facility condition assessment services pa #:107-1564-14 ... · mechanical executive summary...

Facility Condition Assessment Services PA #:107-1564-14 / Work Order Contract # 12870

Tier 1 Report of

Facility Condition Assessment

For

State of Oregon Hillcrest - Water Tower

2450 Strong Rd SE Salem,

Oregon 97302

Date of Report: May 28, 2014 Provided By:

Faithful+Gould, Inc

Provided For:

State of Oregon

Oregon Youth Authority

T A B L E O F CO N T E N T S

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Limiting Conditions .................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Details ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Building Details .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Building Description ................................................................................................................................... 5 Property Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 5 Architectural Structure Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 5 Mechanical Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 5 Electrical Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 5 Site Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 5 Suitability Summary ................................................................................................................................... 5 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................................ 6 Building Expenditure Summary ................................................................................................................. 6 Distribution of Immediate (Year 1) Needs by Building System .................................................................. 8 Distribution of Year 2-Year 10 Needs by Building Systems ...................................................................... 9 Accessibility Overview ............................................................................................................................. 10 E N E R G Y C O N SE R V A T I O N M E AS U R E S ............................................................................................... 11 Facility Condition Needs Index ................................................................................................................ 12 Needs Sorted By Prioritization of Work ................................................................................................... 14 Needs Sorted By Plan Type .................................................................................................................... 15

A SubStructure Systems .............................................................................................................................. 16 A10 FOUNDATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 16

B Shell Systems ............................................................................................................................................ 17 B10 SUPERSTRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................... 17

G Building Sitework Systems ...................................................................................................................... 18 G30 SITE CIVIL/MECHANICAL UTILITIES ........................................................................................... 18

Appendices .................................................................................................................................................... 19

State of Oregon Hillcrest - Water Tower May 28, 2014

F+G Project No.100039643 Powered by iPlan™ © 4tell™ Solutions, LP

E X E C U T I V E SU M M A R Y

INT RO DU CTI ON

In accordance with the work order contract held between State of Oregon and its Oregon Youth Authority (OYA), Project PA #:107-1564-14 / Work Order Contract # 12870 dated April 1, 2014 and Faithful+Gould Inc, this completed report provides a comprehensive Facility Condition Assessment of the Water Tower located at 2450 Strong Rd SE, Salem, Oregon, 97302 (The Property). This report provides a summary of the facility information known to us at the time of the study, the scope of work performed, an equipment inventory, evaluation of the visually apparent condition of The Property together with a capital expenditure forecast of expenditures anticipated over the next 10 years. The expenditure forecast does not account for typical preventative maintenance items such as changing filters to fan coil units. Our cost rates to produce life cycle and replacement cost estimates are based on our knowledge of the local regional market rates. The data in this report represent an opinion of probable cost of construction and is made on the basis of the experience, qualifications, and best judgment of the professional consultant familiar with the construction industry. The report provides a summary of the anticipated primary expenditures over the 10-year study period. Further details of these expenditures are included within each respective report section and within the deficiency report, in Appendix A. In this report we have calculated the Facility Condition Needs Index (FCNI) which is used in Facilities Management to provide a benchmark to compare the relative condition of a group of facilities. The FCNI is primarily used to support asset management initiatives of federal, state, and local government facilities organizations.

LIM IT I NG CO N DIT I ON S

This report has been prepared for the exclusive and sole use of the State of Oregon. The report may not be relied upon by any other person or entity without the express written consent of Faithful+Gould. Any reliance on this report by a third party, any decisions that a third party makes based on this report, or any use at all of this report by a third party is the responsibility of such third parties. Any reuse without written verification or adaptation by Faithful+Gould for the specific purpose intended will be at user’s sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to Faithful+Gould. The assessment of the building/site components was performed using methods and procedures that are consistent with standard commercial and customary practice as outlined in ASTM Standard E 2018-08 for PCA assessments. As per this ASTM Standard, the assessment of the building/site components was based on a visual walk-through site visit, which captured the overall condition of the site at that specific point in time only. No legal surveys, soil tests, environmental assessments, geotechnical assessments, detailed barrier-free compliance assessments, seismic assessments, detailed engineering calculations, or quantity surveying compilations have been made. No responsibility, therefore, is assumed concerning these matters. Faithful+Gould did not design or construct the building(s) or related structures and therefore will not be held responsible for the impact of any design or construction defects, whether or not described in this report. No guarantee or warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the property, building components, building systems, property systems, or any other physical aspect of The property is made.



