HB 343-STATE BUILDINGS: CONSTRUCTION & MAINT.  1:12:19 PM CHAIR P. WILSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 343, "An Act relating to the construction, major rehabilitation, and deferred maintenance of state agency public buildings based on standardized designs; and providing for an effective date." 1:12:45 PM VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett, Alaska State Legislature, stated that HB 343 represents the collaboration between the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) and other stakeholder groups. The bill also builds upon the legislature's success in crafting a state energy policy. He explained that in lean economic times tradeoffs are made between programs that affect Alaskans or infrastructure. The sponsor hopes HB 343 will foster dialogue on funding for deferred maintenance during major construction and major rehabilitation of state-owned buildings and the overall effect of deferred maintenance costs on all state programs. The sponsor anticipates significant changes to the bill but hopes the committee will listen to the expertise; in particular, by the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, the Cold Climate Housing Research Center, and the AHFC. He related the sponsor believes a shift in the state's focus from inputs to outcomes means being able to use cost-effective technology available today. This means the state shouldn't have to come back in five years to fix mistakes made during building construction. 1:17:06 PM DAVE KEMP, P.E.; Engineer, Statewide Facilities, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), began his presentation. He stated that the Statewide Public Facilities (SWPF) provides project management services for the planning, design, and construction for new and renovated vertical buildings. He pointed out a photograph of the Department of Labor & Workforce Development - AVTEC - Alaska's Institute of Technology Dormitory in Seward [slide 2]. 1:17:43 PM MR. KEMP described the statewide public facilities' functions [slide 3]. He read AS 35.10.190(a): The department shall coordinate the procurement of physical facilities for the state to insure the greatest cost savings of planning, design, and contractual techniques. He stated that this shop has 11 professional engineers, three licensed architects, two project manager professionals, and four engineers-in-training (EITs). CHRISTOPHER HODGIN, P.E. Program Manager, Energy Office, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), outlined the energy savings performance contracting program [slide 4]. He said he works with state agencies in an effort to make state facilities more energy efficient. He described the bill as a method for accomplishing energy improvement projects that are funded by the energy savings from the projects. Since 2011, the state has achieved combined energy cost savings greater than $2.1 million per year on projects in over 40 facilities statewide. He stated that the program is ongoing with several projects in development, implementation, and construction phases at any given time. The energy savings office has worked with the Department of Corrections, the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities - Northern Region, and Mount Edgecombe High School in Sitka through the Department of Education and Early Development. 1:19:29 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS suggested that the state owns far more than 40 buildings. She expressed an interest in schools and asked whether the DOT&PF participates in new schools. Although this program began in 2011, she wondered if the energy office has been using cost savings during the design, planning, and contractual techniques when constructing new schools in in the Matanuska-Susitna valley. MR. KEMP answered that the DOT&PF does not have any authority over public school buildings. In further response to a question, Mr. Kemp answered that the local school boards and communities have the authority and purview over school buildings. 1:21:46 PM CHAIR P. WILSON understood schools were a local issue. She wondered a legislative change would be necessary to change this. MR. KEMP understood a similar bill has been introduced that would accomplish this [HB 341]. 1:22:45 PM CHAIR P. WILSON said she was familiar with the weatherization programs and asked whether this process is similar to that program. MR. HODGIN answered yes. He explained that when the DOT&PF uses its energy performance contracting program, an investment grade energy audit is performed to conduct an in-depth review of the facility to assess the heating, mechanical, electrical, windows, walls, and building envelope system. The department receives the results with the best cost savings measures from the analysis. In response to a question, Mr. Hodgin indicated the energy auditors are private companies. He related that the department has a term contract with Cue Energy Services Ltd. 1:24:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS expressed concern about the "wants and needs" in her district. She said that some people think architects are the benefactors of the larger buildings. She suggested the end result is that the legislature and the district want quality buildings designed for the specific area and region of the state. She acknowledged that the state pays energy and deferred maintenance and should do a better job. CHAIR P. WILSON solicited input from testifiers on suggested statute changes since the goal is to achieve efficiency and energy savings. MR. KEMP highlighted the energy savings performance contracting that the legislature required the department to undergo as being one "shining star". The department has been reviewing older buildings that were built 30-40 years ago since the technology has changed significantly since then. He said this program has been saving the state over $2 million per year. 1:27:28 PM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked how many of the 40 public buildings still need improvements. He further asked whether these improvements are a result of the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act. Finally, he asked whether the department has been doing this in conjunction with AHFC or any other department. 