20141010PAC to Staff 1-11.pdf

Shirley Lee-Warner
From:
Sent:
lo:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jean Jewell
Friday, October 10,2014 8:19 AM
Shirley Lee-Warner
FW: RMP Responses to IPUC 1-11 - PAC-E-14-08
Attach IPUC 8.pdf; IPUC 1-11 PAC-E-14-08.docx
F.ECItYlil
?0ltr OCT l0 [t'[ 9: 52
L ;i lr iTiiil ii':,,',i'i tssio ;'
From: Bell, Barry [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, October 09,20L4 5:27 PM
To: Jean Jewell; Nikki Karpavich
Cc: Weston, Ted
Subject: RMP Responses to IPUC 1-11 - PAC-E-14-08
Please find enclosed Rocky Mountain Power's responses to IPUC Data Requests 1-11 in PAC-E-14-08. If you
have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Barry Bell
Manager, Regulation
Rocky Mountain Power
PAC-E- 14-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request L
Please provide and describe the assumptions used in Exhibit 2 to determine the
portfolio costs for the Energy Project Manager Co-funding program.
Response to IPUC Data Request I
Each project receiving co-funding was assumed to be 1,000,000 kwh. One project
was forecast for year 1, two projects in year 2 and two projects in year 3. It was
assumed the $0.025/kWh for each of the projects was less than or equal to l00%o
ofthe energy project manager salary and overhead, and therefore represented an
upper limit on the utility contributions. These costs are displayed in Table 6 of
Exhibit 2. While there was an assumption around project size, which was used to
establish the energy project manager co-funding, this offering is analyzed for cost
effectiveness purposes as only additional costs and no added savings. The
planning assumption is that all savings that would be reported by customers who
make use of this option is included in the business as usual case. While this
assumption is conservative and the Company hopes the funding option will
generate additional savings, we didn't assume any added savings when we
assessed the cost effectiveness.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr. and Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 1 4-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests l-11
IPUC Data Request 2
For the Energy Project Manager Co-funding program, will the customer be paid
$.025/kwh of savings in addition to l00%o of the manager salary and overhead?
Response to IPUC Data Request 2
No. The customer will be paid $.025/kWh up to LOIVo of the energy project
managers' salary and overhead.
Recordholder: Bill Comeau
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 1 4-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 3
For the Energy Project Manager Co-funding program, please explain how the
Company proposes to issue payment. Will payment be issued before, during or
after project completion?
Response to IPUC Data Request 3
The customer can choose to receive an initial payment up to 1/3 of the estimated
incentive amount (not to exceed $25,000) at the beginning of the Energy Project
Manager engagement. The final payment will be issued at the end of the agreed
upon engagement and will be based on actual achieved energy savings.
Recordholder: Bill Comeau
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 1 4-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 4
Should the Energy Project Manager miss milestones and savings goals, please
describe the Company's process and policy to terminate and recover funding due
to non-perforrnance.
Response to IPUC Data Request 4
The initial payment is limited to the lesser of Il3 the estimated incentive amount
or $25,000limiting the financial exposure for the incentive. As a requirement to
participate, customers agree in writing that if savings targets are not achieved to
cover the initial payment, the customer will repay any overpayments of initial
funding. The Company will enforce any necessary recovery of funding based
upon the final inspected results of each Energy Project Manager engagement.
Recordholder: Bill Comeau
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 14-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 5
For calculating cost-effectiveness, are the costs for the Energy Project Manager
program assigned at the nonresidential sector-level or with a specific program?
Response to IPUC Data Request 5
Energy project manager co-funding costs were included in cost effectiveness of
the proposed program. They will be included as program costs for the purposes of
annual reporting. They were described as portfolio costs in Exhibit 2 to reinforce
the point they had no additional savings associated with them for the purposes of
the cost effectiveness analysis since these savings may be embedded in the
business-as-usual case, and this assumption ensures savings are not double
counted. In practice, energy project manager co-funding has to result in energy
savings for the funding to be paid.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr. and Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- l4-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests l-11
IPUC Data Request 6
For the Energy Project Manager Co-funding, please provide the estimated number
ofprojects by year 2015-2017.
Response to IPUC Data Request 6
Please see response to Request No. 1.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr. and Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- l4-O8/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 7
Did the Company assume spillover savings due to the Co-Manager program?
so, please explain how the savings were quantified.
Response to IPUC Data Request 7
Please see response to Request No. 1.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr. and Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 14-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 8
Please provide the analysis used to determine an average of three percent energy
savings per customer site through the Energy Management program. (Hymas
Direct, p. 9.)
Response to IPUC Data Request 8
See Attachment IPUC 8 prepared by EnerNoc. The three percent site reference is
specific to Strategic Energy Management and can be found on page 4-11.
EnerNoc's assessment of the overall annual Idaho energy management potential is
in Table 3-11 on page 3-13.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr. and Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 1 4-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 9
Please explain how the Company will separate Energy Management savings from
capital equipment project savings to avoid double counting.
Response to IPUC Data Request 9
Capital project energy savings are quantified prior to incentive payment and the
installation date is tracked. The engineer responsible for quantifying energy
management savings accounts for the capital projects, and then adjusts the energy
management savings appropriately to avoid double counting.
Recordholder: Nancy Goddard
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E- 14-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2OI4
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 10
For the Commercial Food Service Cost-Effectiveness in Exhibit 2, please explain
the assumptions used to obtain a TRC of 108.49 in2015,61.65 in20l6, and3.94
in2Ol7. Please explain why the 2015 and 2016 cost-effectiveness are
dramatically greater than the 2Ol7 analysis even though the Company forecasts its
greatest gross KWh savings in year 3.
Response to IPUC Data Request 10
This category includes the forecasted costs and savings from equipment listed in
the food service equipment table on pp. 20-21 of Exhibit 1, which includes both
existing and new equipment types. Costs by year for the category are in Table 3
of Exhibit 2 (p. 6).Savings are in Table 8 (p. 9) of Exhibit 2. The cost
effectiveness results are influenced by lower overall incremental measure costs
for many existing measures, a negative incremental cost for chest freezers (RTF),
and the anticipated adoption rates for new measures (Demand Control Ventilation
in Kitchen Hoods and Anti-Sweat Heater Controls). Lower incremental costs are
the result of higher efficiency ENERGY STAR specifications and more stringent
baselines applied over the 3-year period for existing ENERGY STAR measures.
Details by equipment type are provided on pp 3-4 of Exhibit 5. The higher
savings in year 3 are driven primarily by the increasing adoption of new measures
which add additional savings and offset lower/negative incremental costs from
existing measures. These factors combine over the three year period to generate
benefit costs ratios typically not found for programs as a whole, however the
savings contribution from this category is less than l%o of the overall savings
forecasted from the business as usual case, and the overall impact on the proposed
program is small.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr.
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
PAC-E-14-08/Rocky Mountain Power
October 9,2014
IPUC Data Requests 1-11
IPUC Data Request 1.1
Please explain what "EF" means. (Exhibit 2,p.l.)
Response to IPUC Data Request Ll
'EF' is a reference to the soon to be cancelled Energy FinAnswer program
(Schedule 125). The "fncrease EF" reference found on page 1 is specific to
increasing the standard offer incentive ($0.l2lkwh + $50/kW tp to 5O7o of the
costs) currently in the Energy FinAnswer program to $0.151kwh, up to 70Vo of
the costs as proposed in the new Schedule 140.
Recordholder: Don Jones, Jr.
Sponsor: Kathryn Hymas
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
REcel\j in
?01\ OcT l0 Ail 9: 53
ffirJr?i#ij*ituiss'0"
OENERNOC
PacifiCorp Energy Management Program Design
Rocky Mountain Power Idaho Service Territory
Market Characterization arud Progrum Designs
EnerNOC Utility Solutions
Consulting
500 Ygnacio Valley Road
Suite 450
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Tel [phone]
www.enernoc.com
Preparedfor:
PacifiCorp
Presented on:
August 27,2013
1 of95
to PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
This report was prepared by
EnerNOC Utility Solutions
500 Ygnacio Valley Blvd., Suite 450
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Project Director: I. Rohmund
Project Manager: J. Borstein
Attachment IPUC I
2 of95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Study Objectives
The overall objective of the project is to develop an energy management offering that will
complement PacifiCorp's existing program set, and will leverage and integrate with those
existing programs. For purposes of this work, PacifiCorp defines energy management as
"a system of practices that creates reliable and persistent electric energy savings through
improved operations and maintenance (O&M) and management practices at customer
sites." A key element for energy management program design includes identifying
process or tools necessary to ensure persistency.
This report provides a summary of research findings on existing energy management
programs across the U.S.; charucterization of the Rocky Mountain Power Idaho market
and estimates of the energy management opportunity therein; and recommendations for
Idaho energy management programs.
Approach
To support the market characterization and the program design, the project team
conducted in-depth research on existing energy management programs. The goals of this
research were to develop independent estimates of savings, costs, measure lives, and
other characteristics necessary to estimate the savings opportunity, as well as to identify
best practices among existing programs. EnerNOC conducted a thorough search of the
available information, including research reports, program evaluation reports, and
publicly available presentations. Appendix A lists the documents reviewed. In addition,
we conducted a series of telephone interviews with utility personnel or staff from third-
party administrators of programs to gain insights beyond information in publicly
available documents. These interviews were useful for understanding lessons learned
from existing programs. High level findings from this research are summarized in
Chapter 2 and Appendix B.
For the market characterization, 20ll sales data provided by PacifiCorp represented a
total of 584,585 MWh and 8,305 Service Locations. Customers were identified by rate
schedule and market segment (based on building type or industry type). Based on
discussions with PacifiCorp, rates classes 6,9, 19, and 35, which collectively have sales
of 434,696 MWh or 74Yo of the original total, were determined to be the customers most
likely to participate in energy management programs. Next, businesses with multiple sites
were aggregated into business entities. This aggregated data set was used to further
analyze customer usage sizes for which energy management programs are most
applicable. The level of annual sales greater than 500,000 kWh was determined to be an
appropriate cut off for the analysis target market. As shown in Table ES-1, the analysis
target market consists of 122 businesses with total annual sales of 353,379 MWh,
translating to average annual sales per business of approximately 2.9 million kWh. These
customers account for l5Yo of aggregated businesses on rates 6, 9, 19, and 35, and 600/o
of the 584,585 MWh of sales in the original Idaho data set.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
3 of95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Executive Summary
Attachment IPUC 8
Table ES-l ldaho 2011 Sales by Customer Size, Rates Classes 6,9,79, and 35
EnerNOC's LoadMAPrM (Load Management Analysis and Planning) tool was then
applied to forecast these customers' baseline energy use, absent future utility DSM
programs, through the period, 2013-2017. LoadMAP also projected energy use after
accounting for savings from capital measures due to PacifiCorp's existing programs. In a
final step, a set of possible energy management programs were modeled, using
assumptions informed by the research on existing programs to develop savings estimates.
o Strategic Energy Management (SEM) - Programs that support a systematic approach to
integrating energy management into an organization's business practices. This program
type includes both Consultative approaches and Cohort approaches. In the former
services are provided through a consultant who works one-on-one with individual
facilities, while in the latter, a consultant works with a group of facilities.
. Energy Manager - Programs that provide support for hiring a dedicated energy manager
at customer facility.
o Recommissioning (RCx) - Programs that involve monitoring of building systems,
usually HVAC, for a fixed period, usually weeks to months, to identify operational
deficiencies and no-cosVlow-cost measures. A report identifies measures that are
subsequently implemented and verified.
o Persistent Commissioning (PCx) - Programs that involve longer-term (multi-year)
monitoring of building HVAC and possibly other systems, to identify operational
deficiencies and no-cost/low-cost measures. Identified deficiencies are corrected on an
ongoing basis.
o Industrial Recommissioning (lndustrial RCx) - Programs that support monitoring and
optimization of specific systems, e.9., compressed air or ammonia refrigeration.
o Building Tune-up - Programs that provide subsidized maintenance of building systems,
such as roof-top units.
o Training - Programs that subsidize training of facility management and/or O&M
personnel raise understanding of behavioral and O&M measures
o Building Occupant Training - Programs that subsidize training of building occupants to
raise understanding of energy-saving behavioral measures
Based on the modeling results, a recommended subset of the modeled programs were
found to account for the majority of savings, as shown in Table ES-2.
o Strategic Energl- Management (SEM) programs: The SEM programs analyzed,
including both one-on-one consultative or cohort, have potential savings of 1,239 MWh
4 of95
www.enernoc.com
Attachment IPUC I
Executive Summary
by 2017, equivalentto 40Yo of the savings available from Energy Management programs
in20l7.
. Recommissioning programs: The various recommissioning programs, including RCx,
Industrial RCx, and PCx, collectively have cumulative estimated savings of 1,369 MWh
or 44%o of savings in20l7.
Chapter 3 provides additional details regarding the approach and assumptions, along with
summary results.
Table ES-2 Estimated Savrngs by All Evaluated Energy Management Program
Types (Cumulative Savrngs over Five Years, MWh)
Note: Savings represent gross savings dt customer site. .
Building upon the results of the estimated savings assessment and the research on
existing programs, preliminary designs were developed for two broad categories of
programs:
o Strategic Energy Management involves a comprehensive approach to any aspect of an
organization's operations that affect energy use.
o 0&M - Technical is concemed with optimizing the performance of specific systems,
such as HVAC, compressed air, ammonia refrigeration, or other process areas. This
program includes the closely related recommissioning, industrial recommissioning, and
persistent commissioning offerings.
Table ES-3 shows the estimated savings opportunity for the recommended program
options. Note that the names used here to describe program categories may not
necessarily be selected as the final program names.
SEM - Consultative and Cohort 47 '176 453 804 1,239 4Oo/o
Energy Manager 21 56 109 172 230 7o/o
CommercialBldg. RCx 14 42 98 191 303 10o/o
lndustrialSystem RCx 68 191 388 628 857 28Yo
Persistent Commissioning 10 29 68 132 210 7o/o
Building Tune Up 24 61 110 162 205 7%
Training 8 18 33 49 63 2o/o
Total 191 573 1,258 2,138 3,106 100%
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
5 of95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
.:ssglLys rglnuy.Attachment IPUC I
Table ES-3 Estimated Savingg Recommended Energy Management Program Type
(Cumulative Savings over Five Years, MWh)
For the two program types, SEM and O&M Technical, the project developed program
design components including administrative requirements, target markets,
implementation strategies, marketing and outreach guidance, EM&V requirements,
incentive recommendations, estimated customer participation costs, and estimated
program budgets, as described in Chapters 4 and 5.
Strategic Energy Management
Consultative and Cohort 47 176 453 804 1,239 47o/o
O&M Technical
CommercialBldg. RCx 14 42 98 191 303 12o/o
lndustrialSystem RCx 68 191 388 628 857 3304
Persistent Comm issioning 10 29 68 132 210 8o/o
SubtotalO&M Technical 91 262 554 951 1.369 53%
Total, Recommended Programs {38 438 1,006 1,755 2,608 100olo
6 of95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Table ES-4
programs.