The recommendations and our opinion of probable costs associated with these recommendations, as presented in this report, are based on walk-through non-invasive observations of the parts of the building which were readily accessible during our visual review. Conditions may exist that are not as per the general condition of the system being observed and reported in this report. Opinions of probable costs presented in this report are also based on information received during interviews with operations and maintenance staff. In certain instances, Faithful+Gould has been required to assume that the information provided is accurate and cannot be held responsible for incorrect information received during the interview process. Should additional information become available with respect to the condition of the building and/or site elements, Faithful+Gould requests that this information be brought to our attention so that we may reassess the conclusions presented herein. The opinions of probable costs are intended for global budgeting purposes only. Faithful+Gould has no control over the cost of labor and materials, general contractor’s or any subcontractor’s method of determining prices, or competitive bidding and market conditions. The data in this report represent an opinion of probable cost of construction and is made on the basis of the experience, qualifications, and best judgment of the professional consultant familiar with the construction industry. Faithful+Gould cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual construction costs will not vary from this or subsequent Cost Estimates. The scope of work and the actual costs of the work recommended can only be determined after a detailed examination of the site element in question, understanding of the site restrictions, understanding of the effects on the ongoing operations of the site/building, definition of the construction schedule, and preparation of tender documents.

PRO JE CT DET AIL S

On April 17 2014, Nathan Monks and Kyle Thompson of Faithful+Gould visited The Property to observe and document the condition of the building and site components. During our site visit, Faithful+Gould was assisted by Dan Dedera (Maintenance & Operations Supervisor) who is associated with State of Oregon.

BU ILD I NG DET AILS

Item Description

Project Name Hillcrest - Water Tower

Property Type

Full Address 2450 Strong Rd SE Salem,

Oregon 97302 Onsite Date April 17 2014

Historic District No

Historic Building No

Year Built 1925

Occupancy Status N/A

Number of Stories N/A

Gross Building Area (SF) 2,000

Current Replacement Value $ 528,000

ARV/GSF ($/Sq Ft) $264.00 / Sq Ft



BU ILD I NG DES C RI PT IO N PRO PE RTY EX EC UTI VE SU MM A RY The water tower provides the Hillcrest facility with even pressured domestic water supply. The water tower was constructed in 1931. AR C HITE CT U RAL ST RU CT UR E EXE C UTI VE SUM MA RY The water tower is constructed on a welded steel 48,000 gallon domed elevated water reservoir. The water reservoir is supported by four steel legs with cross bracing. The steel legs are constructed of two steel columns which are braced together with webbed bracing which have been fixed with rivets. The water tower has a central steel water pipe. The legs are supported by mass concrete footings. The water tower has an access ladder with a fall arrest system. MEC HA N IC AL EX EC UTI VE SU MM A RY Hillcrest is served by a 48,000 gallon elevated domestic and fire water storage tank. The steel frame tank is fed from a 302 foot deep well through a 6-inch steel piping system. The elevated water tank has been in service for over seventy-five years and has far exceeded its useful life. It is currently showing signs of advanced corrosion and its stability during a major seismic event is speculative. The age, condition, complexity and inherent lack of reliability in the domestic and fire water supply infrastructure warrant prompt replacement of the entire system with a new domestic water storage vault and pumping system at the south end of the site. ELECT R IC AL EXE C UTI VE SU MM A RY The elevated water storage tank has no substantial electrical system components. The installation of a subsurface water storage vault will require the installation of domestic and fire pressure booster systems with emergency power back-up. SITE EX E CUT IVE SUM M AR Y The water tower is within the fenced ground of the Hillcrest site and is located within a central grassed area. SU ITA BIL ITY SUM M AR Y The water tower has susceptible seismic stability, plus with the costs to maintain the structure with routine redecoration and its associated working at a height costs. It is recommended to demolish the water tower and replace this with a ground based water system.