1:28:27 PM CHAIR P. WILSON also asked how many public facilities the state has in total. Mr. HODGIN was unsure of the exact number of public facilities. He referred to the 2011 master building inventory list and indicated approximately 167 state facilities were over 10,000 square feet. He acknowledged many more facilities are owned by agencies that are less than 10,000 square feet. MR. KEMP said it would also depend on the definition of public facilities since municipalities and school districts have facilities. Further, DOT&PF doesn't manage, design, or track all facilities. He offered to provide the figures to the committee ranging from a small utility building to an 80,000 square-foot office building. CHAIR P. WILSON offered to distribute the information. 1:30:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said he appreciated the clarification. He suggested it would also be helpful to know the number of buildings the department has been involved in that relate to municipalities. 1:31:48 PM MR. HODGINS, in response to Representative Isaacson's earlier question on the role the Alaska Sustainability Act (ASA) has played, responded that it absolutely did. In 2010, the ASA was enrolled and since then his office has been working closely with the agencies and the AHFC, in particular, on investment grade energy audits so the AHFC can help fund the projects. 1:32:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS referred to 40 statewide public facilities for which the department has obtained energy savings. She asked for further clarification on the figure. MR. HODGINS answered that the aforementioned 40 public facilities represent the public facilities that the department has accomplished through the energy savings program. The projects include ones in the DOT&PF, the DEED, and the Department of Corrections. Of course, the DOT&PF's facilities include many more than the 40 buildings the program has assisted since it operates maintenance shops and storage buildings, too. REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS recapped that the department has 40 facilities that garnered $2.1 million in savings [per year], but acknowledged the department has many more buildings. MR. KEMP clarified that the energy savings performance contracting has been focused on all buildings not just DOT&PF's buildings. He said that the DOT&PF moves forward with any state agency who would like to have the audits done and participate in the program with AHFC. 1:35:20 PM CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether the Department of Administration (DOA) selects the projects or if the DOT&PF makes the selection. MR. HODGINS answered that it is a combination of methods. The DOA identifies which facilities use more energy and the DOT&PF works with the DOA to determine whether the project would be a good candidate for the energy savings performance project. In other instances, the department uses a state database to identify some energy use and prioritizes accordingly. 1:36:53 PM CHAIR P. WILSON asked for the average cost of the audit. MR. HODGIN answered that the energy audit cost ranges from 25 to 35 cents per square foot. He agreed the state pays for the energy audit through departmental funds or by using the AHFC's loan program. 1:37:46 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS asked whether the DOT&PF does energy audits prior to construction in order to build more energy efficient buildings. MR. KEMP answered that he will cover this a bit during the presentation. However, Senate Bill 220, which passed the legislature in 2010 [26th Legislature] requires the department to follow national standards for energy efficiency. The department must consider all types of energy efficiency, energy savings, options, as well as ways to weatherize. He confirmed that the DOT&PF currently follows the national standards for energy efficiency. Mr. Hodgin's program has been in charge of making energy efficiency improvements in older buildings, he said. 1:39:20 PM MR. HODGIN reported that the cost of audit is repaid through energy cost savings [slide 5]. He explained that under AS 44.42.067 (b-c), as part of the Alaska Sustainability Act, requires retrofitting and new construction to meet the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers {ASHRAE) 90.1, Energy Standards for Buildings. This standard has been adopted by most states, including Alaska, and it provides energy efficiency requirements for the design and construction of buildings. The nature of this standard is that it includes both prescriptive and performance-based requirements allowing flexibility in design approaches. Additionally, it provides energy efficiency performance requirements for building envelope and walls, heating and ventilation systems, interior and exterior lighting, power systems, and more. He described this as a continuously evolving standard with over 100 professionals working to update the standard every few years. 