Table ES-4
Attachment IPUC 8
_ Exegulive SyTIary
energy managementprovides summary budget data for all recommended
Total Budgetfor All Energy Management Programs
Utility Labor
Costs $1,791 $3,993 $5,637 $5,990 $6,717 $24,129
Program Administration Costs
Program
Manager $2,915 $6,506 $9,089 $10,367 $10,365 $39,242
Sales Support $1,791 $2,662 $5,203 $s,231 $6,035 $20,923
AnalysUContract
Administrator $448 $998 $1,951 $2,616 $3,018 $9,030
Engineer $4,180 $7,765 $12,140 $16,274 $18,777 $59,136
TotalProgram
Administration
Labor Costs
$9,334 $17,931 $28,383 $34,488 $38,194 $128,331
Other Services
Energy
Management
Providers
$18,307 $43,951 $89,996 $1 18,555 $140,660 $411,469
Marketing and
Outreach $50,000 $20,380 $20,767 $21,162 $21,564 $133,873
Tracking $1,644 $1,847 $3,132 $3,921 $4,511 $15,054
Evaluation $3,614 $4,1 38 $7,1 1 5 $8,861 $10,2s8 $33,986
TotalOther
Services $73,564 $70,316 $121,011 $152,499 $176,992 $594,383
Total
lmplementation
Cost
$84,690 $92,241 $155,031 $192,977 $221,903 $746,842
Customer
lncentives $2,762 $6,1 07 $11,812 $15,839 $18,393 $54,913
Total Budget $87,451 $98,348 $166,842 $208,816 $240,297 $801,755
Customer Costs (rrior to incentives payment)
Labor $6,270 $13,976 $27,315 $36,617 $42,247 $126.426
Measure
lmplementation $3,655 $6,950 $12,129 $16,7e2 $18,062 $57,587
TotalCustomer
Costs $9,925 $20,927 $39,444 $53,409 $60,309 $184,013
EnerNOC Utrlity Solutions Consultrng
7 of95
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Executive Summary
Attachment IPUC I
Report Contents and Organization
The report is organized as follows:
o Chapter l. Introduction
o Chapter 2. Program Research
o Chapter 3. Market Characterization
o Chapter 4. Strategic Energy Management Program
o Chapter 5. O&M Technical Programs
In follow-on work, for each recommended program design, the project is developing
implementation plans; evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM&V) plans; and
technical manuals for Energy Management Providers (technical service providers).
vi
8 of95
www.enernoc.com
2
!NTRODUCTION..... ................. 1-1
Study Objectives ......... l-l
Approach.. .................... l-l
Report Contents and Organization........ .............1-2
Abbreviations and Acronyms ........ l-3
PROGRAM RESEARCH ............. .............2-1
Research Approach and Goals ........2-l
Research Findings.... ......................2-2
Program Types ....................2-2
Program Parameters ............2-4
Reparticipation............. .......2-8
Net-to-Gross Ratios ............2-8
Program Administration and Delivery.... ..................2-9
Marketing and Customer Recruitment............. .......2-10
Data Requirements..... ........2-10
Measurement and Verification .............2-ll
MARKET CHARACTERIZATION.............. ................ 3-1
Market Characterization.......... .........3-l
ldaho Commercial and Industrial Customer Sales Data. .............3-l
Defining the Target Market for Energy Management Programs................ ...............3-2
Savings Estimation. ......3-4
Baseline Projection .............3-4
Energy Savings Estimates... ...................3-5
Characterization of the Market for Energy Management and Recommendations...3-12
STRATEGIC ENERGY MANAGEMENT ...................4.1
Overview.. ....4-l
Administrative Requirements .........4-2
Integration with Existing Programs ........4-3
Target Market....... ........4-4
Implementation Strategy .................4-6
Recruiting and Screening Customers............... ........4-6
Gaining Customer Commitment............... ................4-6
Role of Energy Management Provider.............. .......4-7
3
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting I of95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Implementation Steps.. .......4-7
SEM Milestones.......... .......4-8
Issues, Risks and Risk Management Strategies ...................4-9
Managing Expectations................. ........4-9
Site-Level Data Requirements .......4-9
EM&V Requirements............... ...4-10
Marketing and Outreach .............. ...................4-10
Marketing for Cohort SEM.......... .........4-l I
Projected Energy Savings and Participation.......... ............4-12
Customer Incentives.. ...................4-12
Customer Costs......... ...................4-12
Budgetary Specifications .............. .................. 4-13
Measure Life ........... .. 4-18
Net-to-Gross............... .................. 4-18
Implementation Schedu1e................ ................ 4-18
s o&M TECHNTCAL PROGRAMS ........ ......5-1
Overview.. ................... 5-l
Administrative Requirements ........5-l
Integration with Existing Programs ..................5-3
Target Market....... .......5-4
Implementation Strategy................ ................... 5-6
Recruiting and Screening Customers............... ........5-6
Role of Energy Management Provider.............. ......5-6
Recommissioning Implementation Steps.. ...............5-6
Industrial Recommissioning Steps.......... .................5-7
Persistent Commissioning Implementation Steps.......... .............5-8
Issues, Risks, and Risk Management Strategies ................5-10
IndustrialRecommissioning Specific Issues .........5-10
PCx Specific Issues...... ....5-l I
Site-Level Data Requirements
EM&V Requirements .............
Marketing and Outreach 5-12
Projected Energy Savings and Participation 5-l 3
Budgetary Specifi cations ................. 5-16
................. 5 -21Measure Life
Implementation Schedu ..........5-21
A
10 of 95
www.enernoc.com
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
EnerNOC Util;ty Solutions Consulting
11 of95
tD PAC-E-I4-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
12 ol 95
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
LIST OF TABLES
Table ES-1
Table ES-2
Table ES-3
Table ES-4
Table l-l
Table 2-l
Table 2-2
Table 2-3
Table 2-4
Table 2-5
Table 2-6
Table 3-1
Table 3-2
Table 3-3
Table 3-4
Table 3-5
Table 3-6
Table 3-7
Table 3-8
Table 3-9
Table 3-10
Table 3-l I
Table 4-l
Table 4-2
Table 4-3
Table 4-4
Table 4-5
Table 4-6
Table 4-7
Table 4-8
Idaho 201I Sales by Customer Size, Rates Classes 6, 9, 19, and 35................... ii
Estimated Savings by All Evaluated Energy Management Program Types
(Cumulative Savings over Five Years, MWh) .............. iii
Estimated Savings, Recommended Energy Management Program Type
(Cumulative Savings over Five Years, MWh) .............. iv
Total Budget for All Energy Management Programs. .......................v
Acronyms Used in This Report ................ l-3
Programs Researched .............2-2
Overview of Program Types........ .............2-3
Program Type Matrix............... ................2-4
Estimated Savings from Representative Programs... ....2-5
Customer Incentive Structure for Representative Programs ..........2-6
Measure Life for Representative Programs................ ....................2-8
Idaho 2011 Sales by Rate Schedule and Service Location.... .........3-l
Idaho 201 I Sales by Customer Size, Rates Classes 6, 9, 19, and 35................3-2
Idaho Target Market Characterization.......... ...............3-3
LoadMAP Baseline Projection (MWh), with and without Capital Measures..3-5
CommercialSectorProgramSavingsAssumptions................ .......3-6
Industrial Sector Program Savings Assumptions ................ ...........3-7
Program Base Saturation and Applicability Assumptions (% of Energy Use) 3-8
Baseline Projections and Estimated Savings from All Evaluated Energy
Management Programs (Cumulative Savings over Five Years (MWh).........3-10
Estimated Savings from by Energy Management Program Type (Cumulative
Savings over Five Years, MWh) ............3-l I
Estimated Savings by Energy Management Program Type (Cumulative Savings
over Five Years, MWh) .......3-12
Estimated Savings from Recommended Energy Management Programs
(Cumulative Savings over Five Years, MWh) ..........3-13
Roles of Program Administrator and Energy Management Providers.............4-3
Roles of Rocky Mountain Power Staff.......... ..............4-4
General Characteristics of One-on-One SEM vs. SEM Cohort Customers.....4-5
Estimated Annual Gross Energy Savings (MWh/yr) ..................4-12
Estimated Number of Participating Businesses per Year.......... ..4-12
Customer Time Requirements ................ 4- 13
SEM Program Administration Labor (FTE)........ ......4-14
SEM Consultative Program Budget....... ................... 4-15
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
13 of95
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Table 4-9
Table 4-10
Table 4-l I
Table 5-l
Table 5-2
Table 5-3
Table 5-4
Table 5-5
Table 5-6
Table 5-7
Table 5-8
Table 5-9
Table 5-10
Table 5-l I
Table 5-12
Table 5-13
Table 5-14
SEM Cohort Program Budget....... .........4-16
Total SEM Program Budget ..................4-17
Proposed SEM Program Implementation Schedule .................... 4-18
Roles of Program Administrator and Energy Management Providers.............5-3
Roles of PacifiCorp Staff...... ...................5-4
General Characteristics of Customers for O&M Tracks ...............5-5
Estimated Annual Energy Savings (MWh/yr).. ........5-13
Estimated Number of Participating Sites/year............... ..............5-14
Recommended Customer Incentives................ ........5-14
Customer Time Requirements ............... 5-15
Customer Cost to lmplement ldentified Measures ...5-15
O&M Technical Program Administration Labor .....5-16
Recommissioning Budget....... ................5-17
Industrial Recommissioning Budget ......5-18
Persistent Commissioning 8udget................. ........... 5-19
Total Budget for All O&M Technical Programs... ...5-20
Proposed O&M Technical Program Implementation Schedule ............... ...... 5 -21
14 of 95
www.enernoc.com
Attachment IPUC 8
CHAPTER i r
INTRODUCTION
Study Objectives
The overall objective of the project is to develop an energy management offering that will
complement PacifiCorp's existing program set, and will leverage and integrate with those
existing programs. For purposes of this work, PacifiCorp defines energy management as
"a system of practices that creates reliable and persistent electric energy savings through
improved operations and maintenance (O&M) and management practices at customer
sites." A key element for energy management program design includes identifying
process or tools necessary to ensure persistency.
EnerNOC Utility Consulting (EnerNOC) is providing organized into five broad
o Task l. Market Characterization - develop estimates of the energy management
opportunity available by state, usage levels, and business type
o Task 2. Program Design --{esign state specific-energy management program offers
o Task J. Technical Serryices - identify the technical third-party resources that will be
necessary for delivery of the energy management programs and develop training and
qual ifi cations for these third-party resources
o Task 4. Implementation Plan - prepare state-specific implementation plans for energy
management programs
r Task 5. EM&V PIan - prepare state-specific evaluation, measurement, and verification
(EM&V) plans for energy management programs
This draft report addresses Tasks I and 2 for the Idaho
Rocky Mountain Power subsidiary.
territory of PacifiCorp's
Approach
To support the Task I market charactedzation and the Task 2 program design, the project
team conducted in-depth research on existing energy management programs. The goals of
this research were to develop independent estimates of savings, costs, measure lives, and
other characteristics necessary to estimate the savings opportunity, as well as to identify
best practices among existing programs. EnerNOC conducted a thorough search of the
available information, including research reports, program evaluation reports, and
publicly available presentations. Appendix A lists the documents reviewed. In addition,
we conducted a series of telephone interviews with utility personnel or staff from third-
party administrators of programs to gain insights beyond information in publicly
available documents. These interviews were useful for understanding lessons learned
from existing programs. High level findings from this research are summarized in
Chapter 2 and Appendix B.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
15 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
I ntroduction
Attachment IPUC 8
For the Task I market characterization, 201I sales data provided by PacifiCorp identified
energy consumption by rate schedule and market segment (based on building type or
industry type). This data set was used to further analyze customer usage levels sizes for
which energy management programs are most applicable. EnerNOC's LoadMAPrM (Load
Management Analysis and Planning) tool was then applied to forecast these customers'
baseline energy use, absent future utility DSM programs, through the period,2013-2017.
LoadMAP also projected energy use after accounting for savings from capital measures
due to PacifiCorp's existing programs. In a final step, energy management programs were
modeled, using assumptions informed by the research on existing programs to develop
savings estimates. Chapter 3 provides additional details regarding the approach along
with summary results.
Building upon the results of the market characterization assessment and the research
existing programs, preliminary designs were developed for two broad categories
programs:
o Strategic Energy Management involves a comprehensive approach to any aspect of an
organization's operations that affect energy use.
o O&M - Technical is concerned with optimizing the performance of specific systems,
such as HVAC, compressed air, ammonia refrigeration, or other process areas.
These names are used here to describe categories used in the analysis and may not
necessarily be selected as the final program name.
Report Contents and Organization
The remainder of this report is organized as follows:
o Chapter 2. Program Research
o Chapter 3. Market Characterization
o Chapter 4. Strategic Energy Management Program
o Chapter 5. O&M Technical Programs
on
of
16 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Introd uction
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Table l-l provides a list of acronyms used in this report.
Table 1-1 Acronyms Used in This Report
BMS Building Monitoring System, sometimes also know as Energy Management System
(EMS)
BPA Bonneville Power Authority
c&r Commercial and lndustrial
CCMs Rocky Mountain Power Customer and Community Managers
cEr Continuous Energy lmprovement
DSM Demand side Management
EE Energy Efficiency
EEPM Rocky Mountain Power Energy Efficiency Project Managers
EM Energy Management
EMP Energy Management Provider, analogous to Recommissioning Service Providers in
existino Utah Recommissionino Drooram
EM&V Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification
EPM Energy Project Manager
ETO Energy Trust of Oregon
HPEM High Performance Energy Management
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
tEt lndustrial Energy lmprovement
lRCx I ndustrial Recommissioning
LEED Leadership for Energy Efficient Design
LoadMAP Global's Load Management Analysis and PlanningTM tool
MBCx Mon itoring Based Commissioning
M&V Measurement and Verification
NTG Net-to-Gross Ratio
PCx Persistent Comm issioning
RCx Recommissioning or Retrocommissioning
RSP Recommissioning Service Provider
M&V Measurement and Verification
NEEA Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
NWPCC Northwest Power and Conservation Council
o&M Operations and Maintenance
SEM Strategic Energy Management
src Standard I nd ustrial Classification
sq.ft.Square feet
TRC Total Resource Cost
VAV Variable-Air-Volume
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
17 of 95
tD PAC-E-I4-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
18 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
CHAPTER lz
Attachment IPUC 8
design, which
separate from
PROGRAM RESEARCH
Research Approach and Goals
To support the Task I market characterization and the Task 2 program design, the project
team began by conducting in-depth research on existing energy management programs.
The goals of this research were to develop independent estimates of savings, costs,
measure lives, and other characteristics necessary to estimate the savings opportunity, as
well as to identify best practices among existing programs.
The research approach incorporated a review of publicly available program information,
regulatory documents, program evaluations, and marketing materials. Research papers
and conference presentations on energy management were also reviewed. Appendix A
lists the documents used for this research.
In addition, we conducted a series of telephone interviews with utility personnel or staff
from third-party administrators of utility programs to gain insights beyond information in
publicly available documents. These interviews were particularly useful for
understanding lessons learned from existing programs. Findings from these interviews are
summarized throughout this chapter.