SU MM A RY OF F I ND IN GS

This report represents summary-level findings for the Property Condition Assessment. The deficiencies identified in this assessment can be combined with potential new construction requirements to develop an overall Long Term Capital Needs Plan that can be the basis for a facility wide capital improvement funding strategy. Key findings from the Assessment include:

Key Findings Metric Current Year Facility Condition Needs Index 115.61 Immediate Capital Needs (included in FCNI) $610,400

Year 2 to Year 10 Capital Needs $0.00

BU ILD I NG EXP EN D ITU RE SUM M AR Y

The building expenditure summary section provides an executive overview of the findings from the assessment. The chart below provides a summary of yearly anticipated expenditures over the study period for the Water Tower building. In addition, we have scheduled key findings highlighting key items of greater than $5,000 and their anticipated failure year. Further details of these expenditures are included within each respective report section and within the expenditure forecast, in Appendix A of this report. The results illustrate a total anticipated expenditure over the study period of circa $610,400.



Key Findings

B Shell: Remove Structural Steel Coumns abd Beam Frame System at an estimated cost of $80,000 in year 2014

G Building Sitework: Replace Potable Water Distribution and Storage at an estimated cost of $528,000 in year 2014 1 All costs presented in present day values 2 Costs represent total anticipated values over the 10 year study period



DIST RI B UTIO N OF IM ME DI ATE (YEA R 1) NE ED S BY BU ILD I NG SYST EM

Building System Estimated Cost Percentage of Total Cost Potable Water Distribution and Storage $528,000 86.5%

Steel Frame Structure $80,000 13.1% Wall Foundations $2,400 0.4%

Total $610,400 100%



DIST RI B UTIO N OF YE AR 2-YE AR 10 NE E D S B Y BU I L D I N G SY S T E M S

There were no year 2 to year 10 needs identified during our site assessment.



ACCESSIBILITY OVERVIEW

Introduction As a publicly accessible facility, access to and within the building for disabled building users will be governed (where applicable) by the 1991 Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines. Specifically, under each use scenario two areas of the ADA have significant effect on the physical aspects of the Property. Title I deals with employment discrimination, and requires that employers not discriminate against a disabled person in hiring or employment. This can impact the configuration and features of buildings and those employers are expected to make “reasonable accommodation”, including making facilities readily accessible to disabled employees. Title III requires that public accommodation provide goods and services to disabled patrons on an equal basis with the non-disabled patrons. This title is the part of the Act with perhaps the greatest impact on buildings, which provide public accommodations. The ADA has provided a benchmark for measuring accessibility, primarily orientated towards new construction. It also provides guidance for modification of existing facilities to eliminate barriers to access. This benchmark is the ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). The ADAAG was written by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, and first issued in final form in July 1991. The stated purpose of the guidelines is to ensure that newly constructed facilities and altered portions of existing facilities covered by the ADA are readily accessible to disabled persons. Tier I: Visual Accessibility Survey—The scope of this limited visual survey is specifically limited to the following four areas. The user should be aware that due to the visual nature of the Tier I survey, the reliability of the results will be less accurate than a Tier II or III survey, which includes representative sampling measurements and counts. The visual accessibility survey was carried out inconjunction with the FCA and any recommended ADA works have been included in the respective asset or system setion of this report and categorised as ADA Plan items:

Accessible Entrances. Providing access from public sidewalks, parking or public transportation that enables disabled individuals

to enter the facility.

Access to Goods and Services. Providing horizontal and vertical access to areas within the building where goods and services are made available to the public.