1:41:09 PM MR. KEMP emphasized the importance of having a prescriptive and performance based standard, especially in Alaska since the DOT&PF plans, designs, and constructs projects from Ketchikan to Nome. The state has a wide range of climate conditions so the department's standards must be flexible enough for DOT&PF to use the best technology for each specific location in Alaska. He concluded that this is what ASHRAE 90.1, does. MR. KEMP said the next slide entitled "Capital Improvement Projects in Alaska" clarifies who has responsibility in Alaska. The large circle represents the entire state, including school districts and schools that fall within and outside the circle representing the State of Alaska, the AHFC, the Alaska Court System, and the University of Alaska. Another circle depicts the statewide public facilities and various state agencies. His agency is in charge of the construction, planning, design and construction of facilities for agencies within this inner circle. 1:42:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked for clarification on where the DOA falls in terms of the circle. MR. KEMP said the DOT&PF gives the DOA authorization to perform projects on an authority basis. 1:43:36 PM KIM RICE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), pointed out that this slide [slide 6] refers to capital projects, but not to maintenance costs. She acknowledged that the department should also create a slide for maintenance costs, but maintenance is managed by individual departments. She emphasized that the DOA's primary function is space, space standards, and allocation among the departments. Most of the work on capital projects for contracting is done by a delegation from the DOT&PF. The DOT&PF performs the standards for contracting. She estimated that the DOT&PF has approximately 750 buildings if every shed and maintenance facility were counted. She surmised that thousands of public buildings exist in the state, but the statewide public facilities group handles capital programs for design and construction of facilities. She characterized it as being the consultant agency that helps other agencies through the process, including fish hatcheries and sand storage buildings. 1:45:11 PM MR. KEMP explained that the information on the next slide, entitled "Public Buildings in Alaska" has already been discussed in terms of the wide variety of facilities in Alaska [slide 7]. For example, LED lights are very appropriate for communities with high fuel costs since the cost of LED lighting is high, but in other locations that sustain lower fuel costs, it may not make sense. This illustrates the type of flexibility that the department needs to "fit" the technology to the location within the state. 1:46:11 PM CHAIR P. WILSON reiterated that the department needs flexibility. MR. KEMP answered that the statutes accomplish the AHFC's white paper and House Bill [343] will direct the department. The problem has been the terminology since it could take a huge effort to develop a standard design that will work from Ketchikan to Nome or for a crime lab or a State Library Archive and Museum (SLAM) project. 1:47:21 PM CHAIR P. WILSON referred to the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act Annual Report in members' packets. She asked if Mr. Kemp helped prepare the report. MR. KEMP answered yes; that the aforementioned report is prepared by the Statewide Public Facilities office. In further response to a question, he agreed it contains information on progress made, which will be updated annually. 1:48:10 PM TOM MAYER, Division Director, Division of General Services, Central Office, Department of Administration (DOA), said the department has reviewed the bill and would like to outline some of the challenges this bill presents for the division. The division manages multiple state-owned buildings; however, as written, this bill will affect buildings operated by multiple agencies from airports to health centers, fish hatcheries to pioneer homes. Each building in the state's portfolio has a specific purpose, which varies greatly in terms of age, condition and systems, including electrical and plumbing. Due to varying needs across the state and the varying roles the buildings play for state agencies, the public, and their communities, what is best for one region may not be recommended for another community due to climatic conditions. MR. MAYER said it would be very challenging to establishment detailed specifications that would apply to all regions across the state. In practical terms, standardization could result in DOT&PF needing developing hundreds of detailed specifications for building systems with DOA and other agencies attempting to balance the tension between applying a set standard for a deferred maintenance project on existing structures while finding the best dollar approach to replacing outdated systems. As technology and building techniques change, specifications need continual evaluation and updates. This type of standard based evaluation represents a cost to the state for any agency that needs space. He estimated costs for the Division