GUIDELINES FOR RTF MEASURE LIFE

Progress Briefing to the Regional Technical Forum

February 14, 2012

Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph.D., SERA

1

SERA

OVERVIEW & STATUS Objective: Develop electric energy efficiency measure

life guidelines Consultant Team: SERA & Cadmus Timeline

Today: present update to RTF March 13, present guidelines to RTF Today through March 13: collect feedback from RTF and

subcommittee, meet with subcommittee 2+ times; revise guidelines with oversight from subcommittee

Products Draft guidelines Summary sheet: summarizes details of analysis and results Checklist: confirms that Guidelines have been followed Potential for computational technical appendices

2

SERA

RTF SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS Mark Kendall, Mgr NW Council:

Gillian Charles Tom Eckman Charlie Grist

BPA: Danielle Giding Erin Hope Lauren Gage

Adam Hadley, Hadley Energy Mike Baker, SBW Consulting David Baylon, Ecotope Eugene Rosolie, Cowlitz PUD Tacoma

Andi Baker Rich Arneson

Graham Parker, PNNL Ian Doyle, LM Co Tom Leinhard, Avista Sarah Castor, Energy Trust

Oregon Consultant Team

SERA

EUL SUBCOMMITTEE TIMELINE / STATUS

4

Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

8/10 - Kickoff / EUL seminar; research / l iterature

9/23 - Draft Document, Subcommittee meeting

10/17 - Revised draft, tool, Subcommittee Meeting

11/14 - Revised draft, tool, Subc. meeting, Sm. Group discussion

12/20 - Revised draft, PM discussion/review

1/2 - Flow chart, deviations table, PM discussion

1/30 - Revised doc, Summary & Checklist, Subc. Mtg.

2/14 - RTF Progress Update; posted 2/7

Feb - Revised docs, Issues, Subc. Mtg.

Feb/Mar - Finalize docs, presentation

3/13 - RTF Review; posted 3/6

Analysis & finalization

SERA

EUL FLOW CHART(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

5

Defined Measure: Equipment Delivery Method Mfg. Installation Mfg. Commissioning Mfg. Maintenance Measure type (UES,

Protocol, Small Saver… Market Sector match

(R, C, I, A, etc.) Operations and other

behavior

“Gold”: Statistical EUL Studies, accepted by RTF-recognized entity Well documented, strong sample size Matches definition (or “adjusted” reliably for

deviations) If Not…

“Silver”: Specific Testing & Review Manuf. Specifications consistent with criteria

established by independent testing agency for equipment

Hours or years or life verified through laboratory or field testing (e.g. conservative warranty, engineered life, well documented)

If Not…

“Bronze”: Reviewed Best Information Available Best available EUL studies adopted by “RTF-

recognized” agencies, documented sources Expert authority representing best available

practices in EUL with combination of manufacturer / field study / expert opinions, or Delphi on existing values, etc.

If Not…

Remaining Hierarchy: Market Saturation / turnover (statistical, same

measure / sector, sufficient data) Other analyses, defensible, well-documented

Significant deviations from definition expected to have effect on EUL?

IF NOT Go to 3B. IF YES, If citable, defensible literature / reliable studies available, develop “adjustment” for deviations from: Delivery Method Mfg. Installation (enviro, conditions) Mfg. Commissioning Mfg. Maintenance Refined Market Sector match (turnover, renovation

rate, disproportionate business types) Operations (hours, environment) Other behavior expected to affect EUL or other

considerations (RUL, TDF)

3B – Determine if defensible data available and/or If adjusted or base EUL sufficient for UES priority

Develop refined calculations; Recommendation memo on best EUL to RTF; Recommend follow-up, sunset, or

other caveats; Document derivation / justification

Adoption Process by RTF Complete Summary Sheet Complete Checklist Place Summary Sheet in EUL in Measure

Workbook Create EUL-driven measure component Include EUL in ProCost Present EUL to RTF Subcommittee for review Submit EUL with UES or Protocol for RTF

approval

STEP 1 Definition

STEP 2 Base EUL

STEP 3 Sufficiency, Adjustments

STEP 4 RTF Review

STEPS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EUL VALUES / RTF

If Yes…

If Yes…

If Yes…

If Yes…

SERA

EUL SUMMARY SHEET& CHECKLIST(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

