HomeMy WebLinkAbout220-17 RESOLUTION113 West Mountain Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
Resolution: 220-17
File Number: 2017-0575
ENERGY ASSESSMENT TASK ORDER 08:
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE TASK ORDER NO. 8 WITH GARVER, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF
$27,600.00 TO COMPLETE AN ENERGY ASSESSMENT FOR THE TERMINAL BUILDING,
TERMINAL PARKING LOT, AND AIRFIELD ELECTRICAL VAULT AT DRAKE FIELD, AND TO
APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves Task Order No. 8 with
Garver, LLC in the amount of $27,600.00 to complete an energy assessment for the terminal building,
terminal parking lot, and airfield electrical vault at Drake Field.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget adjustment,
a copy of which is attached to his Resolution.
PASSED and APPROVED on 10/17/2017
Page 1
Attest:
Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk Treasurer
:111YETTEVILL
fffrl t �1F Iit
ti►`�;mow
Printed on 10118117
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street
'- Fayetteville, AR 72701
(478) 575-8323
Text File
`--� File Number: 2017-0575
Agenda Date: 10/17/2017 Version: 1 Status: Passed
In Control: City Council Meeting File Type: Resolution
Agenda Number: A. 9
ENERGY ASSESSMENT TASK ORDER 08:
A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE TASK ORDER NO. 8 WITH GARVER, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF
$27,600.00 TO COMPLETE AN ENERGY ASSESSMENT FOR THE TERMINAL BUILDING,
TERMINAL PARKING LOT, AND AIRFIELD ELECTRICAL VAULT AT DRAKE FIELD, AND TO
APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves Task Order No. 8 with
Garver, LLC in the amount of $27,600.00 to complete an energy assessment for the terminal building, terminal
parking lot, and airfield electrical vault at Drake Field.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget adjustment, a
copy of which is attached to his Resolution.
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Paye 1 Printed on 10/18/2017
City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form
2017-0575
Legistar File ID
10/17/2017
City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only
N/A for Non -Agenda Item
/
Summer Fallen 9/28/2017 Aviation
Transportation Services Department
Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department
Action Recommendation:
Staff requests approval to utilize grant funds to complete an energy assessment for the terminal building, terminal
parking lot, and airfield electrical vault at Fayetteville — Drake Field Airport. More specifically, this resolution will
allow the Aviation Division to execute a task order in the amount of $27,600 to complete the energy assessment.
Staff also request approval of a budget adjustment.
5550.760.3960.5314.00
Account Number
31706.1701
Project Number
Budgeted Item? Yes
Does item have a cost? Yes
Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes
Previous Ordinance or Resolution #
Original Contract Number:
Comments:
Budget Impact:
Airport
Fund
Airport Energy Assessment
Project Title
Current Budget
$
Funds Obligated
$
Current Balance
$
Item Cost
$
Budget Adjustment
$
Remaining Budget
$
Approval Date.
25,740.00
25,740.00
27, 600.00
2,860.00
1,000.00
V20140710
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2017
TO:
Mayor Lioneld Jordan
Fayetteville City Council
THRU:
Don Marr, Chief of Staff
FROM:
Summer Fallen, Airport Services Manager
DATE:
September 28, 2017
SUBJECT:
Task Order 08- Energy Assessment
CITY COUNCIL MEMO
Recommendation
Staff requests approval to utilize grant funds to complete an energy assessment for the terminal building, terminal
parking lot, and airfield electrical vault at Fayetteville — Drake Field Airport. More specifically, this resolution will
allow the Aviation Division to execute a task order in the amount of $27,600 to complete the energy assessment.
Staff also request approval of a budget adjustment.
Backraround
The airport recently attended an FAA conference and learned about a new FAA grant program for energy efficient
projects. Airport staff immediately followed up with FAA personnel to determine the eligibility for grant funds. In
early 2017, the Airport worked with facilities and sustainability staff to submit proposed energy efficient projects
to the FAA. The FAA has since requested that the airport pursue a grant in FY 2017 for an energy assessment
study with the goal of identifying energy efficient projects at the airport. Once the assessment is complete, the
Airport will be able to apply for grant funds in FY 2018 to the costs associated with completing specific energy
efficient projects.
Discussion
All costs associated with the energy assessment project will be included in the FAA grant application. The airport
staff, facilities staff, and sustainability staff will review the energy assessment report and proposed energy
efficiency projects before submission to the FAA.
Below is a summary of the costs and funding breakdown for the proposed grant
FAA Energy Efficiency Grant
Energy Assessment: $27,600.00 FAA: $25,740.00
Administration and Other Costs: $1,000.00 ADA: $2,860.00*
TOTAL: $28,600.00 City. $0.00
TOTAL: $ 28,600.00
*Aviation Division will come back to Council at the completion of the grant to request approval to apply for a state
grant for the 10% share of the project cost.
Attachments
Staff Review Form
Garver Task Order 08
Mailing Address:
113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov
Fayetteville, AR 72701
APPENDIX A-8
TASK ORDER 08
FAYETTEVILLE — DRAKE FIELD (FYV)
ENERGY ASSESSMENT
This TASK ORDER is made as of (Oa{^btgK 1" , 2017 by and between the CITY
OF FAYETTEVILLE of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereinafter referred to as "CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE," and
GARVER, LLC, hereinafter referred to as "GARVER", in accordance with the provisions of the
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES executed on Argil 21, 2015.
Under this Task Order, the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE intends to complete the following:
Prepare an Energy Assessment for the Fayetteville — Drake Field Airport's Terminal
Building, Terminal Parking Area, and Airfield Lighting.
GARVER will provide professional services related to these improvements as described herein.
SECTION 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES
GARVER will provide services as detailed in Exhibit A-8.
SECTION 2 — PAYMENT
For the work described under SECTION 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES, the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE will
pay GARVER on a lump sum basis. This task order is contingent upon receipt of sufficient grant funds from
the Federal Aviation Administration and/or the Arkansas Department of Aeronautics.
The lump sum amount to be paid under this agreement is $27,600,
SECTION 3 —EXHIBITS
3.1 The following Exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement:
3.1.1 Exhibit A-8 Scope of Services
This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts each of which shall be deemed an original,
but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Task Order 08 1 of 2
FYV Energy Assessment Garver Project No. 17041212
Approval and acceptance of this Task Order, including attachments listed in SECTION 3 —EXHIBITS,
shall incorporate this document as part of the Agreement. Garver is authorized to begin perfonnance upon
receipt of a copy of this Task Order signed by the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. The effective date of this
Task Order shall be the last date written below.