Usability of Restrooms. Providing access to restroom facilities.

Removal of Remaining Barriers. Providing access to the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations.

Projected Expenditures Identified recommended ADA works are scheduled below.



ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES

Energy Conservation opportunities have been identified through an assessment of the systems and equipment during the Facility Condition Assessment (FCA) and provide simple payback in years and the annual cost avoidance for each ECM. The physical assessment consisted of a limited, non-intrusive visual assessment of the building and its components. It was expected that generally all aspects of the buildings were made assessable, including provision to gain access to the roof, interior areas, mechanical, electrical rooms and common areas. Confined spaces or hazardous areas were not expected to be assessed. Low-sloped roofs with safe access were accessed; however, high-sloped, inaccessible roofs or roofs that were considered unsafe without the use of personal protective equipment were not accessed. The assessment techniques followed the ASTM standards for property condition assessments (ASTM E2018-08) and consisted of a visual assessment of those components that are readily accessible and visible. The building assessment was limited to those components that affected energy usage, which typically include: • Building Envelope, material description, construction type, windows and doors • Lighting, type and approximate coverage by type • Heating, type and area serviced • Cooling, type and area serviced • Ventilation, type • Domestic Hot Water, method of heating, capacity, storage • Miscellaneous Equipment, motors, solar panels, pools etc. We have focused our assessment of energy conservation opportunities on measures that have realistic payback periods of 10 years or less. Our experience tells us that major architectural and mechanical system upgrades are almost never justified based on energy savings alone. We recommend specifying suitable high efficiency replacents for systems that are at the end of their useful life in an effort to lower long term cost of ownership. Some typical examples of energy conservation opportunities that are justified based on energy savings alone include, but are not limited to the following: • Lighting lamp and ballast retrofits • Varible Frequency Drive (VFD) upgrades on motors with variable loads greater than 20 horsepower • HVAC system retrocommissioning and/or controls upgrades • Instantaneous domestic water heaters • Heat recovery on 100% fresh air HVAC systems • Economizer / free cooling upgrades on suitable HVAC systems • Attic insulation upgrades Projected Expenditures Identified recommended energy conservation measures are scheduled below.



Deferred Maintenance + Capital Renewal + Plant Adaptation (TC)

Current Replacement Value of the Facility(s) (CRV)

FCNI=

FA CIL IT Y CO ND IT IO N NEE DS IN D EX

In this report we have calculated the Facility Condition Needs Index (FCNI) which is used in Facilities Management to provide a benchmark to compare the relative condition of a group of facilities. The FCNI is primarily used to support asset management initiatives of federal, state, and local government facilities organizations. The FCNI is the ratio of accumulated Total Cost (TC) (Deferred Maintenance, Capital Renewal and Plant Adaptation) to the Current Replacement Value (CRV) for a constructed asset calculated by dividing the TC by the CRV. The range is from zero for a newly constructed asset, to one for a constructed asset with a TC value equal to its CRV. Acceptable ranges vary by “Asset Type’, but as a general guideline the FCNI scoring system is as follows:

If the FCNI rating is 60% or greater then replacement of the asset/building should be considered instead of renewal.

The chart below indicates the current FCNI ratio of the Water Tower building.

Water Tower, FCNI: 115.61%

Condition Definition Percentage Value

GOOD In a new or well-maintained condition, with no visual evidence of wear, soiling or other deficiencies 0% to 5%

FAIR Subject to wear, and soiling but is still in a serviceable and functioning condition 5% to 10%

POOR Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Nearing the end of its useful or serviceable life. Greater than 10%

V-POOR Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Has reached the end of its

useful or serviceable life. Renewal now necessary Greater than 60%



The chart below indicates the effects of the FCNI ratio per year, assuming the required funds and expenditures ARE made to address the identified actions each year.

The Chart below indicates the cumulative effects of the FCNI ratio over the study period assuming the required funds and expenditures are NOT provided to address the identified works and deferred maintenance each year.



