Subcommittee Meeting – August 23, 2011 RTF’s Small & Rural Technical Needs Study – Final Draft Report

Review of Project Objectives Primary Objective – What measures and technical assistance can the RTF improve/offer to SR utilities? Secondary Objective – What infrastructure improvements can BPA and NEEA implement? 2

RTF Staff Interpretation of Findings Survey did not reveal any efficiency measures that were specific to deployment in SR utilities beyond those already identified by the RTF. Survey did reveal that limited infrastructure in SR utilities constrains their ability to deploy efficiency measures and programs. Addressing the infrastructure limitation problems is not the domain of the RTF. 3

RTF Staff Recommendations: Next Steps Accept editorial changes and make simple clarifications (Ecotope and Council) Post all comments received to the subcommittee webpage as Appendix to report Option A: Finalize report as-is – post to website as Ecotope report to the RTF. RTF takes actions on staff recommendations based on report. BPA/NEEA make independent decisions on report recommendations. Option B: Add money (whose?) and revise report to reflect substantive changes recommended by reviewers. 4

RTF Staff Recommended Actions for RTF Process change: Screening mechanism on decisions on measures and specifications – taken SR deployment into consideration? Add to the Guidelines. Compare list of SR requested measures with those that are already in RTF’s work plan. (Does Ecotope have a list of specific measures? Or just “Ag”?) 2012 Work Plan – Option to allocate staff/consultant resources to develop SR measures for RTF. Anything else to be added? Measures added to list for consideration. 5

Small and Rural Utility Technical Needs Study:

 Recap of report status  Changes to final report  Subcommittee feedback/questions  Findings from utility interviews  Measure conclusions and recommendations  Program and delivery structure  General recommendations 7

 Ecotope submitted draft report  RTF subcommittee provided structural and content-level feedback on draft report  Ecotope completed major restructuring and development of new content for June RTF presentation  Ecotope delivered final report addressing feedback from draft report and June 1 RTF presentation  Next step: obtain subcommittee feedback and finalize report 8

 Recast and rewrote the executive summary  Recast and rewrote introduction focusing on the context and content of the project, not the PTR and BPA  Moved section 3 into section 2 and revised content  Revised and added summaries of key interview findings to new section 3 (old section 4, findings)  Added clarification to new section 4 (old section 5, conclusions/recommendations).  Reorganized and clarified specific steps that the RTF can take to support the small/rural utilities  Clarified which recommendations are oriented toward the RTF vs. BPA or NEEA.  Added more detail to measure recommendations  Added new 35-page Appendix D: Summaries of Interview Findings 9

 Findings from utility interviews  Measure conclusions and recommendations  Program and delivery structure  General recommendations 10