GARVER
City Clerk �owl IIfillo,,
Task Order 08
FYV Energy Assessment
2of2
Title: Senior Vice President
Garver Project No. 17041212
EXHIBIT A-8 — SCOPE OF SERVICES
FAYETTEVILLE — DRAKE FIELD (FYV)
ENERGY ASSESSMENT
1.1 General
Generally, the scope of services includes the development of an energy assessment report for the terminal
building, tenninal parking, and airfield vault at Fayetteville — Drake Field Airport in accordance with the
draft APP -400 Memorandum and FAA Order 5100.38D.
1.2 Development of FAA ODO and Grant Application
At the request of the FAA, GARVER will develop an Overall Development Objective (ODO) for the
project. The ODO will include a cost breakdown, description of the assessment method, and schedule.
GARVER will also assist the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE in development of a 90-10 FAA grant application
and, if necessary, an ADA grant application for 10% reimbursement.
1.3 Review of Utility Data and Existing Equipment
The CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE will deliver all 2014-2016 utility usage data for the facilities included in
this project, associated equipment O&M- manuals, and facility as-builts to GARVER for review. Utility
usage data is expected to consist of both electric and gas utilities. GARVER will review the energy usage
data and develop graphs for trend analysis.
The CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE will also provide information as to the wattage of existing light fixtures if
not readily obtainable from the fixture as viewed from the floor or documented in facility as-builts.
1.4 Site Assessment
GARVER will perform a site assessment for all facilities included in the project. The site assessment will be
coordinated with the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE and will include, at a minimum, an electrical, mechanical,
and airfield engineer from GARVER. GARVER will inventory the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE's existing
equipment and systems within the project limits: Equipment and systems shall include, but shall not be
limited to the following:
• Terminal Building Lighting (Interior and Exterior)
• Terminal Building Windows
• Terminal Building Heating & Cooling
• Parking Lot Lighting
• Airfield Lighting, NAVAIDS (Airport -owned), and Vault Equipment
1.5 Evaluation, Recommendations, and Energy Audit Report
GARVER will evaluate and document the efficiency and life remaining of the equipment and systems
within the project area. GARVER will develop a list of strategies, actions, improvements, or practices
that will increase Airport's energy efficiency. This list will take into account performance and usability
of the facility in addition to adopted ASHRAE 90.1 energy requirements for altered spaces. Projects will
be organized in the following categories:
• No-cost/low-cost measures improve energy efficiency and reduce energy costs with minimal
Exhibit A-8 - Scope of Services 1 of 2
FYV Energy Assessment Garver Project No. 17041212
financial investment.
Substantial improvements and projects. To determine feasibility, these projects shall include
financial data, including return on investment (ROI).
GARVER will document the historic utility usage, inventory of existing equipment and systems, and
project recommendations in an Energy Audit Report. Recommendations provided will be conceptually
checked to not lower building performance or any design requirements of the space. Further analysis
would be needed during the design phase.
1.6 Owner Review Meeting
GARVER will attend a review meeting with the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE to review a draft version of
the Energy Audit Report. GARVER will incorporate all CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE comments prior to
submission to the FAA.
1.7 Project Deliverables
The following will be submitted to the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, or others as indicated, by GARVER:
1. Two copies of the Draft Energy Audit Report to the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE.
2. Two copies of the Final Energy Audit Report to the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE and FAA.
3. Electronic files as requested.
1.8 Extra Work
The following items are not included under this agreement but will be considered as extra work:
1. Review of CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE facilities other than those included under Section 1.1.
2. Review of architectural features in the terminal building and building envelope performance, other
than exterior windows.
3. Review of tenninal building energy efficiency with respect to power distribution (transfonners,
power panels, circuit routing, etc.).
4. Then -nal imaging of any equipment or spaces.
5. Submittals or deliverables in addition to those listed herein.
6. Preparations of plans, specifications, or bid documents for any recommended projects.
7. Preparation of any documentation for improvements to historic sites.
Extra Work will be as directed by the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE in writing for an additional fee as agreed
upon by the CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE and GARVER.
1.9 Schedule
GARVER shall begin work immediately upon receipt of the executed task order and shall complete the
work within a mutually agreeable schedule.
Exhibit A-8 - Scope of Services 2 of 2
FYV Energy Assessment Garver Project No. 17041212
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment Form (Legistar)
Budget Year Division Adjustment Number
/Org2 AIRPORT SERVICES (760)
2017
Requestor: Dee McCoy
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION:
Increase Professional Services Budget for the Airport Energy Assessment. Funds will be returned to fund balance upon
receiving state grant funds.
RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE
COUNCIL DATE:
LEGISTAR FILE ID#:
10/17/2017
2017-0575
3c4-b-aWw FeW
10/4/2017 2:15 PM
Budget Director
TYPE:
DESCRIPTION:
GLDATE:
POSTED:
Date
TOTAL 2,860 2,860 v.20170707
Increase / (Decrease) Proiect.Sub#
Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub AT Account Name
5550.760.3960-5314.00 2,860 - 31706 1701 EX Professional Services - :
5550.760.3940-4999.99 2,860 RE Use Fund Balance_- Current
C:\Users\losmith\AppData\Roaming\L5\Temp\26fd38bb-1681-4437-b442-662c085928e7 1 of 1
M
IL
l
_ _.,,
444
'....ate--�.. -
Fayetteville -Drake Field
Energy Assessment
AIP No. 3-05-0020-045-2017
4—
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville
Fayetteville - Drake Field (FYV)
FAA AIP No. 3-05-0020-045-2017
Prepared by:
2049 E Joyce Blvd
Suite 400
Fayetteville, AR 72703
March 2018
Garver Project No.: 17041212
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Engineer's Certification
I hereby certify that this FYV Energy Assessment was prepared by Garver under my direct supervision for
the City of Fayetteville.
000 ARKA SAS
LICENSED
PROFESSIONAL
NG
N .13836
William B. Gilbreath, PE 9�1 B GI- �4J
State of Arkansas PE License 13836 ��
Digitally Signed 03/07/2018
ARKANSAS
WO
CE ED
FE I
\ o. 11074
Lee Suggs, PE
State of Arkansas PE License 11074 R.
