Using the Design-Build Approach to Meet Energy

Reduction Goals

March 2012

University of California, Irvine

457 Buildings comprising 5,480,000 ASF1,478 acres main campus

$16M annual utilities budgetLab buildings consume 2/3 of campus energy

March 2, 2012 2

Statewide Energy Partnership

3-year agreement between CPUC, IOU’s, UC, CSU Annual reduction and incentive goals $40M project cost over 3-years Year one goal – 16,097,345 kWh & 434,844

Therms Organization couldn’t meet year one goals Utilize ESCO-like best value design-build contract Performance guarantee

Annual kWh and therm reduction Maximum acceptance cost (MAC)

March 2, 2012 3

Design – Build ContractingDesign – Build Contracting

Design-Build performanceDesign-Build performance GoalGoal Actual Actual

kWhkWh 11,087,62311,087,623 11,857,97511,857,975 ThermsTherms 236,055 236,055 371,361 371,361 MACMAC $7,800,000$7,800,000 $8,292,910$8,292,910

Types of projects completedTypes of projects completedkWh/yr.kWh/yr.

therms/yr.therms/yr. LightingLighting 5,719,306 (48%)5,719,306 (48%) 00 MBCXMBCX 2,774,175 (23%)2,774,175 (23%) 323,449 (87%)323,449 (87%) AC ControlsAC Controls 1,804,871 (15%)1,804,871 (15%) 47,912 (13%) 47,912 (13%) ESDVRESDVR 1,559,623 (13%)1,559,623 (13%)

March 2, 2012 4

Design-Build Best Value Design-Build Best Value ContractingContracting

ProPro’’ss Large quantity of projects completed quickly; Large quantity of projects completed quickly;

achieved year-1 goalsachieved year-1 goals Contractor managed numerous groupsContractor managed numerous groups Performance guaranteePerformance guarantee

ConCon’’ss Owner accepts risk that cost savings will be Owner accepts risk that cost savings will be

achievedachieved Need in house expertise to verify and monitorNeed in house expertise to verify and monitor

Lessons LearnedLessons Learned Contractor not used to dealing with Owner technical Contractor not used to dealing with Owner technical

expertise & involvementexpertise & involvement Contractor not familiar with SEP approval processContractor not familiar with SEP approval process Separate contracts by type of workSeparate contracts by type of work

March 2, 2012 5

Energy Projects Going Energy Projects Going ForwardForward

Evaluate your organization Evaluate your organization Design-build with specialized contractorsDesign-build with specialized contractors

Less control over designLess control over design Constant Air Volume to Variable Air VolumeConstant Air Volume to Variable Air Volume

Unit price contractUnit price contract LightingLighting

Design – bid – buildDesign – bid – build Retain engineering and design controlRetain engineering and design control Exhaust Stack Discharge Velocity Reduction / Exhaust Stack Discharge Velocity Reduction /

Wind ResponseWind Response Heavy interaction with end-usersHeavy interaction with end-users

CDCV in VivariaCDCV in Vivaria MBCxMBCxMarch 2, 2012 6

Statewide Energy Statewide Energy PartnershipPartnership

March 2, 2012 7

SEP Program Year 2009 2010 2011 Total 2012

Electric Savings (kWh/Yr.)

16,741,000

7,209,000

10,214,000

34,614,000

15,500,000

Natural Gas (Therms/Yr.)

469,000 869,000 425,0001,763,0

00477,000

GHG (CO2e Tones/Yr.)

7,700 6,800 5,400 19,900 7,300

Incentive Received$4,284,0

00$2,586,

000$2,835,0

00$9,705,

000$4,355,0

00

Energy Cost Savings/Yr.

$2,016,000

$1,294,000

$1,271,000

$4,581,000

$1,890,000

kWh % Reduction vs. 2008

12% 5% 7% 24% 11%

Questions?Questions?

March 2, 2012 8