Summary Sheet: summary of… Methods, sources for base value Analysis approach, documentation Need for adjustments; support, approach Match of EUL source / quality vs. priority of EUL Checklist completed

Checklist: documents guidelines followed … Measure definition Base value derivation / sources Whether adjustments needed / conducted / supported Match of EUL source / quality vs. priority of EUL Summary form completed

6

SERA

EUL SUMMARY SHEET(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

7

Appendix A - RTF Summary Sheet - Guidelines for the Development of RTF Measure Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL)

1a) Measure Name:3a) Sheet

completed by:

1b) Sector (R/C/I/A/MF, etc.):3b) Date Sheet

Completed:

2a) Point / Range EUL Measure Life Proposed (years):

3c) Date Reviewed / Adopted:

3d) Sunset period or other caveats:

2 stages: Setting base EUL, and Adjustments for Influencing Factors

Source / Options Value Analytical and Source Underpinnings Description, Notes, Comments

Deriving "Base" or Starting Level for EUL Base Value Source, Alternatives, PriorityEstimate /

Result Uncertainty Analysis underlying estimate Source(s) Notes

Documentation of "Base" EUL Value and SourcesIs source available

/ was it used?Why / why not. Also Describe / assess

similarities and differencesValue, in years - point estimate

Estimate of uncertainty - e.g. standard error, range(s), etc. Description of analysis approach.

Describe data source(s), citations, applicabil ity, quality of the source,

number of observations, etc.

Additional detail , discussion, sources, analysis approach, recommendations to the analysis and its

value short / longer term.

4) Information for "Base" EUL available from / based on: (prioritized l ist)Select from Drop-

down menu Documentation / Notes Documentation / NotesDocumentation / Notes Documentation / Notes Documentation / Notes Documentation / Notesa) Statistical study / EUL study for this program?

b)From a statistically valid study of the exact same measure? Or Very similar (discuss)

c)

Adopted EUL from other "RTF-recognized" Third Party agency (utility, regulator, etc.); documented & reviewed

d)Well-documented study of field experience and observations with review

e)From manufacturers data based on third party testing standard with expert review

f) Expert review / Delphi

g)

From an engineered estimate or expert opinion or other less specific study of measure l ife (specify in detail)

h) Market Saturation / turnover study, reviewed

i) Other (specify)

Selected value Range Justification / Rationale5) Selected Best Estimate for "Base" EUL Value

Included / Excluded Elements for Adjustment to Base EUL Value Analytical and Source Underpinnings Description, Notes, Comments

Adjustments to Base EUL ValueIncluded in

analysis? Reason for Inclusion / Exclusion

Estimate / Result /

Adjustment Uncertainty Analysis underlying estimate Source(s) Notes

Documentation of Adjustments to "Base" EUL for Measure, if any

Was this adjustment factor

included in the analysis?

Why was it included / excluded? - How does this differ from manufacturer or standard case?

Value adjustments, in years

Estimate of uncertainty - e.g. standard error, range(s), etc.

Description of analysis approach - how adjustment made, calculations (attach to document)

Describe data source(s), citations, applicabil ity, quality of the source.

Additional detail , discussion, sources, analysis approach, recommendations to the analysis and its

value short / longer term.

6) Measure l ife adjustment method for each measure or component is described for deviations in...:

Select from Drop-down menu Documentation / Notes Documentation / NotesDocumentation / Notes Documentation / Notes Documentation / Notes Documentation / Notes

a)

Program delivery method (direct install , mail , mail by request, retail , etc.); adjustments for percent not installed, etc.

b) If direct install , i f installed other than according to manufacturer specifications?

c) Measure sizing issues?

d)Measure or component commissioning deviations?

e)Measure or component operation and controls sequence of operation deviations?

f)Measure or component performance verification deviations?

g)

Measure or component manufacturer maintenance requirements deviations (conveyed to owner, carried out, contracted for, other)?