Digitally Signed 03/07/2018
-7
OF OF.A(%��X,tii�.��'
���:� ••••• ••QPM
GARVER i7
0: LLC i�z
;y:• No.
766•��;
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 2
GARVER
CITY c F FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
IARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Table of Contents
Engineer's Certification.................................................................................................................................2
1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................
5
2.0 Background.......................................................................................................................................5
3.0 Site investigation...............................................................................................................................5
3.1 Terminal Building..............................................................................................................................6
3.1.1 Heating and Cooling System....................................................................................................6
3.1.2 Windows................................................................................................................................... 7
3.1.3 Lighting.....................................................................................................................................7
3.2 City Owned Corporate Hangar.........................................................................................................9
3.3 Airfield Electrical Equipment...........................................................................................................10
4.0 Utility Data Review..........................................................................................................................10
5.0 Equipment Evaluation.....................................................................................................................11
5.1 Terminal Building............................................................................................................................11
5.1.1 Heating and Cooling System..................................................................................................11
5.1.2 Windows.................................................................................................................................12
5.1.3 Lighting...................................................................................................................................13
5.2 City Owned Corporate Hangar.......................................................................................................14
5.3 Airfield Electrical Equipment...........................................................................................................14
6.0 Proposed Improvements.................................................................................................................15
6.1 No-Cost/Low-Cost Improvements...................................................................................................15
6.1.1 Terminal Building HVAC.........................................................................................................15
6.1.2 Terminal Building Windows.....................................................................................................15
6.1.3 Terminal Building Lighting.......................................................................................................15
6.1.4 City Owned Corporate Hangar Lighting..................................................................................15
6.1.5 Airfield Electrical Equipment...................................................................................................16
6.2 Substantial Improvements..............................................................................................................16
6.2.1 Terminal Building HVAC.........................................................................................................16
6.2.2 Terminal Window Replacement..............................................................................................17
6.2.3 Terminal Building Lighting.......................................................................................................17
6.2.4 City Owned Corporate Hangar Lighting..................................................................................18
6.2.5 Airfield Electrical Equipment...................................................................................................19
7.0 Recommendation and Improvement Priority..................................................................................19
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 3
GARVER
CITY c F FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
List of Figures
Figure 1: Main Mechanical Room.................................................................................................................6
Figure 2: Mechanical Controls......................................................................................................................7
Figure3: Terminal Lobby Lighting................................................................................................................8
Figure 4: Terminal Exterior Canopy Lighting................................................................................................9
Figure 5: Corporate Hangar Interior Lighting................................................................................................9
Figure 6: Terminal Building Gas Usage 2009-2016....................................................................................10
Figure7: Aged Pumping System................................................................................................................11
Figure 8: Fogging at East Lobby Windows.................................................................................................12
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Low/No Cost Improvements.....................................................................................16
Table 2: Substantial Improvement Priority..................................................................................................20
Appendices
Appendix A - Photographs
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 4
GARNER
CITY OF FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
1.0 Introduction
Fayetteville — Drake Field (FYV) is a tower controlled, Part 139 (Class IV) general aviation airport located
in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The airport serves the general aviation needs of the Northwest Arkansas region
including the University of Arkansas and the US Forest Service.
The City of Fayetteville places high priority on implementing sustainable efforts through many outlets and
is currently rated as a 3 STAR community by the STAR communities Rating System that is used to help
benchmark their sustainability progress by setting goals and reporting on improvements. Additionally, the
City of Fayetteville implemented an Energy Action Plan that went into effect January 2018. The goal of this
plan was to "build a framework and energize action around the City's efforts to be a resource and energy
efficient community." Many of the improvements outlined in this report would assist the city in achieving the
goals and strategies found in the energy action plan. In an effort to cooperate with the City's sustainability
efforts, the Fayetteville — Drake Field Airport initiated the development of an energy assessment report for
the terminal building, terminal parking, airfield lighting, and airfield vault at the airport. The purpose of the
assessment was to evaluate the existing equipment and identify projects that would improve the overall
energy efficiency at Drake Field. The airport staff was presented with the 2018 FAA Southwest Region
Airports Conference environmental award for their efforts in pursing the energy assessment report and
sustainable projects at the airport.
2.0 Background
The Drake Field terminal building was originally designed and constructed in 1978 to provide a commercial
and civilian air travel terminal for Fayetteville and the surrounding area. The original terminal building
provided a large public lobby for ticket counters and passenger waiting, a commercial kitchen / restaurant,
a baggage handling area, and various office spaces for rental car and airline offices.
In 1998, Drake Field ceased handling commercial air traffic (other than charter aircraft) due to the
construction of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport. After this change in operation, many changes
were made to the existing building to accommodate its new role as a primarily general aviation airport. The
baggage handling area was enclosed and made into a meeting room, the commercial kitchen and
restaurant removed, and a large portion of the original open lobby enclosed to make additional offices for
airport personnel and outside business which moved into the facility. An additional pilot lounge was also
added on the east side of building, adjacent to the airfield. The exact timing and extent of these renovations
is unclear since no plans or specifications for this work were provided to the assessment team for review.
3.0 Site investigation
A site visit was conducted by the Garver team on December 6, 2017 to investigate the existing conditions
at the terminal building, and to identify potential modifications, repairs, and upgrades to some of the building
systems to improve the facility's energy efficiency and overall operational efficiency. The following sections
summarize the results of the investigation.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 5
GARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
3.1 Terminal Building
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
3.1.1 Heating and Cooling System
Based on the site investigation, it was determined that the bulk of the existing building HVAC system is
largely original to the initial construction of the facility, circa 1978. The existing systems have been modified
extensively to accommodate the changes to the facility over the years, notably the enclosing of the luggage
area to create a meeting room and the creation of additional office space in portions of passenger waiting
area. This report will address primarily the visually identifiable aspects of the existing systems and their
functionality.
Based upon the original plans and confirmed via field observation, there are multiple HVAC systems serving
this facility. There are two large air handlers located in the main mechanical room, one of which is a constant
volume unit that serves what is now the meeting room (formerly the baggage handling area) and also
provide airflow to floor mounted diffusers installed along the perimeter of the passenger waiting area and
entryways. The second air handler is a constant volume unit that provides air to main passenger lobby and
the secondary lobby on the south end of the building, which has now been converted to an office area. A
third large air handler creates a variable air volume system that serves variable air volume boxes with hot
water reheat coils that serve office area primarily located in the southern wing of the building. There also
appear to be at least 2 additional air handlers installed above the ceilings of various office area to provide
conditioning to areas that were added after the original construction of the facility, but there is no
documentation of these modification to determine the exact capacity or design of these systems.