During this research, the project focused on several goals for the program
were identified by PacifiCorp:
o Develop energy management savings and measure life estimates that are
capital measure savings
. Facilitate integration of energy management offer(s) programs with existing Rocky
Mountain Power programs
The programs researched during this step are shown in Table 2-1. These programs were
selected because they have been operating for several years and thus can provide useful
perspective and lessons learned, or because they represent innovative approaches to
energy management. Additional preference was given to entities that have annual
acquisition targets related to energy management.
E."ir,roc utii[t s.tr;i"; consuttins
19 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Program Research
Table 2-1 Programs Researched
Attachment IPUC I
BC Hydro
Bonneville Power Authority (BPA)
Connecticut Utilities
Energy Trust Oregon (ETO)
Focus on Energy
Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance (NEEA)
Strategic Energy Management Plan
Continuous Optimization
Energy Smart lndustrial Programs:
Energy Project Manager (EPM)
High Performance Energy Management (HPEM)
Track and Tune
,!uslness _!u.stainat1ll!v challgnse
lndustrial Energy lmprovementtlEl) and Kaizen Blitz
i-lactica | !1e!y ua139em"!l
Continuous Energy lmprovement (CEl)
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)Continuous Energy lmprovement Program
Monitoring Based Commissioning (MBCx)
Retro-Commissioning, Continuous Energy lmprovement
Commissioning, HVAC Tune-up, Operator Training, and
Building Occupant Training Programs
Building Tune-up Program
PEPCO
Platte River Authority
Puget Sound Energy
!9cxv nao*lltain Plw:f
San Diego Gas and Electric
Resou rce Conservation M a 11S,e1
Re-Commissioning Pro_gram
Continuous Energy lmprovement Program
Snohomish County PUD Strategic Energy Management System
Southern California Edison (SCE)
Xcel Energy
Continuous Energy lmprovement Pilot
commelcl_atncx e19911
Process Efficiency Program
Research Findings
Program Types
The research identified several types of energy management programs. The general
program types, brief descriptions, and representative programs are found inTable2-2.
20 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
?roglam Researgh
Table 2-2 Overuiew of Program Types
I Retrocommissioning is defined as a systematic process for optimizing the performance of an existing building that has never
undergone a formal commissioning process, whereas recommissioning refers to this systematic optimization process for a building that
has previously been commissioned. In this document, for the sake of simplicity, the term recommissioning is used for both
recommissioning and retrocommissioning.
2-3
Strategic Energy
Management One-
on-One
Consultative
Supports a systematic approach to
integrating energy management into an
organization's business practices, provided
through a consultant who works one-on-one
with facility personnel.
o Xcel Energy Process
Efficiency Program. NEEA Continuous Energy
lmprovement
Supports a systematic approach to
integrating energy management into an
organization's business practices, provided
through cohort approach in which a
consultant works with a group of facilities.
Strategic Energy
Management
Cohort Approach
. BPA High Performance
Energy Management. ETO lndustrial Energy
lmprovemento NEEA Montana SEM
Cohort
Provides support for hiring a dedicated
energy manager at customer facility.Energy Manager
. BPA Energy Project
Manager. Rocky Mountain Power
Wyomingo BC Hydro lndustrial Energy
Persistent
Commissioning
(PCx) / Monitoring
Based
Commissioning
(MBCx)
lnvolves longer-term (multi-year) monitoring
of building HVAC and possibly other
systems, to identify operational deficiencies
and no-cosUlow-cost measures. ldentified
deficiencies are corrected on an ongoing
basis.
. PG&E Monitoring Based
Commissioningo PEPCO Continuous Energy
lmprovement
Commissioning
Recommissioning /
retrocommissioning
(RCx)1
lnvolves monitoring of building systems,
usually HVAC, for a fixed period, usually
weeks to months, to identify operational
deficiencies and no-cosUlow-cost measures.
A report identifies measures that are
subsequently implemented and verified.
. Rocky Mountain PowerUtah Recommissioning
Program
Supports monitoring and optimization of
specific systems, e.9., compressed air or
ammonia refrigeration.
. BPA Track and Tune. ETO Kaizen Blitz
Building Tune-Up Provides subsidized maintenance of building
systems, such as roof-top units.
Plafte River Authority
Building Tune-up Program
PEPCO HVAC Tune-up
Subsidizes training to raise understanding of
behavioral and O&M measures.
PEPCO Operator Trainingand Building Occupant
Training
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
21 of 95
PAC-
JC8
ID PI
IPUC
Prog
E-14-08
Attachment IPUC I
ram Research
To help refine savings estimates and inform program design recommendations, these
program types are categorized based on their target market, focus and engagement length
as shown in Table 2-3.The first of these program types, Strategic Energy Management,
involves a comprehensive approach to any aspect of an organization's operations that
affect energy use. The O&M - Technical program types are concerned with optimizing
the performance of specific systems, such as HVAC, compressed air, ammonia
refrigeration, or other process areas.
Table 2-3 Program Type Matrix
These general program types form the basis of the estimated savings analysis described in
Chapter 3.
Some of the key findings from the research on utility programs, including lessons
Iearned, are briefly summarized below. The program designs in Chapters 4 and 5 include
specific actionable recommendations that address these findings.
Program Parameters
Savings Estimates
There is a wide range of savings estimates reported across different programs. Many
programs are relatively new, and have not yet been evaluated. Therefore, for some
programs, savings estimates may be difficult to attribute to specific actions/measures.
This research indicates reliable and consistent savings estimates are a high priority for
program design. Table 2-4 summarizes the savings estimates associated with the specific
programs that we reviewed during our research.
Facility Manager Training
Building Occupant
Training
Smallto medium
customers without
BMSl
Building Tune-up
Medium to Large
customers w/BMS
One to two-year
engagement SEM Cohort Recommissioning
lndustrial RCx
Large to very large
customers w/BMS
and/or other monitoring
systems
Three-year or longer
engagement
Consultative SEM
Energy Manager
Persistent Cx
Energy Manager
l. Building Monitoring System (BMS), sometimes referred to as Energlt Monitoring System (EMS).
22 of 95
www.eternoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Proqram Research
Table 2-4 Esti m ated Savings from Representative P rogram s
Strategic Energy
Management One-on-
One Consultative
Xcel Energy Process Efficiency
Program
Estimated 5-12o/o
lncludes equipment related measures.
BC Hydro Strategic Energy
Management Plan Estimated 10-30%
Strategic Energy
Management Cohort
NEEA lndustrial lnitiative 1.84% savings from all non-capital
oroiects
BPA High Performance Energy
Management
Aggregated savings of 2.5% for first
year for the first cohort of 13
companies; expected to increase to
6.7% in 5 years
ETO lndustrialEnergy
lmprovement 5%
Energy Manager
BPA Energy Project Manager No attributable savings reported
Rocky Mountain Power \AIY Not available
Persistent
Commissioning (PCx)/
Monitoring Based
Commissioning (MBCx)
PG&E Monitoring Based
Commissioning 1O-2Oo/o
PEPCO Continuous Energy
lmprovement Commissioning 5-10o/o
SCE Commercial RCx program No attributable savings reported
BC Hydro Continuous
Optimization 8.40/o
Efficiency Vermont- Mon itoring
based Commissioning 15o/o
Recommissioning /
retrocommissioning
(RCx)
Rocky Mountain Power Utah
Recommissioning Program 3Yo
PEPCO FullRetro-
Commissioning program Not available
Track-and-Tune
BPA Track and Tune
7.5% savings estimate from regional
grain processor case study
implementing Track and Tune
ETO Kaizen Blitz Not available
Building Tune-Up
Platte River Authority Building
Tune-up Program 5-10o/o
PEPCO HVAC Tune-up Not available
Training PEPCO Operator Training and
Building Occupant Training Not available
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
23 of 95
2-5
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Program Research
Attachment IPUC 8
Customer lncentives
Incentive levels and structure also vary among programs as shown in Table 2-5. The vast
majority of programs provide incentives to the customer via a one-time payment. One
exception is Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which pays out percentages of
incentives over time.
Recommissioning programs have historically paid the cost of engineering studies and
other services provides by technical service providers, which is the case in Rocky
Mountain Power's existing program. As shown in Table 2-5, some energy management
programs are moving toward approaches in which the customer pays for a portion of the
engineering services and/or receives performance-based incentives based on verified
savings achieved. These approaches, in which the customer has "skin in the game," give
the customer increased motivation to implement identified measures and thus share the
risks and rewards among all parties.
Table 2-5 Customer lncentive Structure for Representative Programs
Strategic Energy
Management One-
on-One
Consultative
XcelEnergy Process
Efficiency Program
75o/o of cost of engineering and technical studies.
Customer's contribution is limited lo25o/o with a cap
of $7,500. lf study costs>$30,000, Xcel covers rest.
Capital measures paid through other EE programs.
2 years energy manager's salary; training for energy
manager; cost of workshop to help create a custom
SEM plan; full cost of on-site management
assessment; 60% funding for up to 6 months for
energy management coach to establish program;
access to funds to create a Monitoring, Targeting,
and Reporting (MT&R) program.
BC Hydro Strategic
Energy Management
Plan
Strategic Energy
Management
Cohort
Free consulting, no cash incentives.
$0.025/kwh of energy savings for each year in
years 1 through 3 or 5 years, based on verified
savings over the previous 12 months
ETO lndustrial Energy
lmprovement $.O2lkWh; $.40/Therm
BPA Energy Project
Manager (EPM)
Annual EPM co-funding $0.025/kWh of energy
savings, not to exceed the total EPM salary plus
overhead
Energy Manager
Rocky Mountain Power
Wyoming
lnitial funding 1/3 of funding amount (not to exceed
$25,000) for creating the Energy Management Plan;
Lesser of $0.025/kWh of energy savings achieved
less previous payments, or final approved Energy
Project Manager annual cost less previous
payments
2-6
24 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Program Research
Table 2-5 Customer lncentive Structure for Representative Programs (continued)
Persistent
Commissioning
(PCx)
PG&E Monitoring
Based
Commissioning
$0.09/kwh saved, $100/peak kW; provides up to 50% of
the project cost.
PEPCO
Continuous
Energy
lmprovement
Commissioning
$0.20/kwh of estimated annual savings
$0.05-$0.1s/kWh of energy savings, depending on
measure, plus $100/peak kW; incentives up to 50% of the
project cost
100% of the cost for RCx services plus incentives to
reduce simple payback on measures with a simple
payback above one year
Recommissioning /
retrocommissioning
(RCx)
Rocky Mountain
Power Utah
Recommissioning
Program
PEPCO Full
Retro-
Commissioning
$0.02-$0.06/sq.ft. of building conditioned space with a
maximum cap, depending on the phase of the project, not
to exceed 50% of project cost
1. Scoping- full cost paid;2. Tracking system set-up &
maint. $0.025 /kwh of baseline (max: $50,000); 3. Tune-
up: Fullcost paid; 4. lmplementation $0.075/kWh verified
savings up to 70% of incremental project cost; 5.
Sustained savings $0.025/kwh lyr lor 3 or 5 yrsTrack-and-Tune
BPA Track and
Tune
100% ol technical support, plus 50% of cost of
measures/actions. Also reimburses the participant's
internal labor used for implementation.
Building Tune-Up
Platte River
Authority Building
Tune-up Program
75o/o of the cost of the services performed, or $0.15/ft2
Standard incentives available for equipment improvement
and services
PEPCO Operator
Training and
Building
Occupant
Training
O&M training: up to $1,000, or 80% of enrollment costs
per course, whichever is less. Building Occupant Training:
50% of the full cost of the training program, up to $5,000.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
25 of 95
2-7
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Program Research
Attachment IPUC 8
Measure Life
The programs assign varying measure lives to energy management and behavioral
measures. Table 2-6 shows representative measure life from selected programs.
Table 2-6 Measure Life for Representative Programs
Reparticipation
Several of the existing long-running recommissioning programs allow a facility to again
obtain services through the program after a defined period of time has elapsed. This
recognizes the fact that after several years, recommissioning measures such as control
strategies may no longer be in place, or new problems may have arisen. For example,
Pacific Gas and Electric allows a building to be recommissioned again after three years,
while Southern California Edison requires five years to have elapsed.
Net-to-Gross Ratios
Among the various Energy Management program types researched here,
recommissioning programs have the longest history. A program evaluation of Rocky
Mountain Power's 2007-2008 Utah Recommissioning Program found a net-to-gross
(NTG) ratio of 84o/o. An evaluation of California RCx programs found average NTG
ratios of 80%o.'
The other program types, including PCx and SEM programs, are newer and therefore
NTG results are less readily available. Therefore, the program design assumes a NTG
ratio for these programs of 1.0.
2 Pacifrhrp Recommissionirg 2007-2008 tJtah Program Evaluation, The Cadmus Group, November 2010.
Final Report 2006.{8 Retro-Commissioning Impact Evaluation, SBW Consulting, Inc., February 2010.
Xcel Energy Process
Efficiency Program 18 years (Assumes capital measure are included)
Strategic Energy
Management Cohort
Approach
Recommissioning /
retrocommissioning
(RCx)
3 years for control setting changes
8 years for equipment repairs
BPA Track and Tune
ETO Kaizen Blitz
2-B
26 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Program Research
Program Administration and Delivery
The elements of program administration and delivery include staffing, marketing and
recruitment, evaluation, measurement and verification. For each item, we describe the
best practice identified as a result of the research.
Program Staf/ing
Existing energy management programs typically require staff to fill the following key
roles.
o Program Administrator is responsible for tasks such as marketing, customer
recruitment, results tracking, payment of incentives, and the like. Two different models of
program administration are typically used, depending on resource availability and other
preferences.
o Internal administration. Programs administered internally by utility staff do not
require the additional layer of a program administrator. Customers have a single
point of contact for corresponding on energy efficiency matters, for energy
management programs and other offerings within the utility's entire program
offering suite. This can help integrate these additional program offerings with the
existing set of utility programs that the customer may already be familiar with and
participating in. We found that this is the most common approach/least common
approach.
o Third-party administration. With a third-party administrator approach, the
administrator is responsible for managing the program activities and deliverables,
and for coordinating with utility staff for customer outreach and recruitment
activities. The administrator generally has specific, proven experience and
expertise with the program offering, such that it can effectively market and
administer the program. We found that this is the most common approach/least
common approach.
o EnerSy N{anagement Providers are organizations with staff that have specific
knowledge and expertise required to work with customers to achieve SEM savings.
Energy Management Providers are often be specialized in working with particular types
of customer segments and associated processes and have the requisite skills to
implementing the program at customer sites. Multiple firms may be selected with
necessary specializations. These providers are analogous to the Recommissioning Service
Providers in the existing Utah Recommissioning program and the pre-qualified Energy
Engineering Resource List consultants for the EnergyFin Answer program.
Communication with customers
A key component of successful programs is communicating clearly with customers
regarding the program offering and what participation in the program entails. The
program offer must be stated clearly and concisely in marketing materials and contracting
agreements to clearly define objectives and set customer expectations and
responsibilities. All Program Administration and Energy Management Provider staff
involved in customer communication must be trained regarding how to communicate the
program benefits and expectations to customers.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
27 ot95
2-9
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Program Research
Streamlined processes
Having streamlined processes with clearly defined steps in each stage is essential.