of General Services is $614,000 annually. The unknown cost that can't be estimated at this time is the cost of a building component based on an unknown design that has not yet been created by DOT&PF. MR. MAYER stated that the intent of this bill is commendable but the solution is already in place. He explained that the goal for procurement and construction is to be as efficient as possible with state funds. For example, the original estimate for a new DNR Geological Materials Center building was $45 million, but with careful analysis the DOA reached agreement with the purchase of the old Sam's Club building on Penland Parkway in Anchorage for $16 million, with Wal-Mart paying $2.5 million of the costs. Including the current remodel costs, the overall total cost will be $24 million or a cost savings of over $20 million. Additionally, the DNR will be able to take occupancy this fall many years ahead of schedule. The department strives for an efficient well-designed building for a specific site and region as the best overall cost Regardless of the project. He reported that best practices are already in use with in-house design experts and design consultants to ensure new construction and renovation projects meet ASHRAE 90.1. The guidelines set minimums for energy requirement designs, he said. 1:52:07 PM CHAIR P. WILSON asked for the length of time this process has been in use. MR. MAYER answered that the Public Building Fund (PBF) has been in place since 2003. The department manages 20 buildings, of which 14 are in the PBF, and the remaining 5 are in the Non- Public Building fund (NPBF). Those buildings include warehouse types of facilities, which are not traditional office buildings. MR. MAYER, in response to a question, answered that approximately 30 people are involved in this process statewide, including for maintenance, management, and to perform solicitations for the design. 1:54:07 PM STACY SHUBERT, Director, Governmental Affairs, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) noted that in 2008 the legislature funded AHFC's weatherization and home energy rebate programs. She related that to a lesser extent AHFC is also known for its work with public facilities and energy use. She indicated her presentation will include references to the case study of AHFC's headquarters building. 1:54:32 PM JOHN ANDERSON, Operations Officer, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC), began his presentation. He noted that AHFC was selected as a consultant. In 2010, with passage of Senate Bill 220 the Revolving Loan Fund was created with a $250 million appropriation. At the same time, AHFC was working with the DOT&PF and the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) to develop plans to use the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds [slide 2]. The AHFC developed a process and created a team to begin implement the program. The goal was to assess the public facility energy use. MR. ANDERSON added that the AHFC also created the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS) that also ties into its weatherization and rebate program [slide 3]. This has now become the clearinghouse or depository for all the data. The DOT&PF uses it and anyone can request to use it, he said. 1:56:22 PM MR. ANDERSON said other reasons the AHFC is currently involved in public buildings include the Home Energy Rating System (HERS) and Building Energy Efficiency Standard (BEES) [slide 4]. He related that the AHFC is statutorily required to maintain energy codes and building codes within AHFC when its funds are being used. The AHFC uses AkWarm software for this process. In fact, most of the audits contain AkWarm files and are all listed in the AHFC's retrofit information system. He reported that the database contains over 75,000 unique records. MR. ANDERSON related that the technical service provider is comprised of 40-50 professionals, including certified energy auditors [slide 5]. The team benchmarked as many facilities as possible, totaling 1,200 facilities statewide. He described benchmarking as compiling basic building information, including attempting to collect two years of energy data. The team selected the highest energy users based on the data. Subsequently, AHFC conducted 327 ASHRAE investment grade audits. In response to a question, Mr. Anderson defined investment grade audits as audits that provide a detailed look at the facility, representing a national standard that AHFC adopted from ASHRAE. He explained that this audit "dives in" and examines all aspects of the building, including examining controls and all components and makes recommendations for the best energy improvements. 1:58:48 PM MR. ANDERSON related each of the 327 audits consist of approximately 50-70 pages and cost a total of $7.2 million. Additionally, the AHFC provided another $1 million to the university system to conduct audits. At the same time, the DOT&PF had $10 million in ARRA funds for audits. MS. SCHUBERT reported that all of the AHFC's audits are posted on the agency's website so members can access the data. MR. ANDERSON related that the 327 buildings also resulted in approximately $14.7 million in energy savings. He estimated over 5,000 statewide public facilities exist, including state, schools, cities, and boroughs. He estimated approximately 184 of the 479 schools statewide were audited [slide 6]. 