The main heating system in the building
consists of two 1,260 Mbh natural gas fired mil
hot water boilers located in the main
mechanical room adjacent to the meeting
room on the north end of the building. These r
boilers generate hot water that is distributed
throughout the building by a single end -
suction floor mounted pump located in the
mechanical room. The cooling system
consists of a single air-cooled chiller located
outside the northeast corner of the building
next to the airfield apron. Chilled water is
circulated throughout the building by a single
end -suction floor mounted pump located in
the mechanical room. The boilers and both
pumps appear to be original to the facility. Figure 1: Main Mechanical Room
The chiller appears to have been replaced at
some point during the building history, but is still quite old, and the nameplate was sufficiently weathered
to prevent gathering of make/model/capacity information on the chiller to determine its age.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 6
CARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
The HVAC controls appear to have been updated
partially to electronic controls, with electronic
thermostats to control the equipment. There are
also remnants of the original pneumatic control
system present on the major pieces of equipment
such as air handler, so a full conversion was not
completed. Based on discussion with on-site
personnel, there was at one point a Java based front
end that allowed control of the system via internet
connection as well as a user interface computer, but
these appear to have been removed at some point
in the past. This makes the control system very
difficult to monitor and control without significant on-
site presence of service personnel.
3.1.2 Windows
Figure 2: Mechanical Controls
The windows currently in the facility appear to largely be origi-ial to the construction of the facility, with a
few windows in the south wing of the building having possibly been added at a later date as these areas
were converted to office use.
The existing windows are predominantly storefront type, hollow meta frame windows with 1" double pane
glass. In addition, the windows contain a sealed air gap of approximately'h" between the panes and a light
solar tinting. These windows are mostly located on the east a -id wes. elevations of the passenger lobby,
facing the parking lot entry and the airfield. These large windows span the entire elevation of lobby with
heights of approximately 14 feet on the east side and 10 feet on the west side.
There are also additional storefront windows installed on the east side of the large meeting room, where
the original baggage handling door openings were infilled around 1998. Entryways on the east and west
sides are 1/4" tempered and tinted sliding glass doors.
3.1.3 Lighting
During the site visit all lighting within the terminal spaces was documented with fixture type, wattage, and
control methodology. Where wattages were not obtainable, these were requested from the airport or
assumed based on comparable fixture types and light output. n addition, light measurements were taken
for most spaces. The measurements were taken after dark so that daylight would not interfere with the
results. The light meter used was an Extech Instruments LT300. The spaces where measurements were
unobtainable included spaces where fixtures or lamps were inoperable or the space was occupied by a
private tenant and inaccessible during after-hours.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 7
GARVER
_ CITY OF FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
It should be noted that many fixtures were not fully operative: entire fixture inoperative, partial lamps
inoperative, fixture lacking any lamps, fixture lacking some lamps, or partial lamps intentionally delamped
as discussed in Section 4.0. For the purpose of this report it is assumed all fixtures are operational and the
maximum number of lamps that could operate in a fixture were present and operational. This is primarily
due to the fact that it was not possible to discern exactly which fixtures were intentionally delamped
compared to those simply lacking maintenance attention.
The terminal ramp lighting and the recent upgrades to it are not evaluated as part of this report, as neither
are emergency lighting nor exit signage lighting.
3.1.3.1 Interior Lighting
Generally, seventy-one (71) different space types were found to be evaluated during the investigation for
the interior lighting of the terminal building and adjoining spaces. These space types roughly covered
25,281 square feet. It should be noted that this square footage value may exceed the recorded square
footage of the facility since some of the areas evaluated are open space areas with closed office spaces
within the open air area. Within the facility 455 individual fixtures were counted, excluding any decorative
rope or Christmas lighting found in a meeting space. These 455 fixtures resulted in a total potential interior
lighting load of 42,162 watts (W). Common fixture types found are can downlights of varying wattages; 2x4
lay -in fluorescent fixtures using 2-25W T8 lamps; 2x4 lay -in fluorescent fixtures using 4-25W T8 lamps; 2x2
lay -in fluorescent fixtures using 2-30W lamps; and 2x2 lay -in fluorescent fixtures using 4-40W lamps.
The majority of the lights for the interior of the facility are controlled in one of two ways: wall knife switch or
circuit breaker only control. However, some spaces do include occupancy sensors or occupancy
sensor -enabled knife switches.
Figure 3: Terminal Lobby Lighting
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 8
Ia
GARVER
may, C I T Y o f FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
3.1.3.2 Exterior Lighting
Generally, eighteen (18) different exterior locations,
canopies, or wall segments were evaluated during the
investigation of the terminal building and adjoining
spaces exterior lighting. In these locations seventy-one
(71) individual fixtures were identified resulting in 22,325
watts. It should be noted that many of the exterior
building fagade downlights were unidentifiable. Airport
staff noted that they were 400W lights. Some identifiable
ones were 100W; but where unidentifiable, 400W was
used in the totaling of the exterior lighting wattage.
Common fixture types found are the metal halide or
mercury vapor 400W can downlight and the 100W
mercury vapor can downlight.
Figure 4: Terminal Exterior Canopy Lighting
The majority of the exterior lighting is photo -electric cell (PEC) controlled; however, a few spaces are
controlled by wall knife switches or circuit breaker only.
3.1.3.3 Parking Lot Lighting
The parking lot evaluated included approximately 240,000 square -feet of parking and drive space located
west and north of the terminal ouilding. Within this space are twenty-two (2) 400W mercury vapor fixtures
mounted on roughly 20 -foot tall poles, as well as one inoperative flood fight fixture. The total parking lot
lighting load is approximately 8,800W. The flag pole lights and business signage lighting is not included in
this evaluation.
The parking lot lighting is all PEC controlled.
3.2 City Owned Corporate Hangar
The city owned corporate hangar evaluated is
approximately 125' x 80' (approximately 10,000
square -feet) with non -full -height office, restroom, and
storage closet spaces. Since these spaces are
individually enclosed and do not receive benefit of the
overall hangar area lighting, they are considered
separately and therefore the total square footage exceeds
that of the hangar's exterior walls. Within the hangar
space are twenty-three (23) 2x4 lay -in fluorescent fixtures
using 4-32W T8 lamps and one 60W compact fluorescent
(CFL) light. Outside of the hangar are five fixtures: three
assumed 400W high-pressure sodium flood fixtures for
the aircraft door and two assumed 250W high-pressure
sodium wall packs for the rear pedestrian door. The total
hangar lighting load is approximately 4,624W. All interior and exterior lights are knife switch controlled.
