[Bldg-sim] EPACT - more questions

Josh Howes josh at concordenergystrategies.com
Mon Oct 3 13:47:02 PDT 2011


Rohini,

We specialize in EPACT studies.  The IRS legislation is very complicated and vague.  However, to answer your questions:

1) Nick is correct.  If you cannot get to 50% with your model by combining all the improvements (HVAC, lighting, and envelope), then you must model them separately.  Remember, your baseline is not the building prior to the improvements.  Your baseline is an ASHRAE 90.1-2001 baseline.
2) You are looking for 20% improvement on building improvements placed into service in 2008 or later.  The 16 2/3% benchmark is only for years 2006 and 2007.
3) Nick is again correct.

We would be happy to work with you on future EPACT studies.  Best of luck.

--------
Joshua D. Howes, PE
Concord Energy Strategies
(502) 384-9078
www.concordenergystrategies.com

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this document is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter that is contained in this document.



> 
> From: "Nick Caton" <ncaton at smithboucher.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bldg-sim] EPACT - more questions
> Date: October 3, 2011 1:29:06 PM EDT
> To: "R B" <slv3sat at gmail.com>, <bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org>
> 
> 
> Hi Rohini,
>  
> I haven’t actually put together a final set of documentation for the modeling approaches, but having scoured the legislation & IRS clarification docs at one, here’s my current understanding:
> 1.       “Running the proposed with both these systems as upgrades gives me ~40% cost savings.”  ß This means the whole building approach is out (<50%).  You have to model the lighting/HVAC/envelope improvements independently (“partially qualifying”).
> 2.       For each independently modeled component (lighting/HVAC/envelope) that pushes savings past the 16-2/3% improvement mark, you get to claim $0.60/SF for the deduction. 
> 3.       The improved HVAC run will not benefit from any lighting/envelope improvements for these partially qualifying runs, and so on. 
>  
> Not sure I recall a 20% improvement figure as part of the requirements, but I haven’t brushed up on the particulars in a good while.
>  
> ~Nick
>  
> <image001.jpg>
>  
> NICK CATON, P.E.
> SENIOR ENGINEER
>  
> Smith & Boucher Engineers
> 25501 west valley parkway, suite 200
> olathe, ks 66061
> direct 913.344.0036
> fax 913.345.0617
> www.smithboucher.com
>  
> From: bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:bldg-sim-bounces at lists.onebuilding.org] On Behalf Of R B
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 11:48 AM
> To: bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> Subject: [Bldg-sim] EPACT - more questions
>  
> The building that I am working on will have upgrades to lighting and HVAC. Running the proposed with both these systems as upgrades gives me ~40% cost savings. This is more than the 40% that is needed (for lighting and HVAC individually 20%). My question is if this is partially qualifying (less than 50%), then should I run lighting and HVAC separately? and each should be 20% saving? In this case the benefit of lower lighting will not be available to HVAC.
>  
> Thanks
> -Rohini
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bldg-sim mailing list
> Bldg-sim at lists.onebuilding.org
> http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/bldg-sim-onebuilding.org/attachments/20111003/28162805/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Bldg-sim mailing list