Presentation of Key Findings, Conclusions, & RecommendationsJune 1, 2011

Presented by Ecotope, Inc.

Small and Rural UtilityTechnical Needs Study:

2

Agenda

Acknowledgements Project objectives Project methodology Key findings and recommendations

Utility responses Utility segmentation Existing measures Desired measures

Priorities

3

Acknowledgements Small and rural utilities

across the region that took the time to meet and provide valuable feedback

The RTF SRR subcommittee that provided input and guidance throughout the project

4

Project Objectives Determine what technical assistance the RTF can offer

small/rural utilities to address the unique circumstances of their service territories

Identify program and infrastructure barriers faced by small/rural utilities

Develop and prioritize recommendations

5

Project Methodology Review reporting databases Identify criteria for “small,” “rural,” and

“residential” Select utilities based on review of reporting

databases Develop interview guide based on review of

reporting databases and the project objectives Interview 20 utilities Analyze interview results Develop recommendations based on interview

findings

6

Utility Screening Criteria

Small (<15 aMW) Rural (LLD recipients) Residential (> 60%)

7

Utility Selection Criteria

Utility Category TotalSmall 43Rural 56Small/rural 18Small/residential 13Rural/residential 12Small/rural/residential

9

All Small and/or Rural

77

Selection Criteria:•Small, rural, residential status•Volume of savings •Patterns of measure implementation of various utilities •Climate•Availability of adjacent conservation infrastructure•Residential vs. commercial

8

9

Interview Guide Focus on technical characteristics of conservation

efforts: Development of deemed measures Technical specifications Simplified M&V protocols

Help identify program barriers faced by small/rural utilities (for RTF approved measures/protocols)

Review measures implemented by the utility Discuss staff resources, incentives paid, and

measures not reported to the PTR Develop list of measures the utility is interested in

implementing Assess available conservation infrastructure

10

General Findings The utilities should be segmented in order to zero in

on unique challenges and opportunities The utilities by and large want measures/programs

that: Are deemed and easy to implement Achieve high savings Don’t change very often

Utilities focus on deemed measures and appear to require process improvements and strategic support, rather than technical changes to measures

Many utilities are not aware of what the RTF or NEEA do

11

Utility Resources

12

Utility Constraints

13

Engagement with Regional Organizations

14

Utility Segmentation as Lens for: Measure recommendations Regional collaboration and

communication Prioritization

15

Utility Segmentation, Type 1 Utilities with their own programs, developed

and marketed to their customers Generally larger with conservation staff

resources of at least 1 FTE Specific program offerings outside of PTR,

sometimes not reported Specific recommendations to RTF to support

their programs and approaches Often have a medium-large agricultural

customer base 35% of respondents

16

Utility Segmentation, Type 2 Utilities using PTR as main guideline

Utility programs developed around PTR Utility programs designed as required by

specifications within the utility structure Few custom measures (if any) except as

delivered by third party providers Most recommendations focused on the

need for more measures that are “deemed and provide lots of savings”

45% of respondents

17

Utility Segmentation, Type 3 Utilities with no defined program or

implementation approach React to customer or contractor requests Provide pass through incentives from

PTR Would implement new measures if they

appeared Develop no custom measure Usually staffed at under .25 FTE or less

(much less) 20 % of respondents

18

Applying Utility Segmentations The utilities should be segmented in order to zero in on unique

challenges and opportunities Type 1 utilities will respond to different programs and new initiatives Type 1 &2 utilities need more variety in deemed RTF measures Type 3 utilities may not respond to anything Type 3 utilities need more direct assistance from BPA

The utilities by and large want measures/programs that: Are deemed and easy to implement Achieve high savings Don’t change very often

Type 2 utilities focus on deemed measures and appear to require process improvements and strategic support, rather than technical changes to measures

Many type 2 and 3 utilities are not aware of what the RTF or NEEA do

19

Other Important Factors Staffing: Median conservation staff size-.65 FTE

No type one utilities are below this level Staff size not always critical

Remoteness: Many utilities remote from all major markets or contractor resources Utilities more than 100 miles from a major market Half of our respondents

Size: Median size of these utilities 22.8 aMW Correlated to staff size but not completely Some “Type 1” utilities are smaller while some “Type

3” utilities are larger

20

Guide to Measure Recommendations Recommendations for the RTF (in red) are a combination

of utility comments and Ecotope recommendations. Utility only findings/recommendations identified with “*” Utility and Ecotope recommendations identified with “**”

These small/rural utilities are much more focused on process.