Figure 5: Corporate Hangar Interior Lighting
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 9
Ga7
ARVER,'
CITY OF
._ FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
3.3 Airfield Electrical Equipment
The existing airfield electrical equipment room contains three active constant current regulators (CCR), one
spare CCR, a Generac generator and Generac automatic transfer switch (ATS), and ancillary equipment
for airfield lighting control and general space needs (lighting, receptacles, panels, etc.).
4.0 Utility Data Review
Existing electric utility data from July 2005 through September 2017 was provided by the City for review.
Along with the electric utility data provided, the City also provided a list of recent terminal improvement
projects as well as a Monthly Energy Benchmark Report for July 2015 and Light Level Analysis and
Recommendations report, both conducted by Viridian. The projects will be discussed further in the
Equipment Evaluation section. However, it should be noted that the two reports from Viridian will not be
taken into account during the evaluation. This is due to the fact that the results of the benchmark report are
indicated by Viridian to be "extremely inaccurate", and the lighting analysis and recommendations report
discusses existing and proposed illumination levels, but not what levels are recommended by the
Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) to be kept.
From reviewing the electric utility data, the following information can be deduced for the past five years
(2012-2017):
Terminal Building
• Average Annual Electric Energy Usage: 750,277 kW -hr
• Average hourly electricity load: 85,648W
Corporate Hangar
• Average Annual Electric Energy Usage: 5,056 kW -hr
• Average hourly electricity load: 577W
When reviewing the past five (5) years of electricity energy usage for both the terminal and the hangar, no
trends in energy consumption are discernable nor is there an apparent correlation between total energy
variations and lighting loads and/or delamping.
Looking at gas consumption, it appears
that the deteriorating condition of the
L
45000
boilers is contributing to increased
a
40000
natural gas usage and cost. In year
35000
2009, the total yearly usage of natural30000
gas for the building was 24,222 ccf. By
cD
25000
2015, the total yearly usage had risen to
m
20000
41,692 ccf, an increase of 72%. Looking
�
15000
at the airport fire station, which should
z
10000
experience the same general weather
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
patterns, we see it had a much more
Year
consistent gas usage over the same
Figure 6: Terminal Building Gas Usage 2009-2016
Garver Project No. 17041212
Page 10
GARVER
A.. CITY OF FYV Energy Assessment
�_ FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
period of time, largely eliminating weather as a primary cause of the jump in usage. It stands to reason that
the cause of this increase gas usage is a result of the gas boiler system becoming more and more inefficient
with age which is largely impacting the operating cost of the facility.
The 15% drop in gas consumption observed for the terminal building in 2016 was not mirrored with the gas
consumption of the ARFF facility. Weather data was evaluated for 2014, 2015, and 2016 to determine if
this drop in consumption was a result of average temperatures during winter months (October -March).
While small temperature variances were noted, notable changes in gas consumption during these months
were observed. A 5% increase was noted between 2014 and 2015 and a surprising 20% decrease was
observed between 2015 and 2016.
5.0 Equipment Evaluation
The State of Arkansas Department of Energy has adopted ASHRAE 90.1-2007 as its state energy code.'
Also, industry standard lighting levels are determined by recommendations published by the IES Lighting
Handbook and associated publications. These two documents, in addition to information provided by the
City and data collected during the site visit will be utilized in the evaluations made below.
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 states in Section 4.2.1.3 Alterations of Existing Buildings, "Alterations of existing
buildings shall comply with the provisions of Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, provided, however, that nothing
in this standard shall require compliance with any provision of this standard if such compliance will result in
the increase of energy consumption of the building." Section 6 addresses HVAC systems; Section 9
addresses Lighting systems.
5.1 Terminal Building
5.1.1 Heating and Cooling System
In general, the existing heating and cooling
system is in poor condition, and has little
remaining useful life. All major components of
the system are either original to the building,
making the almost 40 years old, or, as in the
case of the chiller, are clearly aged beyond their
useful life. One of the existing boilers is in such
poor condition that inspections have deemed it
dangerous to operate, leaving it permanently
disabled for life safety reasons. None of the
existing equipment or systems meet current
ASHRAE 90.1 energy efficiency standards. The
HVAC pumps are leaking fluids on the
mechanical room floor, and pipe insulation is
missing in locations. The air handling system are
serviceable, but inspection of the visible
' https.//www.energycodes.gov/adoption/states/arkansas
Figure 7: Aged Pumping System
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 11
Ia
GARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
' ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
components shows aging and the presence of dust and dirt in the ductwork system, as well as numerous
undocumented alterations that are most likely impacting system efficiency and performance.
The chiller is of an unknown age, but based on the exterior condition and appearance of the unit, probably
dates at least to the 1998 conversion of the building to primarily civilian usage, and maintenance personnel
indicated the unit functions poorly and has multiple failed condenser fans, which reduces unit efficiency and
capacity.
Due to the multiple modifications and reconfigurations of the building layout over the years, the efficiency
and ability of the HVAC to provide comfort for the occupants has been negatively impacted. Occupants of
the office areas added to the lobby area complain of poor comfort, as do occupants of the former restaurant
area that was enclosed to make additional office space. The pilot lounge was added onto the existing air
handling system with minor modifications and no increase in capacity, resulting in poor temperature control.
The ventilation effectiveness of the existing systems is unknown due to modifications, but is very likely
inadequate in relation to current ventilation requirements due to system age and configuration.
Due to age of the boilers, chiller, and pumps, these components are currently operating much less efficiently
than new components would be. For instance, the current boilers are estimated to be currently operating
at 80% of peak efficiency, where a modern condensing boiler could produce peak efficiency in the 95%
range. The exact chiller efficiency is unknown, but based on a 20 year age a new chiller would be at least
10% more efficient that the current unit if it was operating at peak efficiency, and likely even more due to
the poor condition of the existing unit.
5.1.2 Windows
The existing windows appear to be in good condition
overall. The frames and glass of the existing windows
did not exhibit significant physical wear and tear, and
no broken glass or damage was noted. It was noted on
some of the larger storefront windows on the east side
of the terminal that there was some slight fogging in
some of the windows closer to ground level. There was
no noted physical damage to these windows, so it may
be that the seals on these windows have failed and
allow outside air into the air space between the panes.