NEE DS SO RTE D BY PR IO R IT IZAT IO N OF WO R K

Faithful+Gould has prioritized the identified work in order to assist with analyzing the deficiencies found during the assessment. The baseline prioritization model is not just based on replacement year or criticality but uses four key data attributes to build an overall importance metric for every recommendation: System type, the cause or nature of the issue, timing and building mission incorporated into the model with relative weighting to provide an overall priority score. Priority categories are shown below:

The chart below illustrates the breakdown of expenditure according the priority coding providing an opportunity to strategically plan and effectively direct funding to the highest priority.

Building System Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Total A SubStructure $2,400 $0.00 $0.00 $2,400

B Shell $80,000 $0.00 $0.00 $80,000 G Building Sitework $528,000 $0.00 $0.00 $528,000

Totals $610,400 $0.00 $0.00 $610,400

•Systems requiring immediate action that have failed, compromises staff or public safety or requires to be upgraded to comply with current codes and accessibility

Priority 1 Currently Critical

•A system or component is nearing end of useful life, if not addressed will cause additional deterioration and added repair costs

Priority 2 Potentially Critical:

•Lifecycle replacements neccessary but not critical or mid-term future replacements to maintain the integrity of the facility or component

Priority 3 Necessary / Not Critical:



NEE DS SO RTE D BY PL A N TYPE

Faithful+Gould has prioritized the identified work according to the Plan Type or deficiency categories in order to assist with analyzing the deficiencies found during the assessment. The following Plan Types are shown below:

The chart below illustrates the breakdown of expenditure according to the Plan Type or deficiency categories providing an opportunity to strategically plan and effectively direct funding.

Building System Total Cost Deferred Maintenance $610,400

Total $610,400

•Maintenance that was not performed when it was scheduled or past its useful life resulting in immediate repair or replacement

Plan Type 1 Deferred Maintenance

•Maintenance that is planned and performed on a routine basis to maintain and preserve the condition

Plan Type 2 Routine Maintenance

•Planned replacement of building systems that have or will reach the end of their useful life

Plan Type 3 Capital Renewal

•When the repair or replacement of equipment or systems are recommended to improve energy and sustainability performance

Plan Type 4 Energy & Sustainability

•When the repair or replacement of equipment or systems are recommended to comply with ADA

Plan Type 5 ADA

•Projects identified as part of a Seismic Study Plan Type 6 Seismic

•When the repair or replacement of equipment or systems are recommended to remove hazardous materials

Plan Type 7

Environmental

•Projects identified to improve the functionality of the facility Plan Type 8 Functionality



A SU B S T R U C T U R E SY S T E M S

A10 FOUNDATIONS A1011 Wall Foundations Description

The water tower has mass concrete footings to the supporting legs and water pipe, with a presumed depth of 12' (reference Photograph A1011 Wall Foundations.1 in Appendix B). Condition

The foundations are in poor condition, due to the risk of seismic stability. It would be recommnended to remove the foundations as part of the demolition of the water tower. Projected Expenditures

Identified recommended works that are required during the 10-year study period are scheduled below. ID Type Recommendation Priority Plan Type Year Expenditures

86781 A1010 Remove Footings / Foundation Priority 1 Deferred Maintenance 2014 $2,400

TOTALS BY YEAR

Year Total Expenditures 2014 $2,400



B SH E L L SY S T E M S

B10 SUPERSTRUCTURE B1031 Steel Frame Structure Description

The water tower is constructed of a welded steel structure, the tower has four steel supporting legs with a mid height steel bracing (reference Photograph B1031 Steel Frame Structure.1 in Appendix B). Each leg of the water tower is constructed of two steel columns with interconnecting webbed bracing fixed by rivets (reference Photograph B1031 Steel Frame Structure.2 in Appendix B). The legs support the welded steel elevated 48,000 gallon domed reservoir. An access ladder is fixed to one of the legs with a fall arrest system. To the center of the tower is the steel constructed water distribution pipe work. The water tower is finished with a metallic gloss paint system. Condition

