3. ENERGY USE AND GROWTH
$43,075,000 $43,227,000 $43,360,000
$40,505,000
47%
$35,300,000
ENERGY COST
$29,348,000 3,178,000 MBTU 3,181,000 MBTU
3,075,000 MBTU
3%
3,093,120 MBTU
2,666,000
CONSUMPTION
MBTU
2,624,000 MBTU
151,312
144,666 23%
144,467
POPULATION
135,895 141,225
116,963
31M sf 35%
27M sf *RP – RCI &
FACILITIES
24M sf 24M sf 26M sf Reimbursable
23M sf
2003 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
4. A SNAPSHOT: ENERGY PORTFOLIO
Fort Bragg Energy Portfolio lays
out our vision by answering the
questions:
• Where are we?
(current status)
• Where do we want to go?
(vision)
• How we will get there?
(plan)
• How much it will cost?
(resource requirements)
usarmy.bragg.imcom-atlantic.mbx.energy@mail.mil
5. ENERGY PROGRAM
GOALS & OBJECTIVES
Goal: Transition to reliable and secure renewable energy
while aggressively reducing overall demand.
• Objective 1: Eliminate energy inefficiencies that
waste natural and financial resources in existing
facilities using FY2003 as a baseline (kwh/sqft). “How
you use it”
• Objective 2: Increase energy efficiency in renovation
and new construction. “How you construct it”
• Objective 3: Reduce dependency on fossil fuel and
increase the use of clean renewable energy. “How
we get it”
• Objective 4: Improve surety and reliability of energy
systems to provide dependable utility services. “How
you protect it”
6. PLANNING FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY
FORT BRAGG REGULATION
MILCON
Data from
other
Installations
http://armysolutions.net/IDG/pdf/EnergyProgram.pdf
Challenge Solution Results
7. BUILDING OPERATION COMMAND CENTER (BOCC)
UTILITY MONITORING AND CONTROL SYSTEM (UMCS)
No centralized system Master Plan Expanding the system
= Saving energy ($$$)
Challenge Solution Results
8. RETROCOMMISSIONING (RCx)
“30,000 mile tune up” - has to become a standard & recurring practice
• Fort Bragg began retro-commissioning (RCx) in 2010
• 300+ buildings currently undergoing RCx
25% Expected
• Over 600 deficiencies were found during RCx annual energy savings
for barracks and 65%
• *Protects the Army’s significant construction investment for admin spaces
8
9. ENERGY EFFICIENCY = ENERGY SECURITY
CENTRAL ENERGY PLANTS
Utility Modernization Program
Central Plant Upgrades Ft. Bragg Central Plants
11 Industrial boilers replaced •7 major plants
4 Chillers replaced •Serve over 8MSF of buildings
Upsized HW/CW lines •466 MMBTU’s of heating
Updated and automated controls •23,207 Tons of cooling
Ground Source Heat Pump Central Plant •Backbone of heating/cooling
in Historical District for barracks & admin spaces
Black Start added for Energy Security
Thermal Energy Storage
Electrical demand reduced up to 2,400 kW
2.2 M gallon storage at 82nd Plant
Three additional TES facilities planned
(2.5MGL, 1.2MGL, 1.2MGL)
$225,000 energy cost avoided
in FY11 (less than 9 year
payback)
11. ENERGY PROJECT FUNDING
ESPC: Energy Savings Performance Contracting
Agreement between a Federal facility and an energy services company (ESCO). The
ESCO designs a project to increase energy efficiency and/or implement renewable
energy at a facility. The ESCO then purchases and installs the necessary equipment. The
ESCO is responsible for maintaining the equipment, as well as measuring the energy
consumption and savings. In exchange, the Federal agency pays the company a share of
the savings resulting from the energy efficiency improvements/renewable energy
generation. To implement this type of financing, guaranteed savings is required, along
with measurement and verification reporting requirements. At end of contract term the
agency retains 100% of the future energy savings. ESPC projects require federal
ownership of the project.
12. ENERGY PROJECT FUNDING
UESC: Utility Energy Savings Contracting
Similar to ESPC agreements, but involve the utility serving the Federal facility instead of
a private energy services company. In a UESC, a utility company agrees to provide
Federal agencies with services or products (or both) that are designed to make Federal
facilities more energy efficient or utilize more renewable energy. Federal agencies may
use appropriated funds in addition to securing third party project financing through the
utility when implementing UESCs. The utility is repaid over the contract term from the
cost savings generated by the energy efficiency and/or renewable energy measures.
During the contract period, the facility pays a lower utility bill, as well as a payment to
the utility for the UESC project. The total of these two payments should be less than or
equal to an average amount of utility bills before the UESC.
13. ENERGY PROJECT FUNDING
ECIP: Energy Conservation Investment Program
Subset of the Defense Agencies Military Construction (MILCON) program specifically
designated for projects that save energy or reduce DoD energy costs. It includes
construction of new, high-efficiency energy systems, the improvement and
modernization of existing systems, and new renewable energy projects. ECIP was
created in 1976 as an energy conservation funding mechanism. ECIP investment awards
are made based upon savings to investment ratio and simple payback criteria. ECIP
funding is limited, and is awarded on a competitive basis within the Army - only the
most economically feasible projects are funded. Like UESC, it requires federal
ownership.
14. ENERGY PROJECT FUNDING
QUTM: Utilities Modernization
The Utilities Modernization Program (UMP) focuses on those utility systems that are
either exempt from privatization or pending exemption from privatization.
Modernization, as part of the Department of Defense Recapitalization program, is
defined as alteration of facilities to implement new or higher standards, to
accommodate new functions, to increase the efficiencies of components or the overall
system and to replace building components that are at or beyond their service life.
Modernization may be required due to a new mission or a change of capacity
requirements at a particular location. Modernization may be accomplished through:
incremental upgrades or replacements of a facility over the facility service life; full
modernization or refurbishment of a facility at the end of its service life; or
replacement of a facility at the end of its service life.
15. CONTRACT EXECUTION
• US Army Corps of Engineers
• Huntsville (HNC)
• Savannah (SAS)
• Wilmington (SAW)
• Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC)
• Fort Bragg Mission Contracting Office (MCO)