It would be beneficial to do an inspection on all windows
for seal failures and repair as necessary. Further, the
airport has had consistent trouble with leaking from the
Figure 8: Fogging at East Lobby Windows
skylight that is believed to be caused by failed sealing of the windows. This seal failure found throughout
the terminal has resulted in the loss of R -value
It was also noted that even though the bulk of the windows face either due east or west into the morning
or evening sun, the tinting was fairly light. It is unclear if this is due to aging or if this was the original tint,
but additional tinting would decrease the solar load on the building interior and increase energy efficiency.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 12
GARVER
C I T Y o f FYV Energy Assessment
�i FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
5.1.3 Lighting
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 requires certain maximum power levels for specific areas not be exceed for lighting.
These are commonly calculated as power (W) per area (square feet, sq -ft) or length (feet), are based on
the specific use of the area or building type, and are known as lighting power densities (LPDs). The general
compliance of the building will be discussed in the sub -sections below. It should be noted that two paths
for compliancy exist: calculating the LPD by the "building area method" or the "space -by -space" method.
The space -by -space method is what is used in this report with general mention of the building area method
to qualify conclusions. In addition to power densities, ASHRAE 90.1-2007 also has mandatory provisions
for lighting control methodologies.
The specific LPDs and control requirements for each space will not be discussed; but rather useful general
conclusions and trends will be evaluated.
5.1.3.1 Interior Lighting
As previously mentioned, it was identified that the lighting power utilized for the terminal building and
adjoining spaces is approximately 42,162W through seventy-one (71) individual areas totaling 25,281 sq -ft.
When evaluating each of the seventy-one (71) spaces for the existing LPD versus the ASHRAE maximum
LPD, fifty-seven (57) (80.3°/x) of the spaces have a lighting load that exceeds that of ASHRAE 90.1-2007
mandatory provisions. Only fourteen (14) (19.7%) of spaces comply with the ASHRAE standard for lighting
power density. For comparison, if each space's individual LPD is evaluated with respect to the space's
area, the total building interior lighting load would be capped at 28,718W. The existing load exceeds that
by 13,444W. Trade-offs between spaces is permitted as long as the total is not exceeded.
In comparison, if the building area method was used rather than the space -by -space method, the maximum
LPD would be 1 W/ft2. For the 25,281 sq -ft space evaluate, the lighting load would be capped at 25,281W
— even a greater deficit (16,881 W) than when using the space -by -space method.
It should be noted; however, that the 2014 lighting terminal delamping job does reduce these deficits
somewhat, but the overall building is still significantly behind meeting ASHRAE 90.1-2007 lighting power
density requirements.
In addition, ASHRAE 90.1-2007 requires lighting control to automatically shut off lighting for all spaces
within a building (with some exceptions) where the total building area exceeds 5,000 sq -ft. The terminal
qualifies for this mandatory provision. This control can be accomplished through either a master lighting
control system, individual space occupancy sensors, or relay control from another system such as an alarm
system. As previously mentioned, some individual spaces within the terminal include occupancy sensor
control, but for the large majority most spaces have no automatic control at all.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 13
GARVER
CITY o F FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
1WA
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
5.1.3.2 Exterior Lighting
As previously mentioned, it was identified that the lighting power utilized for the terminal building exterior
and fagade spaces is approximately 22,325W through eighteen (18) individual spaces. When evaluating
exterior spaces, ASHRAE allows the LPDs to be calculated based on facade length, door width, or canopy
area depending on the space type. The exterior lighting of the terminal has areas that fit each type.
Therefore, when evaluating the calculated existing LPD for the terminal exterior light versus the ASHRAE
maximum LPD for the same space, seventeen (17) (94.4%) of the spaces have a lighting load that exceeds
that of ASHRAE 90.1-2007 mandatory provisions. Only one (1) (5.6%) space complies with the ASHRAE
standard for lighting power density. For comparison, if each space's individual LPD is evaluated with respect
to the exterior allowable total LPD, the total building exterior lighting load would be capped at 7,358W. The
existing load exceeds that by 14,967W.
It should be noted that in 2015 the airport completed a project that replaced eighteen (18) 400W metal
halide fixtures illuminating the apron area with 140W LED fixtures for a cost of around $11,500. For this
report's evaluation of equipment the apron lighting is not considered, but this project is mentioned to
communicate the reason for omitting this lighting from the evaluation.
5.1.3.3 Parking Lot Lighting
As outlined in previous sections, it was identified that the lighting power utilized for parking lot is
approximately 8,800W over 240,000 sq -ft. This results in a parking lot LPD of 0.04 W/ft2, under the ASHRAE
cap of 0.15 W/ft2. It should be noted that only twelve (12) of the twenty-two (22) fixtures were operative,
and the fixture coverage is only about half of the parking lot.
5.2 City Owned Corporate Hangar
As previously discussed, it was identified that the lighting power utilized for the corporate hangar is
approximately 4,624W. Of that total, 2,624W is related to interior spaces and 2,000W related to exterior
spaces.
When evaluating each interior space using the space -by -space method for the existing LPD versus the
ASHRAE maximum LPD, two (2) spaces have a lighting load that exceeds that of ASHRAE 90.1-2007
mandatory provisions and two (2) spaces comply with the mandatory provisions for LPD. However, if we
utilized the building method for the transportation category we are allowed to have an LPD of 1 W/ft2. The
existing building LPD is 0.25 W/ft2 — compliant with ASHRAE 90.1-2007 mandatory provisions for LPD.
With respect to lighting control; however, the corporate hangar still lacks in meeting automatic shutoff
mandatory provisions as no occupancy sensors or lighting control system are installed in any space.
5.3 Airfield Electrical Equipment
No significant evaluation was performed on the airfield electrical equipment; however, recommendations
are made in the Proposed Improvements section.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 14
CARVER
CITY OF FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
6.0 Proposed Improvements
6.1 No-Cost/Low-Cost Improvements
6.1.1 Terminal Building HVAC
In general, due to age and condition, the HVAC system is likely to not be responsive to low cost
improvements. However, replacing the missing control system components such as the operator interface
and the web interface would allow better control of the building at a relatively low cost, approximately
$10,000. This would help maximize what potential the system has remaining, but is only recommended if
the funds for a complete HVAC replacement cannot be allocated.