h)Measure or component operations dis-similar to "standard"? (describe)

i)

Measure or component "usage hours" dis-similar to "standard"? (describe deviations from climate, business sector, turnover, etc.)

j)

Measure or component operating environment dis-similar to "standard" (vs. start / top, unusual run durations, harsh/dirty, etc.)?

k)

Measure or component owner/operator behavioral requirements dis-similar to "standard"?

l)Measure or component code or other jurisdictional changes?

m)

Measure or component has expected technical degradation dis-similar to "standard"? (new / innovative technology, etc.)

n) Other elements of measure "definition" un-met?o)

Documentation of Adjustment Approach Drop down list Discussion (Selected adjustment amount and description of application to "base"; Relative priority of UES related to quality of EUL, sources, and derivation)7) Suffi cient data and justification for EUL adjustment?

8) Is BASE or Adjusted value of quality suffi cient to match UES priority?

Reporting Measure Effective Useful LifeResult / Recommendation Value Range

9) Recommended EUL for the measure after adjustments, if appropriate

10) Recommendations about sunset, length before EUL should be revisited ==>

Measure Estimated Useful Life Summary Sheet Drop down list11) The EUL Guidelines checklist is completed

SERA

EUL SUMMARY SHEET(UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

8

Included / Excluded Elements for Adjustment to Base EUL Value

Adjustments to Base EUL ValueIncluded in

analysis? Reason for Inclusion / Exclusion

Estimate / Result /

Adjustment Uncertainty

Documentation of Adjustments to "Base" EUL for Measure, if any

Was this adjustment factor

included in the analysis?

Why was it included / excluded? - How does this differ from manufacturer or standard case?

Value adjustments, in years

Estimate of uncertainty - e.g. standard error, range(s), etc.

6) Measure l ife adjustment method for each measure or component is described for deviations in...:

Select from Drop-down menu Documentation / Notes Documentation / NotesDocumentation / Notes

a)

Program delivery method (direct install, mail, mail by request, retail , etc.); adjustments for percent not installed, etc.

b) If direct install, if installed other than according to manufacturer specifications?

c) Measure sizing issues?

m)

Measure or component has expected technical degradation dis-similar to "standard"? (new / innovative technology, etc.)

n) Other elements of measure "definition" un-met?o)

Documentation of Adjustment Approach Drop down list Discussion (Selected adjustment amount and description of application to "base"; Relative priority of UES related to quality of EUL, sources, and derivation)7) Suffi cient data and justification for EUL adjustment?

8) Is BASE or Adjusted value of quality suffi cient to match UES priority?

Reporting Measure Effective Useful LifeResult / Recommendation Value Range

9) Recommended EUL for the measure after adjustments, if appropriate

10) Recommendations about sunset, length before EUL should be revisited ==>

Measure Estimated Useful Life Summary Sheet Drop down list11) The EUL Guidelines checklist is completed

SERA

EUL CHECKLIST (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

9

Appendix B - RTF Checklist - Guidelines for the Development of RTF Measure Effective Useful Lifetime (EUL)

1a) Measure Name:3a) Sheet

completed by:

1b) Sector (R/C/I/A/MF, etc.):3b) Date Sheet

Completed:

2a) Base and Adjusted Measure Life Proposed (years):

3c) Date Reviewed / Adopted:

3d) Sunset period or other caveats :

Analysis of Measure Effective Useful Life (EUL)

Measure SpecificationResponse (yes,

no, or n/a) Data Sources or Relevant Details or Notes

4)Measure lifetime dependent characteristics match those provided for analysis of: (Yes for ONE of 3 options)Select from Drop-

down menu Documentation / Notesa) Unit Energy Savings Measure (UES)?

b) Standard Protocol Measuerement & Verification (Standard)?

c) Custom Protocol Measurement & Verification (Custom)?

