1. BPA M&V Protocols
Overview of BPA M&V Protocols and Relationship to RTF Guidelines for Savings and Standard Savings Estimation Protocols

2. BPA’s M&V Protocol Development Activities
Review BPA’s site-specific M&V protocols, referencing
National best practices
BPA’s efficiency resource acquisition activities
Make recommendations for revising and augmenting protocols (Phase 1)
Draft revised protocols (Phase 2)

3. Phase 1 Recommendations
BPA should revise its protocols to be IPMVP-adherent, including:
Identifying the IPMVP Option
Requiring documentation of baseline equipment and operating characteristics
Expanding the description of calculations to be used, data to be collected, and use of data in calculations
Providing additional detail – e.g., selecting monitoring points, sampling, and generally addressing questions that often arise

4. Savings Verification: Spectrum of Rigor Levels – Potential to Perform
VERIFICATION OF POTENTIAL TO PERFORM
One-time visual inspection
Spot measurements of key operational parameters
Measure commissioning through collection and analysis of short- term trends of key operational parameters
Initial measure commissioning and continuous or repeated monitoring and analysis of key operational parameters
Most Rigorous
Least Rigorous

5. Savings Verification: Spectrum of Rigor Levels – Savings
VERIFICATION OF SAVINGS
Use of deemed savings estimates
Comparison of results from an alternate ex-ante savings calculation
Use of collected post-installation data to correct ex-ante savings calculation
Development and projection of baseline energy model, subtracting post- installation use (IPMVP)
Most Rigorous
Least Rigorous

6. Existing Protocols PROTOCOL DESCRIPTION ENERGY INDEXING Guidelines
REFERENCE
DESCRIPTION
ENERGY INDEXING
Guidelines
Applies to industrial processes, consumption calculated on unit basis
CONNECTED LOAD
Site-specific , similar to IPMVP Option D
END-USE METERING
Site-specific , similar to IPMVP Option B
BILLING ANALYSIS
Site-specific, similar to IPMVP Option C
HYBRID METHODS
Addresses measure interaction, double counting, when verifying performance for more than 1 measure, each reported independently
RTF GROUP NO. 1
App P, RTF
Applies to groups of existing residential projects, requires control (non-participant) group, like impact evaluation billing analysis
RTF GROUP NO. 2
Applies to residential new construction, savings are difference between simulated baseline and actual consumption, includes impact evaluation topics like attribution
RTF GROUP NO. 3
Applies to impact evaluation, not project- or measure-specific
RTF GROUP NO. 4
Applies to non-residential buildings and multifamily, uses simulation, like IPMVP New Construction and Option D
RTF SITE NO. 1
Applies to industrial end use measures like motors and lighting that are not weather dependent, similar to IPMVP Option A
RTF SITE NO. 2
Applies to industrial processes, similar to IPMVP Option B, requires baseline monitoring

7. Verification by Energy Modeling
Protocols Revised
EXISTING PROTOCOL
REVISED PROTOCOL
ENERGY INDEXING
Verification by Energy Use Indexing (IPMVP NA)
CONNECTED LOAD
Verification by Equipment or End-Use Metering (IPMVP Options A and B – Savings small relative to building annual use; Characterizes equipment load, schedule, and impact of ECM; Non-interactive, non-complex energy flow paths)
END-USE METERING
RTF SITE NO. 1
HYBRID METHODS
Verification by Energy Modeling
(IPMVP Options B, C, and D – ECMs that involve multiple pieces of equipment with interactions among multiple or complex energy flow paths)
RTF GROUP NO. 3
RTF GROUP NO. 4
BILLING ANALYSIS
RTF SITE NO. 2
NOT REVISING

8. New Documents NEW DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION EBCx
Existing Building Commissioning: An M&V Protocol Application Guide (applies Energy Modeling Protocol)
“BASELINE NOT AVAILABLE”
End-Use Metering Absent Baseline Measurement (applies Equipment and End-Use Metering Protocol)
LIGHT M&V PROTOCOL
Light Verification through Operational Verification and Engineering Calculations or Simulations (available for projects < 200,000 kWh and projects meeting other criteria, such as safety issues precluding energy metering)
REGRESSION GUIDE
Regression for M&V: Reference Guide
SAMPLING GUIDE
Sampling for M&V: Reference Guide
PROTOCOL SELECTION GUIDE
Measurement and Verification (M&V) Protocol Selection Guide and Example M&V Plan
GLOSSARY
Glossary for M&V: Reference Guide

9. Presentation Purpose
Discuss relationship to RTF guidelines for savings and standard savings estimation protocols

10. RTF / BPA Protocol Relationship
Guidelines for RTF Savings
BPA M&V Protocols
RTF Standard Savings Estimation Protocols