Complex processes make the program harder to operate, and discourage both customer
and service provider participations. Program documentation requirements need to be kept
at a minimum level. For example, processes for savings calculation and reimbursing
incentives to the customer must be as streamlined as possible.
Customer relationship
Maintaining the customer relationship is a key element not only for customer recruitment
but also for delivery of energy management offer(s). This is especially the case for SEM
and persistent commissioning type programs, as these programs require more customer
change. The program administrator, be it utility or third-party administrator, needs to be
engaged and proactive, and maintain relationship-building with the customer. Programs
need to offer short-term successful initiatives, with short payback periods (less than I
year) to sustain customer interest. Also, managing relationship through the potential
turnover of customer personnel involved in the project is essential.
Marketing and Customer Recruitment
Deploying effective customer recruitment strategies is a key aspect of successful program
delivery. The party undertaking the recruitment needs to have specialized field
knowledge about customers, with a solid understanding of business processes.
To help convince customers to participate, other program experiences indicate that
additional benefits beyond electric energy savings should be highlighted. For industrial
energy management programs, a key non-energy benefit message is increased
competitiveness through improved energy management practices. Other
messages/benefits include improved product quality, higher productivity and up-time,
better safety procedures, and an additional way to demonstrate corporate
responsib i I itylsustainab ility.
Commercial energy management programs provide benefits in terms of improved air
quality, improved occupant comfort and reduced complaints, reduced O&M costs, early
detection of failing equipment, more time to attend to preventative maintenance, and
reduced greenhouse gas footprints. RCx/PCx programs can also establish or improve
building ENERGY STAR scores and can be used to obtain specific points related to
Leadership for Energy Efficient Design (LEED) for Existing Buildings certification.
Program experience indicates finalizing a customer participation agreement can take
three- to six-months time. To maintain momentum during the recruitment process, the
program administrator needs to be proactive and engaged to help maintain the customer's
top management commitment to the energy management offer.
Data Requirements
Successful programs, especially persistent commissioning, need to have granular data
available at the sub-system level. This enables baselines to be clearly established and
helps identify savings before and after implementation of specific measures. Visibility to
end-point energy use data, such as Variable-Air-Volume (VAV) boxes, provides the most
robust measurement and verification of savings. Establishing building connectivity,
through which different end-points are connected to the project, is a key aspect. This data
enabled both project level M&V and program EM&V.
2-LA
28 of 95
www.enernoc.com
Attachment IPUC 8
Program Research
Successful projects combine automated data mining with experienced engineering
support. The engineering support is a critical component because many facility teams are
resistant to dashboards, however sophisticated, because they lack the time, skills, and/or
budget to take action on the information. A key component of successful energy
management programs is that they put the right data in the hands of the right people at the
right time to make the right decision. Going beyond this concept, the energy management
offering must demonstrate energy improvement success in a reasonably short feedback
timeframe so that the organization recognizes its efforts and seeks to continue
improvement activities.
Measurement and Verification
A key element of successful program design and delivery is to have the right set of
procedures defined for M&V. Establishing a clear, well-defined baseline seems to be a
challenge in most cases and requires the collection of energy driver data; i.e., weather
data, occupancy, or production levels. Therefore, M&V needs to be addressed, beginning
at the customer engagement stage, so that the baseline is well-established and savings
attribution to energy management practices vs. other variables can be clearly defined.
Successful programs have active review processes through which refinements are made
mid-stream, so that optimal customer participation and behavior changes, combined with
reliable and persistent energy savings, are rcalized
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
29 of 95
2-lt
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
30 of 95
Attachment IPUC I
CHAPTER I :
MARKET C HARACTE RIZATIO N
Market Characterization
PacifiCorp provided 20ll monthly sales data for its commercial and industrial customers
in June, 2012. This section presents the characterization of the ldaho market.
ldaho Commercial and lndustrial Customer Sales Data
The original 201I ldaho retail sales data represented a total of 584,585 MWh. The file
contained 88,248 records with monthly meter data for 8,305 Service Locations. The sales
by rate schedule and price structure code are shown in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1 ldaho 2011 Sales by Rate Schedule and Seruice Location
5 - General
iervice Large
)ower
OTGNSV0006 275,747 1,066
305,344 t,281,238OTGNSVOOSA28,551 2r2
07NMT06135 L,il6 3
) -General Servicr
'High Voltage 07GNSV0009 721,574 15 721,574 15 8,105
19 - Commercial 8
I ndustrial Space
Heati ng
07ctsH0019 6,186 774 6,186 t14 54
35 - Optional
lime-of-Day
3eneral Service -
)istri bution
y'oltage
07GNSV0035 7,592 3 L,592 3 531
23 - General
ie rvice
OTGNSVOO23 133,135 5,883
149,889 6,892 22
OTGNSVO23A t6,@7 996
OTGNSV023S 8 3
07NMT23135 ilg 10
Total 584,585 &:tos 584,585 &30s 70
After reviewing these data and based on discussions with PacifiCorp, rate schedules were
removed from the market characterization analysis based on relative usage and likely
opportunity. The class removed in ldaho was general service. The remaining data is
characterized as follows:
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
31 of95
3-1
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Market Characterization
Attachment IPUC I
. Sales of 434,696 MWh; 74%o of original total
Four major rate schedules 3
o Rate 6 -General Service Large Power
o Rate 9 -General Service High Voltage
o Rate 19 - Commercial & Industrial Space Heating
o Rate 35 - Optional Time-of-Day General Service - Distribution Voltage
I ,413 Service Locations
Defining the Target Market for Energy Management Programs
The 1,413 service location sales on rates 6, 9, 19, and 35 were then aggregated by
business name. All locations of a corporation or a retail chain were combined into one
sales total because multiple location customers tend to participate across multiple
locations. Minor differences in company names were accounted for during this analysis.
After this analysis, the 1,413 service locations had been consolidated into 815 business
names.
Many of the aggregated customers had relatively low annual energy use. Usage was
compared to usage thresholds widely utilized in other energy management programs. For
example, programs aimed at smaller commercial buildings generally do not target
buildings under 25,000 sq. ft. Assuming an approximate intensity of 20 kwh per square
foot for an office building, a 25,000 sq. ft. building would use roughly 500,000 kWh per
year.. On the industrial side, most existing SEM programs require that participating
customers have annual usage levels of at least one million kWh.
Table 3-2 shows the Idaho sales divided into two categories, with 500,000 kWh used as
the lowest size threshold, per the discussion above. The 693 customers with annual sales
less than or equal to 500,000 kWh are 85%o of customers on rate classes 6,9, 19, and 35,
but account for only l9Yo of sales. Because customers with annual sales of less than
500,000 kWh are typically unlikely to participate in energy management programs
according to the research results, they were eliminated from the analysis target
market.
Table 3-2 ldaho 2011 Sales by Customer Size, Rafes Classes 6,9, 79, and 35
81,317
After excluding the
businesses form the
customers using less
target market for the
than 500,000 kwh annually, the remaining
analysis of energy management programs.
3 In cases where a service location changed rate classes during the year, it was assigned to the rate class that it was on at year end.
a Average whole-building intensity for small offices in the Rocky Mountain Region is estimated at 17.88 kwh/sq.ft., while large offices
are estimated at 20.41 kWh/sq.ft., based on EnerNOC Utility Solutions' Energy Market Profiles, a database of end-use profiles by
sector, customer segment and region for electricity and natural gas. The database contains market size, fuel shares/saturations,
UECS/EUIS, intensities, and total sales.
3-2
32 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lD PAC-E-I4-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Market Characterization
These 122 businesses have annual sales of 353,379 MWh, translating to average annual
sales per business of approximately 2.9 million kWh. These customers account for 60%o
of the 584,585 MWh in the original Idaho data set.
The remaining targeted businesses, aggregated by name, were classified as commercial or
industrial based on the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes in the original data
file. The aggregated names were also assigned a building or industry type, again based on
the original sales data. Where a specific name had more than one SIC code associated
with it, the entity was assigned the SIC code of the service location with the highest
annual sales. Similarly, if the entity had service locations on differing rate classes, the
aggregated sales for that entity were assigned the rate class associated with the service
location with the highest annual sales.
The resulting market characterization by sector and segment appears in Table 3-3. The
building type and industrial facility segments were selected to capture information at a
sufficiently granular level to represent the ldaho target market while also enabling
modeling with the LoadMAPrM (Load Modeling Analysis and Planning) tool. LoadMAP
characterizes energy use for each segment by energy end-use (i.e., HVAC, lighting, office
equipment, motors, process loads) and to model customer choices when equipment is
replaced or when customers utilize energy more efficiently as a result of an energy
management offer from the utility.
Tahle 3-3 ldaho Target Market Characterization
Commercial
Office 15,211 15 1.014 4o/o
Restaurant 2.031 3 677 1o/o
Retail 18.938 13 '1.457 50h
Grocery 15.604 5 3.121 4o/o
College 43,483 43,483 120
School 23.494 12 1,958 7Yo
Hospital - Health Care 1',t.425 I 1.428 3To
Lodging 806 1 806 0o/o
Assembly 3,451 4 863 10
Warehouse 10,282 6 1,714 3Yo
Miscellaneous 11.832 12 986 30/
Commercial $btotal 156,559 80 1,957
lndustrial
Oil and Gas 16.227 1 16.227 50/
Manufacturing - Chemicals 32,655 32,655 9Yo
Manufacturing - Food 92,851 8 11,606 26Yo
Mining 1 1.390 2 5.695 3%
Manufacturing - Stone and Concrete 2,358 ,|2,358 1o/o
Manufacturing - Miscellaneous 41.U0 29 1.426 12o/"
lndustrlal Subtotal 196,820 42 4,686
Grand Total 353,379 122 2,897 r00!6
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
33 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Market Characterization
Attachment IPUC I
Savings Estimation
Baseline Projection
The first step in the LoadMAP analysis is to develop a baseline projection of how
customers will use energy absent DSM programs. This projection is at the end-use level
and includes estimates of the impacts of equipment standards' that will unfold over the
study timeframe. This baseline projection functions as the foundation for estimating
savings from Energy Management initiatives.
This analysis is designed to identify the savings that Energy Management programs can
provide in addition to capital measures that provide energy savings. Capital measures
opportunities are already addressed in other Rocky Mountain Power planning work and
existing DSM programs. To capture the expected savings due to capital measures, such as
the installation of more efficient HVAC equipment, motors, lighting, and process
equipment, a second baseline projection was developed and subtracted from the "absent
DSM programs" projection. This extra step insures the estimated savings from energy
management offers is accurately identified.
EnerNOC used the following assumptions to develop the baseline projection:
. Market size: Because Energy Management programs generally apply only to existing
facilities, we assumed that the target market size does not grow over the study period.
. htlarket profiles: The LoadMAP model uses market profiles that define the
percentage of overall energy use that is consumed by various end uses. The market
profiles are a snapshot of how customers currently use energy. Market profiles for
each segment were defined based on EnerNOC's recent studies in the Pacific
Northwest, and adjusted to reflect Idaho weather.
. Technolog-y nptions and purchase shares: For purposes of this analysis, the
characterization of technology options was streamlined to only two or three efficiency
levels for each equipment type. We used equipment efficiency levels found to be cost-
effective in previous studies. Assumptions regarding baseline purchase shares for the
various efficiency levels were also drawn from EnerNOC's recent studies for the
Pacific Northwest region. These assumptions explicitly account for how upcoming
equipment standards, such as the EPACT and EISA standards, are likely to affect
equipment choices.
. Capital measure costs and savings: Assumptions regarding energy-efficient
equipment savings, costs, and adoption rates were drawn from EnerNOC's recent
studies for the Pacific Northwest region.
The resulting baseline projections for the period 2011-2017 appear in Table 3-4. The
baseline projection without capital measures is nearly flat, with slight growth offset by
upcoming changes in lighting and equipment standards. After capital measures due to
existing DSM programs are modeled, the forecasted energy use increases approximately
0.1% annually.
s LoadMAP contains assumptions about the vintage distribution of existing equipment and average lifetime. The stock-accounting logic
in the model results in equipment turnover in each year based on the end of its useful life.
3-4
34 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Ma rket Cha racterization
Table 3-4 LoadMAP Baseline Projection (MWh), with and without Capital
Measures
Energy Savings Estimates
The next step of the analysis is to determine the energy savings opportunity due to
various energy management program alternatives. To throw the net as wide as possible,
we modeled a comprehensive range of energy management programs identified by the
project's research. These include the following program types, which are based on the
program research described in Chapter 2. Brief descriptions appear below with additional
details in Chapter 2.
. Commercial
One-on-One Consultative SEM - Programs that support a systematic approach
to integrating energy management into an organization's business practices,
provided through a consultant who works one-on-one with facility personnel.
SEM Cohort - Programs that support a systematic approach to integrating
energy management into an organization's business practices, provided through
cohort approach in which a consultant works with a group of facilities.
Energy Manager - Programs that provide support for hiring a dedicated energy
manager at customer facility.
Persistent Commissioning - Programs that involve longer-term (multi-year)
monitoring of building HVAC and possibly other systems, to identify operational
deficiencies and no-cosVlow-cost measures. Identified deficiencies are corrected
on an ongoing basis.
Recommissioning - Programs that involve monitoring of building systems,
usually HVAC, for a fixed period, usually weeks to months, to identify
operational deficiencies and no-cost/low-cost measures. A report identifies
measures that are subsequently implemented and verified.
o Building Tune-up - Programs that provide subsidized maintenance of building
systems, such as roof-top units.
Baseline Forecast without Capital Measures
3ommercial 156,559 L57,295 757,997 L50,287 162,539 155,015 156,055 t.0%
I ndustrial 196,820 t98,742 796,O79 t97,788 195,253 196,78 198,4@ o.\Yo
C&l Subtotal 353,379 355,037 354,07t 358,075 3s7,792 361,804 364s1s 0.5%
Baseline Forecast with Capital Measures
3ommercial 156,559 L56,946 757,317 t59,228 761,094 163,162 163,830 o.8%
I ndustri a I 196,820 t97,457 L93,735 t94,382 190,955 791,523 192,229 -0.4%
C&l Subtotal 353,379 354,403 351,051 353,610 352,059 354,685 356,060 o.t%
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
35 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Market Cha racterization
Attachment IPUC 8
o SEM and 0&M Trainirg - Programs that subsidize training of facility
management and/or O&M personnel raise understanding of behavioral and O&M
measures
o Building Occupant Training - Programs that subsidize training of building
occupants to raise understanding of energy-saving behavioral measures
. Industrial
o SEM Consultative - same as above
o SEM Cohort - same as above
o SEM Training - Programs that subsidize training of facility management and/or
O&M personnel raise understanding of behavioral and O&M measures
o Energ-v Manager - same as above
o Industrial Recommissioning (lndustrial RCx) Programs that support
monitoring and optimization of specific systems, e.g., compressed air or ammonia
refrigeration.
