Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
03/18/2014 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB343 | |
| HB371 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 343 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 371 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
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
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB371 AGC Support Letter.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| HB 371 Testimony of Dick Mylius .pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| HB 371 comments Smith.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| HB0343A.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB 343-Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB 343-Sectional Anaylsis.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB343 DOTPF Presentation 3-13.msg |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB343-DOA-FAC-03-07-14.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB343-DOR-AHFC-03-07-14.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB343-DOT-SPF-3-13-14.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| Sustainable Energy Act Annual Report to Legislature 2013 (2013 12 26).pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB 343 ASHRAE 90_1 Article.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB 343 Standardized Designs DOTPF 3-13-14.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB-343 AHFC 3 13 14 FINAL.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| HB 343 CCHRC Presentation.pdf |
HTRA 3/13/2014 1:00:00 PM HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 343 |
| 4407 MOU (wo exhibits).pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 SB 211 |
| Egan SB211 Response.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 SB 211 |
| Happy Valley Docs.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 SB 211 |
| HB 371 - letter Milles 3-12-14.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| Project Flow Chart.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 SB 211 |
| HB 371 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| Wilson HB371 Response.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |
| CSHB 371 Ver C Work Draft.pdf |
HTRA 3/18/2014 1:00:00 PM |
HB 371 |