D I S P U T E S & I N V E S T I G A T I O N S • E C O N O M I C S • F I N A N C I A L A D V I S O R Y • M A N A G E M E N T C O N S U L T I N G

Guidelines for Energy Efficiency Measure Cost and Non-Energy Benefits

Subcommittee MeetingSeptember 28, 2011

2:00pm PSTFor the Regional Technical Forum

Agenda

» [2:00 – 2:10 pm] Attendance» [2:10 – 2:20 pm] Review of minutes from last meeting» [2:20 – 2:35 pm] How measure economics are addressed in other

regions» [2:35 – 3:00 pm] Review voting on measure economic elements,

capture areas of disagreement» [3:00 – 3:15 pm] Review Guidelines draft structure» [3:15 - 3:40 pm] Review draft contents» [3:40 – 3:50 pm] Discussion of progress to date» [3:50 – 4:00 pm] Next steps

Review of Minutes

Page 3

Measure Economics in Other Regions

State/Utility Elements How are NEB’s included in TRC calculation?Massachusetts PA Complete summary of

recommended elements and values is available

Currently, each PA handles this differently. MA is in the process of creating a standard approach across PA’s to NEI’s. Inclusion of NEIs in TRC for low income programs (for example health benefits monetized to fewer sick days). Additional target at oil heated homes.

NYSERDA Various, including Lighting quality, Occupant comfort, O&M costs, Aesthetics, and Safety.

Not included in primary scenario used to make formal go/no-go program decisions. Included as a benefit category in one of four B/C scenario analyses.

Xcel Colorado Unspecified For electric DSM, other than low-income, a 10% non-energy benefits adder is applied to represent the non-energy benefits resulting from DSM. This percentage is to be applied to the sum of the other quantifiable benefits, and is to be used when calculating TRC values for specific DSM programs and the overall portfolio.

Vermont Water savings and carbon only

Factored into B/C tests

[1] Tetra Tech. 2011. Massachusetts Special and Cross-Sector Studies Area, Residential and Low-Income Non-Energy Impacts (NEI) Evaluation. Massachusetts Program Administrators. [2] Summit Blue Consulting, LLC. 2007. Non-Energy Impacts (NEI) Evaluation. Prepared for New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.[3] Decision No. C08-0560 May 23, 2008. Docket No. 07A-420E. Paragraph 78.

Measure Economics in Other Regions (cont.)

» Massachusetts Crosscutting NEI’s Final Report› Recently published evaluation presents findings based on review of literature, in-

depth interviews, and telephone surveys with program participants. › Categorized by perspective of the party to which a particular NEI accrues (eg.

utility, participant, society)› Evaluation team recommends not quantifying NEIs for one of several reasons:

‒ Too hard to quantify meaningfully‒ Quantifying the NEI would amount to double counting‒ Insufficient evidence in literature for its existence‒ NEI is too intangible

Page 5

Measure Economics in Other Regions (cont.)

» California› Information obtained from The California Evaluation Framework, 2004 (http://

www.cee1.org/eval/CEF.pdf)› Non-Energy Effects (NEEs): Considers both benefits and detriments to

participants, society, and energy providers.› California includes these in some programs where:

‒ Understanding of total/societal program benefits is needed.‒ Participants cite reasons, other than energy impacts, for program

participation.‒ NEEs can be used to increase program participation.

› California does not have a set list of eligible NEEs.› Regarding funding: NEE program evaluations are typically secondary to impact

and process evaluations and included in order to increase participation.› Benefit/cost: Can include externalities (water, O&M, training, etc).

Page 6

Review of Voting on Measure Economic Elements

Process for capturing areas of disagreement and finalizing votes1. Review the votes and capture areas of disagreement in a document.2. Circulate disagreement document to have committee members to contribute more to

the discussion.3. Navigant cleans up the wording; makes sure comments are relevant to that element.4. Circulate the cleaned up version to subcommittee and conduct a re-vote.5. Bring final version of issues document plus voting to RTF.

Page 7

Review Guidelines Draft Structure

Page 8

Review Draft Contents

» Section 1: Purpose and Scope» Section 2: Measure Economic Analysis» Material Cost (in Section 3)» Water (in Section 5)» Section 8: Measure Economic Maintenance

» Areas of Feedback› Structure of the document?› Measure economic guidelines are more specific than energy guidelines; Is this

okay? › Should what the other states are doing influence our guidelines?

Page 9

Discussion of Progress to Date

MonthWeek-ending Date 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17 24 31 3 10 17 24 31

1.1 Kickoff Meeting1.2 Develop Workplan1.3 Progress Updates and Subcommittee Coordination U U U U U1.4 Coordinating Staff and Meetings1.5 Bringing Together Experts2.1 Draft Measure Cost Guidelines for Subcommittee s S S2.2 Draft Measure Cost Guidelines for RTF R P2.3 Final Measure Cost Guidelines and Recommendations Memo S2.4 Present Final Measure Cost Guidelines R P3.1 Draft NEB Guidelines for Subcommittee s S S3.2 Draft NEB Guidelines for RTF R P3.3 Final NEB Guidelines and Recommendations Memo S3.4 Present Final NEB Guidelines R P

KeyP - Presentation to RTFR - Draft submitted to RTFs Interim deliverable submitted to SubcommitteeS - Draft submitted to SubcommitteeU - Progress meeting with Subcommittee

Task 1: Project Management

Task 2: Measure Cost Guidelines

Task 3: NEB Guidelines

Project Close Out

JanuaryAugust September October November December

» Should Navigant go to the November 1 RTF meeting?• Overview of guidelines process and document structure• Review of measure economic elements and input from the RTF on final selection of

elements

Next Steps

» Navigant will integrate feedback discussed and continue to populate the draft.

» Revised versions will be posted to the RTF website prior to next meeting.

» Next subcommittee meeting is scheduled for October 19, 2pm.

Page 11