11. BPA Protocol Relationship to RTF Standard Savings Estimation Protocols
RTF Protocols are focused on a specific measure.
BPA Protocols are not measure-specific.
provide detail on the necessary processes
can be used to provide guidance on development of a specific standard savings estimation protocol

12. BPA Protocols Do Not Necessarily Meet All RTF Guidelines’ Requirements
Must be entirely prescriptive
Since BPA protocols are not measure-specific, they don’t meet this requirement
Must “yield savings estimates that are additive, i.e., independent of the savings from other measures implemented at the same site”
Savings independence depends on the M&V measurement boundary; is not determined by the BPA protocol

13. BPA Protocols Do Not Necessarily Meet All RTF Guidelines’ Requirements
Must be “simplest reliable estimation procedure”
BPA protocols intended to be best practice rather than simplest reliable
Further prescription – e.g., the RTF protocols – can lead to simplest reliable

14. BPA Protocols Do Not Necessarily Meet All RTF Guidelines’ Requirements
Must require “skills […] common among the region’s program implementation workforce”
BPA protocols intended to be best practice and may require skills that are not common
New reference guides for sampling and regression are intended to help build practitioners’ skills
Some “best practices” include uncommon activities and skill sets, such as calculating uncertainty.
Indeed, some uncertainty calculations are still being developed (e.g., extrapolating short-term data into annual numbers)

15. RTF / BPA Protocol Relationship
Guidelines for RTF Savings
Unit Energy Savings (UES)
Standard Protocols for Site-specific Savings Estimate
Custom Protocol for Site-specific Savings Estimate

16. Relationship of BPA Documents to UES
Statistical:
“The UES estimate may be derived from statistical analysis of baseline and efficient case energy use for reliable random samples of relevant customers or end uses. Such measurements of energy use can be used to estimate typical savings for a population that are representative of the likely future participants. “
Supported by BPA’s:
Sampling for Measurement & Verification (M&V): Reference Guide and Sample Size and Results Calculator
Regression for M&V: Reference Guide

17. Relationship of BPA Documents to UES
Meta-statistical
“The RTF may determine that a value in the range of savings demonstrated by [a number of separate] studies constitutes a sufficiently reliable estimate”
This approach is not supported by BPA’s site-specific protocols and guides.

18. Relationship of BPA Documents to UES
Calibrated Engineering:
“…where statistical or meta-statistical procedures are not practical or where they are not the best choice. In those instances, UES may be estimated with calibrated engineering procedures. These procedures rely on unbiased measurements to establish input values for key parameters of an engineering model.”
Supported by the Light Custom Protocol: Engineering Calculations with Verification

19. Standard and Custom Protocols for Site-specific Savings Estimate
All BPA’s M&V documents can be used to provide guidance on development of the specific standard or custom protocol:
Protocol Selection Guide
Verification by Equipment or End-Use Metering Protocol
Equipment in New Construction: An M&V Protocol Application Guide
Energy Modeling Protocol
Existing Building Commissioning: An M&V Protocol Application Guide
Verification by Energy Use Indexing Protocol
Light Custom Protocol: Engineering Calculations with Verification
Regression for M&V: Reference Guide
Sampling for Measurement & Verification (M&V): Reference Guide

20. BPA Protocol Selection Guide

21. Relationship of BPA Protocols to Other Standards
IPMVP
BPA protocols are more specific and prescriptive than IPMVP (although less prescriptive than the measure-specific RTF protocols)
BPA protocols are designed for adherence to IPMVP, except for Option D
ASHRAE Guideline 14
BPA protocols focus more on the processes and issues associated with M&V and less on data acquisition, cost and compliance issues
BPA protocols are (we hope!) easier to read

22. Relationship of BPA Protocols to IPMVP
IPMVP Option A
Verification by Equipment or End-Use Metering Protocol
IPMVP Option B
Verification by Energy Modeling Protocol
Verification by Energy Use Indexing Protocol

23. Relationship of BPA Protocols to IPMVP
IPMVP Option C
Verification by Energy Modeling Protocol
Verification by Energy Use Indexing Protocol
IPMVP Option D
Engineering Calculations with Verification Protocol
“A revision of the protocol formerly known as Light”
Note that Option D requires calibration, whereas the BPA protocol focuses on calculation and simulation methods, but not calibration

24. Relationship of BPA Protocols to ASHRAE Guideline 14
Whole Building Approach
Verification by Energy Modeling Protocol
Retrofit Isolation Approach
Verification by Equipment or End-Use Metering Protocol
Whole Building Calibrated Simulation Approach
Engineering Calculations with Verification Protocol
Again, note that ASHRAE requires calibration, whereas the BPA protocol focuses on engineering calculation and whole-building simulation methods, but not calibration

25. Next Steps Documents to be finalized by August 31st
Protocols to be used to satisfy projects according to BPA’s October 2011 Implementation Plan

26. Draft Documents Available for Review
Topics
click More
click M&V
Documents have been posted since early June
Comments needed ASAP!