Savings Assumptions
The research on existing programs showed a variety of results regarding savings, as
discussed in Chapter 2. The savings by end-use assumptions used to derive energy
savings estimates, shown in Table 3-5 and Table 3-6, are at the lower ranges of reported
savings, and thus were selected to provide conservative savings estimates. Savings for
programs that provide less persistence were downgraded to represent an annual expected
savings over the measure life. For example, conventional recommissioning can provide
initial savings of 8-l2Yo of HVAC use following measure implementation, but studies
indicate that savings degrade over time. Therefore, this analysis conservatively assumes
an annual average savings on HVAC energy use of 6%o. The end uses shown in Table 3-5
and Table 3-6 represent all major end uses with savings opportunities in the respective
sectors.
Table 3-S Commercial Sector Program Savrngs Assumptions
SEM Consultative 4.5o/o 4.5o/o 4.5%4.5%4.5%4.5o/o 4.50/o
SEM Cohort 4.Oo/o 4.Oo/o 4.Oo/o 4.OoA 4.Oo/o 4.0%4.0o/o
Energy Manager 4s%4.5o/o 4.5%4.5o/o 4.5o/o 4.5%4.5%
Persistent Comm issioning 14.0o/o 8.0o/o 10.0%6.Oo/o o.o%O.Oo/o 0.0%
Recommissioning 6.0%2.0%5.0%10.0o/o 0.0%0.00/o 0.0%
Building Tune-up 5.0%o.o%o%o.o%o.o%O.Oo/o o.o%
36 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
SEM - O&M Training o.5%os%os%os%os%o.s%o.s%
Building Occupant Training o.s%o5%o.s%o.5%o.5%O.Oo/o 0.5%
Table 3-6 I n d u stri a I Sector P ro g ra m Savings Ass u m pti o n s
Notes: Molors savings applied to pumps, fans, blowers, compressed air, material handling, and other
motor loads.
Program Applicability and Base Saturation Assumptions
To model how likelihood to participate in programs differs among the customer segments
(building or industry type) and facility size, the research findings regarding applicability
of programs to various customer types were applied to the Idaho sales data. For example,
the SEM and energy manager programs were assumed to apply mainly to the largest
customers, while programs such as training or building tune-up were assumed to apply to
relatively smaller customers. The analysis then developed weighted average
applicabilities, based on the distributions of customer sizes within each segment. The
resulting applicability assumptions appear in Table 3-7. To avoid double counting of
savings, the applicability across all of the programs totals to 100% for each segment.6
Note that these applicability factors control the percentage of the sector's energy use, not
the percentage of customers, to which the programs apply.
To reflect that some customers already practice an O&M measure, such as having an
energy manager on staff or conducting regular HVAC maintenance, the study assumed a
base saturation of the measure/practice. These assumptions appear in Table 3-7 as well.
6 Assumes that in any year, a customer could participate in only one program. In terms ofthe program des(1n however, this does not
mean that a customer should be precluded from participating in multiple programs over time. For example, a customer who
participated in Recommissioning might later choose to participate in an SEM program.
SEM Consultative 4.5%4.5%4.5o/o 4.5%4.5%4.5%4.5o/o 4.5o/o
SEM Cohort 4.OoA 4.0%4.0%4.Oo/o 4.0%4.Oo/o 4.0o/o 4.0o/o
Energy Manager 4.5%4.5o/o 4.5%4.5o/o 4.5o/o 4.5o/o 4.5o/o 4.5o/o
lndustrial RCx o.ooa O.Oo/o 5.Oo/o 5.Oo/o 1O.Oo/o 5.Oo/o 5.Oo/o 5.Oo/o
SEM - O&M Training 0.5%O.5o/o 0.5%O.5o/o O.5o/o 0.5%O.5o/o 0.5%
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
37 of 95
3-7
Eo9UocLo
q
=
1Oo,
o
@o
@
E xo a so x }R6r E x $
6 :Ro g!No 5 s x 5
6 6 s s x
N
so x s@
s
E
s xo ts so E s x }Rb
5 xo s s so d E 5N E
E 5 6 d s sr s E
s xo 6 5 so Nr x6 s E
s s t s S s
N sN E
a :R E s
N
s xo o
)R
B
6 a 6 6 x s ;R6 S
b x S s s 6 :R x($
b :Rb s E s :s x6 I
o
Eo
=toU
=u
EoEoI
=g
oU6co
=u
ocu
uE
E
.9
.E
EoI
co
.2Eo4
U.sg
.9
.E
Eo
oE
ca
oEaFE.E
='=6
UE.E
.E
F
=oto
=g
u.sc'E
F
Eoc
=ouc
!=36
o
oF
E sN
a6 x x s x6 s6
:R
E
b\R b^x@ 5 x x xN E
b s }Rb $x@N
xN 5 x E9
s s >sb s x >R s so
6 x ts s :RN x@ aN ;Rr E
I 6 E s s :Rq :Rs t
E 6 E 5 x }Ro x x :e
B
5 6 I S ts s@ s
s >Ro 6 5 x Io E 6N E
I I 6 5 x :RN x E
o
Eo!
=co(,
=g
EoEoI
=U
oUoco
=M
oEr
EE
E
.9
.E
EoI
co
.2Eoa
UEg
.9
.E
Eo
oi
o
ocaFuEE
f6
Uc
E.E
F
=oto
=u
u
.Ec.E
F
coa:
oUE
E=6
G
o
olD5\p
o
ut
o
N
tDtro
a.
Ito.o
\
aGo
a.a.
!
G
tro
lE
5
GCt
oto(!o
g
OrotI
Ndoafl
ool(L
co
E-co(E
col,81
(oN6ioi
*a:EryEc)o.c{ rr (J
ad-9
oE
O,
fo
lr)o)
o
O)(9
trT,c
=c
Uoc
Ef,=(,
:
-
oz
OJCu.l
co,E
(,
@.Nob)?,o-;
=oo!EU-Euo0JgY
<c
=
Nd smN
No so xlo(o
xood
xo :Ro 5 xr}x@d
so xoN
so xo so<t
sood
:so >Ro so xr)}RoN
xNc{
NtN
srom Nor s('r
sood
:Ro s xrn xst s
co
Eoo0t!EIE
=!!o
Ug
'f,oo
6
6
EoEoI
U6
0,E!t!Eo
=h!
ocU
otfF!,ct!
I6
!r!c
E.E
=05o
=U6
to
o
N(nN
stN
:R!n(n xcn xN
s8d
>so x<)}Rrn Nft N<f
;RrrlN
xftN
IRut xo xn
N8
xo I srn xrn xm
xlnN
srlr{xln xo slrl
xId
E :so :Rod xft x(o
ot.E
6g5
Eo(J
=Utl
to..coI
=UJ
ot5F!EIETIe
ooot!c.!
=60
ocU
EOc
E.E
=do
=U6
a0
o
aos
o{roah5\
Po
ru
o
E
2
o
a.
Ito
ut
b
aGo
a.a.
E
G
o
g
S
GU,
otoGo
t!
UIoq
NIr)
oafl
@o{
LlJ(Jo{ rro-5O(L
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
I\4a rket Cha racte_rrzation- _
Aftachment IPUC 8
Table 3-8 shows the overall results of the modeling, including the baseline forecast,
projected savings due to capital measures, and projected savings due to energy
management opportunities over the five-year period. The values are cumulative gross
savings. Energy Management program savings are low initially, because of the time
required to implement programs and recruit customers. However, by 2017, estimated
Energy Management savings are approximately 0.85% of the baseline forecast without
capital measures. For comparison, capital measures cumulative savings over the same
time period are2.32o/o of the baseline forecast.
Table 3-8 Baseline Projections and Estimated Savings from All Evaluated Energy
Management Programs (Cumulative Savings over Five Years (MWh)
Note: Savings represent gross (not net) savings.
Baseline Projection 1
(w-out Capital
Measures)
354,071 358,075 357,792 361,804 364,515
Baseline Projection 2
(with Capital Measures)351,051 353,610 352,059 354,685 356,060
Capital Measure
Savings (cumulative)3,019 4,465 5,733 7,119 8,456
Capital Measure
Savings
as % of Baseline 1
0.85%1.25o/o 1.60%1.97o/o 2.32o/"
Energy Management
(EM)Projection 350,860 353,037 350,801 352,547 352,954
AIIEM Program Savings
(cumulative)191 573 1,258 2,138 3,106
Energy Mgmt. Savings
as 7o of Baseline 1
0.05%0.160/0 0.35%0.58%0.85%
Energy Mgmt. Savings
as % of Baseline 2 0.05%0.16%0.3s%0.60%0.87o/o
3-10
40 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Atlachment IPUC 8
Market Cha racterization
Table 3-9 shows how the savings are distributed among the program types and the two
sectors. Table 3-10 further summarizes the estimated savings by related programs.
Table 3-9 Estimated Savrngs from by Energy Management Program Type
(Cumulative Savings over Five Years, MWh)
Note. Savings represent gross (not net) savings
Commercial
SEM Consultative 2 6 t6 29 46 1%
SEM Cohort 7 26 81 732 181 60/o
Energy Manager 1 7 16 27 39 !%
Persistent Commissioni ng 10 29 68 732 270 7%
Retrocommissioning t4 42 98 191 303 r0%
BuildingTune-up 24 51 110 162 20s 7o/o
SEM - O&M Training 2 5 10 14 18 L%
Building Occupant Training 2 5 9 t4 18 1%
Commerciol Subtotol 62 180 406 702 1,019 33%
!ndustrial
SEM consultative L7 52 L25 232 367 t2%o
SEM Cohort 20 91 231 410 ilS 2t%
Energy Manager 20 49 93 145 191 6%
lndustrial Recommissioning 68 191 388 628 857 28%
SEM- O&MTraining 4 8 15 2t 27 7%
lndustrial Subtotal 129 392 852 L,436 2,87 6'10/0
C&lTotal 191 573 L,258 2,t38 3,1(r LOU/o
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
41 of 95
3-11
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Market Characte.ization
Table 3-10 Estimated Savings by Energy Management Program Type (Cumulative
Savrngs over Five Years, MWh)
Note: Savings represent gross savings at customer site.
Characterization of the Market for Energy Management and
Recommendations
The analysis provides the following results:
o SEM programs: The various SEM programs, whether one-on-one consultative or cohort,
have estimated savings of 1,239 MWh by 2017, equivalent to 40Yo of the savings
available from Energy Management programs in 2017.
o Recommissioning programs, including RCx, Industrial RCx, and PCx, collectively have
cumulative estimated savings of 1,370 MWh or 44Yo of estimated savings in2017.
. Energy Manager has cumulative energy management savings of 230 MWh or 7Yo of
estimated savings by 2017.
o lluilding Tune-Up program has cumulative estimated savings of 205 MWh by 2017,
but these savings are spread out over a much larger number of business entities than the
savings for the other programs. Although a few utilities offer these programs, they have
not been evaluated and thus information is not available on verified savings or
persistence of savings.
o Training programs provide minimal savings, particularly Building Occupant Training.
Persistence of savings from these programs is also highly questionable, though they do
provide potential benefits in terms of raising awareness of energy management and of
PacifiCorp DSM programs in general. They also can serve as a marketing tactic for
recruiting customers for the other Energy Management program types.
SEM - Consultative and Cohort 47 176 453 804 1,239 4Oo/o
Energy Manager 21 56 109 172 230 7o/o
CommercialBldg. RCx 14 42 98 191 303 10o/o
lndustrialSystem RCx 68 191 388 628 857 28o/o
Persistent Comm ission ing 10 29 68 132 210 7o/o
Building Tune Up 24 61 110 162 205 7%
Training 8 18 33 49 63 2o/o
Total {91 573 1,258 2,138 3,106 {00%
3-L2
42 oI 95
www.enernoc.com
Attachment IPUC I
Market Characterization
Based on the above findings, it is recommended that PaciliCorp initiallt' focus on trl'o
main program concepts, rvhich together account lirr 11406 of the identilied energy
management sirvings estimates. These programs are:
r Strategic Energ-v Management
. O&M Technical programs, rvhich include Recommissioning, [rdustrial
llecommissioning, and Persistent Comm ission ing
Table 3-ll shows savings from the recommended program options. By 2017, they
provide 2,608 MWh of cumulative savings. These program options achieve savings
through concentrated efforts with customers that can benefit most from behavioral and
O&M measures. They also can be more readily integrated into existing programs as
described in Chapter 4 and Chapter 5.
Table 3-11 Estimated Savings from Recommended Energy Management Programs
(Cumulative Savrngs over Five Years, MWh)
lt[otes: Savings represent gross savings at customer sile.
Recommend Program savings exclude Building Tune-Up, Energ,, Manager, and Training.
The Building Tune-Up and the various training alternatives are not recommended as new
program designs at this time. These programs are currently offered by only a few utilities
or other organizations and evaluation results are not available. Thus savings levels and
the persistence of savings are less well understood. Finally, these programs do not readily
integrate with existing Rocky Mountain Power ldaho programs. PacifiCorp may want to
consider offering these programs at a later date.
Baseline Projection 1
(w-out Capital
Measures)
354,071 358,075 357,792 361,804 364,515
Baseline Projection 2
(with Capital
Measures)
351,051 353,610 352,059 354,685 356,060
CapitalMeasure
Savinos (cumulative)3,019 4,465 5,733 7,119 8,456
Capital Measure
Savings
as % of Baseline 1
0.85%1.25%1.60%1.97%2.32o/o
Energy Management
(EM) Proiection 350,860 353,037 350,801 352,547 352,954
AIIEM Program
Savings
(cumulative)
191 573 1,258 2,138 3,106
Energy Mgmt. Savings
as % of Baseline 1
0.05%0.160/o 0.35%0.58%0.85%
Energy Mgmt. Savings
as % of Baseline 2 0.05%0.160/o 0.35%0.60%0.87o/o
Recommended EM
Program Savings
Cumulative
138 438 1,006 1,755 2,608
Recommended EM
Programs aso/o of
Baseline 1
O.O4o/o 0.12%0.28%0.49%o.72%
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
43 of 95
3-13
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Market Characterization
Attachment IPUC I
The Energy Project Manager concept is similar to Rocky Mountain Power's existing
Energy Project Manager, currently offered in Wyoming. This study recommends that a
similar offer be provided in Idaho, to enable customers to identify and complete capital
measure and/or behavioral projects at facilities. Analysis of the available energy
management opportunities provided above is predicated on the assumption this support is
available to Idaho customers contemporaneously with the introduction of the energy
management offers.
3-14
44 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
CHAPTER
Attachment IPUC 8
l+
STRATEGIC ENERGY MANAGEM ENT
Overview
Strategic Energy Management is a systematic approach to integrating energy
management into an organization's business practices and creating lasting energy
management processes that produce reliable energy savings. SEM has been shown to
produce larger and longer lasting energy savings when compared to other energy
management offers. Few customers, however, have the internal resources to pursue and
sustain these initiatives on their own (without utility support).
We recommend two SEM Improvement program tracks that use different delivery
mechanisms:
o One-on-One Consultative Strategic Energy Management (Consultative SEM)
provides the customer with access to an energy expert who works intensively with the
customer to integrate energy management into the organization's business practices by
helping the customer to set up an energy management process and to implement
improvements.
o Strategic Energl' Management Cohort (SEM Cohort) places companies into groups
that work alongside each other for one year or longer, coming together in periodic
workshops, approximately quarterly, and working on their own in-between these
sessions. The group encourages participant action as they strive to perform in front of
their peers. Structured groups are composed of approximately 5 to 12 program
participants sharing best practices and learning together in a group setting. The cohort is
typically filled with non-competitive participants; however, if mutual agreement is
established, competitors may participate in the same cohort. The cohort is typically
established for a geographic area, as the cohort participants are expected to convene for
workshop events.
