PLANT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
This chapter examines Austin Community College's (ACC's) plant operation and maintenance functions in the following sections:
- A. Facilities Planning, Condition and Utilization
- B. Facilities Organization and Management
- C. Custodial Management
- D. Construction Program Management
- E. Energy Conservation and Management
- F. Safety and Security
- G. Transportation Services
E. ENERGY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT
Energy rates vary from college to college because some colleges generate their own power, while others must negotiate with local utility companies. Regardless of how an institution accesses energy, costs are increasing year after year, and energy conservation is fiscally and environmentally responsible.
ACC's total utilities budgets for 1998 through 2002 are indicated in Exhibit 10-11. Actual utilities expenditures for fiscal 1998 through 2001 are also shown. The total cost per gross square foot (GSF) in 2001 was $1.97. The cost per GSF remained constant for 1999, 2000 and 2001. The utilities budget increased 37 percent from 1998 to 2002 and 32 percent between 2001 and 2002. The actual expenditures from 1998 through 2001 increased 13.8 percent. This increase resulted from rate increases imposed by the utility providers.
Exhibit 10-11 Source: ACC Annual Budgets & Building Inventory, June 2002.
ACC Utilities Budget and Expenditures
1998 through 2002
Year Budget Expenditures Space (GSF) $/GSF 1998 $1,510,000 $1,639,111 815,012 $2.01 1999 $1,544,121 $1,765,342 893,076 $1.98 2000 $1,544,121 $1,780,882 893,076 $1.99 2001 $1,571,706 $1,865,203 948,623 $1.97 2002 $2,071,706 N/A 948,623 $2.18 Exhibit 10-12 shows utilities cost comparisons between ACC and the three peer colleges. The exhibit also shows which colleges have energy management programs in place.
Exhibit 10-12 Source: Peer College Data, July 2002.
Electrical Cost Comparisons with Peer Colleges
2001
Data ACC San
JacintoCollin
CountyNorth Harris
MontgomeryTotal Electrical Cost $1,627,103 $1,492,146 $1,507,654 $2,170,000 Electrical Cost per GSF $1.72 $0.85 $1.52 $1.52 Energy Management Program No Yes No Yes for 50% of the campuses FINDING
ACC has taken a major step to curtail future energy consumption. In November 2001, the college awarded Honeywell, Inc. a $4.3 million contract to perform major energy retrofits at the Cypress Creek, Pinnacle, Northridge and Riverside campuses. The scope of work at each campus includes lighting and mechanical retrofits, water conservation, irrigation control systems and a computerized energy management system. The project is scheduled for completion in September 2002. The contract also has a support services agreement that requires Honeywell to provide energy auditing and analysis services and energy guarantee provisions. These services will commence after the job is completed and accepted at an annual cost of $6,570.
Honeywell guarantees ACC that the retrofitted facilities and systems will realize the total energy and operational cost avoidance over the term of the energy guarantee provision of 15 years. As specified in the contract, the guaranteed energy and operational cost avoidance will be a minimum $430,977 per year for a total of $6.5 million for the 15-year term. In order to fully realize these savings, ACC plans to adhere to the contractually stipulated "Energy and Operational Cost Avoidance Guarantee Practices" (EOCAGP). These practices include operating and maintenance procedures agreed upon by Honeywell and ACC.
Honeywell's guaranteed savings obligations under the agreement are contingent on ACC following the EOCAGP and meeting other stipulations such as the timely reporting of utility bills. If ACC fails to fully perform any of its obligations, Honeywell has the right to adjust its guaranteed savings obligation.
COMMENDATION
ACC executed a minimum guaranteed savings contract of $430,977 annually with Honeywell Inc. to perform energy conservation retrofits at Cypress Creek, Pinnacle, Northridge and Riverside campuses.
FINDING
Although ACC has taken a major step to curtail future energy consumption, it does not have an ongoing energy conservation and management program. The associate vice president of Facilities and Operations has written a draft of a basic program, but it has not been reviewed and approved by the facilities task force and college administration. The proposal specifies individual practices that students and college employees can perform in day-to-day activities to save energy, including turning off lights in unoccupied buildings and keeping thermostats set to optimum temperatures in summer and winter. The drafted plan acknowledges that the Facilities and Operations Department has a responsibility to the taxpayers, faculty, staff and students to manage the ACC physical plant in a manner that does not waste the college's energy resources, while providing an optimal educational environment and workplace. Although the college does not have published design standards, ACC officials consider energy efficiency in the design review process for construction of new ACC facilities and in the retrofit of existing buildings.
An ongoing energy conservation program helps organizations accurately monitor energy use, which reduces the risk of excessive costs and premature equipment maintenance or replacement.
Vending machines provide an interesting opportunity to save energy. The average soft drink machine uses two fluorescent bulbs, which total 80 watts. Add to this the energy required to operate the ballast, a component required to alter the electricity when using fluorescent bulbs. At a very conservative estimate of only 2 kilowatt-hours per day, a soda machine uses an annual total of 730 kilowatt-hours just for lights. At an average rate of $0.10 per kilowatt hour, this amounts to $73 per year for just one machine. ACC has 46 vending machines collegewide.
Recommendation 102:
Implement a comprehensive energy management program.
Even by establishing a basic conservation program, ACC can save thousands of dollars a year. With the current electricity costs of $.10 per kilowatt-hour, raising building temperatures by two degrees and shutting off lights when possible will quickly translate into utilities savings. Disconnecting the lights in vending machines alone could save an estimated $3,358 annually. Additional annual savings will depend upon the conservation measures established in the program and how well the college community participates in the program.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The associate vice president of Facilities and Operations and staff finalizes the energy management program plan. March 2003 2. The associate vice president of Facilities and Operations presents the program to the facilities task force for its review and approval. April 2003 3. The associate vice president of Facilities and Operations sends the program to the president for approval. May 2003 4. The associate vice president of Facilities and Operations implements and continuously monitors the program. May 2003 FISCAL IMPACT
Energy savings from collegewide conservation measures could result in significant savings to the college, but are conservatively limited here to the savings that could be achieved through disconnecting vending machines shown above. First year savings are prorated.
Recommendation 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Implement a comprehensive energy management program. $839 $3,358 $3,358 $3,358 $3,358