5) DOCUMENT: Measure definition and specifications include all measure l ife dependent characteristics including:Select from Drop-

down menu Documentation / Notesa) Measure / equipmentb) Installation, sizing, specificationc) Commissioningd) Maintenancee) Operations and other Behavior

Documentation of "Base" EUL Value and Sources Drop Down Documentation / Notes

6) Measure basis l ifetime Source is: (Select ONE of the next FOUR and elaborate)a) Gold - From a statistically valid study of the exact same measure life

b) Silver - From manufacturers data based on third party testing standard

c)Bronze - From an engineered estimate or expert opinion or other less specific study of measure life (specify in detail)

d) Other source

6) Measure basis l ifetime source is documented and rated for quality

7) Measure basis l ifetime source is RTF recognized

8) Measure Effective Useful Life Adjustments to the basis l ife, if warranted, are documented (from below)

Documentation of Adjustments to "Base" EUL for Measure, if any Drop Down Documentation / Notes

9) Measure life adjustment method for each measure or component is described for one or more sources of deviations with potential to substantially affect EUL (Yes / No; Describe adjustments considered and/or applied.10) Measure Estimated Useful Life adjustments data sources are provided

Documentation of Analysis Approach Drop Down Data Sources or Relevant Details or Notes11) Analysis methods are appropriate to the measure and datasets used in the EUL estimation / derivation

12) Analysis methods are transparent and replicable

13) Dataset sources are clear, transparent, and well-documented14) Results are representative of the mean effective useful l ife through the measure sunset period15) Measure Effective Useful Life dependent characteristics are included in measure cost, effi cient case l ife16) Results are provided in a single measure l ife in whole years by component and range by measure

Reporting Measure Effective Useful LifeAnalysis

Drop Down Documentation / Notes

17) The derivation of the estimated useful l ife (EUL) of measure components is described thoroughly (separately)

18) The Estimated / adjusted EUL is of a quality suited to the priority of the UES / Measure

Measure Estimated Useful Life Summary Sheet 19) The summary spreadsheet is completed

SERA

EUL CHECKLIST (UNDER SEPARATE COVER)

10

Documentation of Adjustments to "Base" EUL for Measure, if any Drop Down Documentation / Notes

9) Measure l ife adjustment method for each measure or component is described for one or more sources of deviations with potential to substantially affect EUL (Yes / No; Describe adjustments considered and/or applied.10) Measure Estimated Useful Life adjustments data sources are provided

Documentation of Analysis Approach Drop Down Data Sources or Relevant Details or Notes11) Analysis methods are appropriate to the measure and datasets used in the EUL estimation / derivation

12) Analysis methods are transparent and replicable

13) Dataset sources are clear, transparent, and well-documented14) Results are representative of the mean effective useful l ife through the measure sunset period15) Measure Effective Useful Life dependent characteristics are included in measure cost, effi cient case l ife16) Results are provided in a single measure l ife in whole years by component and range by measure

Reporting Measure Effective Useful LifeAnalysis

Drop Down Documentation / Notes

17) The derivation of the estimated useful l ife (EUL) of measure components is described thoroughly (separately)

18) The Estimated / adjusted EUL is of a quality suited to the priority of the UES / Measure

Measure Estimated Useful Life Summary Sheet 19) The summary spreadsheet is completed

SERA

DRAFT GUIDELINES

AppendicesA. Summary spreadsheetB. EUL ChecklistC. RTF Historical EUL

ValuesD. Other EUL studiesE. EUL Best PracticesF. CA EUL ProtocolsG. Adjustment ExamplesH. Deviations by End Use

11

Guidelines1. Background, purpose2. Measure

specification3. Derivation of “Base”

EUL4. Adjustments for

deviations5. Reporting,

checklists, maintenance

SERA

ISSUES TO “FIRM UP” WITH SUBCOMMITTEE

Measures & components Triggering development of separate UES, EUL Summary sheet treatment

Prioritization of measures / relationship to UEL source quality (savings, use, risk, etc.)

Variations in savings and/or EUL from deviations (one or both)

How guidelines for EUL work with standard and custom protocols

Testing summary / checklist sheets for usability Review of RUL, TDF treatment / triggers Others

12

SERA

RTF DISCUSSION & QUESTIONS

Thanks to subcommittee

Contact:Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph.D., SERA303/494-1178, skumatz@serainc.com