2:00:49 PM MR. ANDERSON said the AHFC took advantage of a great opportunity to make improvements to its own building [slide 7]. In 2011, the AHFC purchased its headquarters following a 14-year lease. The agency immediately began implementing efficiency measures including lighting and heating, as well as completing a major roof repair. Additionally, the AHFC has begun to replace exterior lighting and some of its outdated control systems. He estimated that based on improvements, AHFC has reduced gas use by 40 percent and electric by 30 percent. He said that through the audit process, benchmarking, collaboration, and "white paper" the agency asked entities to make recommendations to move forward. He has reviewed these recommendations, which included suggestions for appropriately-size new buildings, to establish a level of accountability, to meter and track energy use data, and to consolidate facility use where possible [slide 8]. He said AHFC believes, in particular, in the smaller communities that consolidation makes more sense such as housing a post office and school in one building. 2:02:31 PM MR. ANDERSON discussed recommendations for the building design process [slide 10]. He understood this could be construed as controversial, but the "white paper" showed the need to consider life-cycle costing. This process determines whether to install better pumps that can last longer than 30 years and whether the cost to benefit ratio make sense. Especially in rural Alaska, with its high energy costs, designers should consider building use, system sizes, controlled ventilation, and lighting to maximize efficiency. Further, designers should reduce excessive glass and maximize daylight with the orientation of the school or other building. Additionally, the commissioning aspect includes commissioning, retro-commissioning and ongoing commissioning. In response to a question, Mr. Anderson defined commissioning as essentially consisting of an audit of the constructed facility. For example, commissioning would consider whether the building was operating properly and if things installed correctly. The audit process highlighted that commissioning was often not done so systems were not balanced properly. Retro-commissioning occurs later and would review plans and drawings to determine if the building was designed properly. If not, rebalancing and other improvements have been found to reap benefits. Interestingly, the AHFC discovered that there wasn't any correlation between the age of a building and energy use. For example, two similar schools were built in adjacent communities but one facility used five times the energy. The AHFC audited some buildings that were at least 30 years old. 2:05:34 PM CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether the audits are only performed on existing buildings. MR. ANDERSON answered yes. 2:05:49 PM CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether the AHFC discusses these issues when new buildings are being built. MR. ANDERSON answered that AHFC believes it brings a unique perspective and as consultants are willing to be part of the conversation. 2:06:05 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS asked if anyone asking for assistance. MR. ANDERSON answered yes; the Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, the Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC), and several of the schools have requested AHFC's assistance. He explained that the AHFC works closely with the DOT&PF. Based on the AHFC's audit process some energy efficiency projects have been completed with other funding. The organization either found in-house funds, bonding, or arranged for other financing, he said. 2:07:04 PM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS noted challenges, such that she has observed some people open windows in cold climates. She also pointed out that highly technical equipment has sometimes been installed but people often don't know how to operate or fix it. For example, she has seen people "rip out" some equipment and put in a simple value. Additionally, she noticed some smoke alarms were not working in some buildings. She recalled the DEED has used less insulation in order to enhance the interior size of their buildings. She hoped that improvements in energy efficiency will happen. MS. SHUBERT responded that one of AHFC's recommendations in its "white paper" is to property train maintenance staff. These buildings require proactive management and maintenance to ensure equipment is being appropriately controlled. One of the things AHFC does in its own building is to meter the building. For example, employees actively monitor whether the lights come on at 2 a.m. 2:10:25 PM RYAN COLGAN, Chief Programs Officer, Cold Climate Housing Research Center, explained the Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization formed by the Alaska State Homebuilding Association (ASHBA) to address the challenges of building in Alaska's extreme environment through applied research, policy research, design consulting and other means [[slide 1]. MR. COLGAN referred to a familiar image of a map of Alaska superimposed on the Lower 48. This image illustrates how remote and diverse the communities of Alaska, which is important in terms of standards. He characterized the necessary approach as being not focused on the "cookie cutter" but on the cookie recipe. Another factor to consider in Alaska is the logistics since it is difficult to get to construction sites in many places [slide 3]. In addition, work itself can be difficult due to the environment [slide 4]. MR. COLGAN said one of Alaska's assets is that the state consists of problem solvers, which is inherent in its people. In fact, it is necessary to problem solve in order to survive in parts of Alaska [slides 5-6]. 