6.1.2 Terminal Building Windows
A few windows in the terminal lobby do exhibit some signs of leakage, which is causing fogging of the glass.
It is recommended that on these windows, the outside glass be removed and replaced along with the
window seals to prevent fogging.
There is a potential for energy savings with the windows by additional tinting being applied to the terminal
windows to reduce the solar load on the space and increase energy efficiency, especially on the west side
of the building which gets large amounts of heat load in the summertime due to solar radiation. Energy
savings on west facing rooms could reach 3-5% and reduce glare for occupant comfort. The estimated cost
to complete window tinting on the west side of the terminal building along with partial window replacement
in the lobby is $10,000.
6.1.3 Terminal Building Lighting
Through sixty-five (65) interior spaces where lighting measurements were able to be collected, forty-three
(43) (66.2%) of these exceed IES light level recommendations by more than 10%. One potential no-
cost/low-cost improvement would be to determine if these spaces could be delamped further to reduce
energy usage without falling below the IES recommended light level. It is not anticipated that delamping
harms the fixtures as long as the ballast is rated to handle the delamping or the ballast is replaced. In
contrast, however, fourteen (14) (21.5%) of the interior measured spaces fall short of IES light level
recommendations.
Another low-cost solution would be to make sure existing delamped fixtures are matched with ballasts rated
for the lamps used. This would ensure greater efficiencies.
The delamping is assumed to be completed by airport staff and is assumed to have a cost incidental to
standard maintenance and therefore negligible.
6.1.4 City Owned Corporate Hangar Lighting
Similar to the terminal building, half of the spaces in the corporate hangar exceed IES light level
recommendations by more than 10%. These specific spaces are the restroom and closet. It could be
advantageous to further look at lower wattage lamps or delamping to reduce energy usage without falling
below the IES recommended light levels.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 15
5-
GARVER
CITY OF FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
6.1.5 Airfield Electrical Equipment
Currently the lights are only controlled by the air traffic control tower and PEC. When the tower is unmanned,
the lights operate continuously. Adding new control equipment and a pilot controlled radio receiver will allow
pilots to operate the airfield lights as they are needed. It is reasonable to assume that pilot controlled airfield
lighting would reduce the energy usage of the airfield by half. This project would require an upfront cost of
approximately $50,000.
Table 1: Summary of Low/No Cost Improvements
HVAC Control Upgrade
$10,000
Easier and more convenient
system controls
Terminal Building
$10,000
Energy savings, improve
Window Upgrade
occupant comfort
Terminal Building
L Delamping
Negligible
Energy savings
City Owned Corporate
Negligible
Energy savings
Hangar Delamping
Pilot Controlled Lighting
$50,000
Approximately 50% reduction
in Airfield energy consumption
6.2 Substantial Improvements
6.2.1 Terminal Building HVAC
The terminal building HVAC system is in need of a complete replacement in the very near future, both for
comfort and for energy efficiency. The equipment is old and difficult to maintain, and the system layouts are
not suitable for the building layout and occupancy. The following are assumptions considered for the two
alternatives discussed below. Each alternative assumes complete replacement of the existing HVAC
system. It should be noted that utility incentives were not included in the ROI evaluation of the two HVAC
units. However, once a final design of the system is completed, the airport will submit the appropriate
documentation to the utility to determine what incentive could be received for the system upgrade.
Common Assumptions:
• Approximate Maintenance and Repair Saving: $29,400
o Airport Labor @ $20/hr and 60 hr/month: $14,400
o Materials & Service Cost lump sum / year: $15,000
It is estimated that a complete HVAC replacement for this facility would cost approximately $750,000 for a
standard chilled water / hot water HVAC system. Based on utility bill analysis it appears this replacement
would save at least 50% on the current gas usage of the building and approximately 10-15% on the
electrical usage. This equates to about $2,000 per month energy savings based on the supplied utility
information (approximately $1,500 per month on gas and $500 on electrical). This yields a simple payback
of approximately 14 years. It should be noted however that delay in replacing the HVAC system will soon
lead to a non-functional facility given the condition of the existing equipment.
Garver Project No. 17041212
GARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
During this investigation it is noted that the facility operators have interest in the potential of utilizing a
ground source heat pump (geothermal) system in lieu of the existing chilled water/ hot water HVAC system.
Ground source heat pumps tend to provide increased heating and cooling efficiencies and reduced
maintenance over traditional HVAC systems, but at an increased first cost for wellfield installation. It is
estimated that a new geothermal based system for this facility would add approximately 20% to the cost of
a standard system, increase installed cost to $1,000,000. This system would cut gas usage by 80% and
electrical usage by 15-20% over the existing system, for a monthly savings of $2,800. This yields a simple
payback of approximately 16 years.
6.2.2 Terminal Window Replacement
While minor repairs to the terminal windows would provide benefit to the efficiency of the terminal building,
the performance of the original windows will continue to decline. As such, replacement of all storefronts,
sky light, and windows with low E, tinted, high efficiency glazing and thermal break frames could result in a
20-30% decrease in solar load of the facility which would translate to approximately 5-10% reduction in
energy savings for the terminal building. It is estimated that the cost for replacement would be approximately
$150,000. Because the energy savings resulting from window replacement is difficult to quantify, ROI
calculations would likely be misleading and were not included in this report.
6.2.3 Terminal Building Lighting
For both the interior and exterior of the terminal building, a facility -wide LED upgrade would be a substantial
improvement. A total of 549 fixtures were identified. Without taking into account of the addition of any
fixtures to compensate for lower than recommended IES light levels or areas of the parking lot not covered,
it would be anticipated that an LED upgrade project would significantly lower energy usage and lighting
power densities. A reasonable reduction in power usage would be approximately 70%, but may vary
depending on the fixture type. A quick return on investment (ROI) can be approximated as below:
Assumptions:
• Approximate average LED fixture upgrade / replacement cost: $500/ea
0 549 fixtures to be replaced
0 1:1 replacement: $274,500
Approximate total power reduction: 70%
o Initial terminal lighting power load: 73,287W
0 Proposed terminal lighting power load: 21,986W
o Assume $0.08 per kw -hr energy rate: $12,000 approximate annual savings
• Hours based on half of average operating times of FBO
Assuming average of 2 total lamp replacements of each fixture per year and maintenance labor:
o Material @ $10/fixture for 549 fixtures: $10,980
o Labor @ $20/hr for 'h hr per fixture: $10,980
Based upon the assumptions listed above, the reduced energy consumption and reduced maintenance for
the terminal building would produce approximately $34,000 in annual savings and would result in an ROI
of approximately 8 years.