The water tower is in poor condition, the paint work is in poor condition which requires repainting (reference Photograph B1031 Steel Frame Structure.3 in Appendix B). The tower was last repainted 10 years ago. The fall arrest system has come away from its holdings and does not provide adequate fall protection (reference Photograph B1031 Steel Frame Structure.4 in Appendix B). The water tower stability is highly speculative to seismic activity. Considering the considerable cost for access and repainting and the stability risks, it is considered to demolish the water tower early within the study plan, a budget lump sum estimate of $80,000 has been given to the demolition of the water tower, cost of a replacement system are within the MEP section of the report. Projected Expenditures


86782 B1030 Remove Structural Steel Coumns and Beam Frame System Priority 1 Deferred

Maintenance 2014 $80,000

TOTALS BY YEAR




G B U I L D I N G S I T E W O R K SY S T E M S

G30 SITE CIVIL/MECHANICAL UTILITIES G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage Description

Hillcrest is served by a 48,000 gallon elevated domestic and fire water storage tank. The steel frame tank is fed from a 302 foot deep well through a 6-inch steel piping system (reference Photograph G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.1 through 7 in Appendix B). Condition

The elevated water tank has been in service for over seventy-five years and has far exceeded its useful life. It is currently showing signs of advanced corrosion and its stability during a major seismic event is speculative. The age, condition, complexity and inherent lack of reliability in the domestic and fire water supply infrastructure warrant prompt replacement of the entire system with a new domestic water storage vault and pumping system at the south end of the site. Projected Expenditures


86783 G3010 Replace Potable Water Distribution and Storage Priority 1 Deferred Maintenance 2014 $528,000

TOTALS BY YEAR


A P P E N D I C E S

APPENDIX A: Capital Expenditures

APPENDIX B: Photographic Record

APPENDIX C: Document Review and Warranty Information

APPENDIX D: Equipment Tables

APPENDIX E: Glossary of Terms

APPENDIX A: C A P I T A L EX P E N D I T U R E S

Water TowerGSF: 2,000

Year Built: 1925 Renew Year :

Replacement Cost: $528,000

Materials

Fiscal Year $ ID CSI Type Name Description Qty Units Cost Other Material

Estimate $

2014 $610,400 86781 A1010 Deferred Maintenance

Remove Footings / Foundation 48 CY $50.00 $2,400 $2,400

86782 B1030 Deferred Maintenance

Remove Structural Steel Coumns abd Beam Frame System

1 LS $80,000.00 $80,000 $80,000

86783 G3010 Deferred Maintenance

Replace Potable Water Distribution and Storage 48000 GALS $11.00 $528,000 $528,000

Total Total: $610,400

5/28/2014 2:04:20 PM Page 1 of 1State of Oregon

Deficiency Report

APPENDIX B: PH O T O G R A P H I C R E C O R D

A1011 Wall Foundations.1:- View of foundation footing.

B1031 Steel Frame Structure.1:- View of the water tower.

B1031 Steel Frame Structure.2:- View of the steel leg webbed bracing.

B1031 Steel Frame Structure.3:- View of failed paint work to the water reservoir.

B1031 Steel Frame Structure.4:- View of the failed fall arrest system to the access ladder.

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.1:- View of advanced corrosion at the base of the tower

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.2:- View of typical corrosion on the tower pedestal

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.3:- View of the valve vault and tower riser

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.4:- Elevated storage tank

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.5:- View of typical concrete pier

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.6:- View of valves and backflow preventer in the tower vault

G3011 Potable Water Distribution and Storage.7:- View of the water tower from the grounds of the School

APPENDIX C: D O C U M E N T RE V I E W A N D

WA R R A N T Y IN F O R M A T I O N

The following documents were reviewed as part of the facility condition assessment of the Water Tower facility:

Documents on the water capacity of the water tower were reviewed.

