D EEMED M EASURE R EVIEW P ROJECT Final Report December 7, 2010 Regional Technical Forum Presented by: Michael Baker

Project Goals Conduct detailed reviews of high priority deemed measure categories Enhance transparency of deemed measure workbooks Develop update recommendations based on detailed review of workbooks and regional / national source materials Develop guidelines that formalize policies and practices for RTF deemed measures 2 12/7/2010

Methodology Data Collection from Regional and National Sources Selection of Measure Categories for Detailed Review Develop Summary Template Detailed Review Develop the Guidelines 3 12/7/2010

Data Collection from Regional and National Sources Objective was to find relevant studies that could provide primary data useful to improving the RTF’s deemed savings estimates Two phase search Phase 1 - Readily available documentation for any deemed measure category Subcommittee prioritized measure categories Phase 2 – In-depth search for documents relevant to high priority measure categories 4 12/7/2010

Results of the Search 31 sources provided documents (reports, memos, spreadsheets) 83 documents were relevant to high priority measure categories  Enhanced documentation of existing workbooks  Basis for recommended updates Many other documents reviewed but not found to contain primary work or were not relevant. 5 12/7/2010

Selection of Measure Categories for Detailed Review Developed master measure list, sourced from: 6 th Plan, documents provided by regional utilities, and our experience Classified measures as: Deemed, Standard Protocols or Custom Protocols Ranked measure categories based on factors such as current RTF status, likely savings, availability of good sources and RTF staff and subcommittee scores Selected top 20 for detailed review 6 12/7/2010

Develop Summary Template Four tables of information  Measure Classification and Properties - market sector, market segment, measure category, measure description, sunset criteria, primary workbook, linked workbooks, and a description of the number of measures and UES components  Measure Identifiers - identifiers of the specific measure applications for which UES values are estimated 7 12/7/2010

More Develop Summary Template  Constant Parameters - key input parameters whose values do not vary between baseline and efficient case for a measure  Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources - analysis approach used to derive the UES for each of the UES components for each measure type, baseline and efficient case values, and sources for each 8 12/7/2010

Detail Review Measure Categories 9 12/7/2010

Steps in Detail Review Workbook Inspection Enhance documentation Complete Summary worksheet Review Regional and National Sources Developed recommendation memo Created new workbook 10 12/7/2010

Detail Review Memo Structure Summary Recommendation Additions to Workbook Documentation Workbook Calculation Errors Recommendations for Updates  Workbook Structure and Formulas  Documentation  Measure Definition  UES Savings Estimation Method  Input Parameters 11 12/7/2010

Guideline Development Provide guidance on policies and practices relevant to the development and approval of deemed savings Combined with guidelines for the development of Standard Protocols and Custom Protocol See  Guidelines for the Development and Maintenance of RTF-Approved Measure Savings Estimates 12 12/7/2010

W ORK PRODUCTS FROM D ETAILED R EVIEW Work Products  For each measure category Workbooks with enhanced documentation and new standard names Detail review and update recommendations memos See Detailed Review zip  Regional / national source search See Citations - National and Regional.xlsm SourcesCited.zip – all documents cited in workbooks or memos Sources.zip – all documents obtained from all sources 13 12/7/2010

Measure Category Recommendations Highlights  6 measure categories require only a low level of effort prior to being restored to Deemed status  3 measure categories are Out of Compliance with the Guideline and require significant new studies  2 measure categories should be De-Activated  Other measure categories either remain provisional; can advance to Proposal status; or need additional development work by BPA or NEEA Summary Recommendations  See Final Report Table /7/2010

Recommendation Applicable to All Measure Categories Standard Workbook Worksheets – Summary, MeasureTable and ProCostInOut – Facilitate automated systems Decision-Making Scope of Measure Category – Use Measure Types to group appropriately ProCostInOut and the ProCost Macro – Modify to allow single ProCost run per MeasureTable Additional Macros – Needed for quality control 15 12/7/2010

Recommendations Relevant to Future Reviews and Updates Prioritizing Measure Category Reviews: Sunset criteria and the needs of regional programs should be the primary determinants of the order in which measure category reviews are conducted. Narrower Search Strategy: Rely more heavily on literature from CEE, ACEEE, NEEA and CALMAC and studies that can be identified by RTF participants /7/2010

More Recommendations Relevant to Future Reviews and Updates Reporting New Regional Studies: On an annual basis, RTF participants should submit a list of studies that commenced or were completed in the previous year. Current NEEA efforts may provide a mechanism for implementing this recommendation. Capturing Sources through RTF Networking. A centralized place where RTF participants can submit information about relevant studies /7/2010

More Recommendations Relevant to Future Reviews and Updates Measuring Impact of Guidelines: RTF participants currently report annual savings achieved by their programs. They should add to this report annual spending on savings estimation. Spending per kWh saved could be used as a metric for determining whether the Guidelines are imposing to large a burden on the region’s efficiency efforts /7/2010