Optimizing Airport Building Operations and Maintenance Through Retrocommissioning: A Whole-Systems Approach (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

26 Ongoing commissioning (Figure 4) leverages the data collection and analysis capabilities of building control systems to monitor real-time building performance, identify potential issues, and notify the operations team to investigate and resolve them. Ongoing commissioning in the industry may also be called monitoring based commissioning. The intent of ongoing commissioning is to fully integrate the commissioning philosophy into the business-as-usual O&M process. The objective is to continuously monitor and optimize total building performance. Once a facility’s operation has been optimized, the building must maintain this “optimized performance” to sustain the benefits of the retrocommissioning or recommissioning process. To sustain the benefits of the retrocommissioning process, the operations team can employ both administrative and technology solutions that encourage a culture of ongoing commission- ing. The description of an ongoing commissioning process provided in this section of ACRP Report 139 can serve as a basis for a cost-effective process that supports the existing staff with technology, information, and technical support. Further, an effective ongoing commissioning process will support a culture of accountability and reward that provides incentives to sustain superior building performance. Objective The objective of an ongoing commissioning process is to provide support and accountability for the operations team for maintaining effective facility operations while optimizing energy con- sumption. The process is intended to address the traditional issues that impede effective O&M of energy-consuming systems. The process should achieve, as a minimum, the following objectives: • Provide technical solutions (i.e., software data acquisition, analysis, and exception reporting tools) that provide visibility of system performance deficiencies in a user-friendly manner. Examples of system performance deficiencies include deviations from setpoint standards, occupancy schedule standards, and well-established performance criteria such as discharge air temperature setpoints, outdoor air volumes, chilled water temperatures, and energy con- sumption profiles. • Provide for periodic reviews with third-party support of system operations to create space in the operations team schedule to analyze system performance. Reviews should provide the opportunity to review and establish best practices and reinforce staff training. • Provide a mechanism to execute corrective actions to repair or upgrade system components that fail or deteriorate to the point of compromising system performance as part of the peri- odic review process. Establish a repair and renovation budget that allows for “quick-fix” exe- cution no less than annually to address persistent component deterioration issues. S E C T I O N 4 Ongoing Commissioning

Ongoing Commissioning 27 Rationale Once a building’s performance has been reestablished by a retrocommissioning project, the abil- ity of systems to meet CFRs can deteriorate almost immediately. Deterioration may be caused by: • Failure of system components (e.g., coil fouling, sensor calibration drift, sensor failure, or actuator failure). • Not following through on the O&M process to reinforce the best practices developed during the retrocommissioning process (e.g., implementing system overrides in response to com- plaints, or taking temporary corrective actions that are never reversed). • Changes in space environmental control requirements (e.g., conversion of gate areas to dense retail space or installation of computer rooms with server equipment loads). If an effective ongoing commissioning program is in place (described as “Monitoring Based Continuous Operation” in Figure 5), the facility will continue to operate in an optimized con- dition. Moreover, although ongoing commissioning requires a first-time setup (which can be included in the scope of a recommissioning or retrocommissioning project), ongoing program costs are minimal. Deterioration in system performance can be exacerbated if sufficient funds or contracting processes are not available to correct component failures that normally occur in any build- ing. Finally, the cultural attitudes that make efficient resource allocation a value in each facility should be periodically reinforced so that the effective practices established during the retro- commissioning process are not overwhelmed or undone by “comfort complaints” and “special circumstances” that lead to compromising these good practices. When special circumstances arise that require a change, the goal should be to (1) resume normal procedures according to the O&M process as soon as possible and/or (2) address permanent changes by making additional changes to maintain optimized performance. To this end, an ongoing commissioning process should incorporate the following values: • Provide the tools to efficiently identify system deficiencies and guide resolution of those defi- ciencies in an expeditious manner. Plan Investigate Implement Track Figure 4. Ongoing commissioning. Figure 5. Maintaining optimum efficiency with ongoing commissioning.