2:13:37 PM MR. COLGAN turned to slide 7, entitled "How does CCHRC Solve Problems?" The CCHRC first works to understand the problem, gathers information, and identifies solutions. He showed some slides that illustrate the types of problems encountered [slides 7-9]. MR. COLGAN said that CCHRC gathers information through peers, those who have researched and found solutions, and through advanced modeling [as shown on the top of slide 11]. This slide shows the mobile test lab and the research testing facility [slide 11]. MR. COLGAN explained that CCHRC has identified several unique wall solutions to meet and exceed building standards and address unique challenges that stem from Alaska's extreme climate [slide 12]. 2:15:10 PM MR. COLGAN turned to the next slice, which illustrates how CCHRC incorporates solutions into designs [slides 13-14]. For example, this shows the sustainable village at UAF, and prototypes at Quinhagak and Anaktuvuk Pass. The CCHRC helps find solutions for heating, ventilation, water, and wastewater. MR. COLGAN reported that CCHRC communicates with end users and has about 50,000 hits per year on its website, 20,000 hits per year on its blog for homeowners, and 200,000 views on the website podcasts. The CCHRC works with Alaskans and either deliver or work with partners to provide over 50 classes per year [slides 16-17]. MR. COLGAN turned to demonstration projects that show what can be accomplished [slide 18-19]. He then returned to the question of how CCHRC solves problems [slide 20]. He related that to understand the problem, CCHRC recognizes that high energy costs exist in some public facilities and with budget deficit can create long-term burdens for the state. The agencies have reported today that a significant amount of information has been gathered through benchmark, investment grade audits and by consulting with numerous experts to produce the "white paper" on public facilities. The state has also been working to identify solutions using the revolving loan program, holding conversations about standards, and recognizing that it is hard to implement the standard without involving multiple- stakeholders. DUSTIN MADDEN, Policy Researcher, Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC), offered a presentation that covers some history about energy in Alaska. In the 1970s natural gas use lessened, primarily due to energy codes that required "2x6" wall construction and energy heel trusses [slide 21]. In the early 1990s usage reached a plateau until the AHFC instituted a building energy efficiency standard, which like ASHRAE 90.1 has a prescriptive performance. The graph illustrates that energy use in Alaska has continued to decrease as the building efficiency standard has become more widespread and reflects the current technology of the industry [slide 21]. He observed that energy standards over time have proven effective. 2:20:50 PM MR. MADDEN highlighted the pie chart that shows the energy use for public schools in Alaska with about 75 percent of energy use due to space heating. He reported that many schools have received energy audits or have been benchmarked. Over half of the 75 percent of energy use for space heating is lost through ventilation and air leakage. He reported that heating outside air at minus 20 degree air to 70 degrees for indoor comfort uses considerable energy. It's important that energy efficiency is well managed [slide 23]. MR. MADDEN explained the graph with energy efficiency depicted on the "y" axis and the total annual ventilation is shown on "x" axis [slide 24]. He acknowledged that some older buildings often performed better than newer buildings; however, the CCHRC did find that one driver of space heating energy efficiency was the ventilation rate. He identified the ventilation rate as one ingredient of the "cookie" recipe that can be standardized to increase efficiency. Many systems are quite complex for controlling ventilation, such as direct digital control systems so having a more standard set of these systems will increase the effectiveness of the systems used and operated throughout Alaska. Factors such as standardization of ventilation, depending on the design depending on the number of zones and the equipment used, have the potential to save energy and reduce operating costs. In response to a question, Mr. Madden explained that the "DHW" on slide 22 refers to "domestic hot water." 2:24:15 PM REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS referred to the graph [on slide 24] and asked what outlier was close to 40 billion cubic feet of air. MR. MADDEN was unsure. He offered to look it up and provide it to the committee. In further response to a question, he answered that "HDD" stands for "heating degree days." 2:25:40 PM BRYAN BUTCHER, Executive Director/Chief Executive Officer, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC), added that energy efficiency is what AHFC does. CHAIR P. WILSON said this presentation has helped the committee get a handle on the energy efficiency issues. She suggested it might be necessary to get rid of the silos and work more cooperatively to address these issues. [HB 343 was held over.] 2:27:08 PM