The Consultative SEM approach is straightforward; the participating customer receives
frequent and personalized attention throughout the implementation period. Touch points
and milestones are agreed upon between the two parties.
The Cohort model does not go into as much depth with individual customers. Instead, it
relies on group meetings and interactions to help participating customers develop their
own energy programs. Meetings are often held face-to-face which the participants
appreciate. However, they may not always be practical, particularly if the program serves
a broad geographic area (as is the case in Montana). In this case, the in-person meetings
are supplemented with online webinars and conference calls. The final cohort meeting is
a recognition and graduation event in which each participant presents the results of its
program and plans for the coming years. This event is attended by executives from each
participating company, as well as PacifiCorp staff and representatives from stakeholder
groups.
45 of 95
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting 4-7
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Strateg ic Energy Management
Attachment IPUC 8
Adm i n istrative Req ui rements
The SEM program is designed to integrate with existing PacifiCorp programs and
approaches, and to minimize incremental work placed upon existing resources. The
design relies on a Program Administrator and Energy Management Providers, with roles
as described below.
Program Administrator refers to the staff that deliver the program and manage its
administrative functions, such as marketing, customer recruitment, and results tracking.
At PacifiCorp's discretion, this responsibility could be handled entirely by PacifiCorp
staff, performed by a third-party contractor, or shared between PacifiCorp and a third-
party contractor. In either case, the Program Administrator activities would be
coordinated with PacifiCorp program staff.
Energv Management I'roviders (EMPs) are firms and personnel with specific
knowledge and expertise who work with customers to achieve SEM savings. Due to the
specialized nature of the SEM consulting, Energy Management Providers must have a
combination of the following:
o Experience in customer consulting and change management.
o Experience with continuous improvement methodologies such as LEAN and Six Sigma.
o Experience in engaging customer personnel at all levels, particularly executives.
o Experience in using and deploying management systems such as quality, environmental
impact, and safety; these can be at the third-party certification level, such as for ISO
9001, ISO 14001 or OSHAS 18001, respectively. Ideally the contractor would have
familiarity in deploying the ISO 50001 standard for energy management systems.
. Technical expertise for understanding production process and operations to identify
energy savings opportunities.
o Established track record in deploying utility-based SEM programs, driving energy
savings along with customer change and customer satisfaction.
Engineering service providers within PacifiCorp's authorized technical services pool may
be suitable providers if they have the requisite skills described above.
Table 4-l outlines the roles of the Program Administrator and the EMPs, and how they
coordinate with existing PacifiCorp staff, including Customer and Community Managers
(CCMs) and Energy Efficiency Project Managers (EEPMs).
46 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Strategic Energy Management
Table 4-1 Roles of Program Administrator and Energy Management Providers
Program . Ensures that Rocky Mountain Power educational and program
Ad m in istrato(PacifiCorp
staff or third-party)
Energy Management
Provide(s)
messages are accurately and clearly delivered to customers to enable
effective program delivery and maximize customer satisfaction
ldentifies and recruits customers for participation in SEM programs, in
conjunction with EEPMs
Screens potential EMPs to select qualified providers
Coordinates training of EMPs
Engages EMPs for specific projects
Ensures the EMPs perform all program activities and provide
monitoring and tracking as required in the SEM Program Agreement
and EMP Program Manual
. Provides quality control; approves final SEM Energy Savrngs
Memoranda
. Assists the Program Administrator, CCMs, and EEPMs with customer
recruitment as appropriate
. Works with individual customers under the Consultative SEM
approach or with groups of customers under the SEM Cohort
approach to implement program steps (see Program lmplementation
below)
Organizes meetings and recognition events under the Cohort
approach
Develops SEM Energy Savings Memoranda for review by the
Program Administrator
I
lntegration with Existing Programs
The SEM offerings provide a natural complement to existing Rocky Mountain
Power/Pacific Power programs. Customers that have already completed capital
equipment upgrades under existing programs or are currently participating in capital
measure programs can gain further efficiency gains through SEM programs. If capital
measures are identified during the course of participation in SEM programs, they can be
submitted for incentives under the appropriate existing capital measure programs.
Table 4-2 provides an overview of the existing Rocky Mountain Power staff roles for
existing energy efficiency programs, plus the proposed additional activities associated
with the SEM program design.
Er".rrroc utir,tv i;rti;;icr*rlfis
47 ot95
4-3
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Strateg ic Energy Management
Table 4-2 Roles of Rocky Mountain Power Staff
Rocky
Mountain
Power
Customer
and
Community
Managers
(CCMs)
Explain EE program
offerings (at a high level) to
customers
Facilitate introduction of
EEPM to customer
Provide customer service
support
Participate in customer
marketing (e.9., incentive
check presentations)
. Explain EE program
offerings to customer in
greater detailand help
customer determine which
program(s) best meet
customer needs
Engage with Program Administrator
(whether internal to Rocky Mountain
Power or a third-party) and EMPs
Build upon existing customer relationships
to identify potential SEM Program
participants and assist with recruitment
Participate, as available, in SEM kick-off
meetings as well as the ongoing SEM
implementation process and customer
recognition events (e.9., cohort recognition
events)
Engage with Program Administrator and
EMP
Support customer recruitment and approve
customer selection
Review SEM Savings Memoranda
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Rocky
i Mountain
I Po*"'.
Energy
Efficiency
Project
Managers
(EEPMS)
ia
!
:
!!:
:
:+
iI
I
I
!
!
I
I
!
I
:
I
j
Manage energy efficiency
opportunities
Engage energy engineering
firms
Approve final Energy
FinAnswer and Self-Direct
Credit reports I
:t__
Target Market
The target market for the SEM program includes customers with high energy use and
who generally have BMS or other monitoring systems. This program is also applicable to
government or institutional customers. Based on experience with similar programs
offered by other entities, the best possible candidates are likely to have the following
attributes:
o Large manufacturing companies or commercial facilities with greater than 300 kW peak
demand.
o Companies with multiple sites, with operations or offices in another state or country, as
they are typically more accustomed to strategic types of efforts. These customer types
may have an interest in translating their practices to other locations.
o Institutional customers with multiple sites, such as government, universities, or school
districts.
o Customers with commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship.
o Customers in regulated industries, as they tend to have a high familiarity with process
improvement.
o Companies that have well established management systems like quality or safety, or
those using continuous improvement practices like Lean or Six Sigma.
4-4
48 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
Strategic Energy Ma nagement
o On-going participation in capital measure programs (because they are already familiar
with utility programs)
o Companies in a stable growth mode because the companies that are growing rapidly are
likely to have significant resources dedicated towards expansion.
It is often true that the largest customers are a good fit for Consultative SEM while relatively
smaller customers tend to join the SEM Cohort track. However, this is not a firm rule. Table
4-3 provides guidance for determining which customers are more suitable for a one-on-one
versus a cohort approach. These characteristics are meant to suggest which program
approach may be appropriate, but are not intended as firm rules. Ultimately, customers will
be placed in one or the other track based on their preferences and PacifiCorp's discretion.
Table &3 General Characteristics of On*on-One SEM vs. SEM Cohort Customers
l. May be aggregated use from multiple sites.
C&l segments that are the best targets include:
Large offices High-tech manufacturing Cement
Large colleges/universities Large food processors Aerospace
Schooldistricts Beverages food products Lumber
Government facilities Pulp and paper Plastics
Biotech Transportation Mining
Transportation Pharmaceuticals Metals
Large hospitals/health care
chains Chemicals and petro-chemicals
Municipalities with large water
treatment and pumping
facilities
Annual Energy Use or
Peak Demand 1
>2,OOO MWh/yearl
>300 kW peak demand
>2,OOO MWh/yearl
>300 kW peak demand
Multiple Sites
A customer with multiple sites could
prefer to form its own cohort in which
representatives from sites meet to
support one another, rather than
joining in a cohort with other
businesses.
SEM Cohort also applicable to
customer with multiple sites.
Geographic location
Customer may be in any location, but
remote location could make
Consu ltative approach preferable for
some customers
Centrally located to allow
participation in cohort meetings
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
49 of 95
4-5
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Strategic Energy Management
Attachment IPUC 8
lm plementatlon Strategy
Implementation involves recruiting and screening customers and actual program
implementation. Each is discussed below.
Recruiting and Screening Customers
Program implementation begins with recruiting and screening customers. The Program
Administrator, together with the CCMs, will create initial outreach plans and preliminary
customer target lists. The Program Administrator and the CCMs will work together to
recruit customers for participation. (See also discussion of Marketing ond Outreach
below.) Once engaged, potential SEM program participants will be screened on the size
of their connected load and also on factors including history of implementing energy
efficiency projects, experience with other continuous improvement programs, general
responsiveness of plant personnel, etc. Screening will take place through discussions with
account managers and preliminary conversations with prospective customers.
Participation in the Cohort track involves sharing information with other companies in
the cohort and it is possible that competitors may end up in the same cohort. Some
companies don't want to share information with competitors while other companies have
enjoyed participating with competitors (although they may share information less freely).
Customers should be made aware of this possibility and offered participation in a cohort
at alater time or offered the Consultative SEM alternative.
Gaining Customer Commitment
As part of the screening process, participating customers will commit to the following:
o An on-site executive-level sponsor
. A dedicated program budget
o Access to key human resources (such as time allocation and training)
r The inclusion of an energy continuous improvement statement within existing corporate
goals
o A training program for new and existing personnel
To indicate their commitment, participating customers will sign a customer
participation agreement. This agreement includes customer-time expectations in terms
of duration as well as employee hours per month, as well as commitments to save energy,
typically expressed as a percentage of energy intensity reduction. Key elements for utility
contributions include identifying the amount of training and coaching available. These
agreements typically do not have penalties or repayment obligations if the customer fails
to meet its commitments. However, these agreements typically include a section stating
that the program team will regularly review performance of the customer against the
program objectives, and if performance slips (e.g., due to shut-downs, re-organizations,
staff cuts), then the program team may elect to end the engagement.
Cohort Scheduling Commitment: While Consultative SEM typically has a flexible
start-date determined by the customer and the SEM implementation team, Cohorts require
more coordinated scheduling. With that, hard dates may be established months out for
key meetings, and the customers must commit to participate in those sessions. These
nonnegotiable dates can provide positive pressure on customers to participate and to
50 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Strateg ic Energy Ma nagement
maintain momentum, as opposed to continually delaying launch or progress. However,
customers should understand that they are committing to participate on these dates.
Role of Energy Management Provider
An Energy Management Provider will be assigned to each customer. In many cases, the
Energy Management Provider will have been involved during customer recruitment. If not,
PacifiCorp staff and the Program Administrator will work with the customer to select an
Energy Management Provider.
The Energy Management Provider will have primary responsibility for implementing the
program and working with customers and will have three roles:
o SEM Project manager - coordinate customer communication and meetings, develop all
program reports
o Organizational Facilitator(s) - conduct initial Energy Management Assessment (EMA),
provide ongoing customer coaching, maintain customer satisfaction, provide input to
energy maps and savings models
. Savings modeler - develop energy maps and savings models, create energy savings
memos
Implementation Steps
To implement the SEM program, the Energy Management Provider will work with
participating customers in several steps:
o Initiation and ramp up. This takes place in one or more initial meetings (either one-
on-one or cohort) and involves the following:
o Identify and cultivate an energy champion or team leader
o Create an energy team (or add energy to an existing team) so that the team meets
regularly and moves forward consistently in both idea development as well as project
prioritization
o Involve executives to support the team as well as review their progress
o Establish an energy strategy customized for the facility through development of a
policy or mission statement
o Conduct an energy management assessment
o Technical assistance. The Energy Management Provider provides technical assistance
to participating customers to understand current energy use and processes, identify
opportunities to reduce energy use, and to set energy-use reduction goals.
Specifically, the Energy Management Provider assists the customer with the
following:
o Develop energy performance indicators to monitor and track energy
o Determine current (baseline) energy use, with an in-depth analysis of energy
consumption drivers, such as weather, production levels, feedstock characteristics,
occupancy, and any other appropriate characteristics
o Set energy savings goals (i.e., 5olo reduction over l2 months)
o Identify and prioritize activities and projects that reduce energy intensity
4-7EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
51 of 95
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Strategic Energy Management
o Develop an energy map, to lay out energy consuming processes, leading to
operational understanding and eventual optimization
o Understand how to increase the number of energy projects through review of
alternative project ideas (e.g., targeting process and operations)
Organizational coaching. Throughout the implementation process, the Energy
Management Provider coaches the participating customer to develop a strong energy
management process. Specific activities include:
o Connect energy efficiency to other business objectives (i.e., safety, quality, etc.)
o Develop a facility-specific energy action plan
o Coach energy champions and executives to apply SEM concepts
o Engage employees to expand the reach of the energy management efforts, producing
greater behavioral savings as well as a larger number of savings opportunities
o Improve the business case for projects by finding funding mechanisms beyond utility
incentives.
SEM Milestones
Because SEM involves culture change, much of this work happens over a year-long time
rather than instantaneously. The Energy Management Provider will work with each facility's
energy team to ensure that it is effectively executing its plans. The Energy Management
Provider also helps the team with problem solving to get past organizational roadblocks,
launching of awareness campaigns, and engaging resources from PacifiCorp. Successful
implementations require a commitment of a year or longer.
During this time period, typical milestones and touch points include the following:
o At the outset, the Energy Management Provider estimates the time required to implement
the recommended changes and put customer processes in place. PacifiCorp issues a work
order based upon this project scope.
. The Energy Management Provider provides an Excel-based analysis tool to participants
to allow them to assess facility energy use and consumption. Because it is Excel-based,
the tool can be easily adapted to individual facilities and accommodate operational
complexity.
o Once the Energy Management Provider and participating customer complete the project,
the engagement would cease.
o Sometimes, Energy Management Provider and participants identify additional activities
that could extend the engagement. In this case, they would approach the PacifiCorp about
extending the relationship. PacifiCorp could accept or reject this opportunity. If the
engagement continues, then the work order is updated to identify the tasks and allow time
for completion. If PacifiCorp decides to cease engagement, they communicate with the
customer and Energy Management Provider about the decision.
Participants who complete these steps and "graduate" from the program have a mature
SEM process that is sustainable over time. In addition, these customers will have a
stronger relationship with PacifiCo.p, whereby they will proactively engage PacifiCorp
when making facility or operational changes.
4-B
52 of 95
www.enernoc.com
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Strategic Energy Management
lssues, Risks and Risk Management Strategies
The most challenging aspect of a SEM program is maintaining long-term customer
commitment because it directly affects savings persistence. To ensure customer
commitment, the customer must clearly understand the following:
o The level of staff time, management review, and other resources they are committing
o The services such as consulting and training they will receive
o The benefits such as a more systematic and proactive approach to managing energy they
will obtain
In addition, the customer participation agreement (see above), expectation management,
and robust measurement and verification approach reinforce the customer commitment to
the program.
