Achieving Energy Efficient Multifamily Buildings

Transcription

1 Achieving Energy Efficient Multifamily Buildings Retrofitting Multifamily Buildings through the Department of Energy s Weatherization AssistanceProgram Session TL11 MF: Introduction to Multifamily Tuesday December 13, 2011 Presented at the 2011 National Weatherization Training Conference in New Orleans by David Hepinstall, Executive Director Association for Energy Affordability, Inc. 1

2 Focus of this Session An overview of multifamily weatherization (from the perspective of one person who has worked directly in MF weatherization since 1990) Federal and state policy context for implementing multifamily weatherization Comparisons of types of multifamily housing stock and program WAP approaches nationally Leveraging owner, utility, and other public and private funding to support MF weatherization 2 2

3 Background: What is AEA? A not for profit membership organization of weatherization CBOs A DOE funded Weatherization Training Center and State funded technical services provider of energy audits, specifications and other technical services to the WAP network in NY. A BPI Affiliate providing training for all current BPI certifications (both small homes and MF) and proctoring of BPI written and field tests. An energy efficiency policy advocate active in Federal, State and City policy arenas representing community based, low income and multifamily perspectives An implementer of WAP, NYSERDA, and utility residential, MF and small commercial energy efficiency programs for the past 18 years in NY. 3 3

4 AEA s Relevent Direct Experience AEA technical staff have conducted energy audits of over 3,000 MF buildings with over 120,000 units, including over 500 buildings with over 30,000 units in past 2.5 years Direct weatherization of over 3,000 units under ARRA in NYC Multifamily energy auditor training to stateand and local staff in Ohio, Colorado, Washington and California over past decade. MF training through National Distance Learning Network with partners NRCERT, INCAA, BPC, COAD, CEDA, first through NCAF/ExxonMobil grant and now through DOE Weatherization Training Center grant. Implementer of NYSERDA, National Grid and Con Edison multifamily programs over past 18 years Organizer of 5 national MF energy efficiency conferences 4

5 Multifamily Housing Nationally 17% of all housing units in US are in building structures with 5 or more units (over 22 million households out of over 129 million) 12% (or 16 million) households in building with 10 or more units Looking only at the percentages for those with 10 or more units: In NYC as a whole, 54% live in such buildings, including Over 90% in Manhattan and 69% in the Bronx, but only 40% in Brooklyn and 34% in Queens; And only 11% in Staten Island and 26% in Westchester County Other cities with large percentages of households living in MFBs: Washington, DC 50% in 5+; 44% in 10+ Atlanta 45% and 37%; Boston 44% and 31% Houston 42% and 34% Seattle 41% and 35% Chicago 38% and 27% 5 5

6 Number of Units in Residential Structures: Regional Variations (2009) Nationally 12.6% % multi unit (2 to 9), 12.2% 10 plus Percent of households in buildings 10 units or more: Mid Atlantic = 18.6% (37.3% total MFU) Pacific = 15.5% (29% MFU) South Atlantic = 11.8% New England = 11.5% (34.4% MFU) West South Central = 10.8i% Mountain = 10.5% (20.2% MFU) West North Central = 10.0% East North Central 9.8% 6 6

7 Regions in American Community Survey 7 7

8 Key Housing stock variations By type of building: low rise, mid rise, high rise By type of heating/hot water fuel: gas, oil, electric By type of mechanical systems: central, in unit By type of metering: direct (to HH), master (to building); Master plus submetering to household By type of ownership (rental, coop, condo) 8 8

9 Key DOE Multifamily Weatherization Policies The low income residential household is the primary beneficiary of WAP No undue or excessive enhancement of the value of the owner s property should result from WAP. 9 9

10 Multifamily Building Eligibility for WAP At least 66% (or 50%, under special ilconditions) i of households must be income eligible, i.e, below 60% of State Median Income or 200% of poverty level (by household size). Distinction between 50% and 66% eligibility (see precise language of the regulations and resulting state policies) 10 10

11 State and local variations in WAP WAP started as a federal categorical program under CSA Subsequently has become a State Grant program governed by Federal law and regulation but subject to large state by state variation Local housing stock and climate variations impact treatment of multifamily housing

12 Tenants in rental properties Household eligibility rules apply equally to renters, not just owners Rental properties require investment by the ineligible owner. Multiunit properties >4 units defined as multifamily buildings 12 12

13 What does Building Eligibility Mean? MF building eligibility, once determined, allows treatment of the whole building Cost effective weatherization measures can be completed in all units and common areas, not just income eligible units

14 Impact of ARRA Funding on MF WAP Many states addressing MF on a scale greater than ever before Davis Bacon Act prevailing wage determinations have had hdvarying effects on actual state by state implementation DOE development of program rules to provide some flexibility in addressing this issue 14 14

