om these m easures to th e ove rall project, even if m easures are im plem ented by Agency staff prior to aw ard of the Delivery Order. ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES The following is an overview of the responsibilities fo r the team me m b er s, including Agency Lead Representative, Agency Technical Suppor t Staff, the Commissioni ng Provider, and the Controls Contractor. Agency Lead Representative Provides overall supervis ion of this project Is the party referred to as the “owner” Develops contractual agreem ents Ensures the participa tion of Agency staf f Funds the participation of the c ontrols contractor as needed
Attends m eetings as necessary Agency Technical Support Staff - Building Operator / Engineer

Attends m eetings as necessary Reviews and accepts co mmissionin g plan developed by Commissionin g Provider Ensures the participation of building pers onnel and controls cont ractors as needed Assists in ga ther ing the b u ild ing docum e ntation as needed Provides input into the investig ation process through interviews

FEMP Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n Federal Energy Saving Performance Contracts I-11Provides governm e nt w itnessing of a c tiv ities
Assists with im plem entati on of sensor calibration
Perform s or assists with setti ng up data trends in the EMCS
Perform s or assists with the installation and re m o val of diagnostic equipm ent such as data loggers, as needed Assists with perfor m i ng functional tests

Ensures m a intenance ite m s af f

ecting the pro j ect are rem e died, such as replacing failed

sensors Controls Contractor Attends project Kick-Off m eeting to coordinate work Assists with gathering data a nd setting up trends as needed Assists with perfor m i ng functional tests
Assists the Comm issioning Provi der in identifying and understa nding the control sequences and program m i ng of the EMCS Commissioning Provider (ESCO)

Is the techn i cal lead for this project
Conducts the Kick-Off m eeting Develops the Retro-Commissioning Plan Reviews req u ired docum entation such as en ergy bills, sequen ces of operation, drawing s , specification s , etc. Conducts the operations site i nvestigation includi ng interview s , observations and analysis
Oversees all m onitoring dia gnostic planning and execution Oversees any m a nual functional testing planning and execution Conducts the engineering analys is and energy calculations Develops the Final Re tro-Comm issioning Report

I-12 Appendix I – Including Retro-Co mmissioning I n FEMP Federal Energy Saving Performance ContractsA pril 2008