Managing Expectations
Successful efforts involve setting rigorous expectations through ongoing meetings
between the participating customer and the EEPM, as well as the Program Administrator
and PacifiCorp staff.
o Participating Custnmer and Program Administrator. To ensure that the customer
maintains momentum and arrives at an agreed upon success point, a Stage-gate approach
is recommended. This includes clearly defined stages based on progress indicators such
as the existence of an energy goal, consistent meetings of an energy team, and the
engagement of employees in energy awareness.
o Program Administrator and PacifiCorp. A periodic review meeting on a quarterly
basis brings together PacifiCorp staff, the Program Administrator, and the Energy
Management Provider to discuss each SEM participant with respect to successes,
challenges, and overall progress. If it is determined that a customer's progress is lagging,
they will agree to next steps, including increased engagement scope and discussions with
the customer to ensure that they understand program support may be withdrawn if they
do not improve performance.
Site-Level Data Requirements
Ensuring that appropriate information is in place and subsequently managed will support
the customer's use of data to manage energy as a controllable cost and enable PacifiCorp
to properly demonstrate true savings. Customized data requirements for each project will
be developed and specified in the customer participation agreement. (General M&V
protocols will be spelled out in the program manual). Example data requirements include:
o The customer authorizes PacifiCorp to provide their energy usage data to the Program
Administrator and Energy Management Provider. While hourly usage data are not
required, the hourly data, together with hourly production data, enable development of
better facility-wide energy models, provide more detailed information about actual
facility performance, and also makes it easier to demonstrate change. If hourly usage data
are available, but production data is only available monthly, then the hourly usage data
are somewhat less valuable.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
53 of 95
4-9
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Stra te g i c E n e rs y, llgl qggl
-e lt
o The customer will provide the PacifiCorp Program Manager and Energy Management
Provider with production data as well as any other energy driver data such as headcount,
operating hours, and weather.
o The customer will provide this data for the three years, or as much history as is available,
preceding program participation.
The customer will work with the Energy Management Provider to develop a facility
energy model. This effort involves supporting the program team during an onsite Energy
Map exercise, providing information regarding energy efficiency measures installed prior
to and during program participation, and answering other questions related to energy
performance.
After participation in the PacifiCorp energy management program, the customer will
continue to acquire and analyze energy related data, and make energy management
decisions based on this information.
EM&V Requirements
Because the program design recommends that incentives be paid on verified energy
savings (see below), third-party verification of reported project-level savings will be
required. The program design assumes that this function will be provided by an
independent evaluation firm under contract to the Program Administrator.
In addition, an independent third-party contractor will be hired to evaluate the impact of
the program. The contractor will use the measurement and verification data collected by
the program implementer to determine gross savings by project and customer for both
demand and energy.
A comprehensive process evaluation will be conducted in the first year to develop
program logic models, identify strategies that have been successful, customer
satisfaction, and opportunities to improve program participation and increase savings.
The evaluation contractor will use best practice methodologies when conducting process
evaluations including, but not limited to, stakeholder interviews, customer surveys,
program-ally interviews, tracking systems review, and assessment of quality assurance
and quality control. Subsequent evaluation will be done in the third year to determine the
effect of program improvements.
Impact evaluation data will include the hourly data collected as part of customer
measurement and verification, production data, operating conditions, any significant
changes to the facilities that would affect energy use, such as a new building addition or
change in process.
Marketing and Outreach
Customers will be recruited into the SEM program through one-on-one contacts. To
achieve goals, the program will likely need to target two- to three-times the participation
goal. This recruitment process will build an SEM customer participant pipeline, wherein
potential SEM participants can be monitored as their priorities and business situations
change over time. The one-on-one recruiting process builds on familiarity and trust,
providing the basis for successful engagements.
Often, utility relationships with customers are concentrated at the facility or maintenance-
manager level. While existing relationships between PacifiCorp CCMs and Energy
Attachment IPUC 8
54 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
9 t'elsggElstgy I't9re99r9$
Project Mangers will definitely play a role in recruiting customers, the strategic and
organizational nature of SEM usually requires that the decision around program
participation be made at the executive level. Therefore, customer recruiting requires a
two-prong approach at both the facility management level and the executive level.
PacifiCorp should leverage the highest-level relationships it has with its large customers,
including any peer relationships that PacifiCorp executives may have with customer
executives. Attendance or participation in meetings or conferences on sustainable
business practices or on Lean Manufacturing, as well as participation in trade
associations such as the Idaho Manufacturers Association may also aid in recruiting
participants.
The key marketing message should be that PacifiCorp is supporting customers to more
strategically manage energy, and is asking that its customers invest in their future by
building an organizational foundation for energy management. PacifiCorp provides the
consultative resources to support its customers as they go through this change, and will
provide incentives for energy saved as a result of this effort.
Given the specific and targeted nature of this effort, marketing will rely heavily upon
presentations and letter templates, supported by brochures and case study materials.
It is important for the marketing materials to:
. Provide a basic understanding of the concept of SEM and the program.
o Outline the compelling business case (benefits and costs) of participation.
o The key benefits are direct cost savings related to reduced energy usage, which can
range from l%o to 20Yo, with a typical result being 3o/o per year. An indirect benefit is
reduced equipment downtime that results from improved maintenance and employee
morale.
o The program also provides a financial incentive for verified energy savings of
$0.o2lkwh.
o The main participation costs will relate to employee time, with a reasonable
expectation being approximately 84 hours for the one year program (see Customer
Costs below). Participating customers are asked to commit budget dollars to energy
management projects, but these projects are not expected to utilize different internal
financial hurdle rates for decision making than other business decisions, so this is not
a significant request.
o Connect the SEM offering to the existing portfolio of PacifiCorp programs.
o Include case studies and success stories.
o Identify the two tracks for participation in the program: Consultative and Cohort. For the
Cohort SEM program, the message should reflect that via participation in the cohort,
customers gain peer group benefits, such as sharing results and ideas and positive peer
pressure from cohort presentations. This addresses the lower degree of the individualized
support that is provided in Consultative SEM.
Marketing for Cohort SEM
For the Cohort SEM program, the market message should be modified to reflect the
following differences from the Consultative SEM track:
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
55 of 95
4-1 1
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Strategic Enerqy Manaqement
Attachment IPUC I
Projected Energy Savings and Participation
Table 4-4 shows the estimated savings based on the market characterization and
assessment described in Chapter 3. Table 4-5 provides an approximate number of
businesses projected to participate in SEM programs and provide savings. Note that
because customers do not immediately begin producing savings, the number of customers
recruited in a given year will be higher than the numbers shown in the table.
Table 44 Estimated Annual Gross Energy Savrngs (Mwhlyr)
Table 45 Estimated Number of Participating Businesses per Year
Note: Fractional customer indicates less than afull year of participation as program ramps up. Numbers
may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Customer lncentives
The customer receives services to help implement an ongoing SEM program. In addition,
the customer receives an incentive of $0.020/kwh of verified fist-year savings.
Customer Costs
The vast majority of customer costs are related to staff time commitments. From SEM
program research and EnerNOC's experience, approximate time commitments are as
shown in Table 4-6.
SEM Consultative cumulative 20 59 140 262 413
SEM Cohort cumulative 27 117 312 543 825
TotalSEM cumulative 47 176 453 804 1,239
SEM Consultative incremental 20 39 82 121 152
SEM Cohort incremental 27 90 195 231 283
Total SEM incremental annual 47 129 277 352 434
SEM Consultative cumulative 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.8
SEM Cohort cumulative 0.2 0.7 1.8 3.'r 4.8
TotalSEM cumulative 0.2 0.8 2.1 3.6 5.5
SEM Consultative lncremental 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3
SEM Cohort lncremental 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.3 1.6
TotalSEM incremental 0.2 0.6 1.3 {.6 1.9
4-L2
56 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
Strategic Energy Management
Table *6 Custom er Ti m e Requirements
Participation in coaching sessions with the Energy Management Provider i
Assuming that the total costs of employees, including benefits, are $10O/hour, for 84
hours the total customer cost would be $8,400 for the one year SEM engagement. In
addition, participants in a Cohort program would incur travel expenses. In addition, the
customer should spend approximately 48 hours/year (valued at $4,800/year) on SEM
activities after the first year to maintain savings.
Budgeta ry S pecifications
The following elements were taken into account when developing the budget for the
Consultative and Cohort approaches of the SEM Program:
o Utility Program Manager
o Program Administrator labor (could be utility or third-party administrator)
. Energy Management Provider costs
o Marketing and customer recruitment
. Analytictool development/purchase(optional)
These roles will ramp up in activity over time. Table 4-7 shows anticipated PacifiCorp
and Program Administrator labor hours, expressed as full time equivalents (FTEs) for the
combined Cohort and Consultative tracks. The PacifiCorp program manager is assumed
to have responsibility for overseeing the Program Administrator and facilitating
integration of the program with existing PacifiCorp staff. The Program Administrator, as
discussed above, delivers the program and manages its administrative functions, such as
marketing, customer recruitment, and results tracking. At PacifiCorp's discretion, this
responsibility could be handled entirely by PacifiCorp staff, performed by a third-party
contractor, or shared between PacifiCorp and a third-party contractor.
Conducting activities between SEM coaching sessions (assumes four-person i
E;.Noc uiiti, s"trti";; consultins
57 of 95
4-t3
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Strateg ic Energy Management
Attachment IPUC 8
Table &7 SEM Program Administration Labor (FTE)
Based on program participation projected by the market characterization, the budgets for
Consultative and Cohort approaches are shown in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9. Table 4-10
provides budgets for the two tracks combined.
Utility Program Manager 0.00 0.01 0.0{0.0{0.02
Program Administrator
Program Manager 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03
Sales Support 0.00 0.01 o.o2 o.o2 0.02
AnalysUContract
Administrator 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
Engineer/Technical Staff 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03
Total Program Adm inistrator 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08
Note: Numbers may nol sum exactly due to rounding,
4-L4
58 of 95
www.enernoc.com
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Table 4-8
Attachment IPUC 8
Strategic Energy Ma nagement
SEM Consultative Program Budget
59 of 95
Utility Labor Costs $85 $174 $269 $323 $408 $1,259
Program Administration Labor Costs
Program Manager $2',12 $436 $77s $711 $917 $3,051
Sales Support $85 $1 16 $248 $285 $367 $1,100
AnalysUContract
Administrator $21 w $93 $142 $183 $483
Engineer $1 97 $339 $578 $885 $1,141 $3,142
TotalProgram
Admin. Labor Costs $515 $935 $1,694 $2,024 $2,609 $7,776
Other Services
Energy
Management
Providers
$2,292 $4,722 $10,071 $15,415 $19,872 $52,372
Marketing and
Outreach $10,000 $4,076 $4,153 $4,232 $4,313 $26.775
Tracking $266 $214 $358 $491 $6og $1,e38
Evaluation $664 $535 $894 $1,228 $1,524 $4,845
TotalOther
Services $13,221 $9,547 $15,477 $21,367 $26,318 $85,930
Total
lmplementation
Cost
$13,821 $10,656 $17,439 $23,713 $29,335 $94,964
Customer
lncentives $392 $800 $1,693 $2,565 $3,271 $8,720
Total Budget $14,213 $11,456 $19,133 $26,278 $32,606 $103,684
Customer Costs (prior to incentives payment)
Labor $296 $61 0 $1,302 $1,992 $2,568 $6,768
Measure
lmplementation $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
TotalCustomer
Costs $296 $610 $1,302 $1,992 $2,568 $6,768
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting 4-1 5
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
Strategic E.nergy Ma-nqgement
Table 4-9 SEM Cohort Program Budget
Attachment IPUC 8
Utility Labor Costs $369 $1,239 $2,052 $1,921 $2,334 $7,915
Program Administration Costs
Program Manager $1,1 53 $3,098 $4,438 $4,235 $3,495 $16,419
Sales Support $369 $826 $1,894 $1,6%$2,097 $6,880
AnalysU0ontract
Administrator $e2 $310 $710 $847 $1,048 $3,008
Engineer $861 52,410 $4,419 $5.270 $6,523 $19.483
TotalProgram
Admin. Labor Costs $2,475 $6,644 $1{,461 $12,045 $13,163 $45,789
Other Services
Energy
Management
Providers
$5,918 $19,882 $45,568 $54,344 $67,272 $192,985
Marketing and
Outreach $10,000 $4,076 $4,1 53 $4.232 $4,313 $26,775
Tracking $386 $673 $1,346 $1,548 $1,863 $5,817
Evaluation $965 $1,684 $3,364 $3,871 $4,6s9 $14,543
TotalOther
Services $17,270 $26,315 $54,432 $63,996 $78,107 $240,119
Total
lmplementation
Cost
$20,113 $34,199 $67,945 $77,962 $93,604 $293,823
Customer
lncentives $542 $1,832 $4,054 $4,879 $6,092 $17,400
Total Budget $20,656 $36,031 $71,999 $82,841 $99,696 $311,222
Customer Costs (prior to incentives payment)
Labor $1,291 $4,338 $9,942 $11,857 $14.677 $42,1 06
Measure
lmplementation $o $o $0 $0 $o $o
TotalCustomer
Costs $1,291 $4,338 $9,942 $11,857 $14,677 $42,106
4-L6
60 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-I4-08
IPUC 8
Table 410 Total SEM Program Budget
Attachment IPUC 8
Strategic Energy Management
Utility Labor Costs s4s4 SLqr+52,320 52,244 52,742 59,173
Program Administration Labor Costs
Program Manager $r,Eo+S3,s34 Ss,213 S+,9+e 54,4Lz $tg,+zo
Sales Support s4s4 Sscz 5z,uz Sr,gzs 52,4u s7,g80
AnalysUContract
Administrator $us s3s3 Seog Sgsg 5L,232 S3,4s1
Engineer s1,059 52,749 54,997 SG,155 s7,665 s22,624
TotalProgram
Admin. Labor Costs Saggo 57,5t9 $13,155 s14,069 5L5,772 s53,565
Other Services
Energy
Management
Providers
S8,210 524,603 Sss,s+o s69,750 587,744 Sz+s,zsa
Marketing and
Outreach s20,0oo S8,152 s8,307 s8,465 S8,626 s53,549
Tracking s6s2 Ssss S1,703 S2,o40 52,473 57,7ss
Evaluation sL,629 52,2t9 S4,258 s5,099 S6,t8z s19,388
TotalOther
Services S3o,agt s35,862 s69,908 s85,363 Sto4,42s s326,049
Total
lmplementation
Cost
s33,934 s44,855 S85,384 s101,675 5t22,939 s38&787
Customer
lncentives Sss+52,632 Sstqt 5t,qqq s9,363 s26,119
Total Budget S34,868 547,487 Sgt,t3t $tog,ttg S132,301 s414e07
Customer Gosts (prior to incentives payment)
Labor s1,587 S4,948 577,244 s13,849 577,246 Sqs,atq
Measure
lmplementation So SO SO SO SO So
TotalCustomer
Costs s1,587 S4,948 SLt,z44 s13,849 517,246 548,874
rnu.r,rbc utiriiv 6oiutions Consulting
61 of 95
4-77
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
St.ateqic Energy Management
Attachment IPUC 8
Measure Life
The program design assumes a three-year measure life for SEM programs.