15 Building Owner Obligations in WAP Proof of Ownership and Permission i to Enter premises form (for income documentation, energy audit, construction management and post inspection); and Fuel information release forms (for all energy use in the building) that provide access to all building energy usage information for up to five years pre and post weatherization WAP Deposit (typical minimum $1,000 in NY has been increase to $100 to $200 per unit up front) included with initial building application

16 SELECTION OF MEASURES WAP investment tin measures is energy audit di driven, All building wide energy efficiency and health and safety materials and measures eligible under DOE regulations (heating, domestic hot water and electric usage reduction) Owners typically have own priorities that may be inconsistent with audit Audit requirements (e.g.) S.I.R.> 1.0 for each measure enables successful energy savings strategy (and dincreases owner investments share in their favored measures to buy down the S.I.R.) 16 16

17 Savings to Investment Ratio (S.I.R.) Listedi in SIR order, with hfull llinteractivity, ii from higher h to lower SIR, SIR>1.0 requirement to pay for itself in the life of the measure Scope of Work includes only measures with a Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) >1.0 DOE rej ec ts pac kage o f measures > 10th 1.0 that t has been used by NYSERDA in its Multifamily Performance Program 17 17

18 MF WAP Owner Agreement This document Should outline obligations of each party and be executed with signature of an authorized official from Building Owner/Management Company. Should be accompanied by the initial Owner Investment check (or regulatory approval if access to reserves/funds requires such 3 rd party signoff). Should list types of measures to be installed with estimated costs and owner s share, WAP share and leveraged funds committed

19 Tenant Protection Tools Owner Agreement should provide tenant protections (e.g., prohibiting rent increases for weatherization improvements and provision that apartments be rented to income eligible households for a specified period of time) Tenant Synopsis of Owner Agreement should provide written notice informing tenants of their rights as third party beneficiaries, and recourse if landlord violates tenant protections in Owner s Agreement 19 19

20 Owner Investment in the Project Owner Investment funds should ldbe obtained up front before work begins. These funds should be held in an escrow account managed by the subgrantee agency to pay subcontractors for owner s share of the work. (a best practice in our view) In NY, Apartment Building Work Scope (ABWS) is signed off by owner upon completion of work scope with any balance in Owner Investment account returned to owner

21 Energy Audit Process: AEA s approach Pre audit collection and recording of basic data describing existing conditions in the building, by WAP field technicians. Field assessment by one or more energy engineers accompanied by the local agency weatherization director, the property manager or other representative of the building owner, and the building superintendent, to interview key persons, observe operations and conduct diagnostic tests, including combustion safety tests, and to identify operations and maintenance issues as well as energy efficiency upgrade opportunities and health & safety issues to be addressed. Energy engineer enters building data into EA QUIP (or other DOE approved energy audit tool), imports energy usage information and weatherdata forthe same time period, and models the building toobtain obtain a good fit between building description and energy usage

22 Ea quip and TREAT Both are DOE approved MF audit tools Ea quip now available as an on line, internet based energy audit tool Contact Nick Dirr at AEA if interested in Webinar on EA QUIP 22 22

23 Developing the WAP Workscope Using EA QUIP (or TREAT), energy auditor runs the calculation l engine on the modeled building to produce a series of reports that identify the Savings to Investment Ratios (SIRs) of each measure, listed in rank order from the highest to lower SIR measures. Recommended Scope ofwork (with cost estimates) and Audit Report are completed and shared with Owner 23 23

24 Obtaining the Owner Investment Agency completes owner negotiations to confirm the measures to be included and the relative share of the estimated costs to be paid by WAP, owner, and other leveraged funds The energy audit remains the driver of DOE investment in the building

25 WAP Measures in MFBs Electric base load reduction In unit CFL & energy efficient HW fixtures Energy Star* replacement refrigerators Common area EE lighting and controls Envelope & ventilation upgrades Roof insulation; air sealing; window replacement (Low E, argon filled); ventilation system upgrades Heating & system upgrade or replacement Including controls & building EMS Pipe insulation in basement Advanced measures (Solar PV and Solar Thermal) 25 25

26 Executing the WAP Owner Agreement and Scope of Work Scope of Work must meet DOE and State requirements, i.e., cannot skip over a more cost effective measure to include one with a lower S.I.R. without adequate justification DOE funding for EACH measure must meet SIR of 1.0 standard (Owner can reduce WAP cost, e.g. for a high efficiency, condensing boiler, buying down the cost to WAP thus bringing it up to a 1.0 SIR for the DOE funds.) 26 26