Garver Project No. 17041212
Page
GARVER
Aft CITY OF
MONINZ FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
A faster ROI may be achieved by taking advantage of energy reduction rebate program incentives through
the airport's electric utility. Although these programs may provide additional rebate opportunities that will
reduce the ROI, their magnitude is not able to be estimated until the projects are taken into the design
phase. The size of the rebate depends on the type of fixture being replaced, its wattage and source, as
well as the type, wattage, and source of the replacement fixture — even to the point of needing to know the
manufacturer and model of the replacement fixture. It is our recommendation to pursue these rebate
programs during design, and we anticipate the ROI being improved as a result.
In addition to the cost savings outlined above, many areas vary greatly from their IES illuminance
recommendations. There variances can result in either wasted energy, potential inefficiency in work of the
employees in these areas due to not having adequate light, reduced security around the building perimeter,
or safety in the parking lot. By going to LED fixtures or changes in fixture layouts, light levels may be
increased to recommended levels while still overall reducing power consumption.
6.2.4 City Owned Corporate Hangar Lighting
Similar to the terminal building, an LED upgrade would be the major substantial improvement to consider.
Using the same assumptions as above the following ROI can be calculated:
Assumptions:
• Approximate average LED fixture upgrade / replacement cost: $500/ea
o 28 fixtures to be replaced
0 1:1 replacement: $14,000
• Approximate total power reduction: 70%
o Initial hangar lighting power load: 4,624W
o Proposed hangar lighting power load: 1,387W
o Assume $0.08 per kw -hr energy rate: $540 approximate annual savings
■ Based on 8 hours per day on working days
• Assuming average of 2 total lamp replacements of each fixture per year and maintenance labor:
o Material @ $10/fixture for 28 fixtures: $280
o Labor @ $20/hr for 1/2 hr per fixture: $280
Based upon the assumptions listed above, the reduced energy consumption and reduced maintenance
would produce approximately $1,100 in annual savings for the airport and would result in an ROI of
approximately 8 years.
Similar to the terminal recommendations, the hangar would also be available to participate in the utility
energy savings rebate incentives program. We would evaluate this during design and determine the
anticipated savings at that time.
Additional improvements to consider would be adding daylight level sensors for the hangar to improve
energy savings. This addition may also help in complying with the ASHRAE 90.1 lighting control
requirements.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 18
,__CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE —
ARKANSAS
6.2.5 Airfield Electrical Equipment
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Significant improvements to the airfield electrical equipment can include the following:
• Upgrading the existing generator and ATS to improve efficiency
• Upgrading the existing CCRs to improve efficiency
• Upgrade the existing runway lighting to LED
It should be noted that the airport has identified the electrical upgrades listed above on an upcoming airfield
lighting project that has been submitted on the most recent FAA Capital Improvement Plan and, if approved
by the FAA, would be completed in 2021. As shown in the most recent Capital Improvement Plan the total
estimated construction cost of these improvements will be $1,100,000. No confirmation from the FAA has
been received as to whether this project will be officially programmed as part of future FAA grant funding.
7.0 Recommendation and Improvement Priority
As demonstrated in Section 6.0 above, the terminal interior and exterior lighting offer the most economical
and financially feasible improvement alternative. However, based upon the current state of the terminal
heating and cooling system, the airport is an equipment failure away from being unable to condition the
facility. As such, it is recommended that the City pursue the complete replacement of the HVAC system as
their highest priority. Both HVAC replacement alternatives will provide the airport significant decreases in
energy consumption, and if the City can obtain the additional capital to implement the geothermal system,
it would provide a better long term benefit to the airport terminal.
For both the terminal building (interior, exterior, and parking lot) and the corporate hangar, it is
recommended to perform a complete lighting rehabilitation. The majority of spaces evaluated do not meet
ASHRAE 90.1-2007 mandatory provisions for lighting power densities or automatic control. There are
significant areas where improvements can be made in energy efficiency and these have a reasonable ROI
for an LED upgrade as indicated above. Many spaces throughout the terminal utilize lamps that contain
mercury. The reduction or elimination of mercury is accomplished by reducing or removing the use of
fluorescent or some high-intensity discharge types of lighting. By reducing or eliminating use of these lamp
types, the harmful mercury content the airport disposes of into the waste system and requires to continue
purchasing for those types of fixtures is inherently also reduced. Additional utility incentive rebates may be
available to assist in shortening this ROI. The impact of these rebates would be calculated during a greater
lighting rehabilitation effort. In alignment with the City of Fayetteville's sustainable practices reducing the
energy usage, complying with ASHRAE, and eliminating the need for mercury based lamps is
recommended.
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 19
GARVER
CITY o f FYV Energy Assessment
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville - Drake Field
Table 2: Substantial Im
�
1
HVAC (
$24,000-$33,600
Traditional: $750,000
14 years
Replacement
Geothermal: $1,000,000
16 years i
2
Terminal Lighting
$33,960
$275,000
8 years Highly
beneficial
3
Corporate
j HHamar Lighting_;
$1,100
$14,000
8 years Beneficial
_
4
! Vault Upgrades
50% energy reduction
for runway lights
$1,100,000
- Beneficial
Window
-FBeneficial
5
Upgrades
$4,000
$150,000
-
Garver Project No. 17041212 Page 20
Ia
GARNER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
APPENDIX A
Project Photographs
Garver Project No. 17041212
IGARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville - Drake Field
Figure B-1 -Terminal Building Boilers
Figure B-2 - Terminal Building Chiller
Garver Project No. 17041211 Page A-1
ra
GARVER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Figure B-3 — Terminal Building East Facing Lobby Windows
Figure B-4 — Terminal Building Interior Lighting
Garver Project No. 17041211 Page A-2
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Figure B-5 — Terminal Building Interior Lighting
Figure B-6 — Terminal Building Exterior Lighting
Garver Project No. 17041211 Page A-3
GARNER
CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE
ARKANSAS
FYV Energy Assessment
City of Fayetteville and Fayetteville — Drake Field
Figure B-7 — Airfield Electrical Vault and Generator
Figure B-8 — City Owned Corporate Hangar Interior Lighting
Garver Project No. 17041211 Page A-4