APPENDIX D: EQ U I P M E N T TA B L E S

APPENDIX E: G L O S S A R Y O F T E R M S

Acronyms & Glossary of Terms

CMU Concrete Masonry Unit BUR Built-Up Roof EIFS Exterior Insulation and Finish System EPDM Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer SC Solid Core Doors HM Hollow Metal Doors MH Man Holes ABC Aggregate Base Course EMT Electrical Metallic Conduit EUL Estimated Useful Life RUL Recommended Useful Life EOL End of Life FCI Facility Condition Index CRV Current Replacement Value DM Deferred Maintenance SF Square Foot SY Square Yards PSF Pounds-Per-Square-Foot PSI Pounds-Per-Square-Inch GPF Gallons Per Flush NFPA National Fire Protection Association FACP Fire Alarm Control Panel NAC Notification Appliance Circuit FCC Fire Command Center HVAC Heating Ventilating and Air conditioning VAV Variable Air Volume AHU Main Air Handling Units FCU Fan Coil Unit EF Exhaust Fan VFD Variable Frequency Drives HP Horse Power FSS Fuel Supply System MDP Main Distribution Panel SES Service Entrance Switchboard’s NEMA National Electrical Manufactures Association HID Intensity Discharge EMT Electrical Metallic Tubing KVA kilovolt-ampere RO Reverse Osmosis BTU/HR British Thermal Units per Hour kW Kilowatt FPM Feet per Minute (Elevator Speed) AMP Amperage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilovolt-ampere

Acronyms & Glossary of Terms

BTU – British Thermal Unit; the energy required to raise the temperature of one pound of water by one degree. Building Envelope - The enclosure of the building that protects the building’s interior from the outside elements, namely the exterior walls, roof and soffit areas. Building Systems – Interacting or independent components or assemblies, which from single integrated units, that comprise a building and its site work, such as, pavement and flatwork, structural frame, roofing, exterior walls, plumbing, HVAC, electrical, etc. Caulking – Soft, putty-like material used to fill joints, seams, and cracks. Codes – See building codes. Component – A fully functional portion of a building system, piece of equipment, or building element. Deferred Maintenance – Physical deficiencies that cannot be remedied with routine maintenance, normal operating maintenance, etc., excluding de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material physical deficiency to the subject property. Expected Useful Life (EUL) – The average amount of time in years that an item, component or system is estimated to function when installed new and assuming routine maintenance is practiced. Facility – All or any portion of buildings, structures, site improvements, complexes, equipment, roads, walks, passageways, parking lots, or other real or personal property located on site. Flashing – A thin, impervious sheet of material placed in construction to prevent water penetration or to direct the flow of water. Flashing is used especially at roof hips and valleys, roof penetrations, joints between a roof and a vertical wall, and in masonry walls to direct the flow of water and moisture. Remaining Useful Life (RUL) – A subjective estimate based upon observations, or average estimates of similar items, components, or systems, or a combination thereof, of a number of remaining years that an item, component, or system is established to be able to function in accordance with its intended purpose before warranting replacement. Such period of time is affected by the initial quality of an item, component, or system, the quality of the initial installation, the quality and amount of preventative maintenance exercised, climatic conditions, extent of use, etc. Thermal Resistance (R) – A unit used to measure a material’s resistance to heat transfer. The formula for thermal resistance is: R = Thickness(in inches)/K Structural Frame – The components or building systems that support the building’s non-variable forces or weights (dead loads) and variable forces or weights (live loads). Warranty – Legally enforceable assurance of quality or performance of a product or work, or of the duration of satisfactory performance. Warranty guarantee and guaranty are substantially identical in meaning; nevertheless, confusion frequently arises from supposed distinctions attributed to guarantee (or guaranty) being exclusively indicative of duration of satisfactory performance or of a legally enforceable assurance furnished by a manufacturer or other third party. The uniform commercial code provisions on sales (effective in all states except Louisiana) use warranty but recognize the continuation of the use of guarantee and guaranty.