28 Optimizing Airport Building Operations and Maintenance Through Retrocommissioning: A Whole-Systems Approach • Provide expert support for the operations team to resolve identified deficiencies in a cost-effective fashion. This support must recognize the challenge of sustaining operations on a daily basis while at the same time executing repair/upgrade tasks necessary to sustain system operations. • Provide funding and a time-efficient way to contract for materials and services that are nec- essary to implement a variety of small and potentially disassociated tasks required to sustain building systems. Process Four steps can be taken to address the objectives outlined above. These steps should be designed to make the best practices “business as usual” for each operations team. Thus, the ongoing commissioning process will have the potential to become an entirely internal process within the system. Step 1. Implement the use of data acquisition and analysis software that can provide an effective exception reporting tool for the operations and ongoing commissioning team. This software should allow an O&M team to review the entirety of a large campus system by examining only those com- ponents that are operating outside the boundaries of “acceptable systems operating parameters.” Step 2. Develop and deploy a set of operating rules within the data acquisition and analy- sis software to address the most critical operating parameters that affect system performance and energy consumption. These rules need to be developed for the facility to address operating strategies, system types, and predicted energy profiles. By using the software and configuration tools, exception reports can be generated at will. Exceptions should be limited to a manageable volume, however, so that O&M teams are not overwhelmed with deficiencies. Finally, deficien- cies should be prioritized to distinguish between the most critical failures and those failures that can be addressed over longer intervals. Step 3. Using qualified third-party resources, either internal or external, provide periodic site-visit reviews of both the exception reports and overall system operations “checkups.” The checkups should be designed to provide (1) technical support for analyzing exception reports and trended performance data and (2) additional training to reinforce effective team practices. Periodic checkups can include annual reviews of FCAs to support the capital budgeting process at the airport. Step 4. In conjunction with the periodic visits, provide a “quick-fix” budget to allow the third- party technical support team to contract for and implement corrections in a process similar to that used for retrocommissioning. The ability to identify and correct deficiencies is at the heart of sustaining O&M team support and in changing the O&M paradigm to one that expects sys- tems to operate at high levels of performance. The periodic visits are critical to providing both accountability and positive feedback for superior results. Technology Tools Implementation of data acquisition and exception report tools requires that software tools be integrated into the building control and energy metering systems. Integration typically requires either Internet web-based access or the installation of multiple servers onsite to access the direct digital control (DDC) local area network and log data to a proprietary database. The data acquisition and reporting tools should have the following characteristics: • The data acquisition system should allow for periodic data transfer to the operating database to allow the operator to schedule data downloads and manage DDC system network traffic.

Ongoing Commissioning 29 • The data reporting software should provide the ability to generate standard reports on preset frequencies. It should also provide easily customizable reports to allow for interrogation of the DDC system as appropriate for investigating identified system deficiencies. • The data acquisition system should incorporate energy monitoring and reporting to ensure that the tool and its information can be configured into a comprehensive energy and perfor- mance management system. Periodic Site Visits As part of the ongoing commissioning process, the airport may either develop an in-house team or contract for third-party support to visit facilities periodically (e.g., quarterly) to accom- plish the following objectives: • Review the exception reports with the O&M team to verify that the information provided by the reports is clearly understood. • Reinforce training with regard to (1) reading and understanding the information provided by the tool and (2) determining the appropriate response to that information. • Review any corrective action items created by the O&M team based on the exception reports reviewed by that team. Confirm that corrective actions are being created and acted on by the O&M team. • Develop additional corrective action items based on a detailed review of the operating systems on the campus. Create alternative execution strategies for each item or group of items to facili- tate component and systems repairs necessary to sustain performance. • Based on agreements with the airport’s O&M team, facilitate execution of significant corrective actions by onsite personnel or service contractors. Validate proper completion of each item. • Review with site personnel each service contract’s records and performance to validate that active service contracts are being fully executed and delivering value to the site. • Reinforce training and recommend additional third-party training for O&M personnel to supplement their technical skills as necessary to sustain performance of the installed systems.