The measures recommendations are both technical and programmatic.

Deemed savings are important but so are savings that can be achieved in these utilities.

Incentives need to be improved for some programs to work.

21

Existing Measures Weatherization

RTF: Make new weatherization specifications more practical for utility administration*

RTF: Improve air sealing measure to make it more usable* *

RTF: Add small commercial deemed measures (Wx)* Stabilize window replacement measures, incentives

and savings are unpredictable** EStar New homes

Must have higher incentives to get builders attention*

Mostly a gas program, need more electric savings*

22

Existing Measures PTCS

PTCS measures require more attention than most of these utilities can give*▪ Contractors not available▪ Contractors not interested▪ Customers not impressed

Provide more training opportunities** Provide incentives to contractors for training** RTF: Provide alternatives to QC regime (with reduced savings)**

GSHP GSHP seen as an important alternative for electric heating* Customers and contractors are very interested but no current incentives* Cost effectiveness seen as a barrier, customers will not use air source HP* RTF: Provide some mechanism for use in MT**

▪ Develop incremental savings and costs that can be cost effective▪ Establish “non-energy benefits” that reflect the value of GSHP in cold climates▪ Develop a deemed measure or calculator that can be the basis of utility incentives and

rate credits

23

Existing Measures

Irrigation Irrigation energy important use for several utilities, irrigation

measures are difficult to package for customers* RTF: More individual measures need to be deemed** RTF: Package measures to focus on specific irrigation needs** Timing must be more flexible, adapted to customer *

Distribution Efficiency Distribution efficiency very important to these utilities with

large distances between loads** RTF measures address these technical needs** Direct help with design and installation required for most of

the small/rural utilities**▪ Many utilities do not have in-house engineering resources▪ DEI needs to be clarified to these utilities to sell them

24

Existing Measures DHPs

Program need more flexibility* Many utilities mentioned this program as a great model*

Commercial Lighting Commercial lighting one of the few measures for the commercial

sector of these SRR utilities* Contractors have difficulty using the current calculator* Improve the calculator** RTF: Add deemed measures (LEDs maybe)**

Schools Schools represent a major commercial customer in these smaller

utilities. *▪ Directly targeting schools would make a usable commercial measure**▪ Should be based on packages that can be presented to Schools**

RTF: Develop deemed savings for lighting packages** RTF: HVAC and Envelope measures should be included as packages**

25

Desired New Measures Several utilities had suggestions for new measures

RTF: HPWH*▪ Utilities want this measure as a deemed measure*▪ Address cold climate concerns**

RTF: Wind turbines (idle) have large impact on small utilities, need measures to control this load**

Add appliances and electronics, (EnergyStar)* TVs * RTF: Manufactured homes recycle program** Water heater timers and cozies* Room AC/Dehumidifiers* Small water heaters (30-40 gallons)*

26

SRR Measure Review Form(Ecotope Recommendation) The RTF should develop and utilize a standard

“measure review form” to assess and clearly communicate the applicability of new or revised measures to small/rural utilities.

The review form would front-load problem identification.

The review form would also provide a feedback loop to BPA or other regional organizations, providing an opportunity to build in programmatic adjustments/support for small/rural utilities as required.

27

Priorities Proposed by Ecotope RTF, BPA, and NEEA should coordinate to develop an

integrated approach to supporting small/rural utilities What can be accomplished in 2012? What can be accomplished by 2016? How can the complementary capacities of these

organizations be leveraged across the region to achieve specific 1-year and 5-year goals?

RTF should focus on Type 1 utilities Agricultural measures M&V, evaluation, and QC Deemed commercial measures

BPA and NEEA should focus on Type 2 and 3 utilities

28

Questions and Answers

Ecotope Contact:Poppy Storm4056 9th Avenue NE Seattle, WA, 98105(206) 322-3753 www.ecotope.com