27 Heating System Upgrade or Replacement Specifications AEA s Energy Engineers develop heating specifications for use by subgrantee in conducting a bid process Heating contractors must annually complete the requirements of the CleanBoiler Program administered by AEA to be eligible to bid. Pre bid conferences and sealed bids to subgrantee are standard

28 Scope of Work for the Project Development of an estimated ABWS (Apartment Building Work Scope Summary) specifies by measure the relative cost to the owner, WAP and this estimate is attached or summarized as part of the Owners Agreement Owner signs Owners Agreement and provides a check for the owner investment share confirming commitment to proceed before WAP dollars spent

29 Owners investment Account Subgrantee deposits owner investment into the Owner Investment Account Owner s funds are due prior to the commencement of work in the building Subgrantee agency pays subcontractors directly from both the WAP account and the Owner s account per the terms of the scope of work identified in the owner s agreement At completion of work, owner signs ABWS and receives balance if any amount not spent on the building (e.g., due to lower costs than estimated in Owners Agreement) 29 29

30 Selection of Subcontractors to Complete the Measure installation Subgrantees must follow Federal and State procurement requirements specified in the WAP Policies and Procedures Manual Subgrantee must post inspect 100% of the work by subcontractors prior to certification of completed work by State field representatives WAP in NYC MFB is a turn key operation from a building owner s perspective

31 Construction Oversight/ Project Management of WAP Project Work WAP subgrantee is responsible for overseeing the procurement process, developing subcontractor agreements for installation of each measure, and providing construction oversight and post inspection of all work to meet certification requirements

32 Other options for Owner s WAP work May recognize and give credit (to the owner s match requirement) for work completed (separately) that meets WAP specifications and guidelines May permit owner to select own construction manager, as long as construction oversight by WAP subgrantee (bank examiner s role) 32 32

33 Multifamily Project Timeline Bldg application (with deposit) Collect household application & income documentation Audit data collection Auditor field visit SOW and audit report Execute Owner Agreement and obtain owner investment (or funding source/regulator approval letter) based upon estimated costs Subcontractor selection, obtain final prices, sign subcontractor agreements Work kin progress to completion lti Final agency inspection and State certification Total = 3 to 6 months 33 33

34 Recognition of Completed MF Units State t WAPfi field representatives ti conduct tfield visits it to review measures in all buildings presented for certification against the completed ABWS and to inspect all relevant building files (including client income documentation) required by DHCR in NY to demonstrate compliance with the WAP PPM. Each building is then certified by the State as weatherized, and its units are only then reported to DOE as complete. No system for treating obligated funds (upon completion of audit, owner s agreement and subcontractor agreements) has yet been accepted by DOE or (in NY, by the PSC or utilities), although this has been done by NYSERDA in its MF programs

35 Target MF in relationship to need WAP subgrantees should recognize relative distribution of low income households among geographic areas and types of housing, including multifamily units. Income eligible residents of multifamily housing should be beneficiaries of WAP in proportion to their relative size in the community served by the subgrantee. Where does public, or publicly assisted housing fit? 35 35

36 Variables that affect completion timelines for Multifamily projects Building application is incomplete insufficient energy usage information, delay in receiving deposit check or regulatory approval Access to tenants difficult, tenant resistance to providing required income documentation, delays in obtaining approval to view on site residential income files; coming up just short of 50% income eligibility (often last 10% is the hardest to obtain) Audit data collection access issues, number of buildings, size and complexity of projects affect resource utilization Auditor field visit complexity of site and potential project, eg, if special opportunities for solar thermal or condensing boilers SOW and audit report workload flow not uniform, so affects capacity Heating system specifications complexity of system requirements and options complicates staffing decisions 36 36

37 Variables affecting completion time line (continued) Obtaining signedowneragreement and receiving owner supfront investment delayed, e.g, due to need to receive regulatory agency or other third party approval Subcontractor selection, pricing, agreements and work start workload flow of subcontractors and permitting delays with Buildings Department Work in progress to completion on site access issues for some measures; site configuration impact on timing of multiple subcontractors on site work Final agency inspection and State certification workload flow and scheduling of all involved Large multifamily buildings are not completed one unit at a time when they have central systems, and yet both DOE and utilities assume a production/completion cycle based on a single family mindset

38 Split Incentive Issues in MF Buildings Largest barr ier to effect i ve program design and implementation. Issue: Who pays for the energy use determines who directly benefits from the installation of any measure that reduces the costs associated with that use Neither tenants nor landlords tend to be interested in paying for measures that benefit the other party rather than themselves. Incentivizing all parties is an on going challenge of program design and implementation. 38

39 Questions? Follow up? To contact me: David Hepinstall Executive Director Association for Energy Affordability, Inc. 105 Bruckner Blvd, Bronx, NY direct fax