Net-to-Gross
Limited data on net-to-gross for SEM programs is available, as discussed in Chapter 2.
Therefore, the program design assumes a net-to-gross ratio of 100%.
lm plementation Schedule
The schedule for program implementation appears in Table 4-l l.
Table &11 Proposed SEM Program lmplementation Schedule
Assign Rocky Mountain Power program manager
and staff Upon submiftal of program plan to Commission,
anticipated 4Q,2012
Select and contract with Program Administrator or
hire and train internal Rocky Mountain Power staff
lmmediately upon program approval, anticipated
1Q, 2013
Pre-rollout program development:
. Prepare marketing materials and SEM
Program Applicationr Develop activity and incentive processing
protocols
e ldentify qualified EMPs
o Train EMPs
Program rollout:
. Launch consumer marketing and outreach
. Allprogram services
Prepare reports:
o Document program activities and progress
toward goals by Program Administrator. Report to Commission
Monthly throughout program implementation
period
Quarterly, and annually each July 15
Conclude program operation for this planning
cycle
4-18
62 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
CHAPTER
Attachment IPUC 8
ls
O&M TECHNICAL PROGRAMS
Overview
O&M technical programs emphasize optimization of specific building systems, which is
achieved by monitoring energy use over time to identify operational improvements. There
are three closely related O&M Technical Programs tracks:
. Reconrmissioning (RCx) uses a facility study based on data from a facility's BMS
plus additional data logging to uncover performance issues that can be addressed by
low- or no-cost measures. This program is similar to the Rocky Mountain Power Utah
Recommissioning program, but with recommendations for program improvement.
. Inclustrial Recommissioning (IRCx) is very similar to RCx, but focuses on specific
industrial systems such as compressed air, ammonia refrigeration, industrial electric
process heating, or materials handling. It begins with engineering support for an on-
site facility/system assessment to identify low- or no-cost opportunities to reduce
facility energy use. Engineering support is provided periodically, usually for a period
of at least a year, to track the changes made and to support the participants in
monitoring energy use performance and improving facility performance.
. Persistent Commissioning (PCx) begins with a process similar to Recommissioning,
but monitoring equipment is left in place, typically for a period of two to three years.
This ongoing data monitoring ensures that the savings persist over time and also
identifies operational issues as they arise.
The three O&M Technical options use similar implementation and marketing approaches.
For example, the RCx and IRCx approaches could be combined in a facility that has both
a large office space and manufacturing. This program design assumes that these three
program tracks will be administered together. Therefore, they are described together
below, but differences are highlighted where appropriate.
Adm in istrative Requ irements
The O&M Technical programs are designed to integrate with existing PacifiCorp
programs and approaches, and to minimize incremental work placed upon existing
resources. The design relies on a Program Administrator and Energy Management
Providers, with roles as described below.
Progranr Administrator - refers to the staff that deliver the program and manage its
administrative functions, such as marketing, customer recruitment, and results tracking.
At PacifiCorp's discretion, this responsibility could be handled entirely by PacifiCorp
staff, performed by a third-party contractor, or shared between PacifiCorp and a third-
party contractor. In either case, the Program Administrator activities would be
coordinated with the work of existing PacifiCorp program staff. (Note that the Program
Administrator for these programs could be the same entity as for the SEM programs or
could be a different organization.)
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
63 of 95
5-1
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
nnergy l\lanagement Provide firms and personnel with specific knowledge and
expertise required to work with customers to achieve RCx, PCx, and Industrial RCx
savings. Due to the specialized nature of the O&M Technical programs, Energy
Management Providers must have specific skills and background, including a
combination of the following:
o Experience in customer consulting and engaging customer personnel.
o Technical expertise for understanding building and industrial systems (e.g., HVAC and
BMS for RCx and PCx, and industrial processes for IRCx).
o Experience in identifying O&M measures and quantifying savings through technical
analysis (i.e., specialized spreadsheet tools or building simulation)
o Experience in training facility O&M personnel to help them understand measures so that
savings persist
o Established track record in working within utility programs to deliver services within
program parameters and provide customer satisfaction.
These Energy Management Providers may be existing technical resources in PacifiCorp's
engineering services pool if the firm has the necessary skills, or may be additional firms
with expertise specific to these programs. It is expected that the existing pool of
Recommissioning Service Providers (RSPs) and providers for existing Rocky Mountain
Power programs may have the requisite skills.
Table 5-l outlines the roles of the Program Administrator and the Energy Management
Providers, and how they coordinate with existing PacifiCorp staff, including Customer
and Community Managers (CCMs) and Energy Efficiency Project Managers (EEPMs).
r-
64 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Table $1 Roles of Program Administrator and Energy Management Providers
Program r Ensures that PacifiCorp educational and program messages are
Ad ministrator(PacifiCorp
staff or third-party)
accurately and clearly delivered to customers to enable effective
program delivery and maximize customer satisfaction
o ldentifies and recruits customers for participation in O&M
Technical programs, in conjunction with EEPMs
o Screens potential Energy Management Providers to select
qualified providers
o Coordinates training of Energy Management Providers
o Engages Energy Management Providers for specific projects
o Ensures the Energy Management Providers perform all program
activities and provide monitoring and tracking as required in the
Porticipotion Agreements and Technicol ManuolT
o Provides quality control; approves final Energy Management
savings reports
Energy Management
Provider(s)
o Assists the Program Administrator, CCMs, and EEPMs with i
o lnstalls monitoring equipment at customer site to supplement
existing data acquisition equipment
o Analyzes data and makes recommendations regarding O&M
other low-cost and no-cost measures
o Develops Energy Management savings reports for review by
Program Administrator
:i _ ,. -. -_-_--.-*-]._
lntegration with Existing Programs
The O&M Technical offerings provide a natural complement to existing Rocky Mountain
Power programs. Customers that have already completed capital equipment upgrades
under existing programs or are currently participating in capital measure programs can
achieve additional savings through these programs. Customers who have participated in
the Recommissioning program more than five years ago (i.e., in 2007 or 2008) can
participate in the Persistent Commissioning program to once again tune up their
buildings, identify new savings opportunities, and ensure savings persistence. If capital
measures are identified during the course of participation in the Industrial O&M program
tracks, they can be submitted for incentives under the appropriate existing capital
measure programs.
Table 5-2 provides an overview of the existing PacifiCorp staff roles for existing energy
efficiency programs, plus the proposed additional activities associated with the O&M
Technical program design.
7 The Participation Agreement and Technical Manual refer to documents that will be developed in the next Phase of the poect.
iand l
i
l
:
:lthe l
:
i
!
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
65 of 95
5-3
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Attachment IPUC 8
Table &2 Roles of PacifiCorp Staff
PacifiCorp
Customer
and
Community
Managers
(CCMs)
Explain EE program offerings (at a
high level) to customers
Facilitate introduction of EEPM to
customer
Provide customer service support
Participate in customer marketing
(e.9. incentive check presentations)
Explain EE program offerings to
customer in greater detail and help
customer determine which program(s)
best meet customer needs
Manage energy efficiency
opportunities
Engage energy engineering firms
Approve final Energy FinAnswer and
Self Direct Credit reports
Engage with Energy Management Program
Administrator (whether internal to
PacifiCorp or a third-party)
Build upon existing customer relationships
to identify potential O&M Technical
program participants and assist with
recruitment
Assist customer with Program Application
Offer Participation Agreement to end user
Participate, as available, in kick-off
meetings with customer, Program
Administrator, and Energy Management
Provider
Engage with Program Administrator
(whether internal to PacifiCorp or a third-
party)
Support customer recruitment and assist
customer with Program Application
Approve customer selection
Offer Participation Agreement to end user
Participate, as available, in kick-off
meetings with customer, Program
Administrator, and Energy Management
Provider
Review final energy management savings
reports
t____
I
I PacifiCorp
I rnergyj Efficiency
I Project
Managers
Target Market
The target market for all three program options is large C&I customers. In addition,
specific attributes for each program track are identified below:
. Recommissioning: The existing Utah RCx program targets customers with a summer
peak electric demand of at least 300 kW, with an installed BMS. We recommend that
PacifiCorp target buildings with floor space of 75,000 square feet or more. The best
segments to target are office buildings, hospitals, colleges, and large institutional
buildings.
Industrial Recommissioning: The target market is large industrial facilities in which
specific process systems account for a substantial percentage of overall energy use.
These systems typically include compressed air or ammonia refrigeration.
Persistent Commissinning: Target larger buildings with floor space of 250,000
square feet or more (annual use of 5,000 MWh or more, assuming an intensity of 20
kWh/sq. ft.) because they will have sufficient energy use and thus savings potential to
justify the added monitoring costs. As with RCx, the best segments to target are office
66 of 95
www.ene!'noc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
buildings, hospitals, colleges, and large institutional buildings. The program track
also works well for customers with multiple facilities because the process can be
easily repeated from building to building. If aggregating multiple buildings, the
program could consider size thresholds on a case-by-case basis to develop customized
size thresholds.
Table 5-3 provides guidance for determining which customers are more suitable for the
three tracks. These characteristics are meant to suggest which program approach may be
appropriate, but are not intended as firm rules. Ultimately, customers will be placed in
one or the other track based on their preferences and PacifiCorp's discretion. Note that
RCx and IRCx approaches could be combined in a facility that has both a large office
space and manufacturing facilities.
Table $3 General Characteristics of Customers for O&M Tracks
I May be aggregated use from multiple sites.
2. Cuslomers needing major system renovation or retrofits shouldfirst use other Rocky Mountain Power
programs lhat provide incentivesfor capital meqsures to address these needs.
>5,000 MWh/year
>3OO kW peak demandl
1,500 MWh/year
>300 kW peak demandl
>2,000 MWh/year
>3OO kW peak demandl
No planned major
system renovations or
retrofits; free of major
problems requiring costly
repairs or replacements2
No planned major
system renovations or
retrofits; free of major
problems requiring costly
repairs or replacements'
GeneralFacility
Condition
No planned major
system renovations or
retrofits; free of major
problems requiring costly
repairs or replacements2
>75,000 sq. feet >250,000 sq. feet
BMS, preferably with
direct digital control
Commitment by the
facility owner and
engineering staff to be
actively involved in
project for two to three
years
Customer
Willingness to
Engage in Project
Commitment by the
facility owner and
engineering staff to be
actively involved in
project for approximately
one year
Commitment by the
facility owner and
engineering staff to be
actively involved in
project for approximately
one year
Specific industrial or
manufacturing systems
account for large portion
of facility energy use
Other Criteria
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
67 of 95
5-5
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Attachment IPUC I
lm plementation Strategy
Recruiting and Screening Customers
Program implementation begins with screening and recruiting customers. The Program
Administrator, together with the CCMs, will create initial outreach plans and preliminary
customer target lists. The Program Administrator and the CCMs will work together to
recruit customers for participation. (See also discussion of Marketing and Outreach
below.) Potential participants will be screened for the RCx and PCx offerings based on
the size of their facility in terms of square footage, peak load, existing BMS, and also on
factors including history of implementing energy efficiency projects, commitment of
O&M staff, etc. For Industrial RCx, the screening will consider the existing industrial
processes and associated energy use, rather than facility size Screening will take place
through discussions with account managers and preliminary conversations with
prospective customers.
Role of Energy Management Provider
Once the customers are committed to the program and have signed the Participation
Agreement, an Energy Management Provider will be assigned to that customer. In many
cases, the Energy Management Provider will have been involved during customer
recruitment. If not, PacifiCorp staff and the Program Administrator will work with the
customer to select an Energy Management Provider. The Energy Management Provider
will work with the customer as described below for each program track.
Recommissioning lmplementation Steps
The Recommissioning program track will use the basic implementation processes
identified in the existing Utah RCx program.'However, this program design recommends
that the program be streamlined and simplified in the following ways.
o Streamline the recruiting and the existing Application Phase into a single step combined
with developing the Customer Participation Agreement. Have Program Administration
staff complete the participation application on behalf of the customer.
o Combine the existing program Planning Phase (during which a recommissioning plan is
developed) and the Investigation Phase (during which the recommissioning plan is
executed to identify measures, calculate savings, and estimate implementation costs).
This change will reduce reporting and meeting time requirements.
o Have Energy Management Providers use standardized approaches for calculating savings
from the most commonly identified measures. This streamlines the Energy Management
Provider's work and also facilities review of submitted savings analyses. One option is
the Custom Building Optimization Analysis tool (C-BOA)'.
o Develop standardized templates for all reporting and other RCx project documents to be
used by Energy Management Providers.
Combining the existing Utah RCx program and the recommended changes results in the
following implementation steps:
8 Program information available at http://www.rockymountainpower.net/bus/se/epi/utah/ilc/recommissioning.html.
9 C-BOA was developed by the Califomia Commissioning Collaborative with additional funding from the Califomia Energy Commission's Public
Interest Energy Research (PIER) program and Southem Californra Edison. This Excel-based tool, whtch calculates savings based on engineering
formulas, is available online at htp://www.cacx.org/resources/rcxtools/cboa/index.html. Nine common RCx measures are currently supported.
5-6
68 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
O&M Technical Programs
l. Program Administration and/or Energy Management Provider staff provide an initial
screening of the facility and the customer completes a program application. This includes
a meeting with the customer to determine the alignment of the program with their
objectives and organizational readiness. If the site is determined to be a good candidate
for RCx, the application is accepted. The customer is then asked to sign a participation
agreement with PacifiCorp. Services, schedules, and potential incentives are outlined
along with customer commitments. (Replaces the existing Application Phase and Project
Kick-off.)
2. The Energy Management Provider develops and executes a recommissioning plan to
identify measures, calculate savings, and estimate implementation costs. The resulting
Investigation report provides findings and recommendations regarding measures.
After the customer and Rocky Mountain Power agree upon the bundle of measures to
be implemented, the Investigation report is amended accordingly. (Combines the
existing program Planning and [nvestigation Phases.)
3. The customer implements the measures, using as it chooses its own staff, the Energy
Management Provider, or other contractors. (Existing Implementation Phase.)
4. The Energy Management Provider revisits the site to verify measure implementation.
During this visit the Energy Management Provider also provides training to building
personnel regarding the measures to help support measure persistence. (Existing
Verification Phase.)
Energv Managemcnt Providers for Recommissioning: The existing group of approved
Recommissioning Service Providers (RSPs) is expected to fulfill the Energy Management
Provider role for this program track.
I ndustrial Recommissioning Steps
This program track is similar to the Recommissioning track, but focuses on improving the
performance of a targeted sub-system to establish its baseline performance and energy
use. The subsystem could be refrigeration, compressed air, lighting, HVAC, battery
systems, other site-specific energy consuming systems, or a combination thereof. After an
initial effort to identify recommissioning measures and implement recommendations,
performance is monitored over time to verify savings, and identify additional operational
savings. Technical support is provided by the Energy Management Provider throughout
the customer's participation in the program, typically a one-year period.
During the initial phase, the Energy Management Provider works intensively with the
customer, on site, to identify low or no-cost opportunities to reduce energy used by the
targeted system(s). An Action ltems Report is prepared documenting the results of the
investigation, future energy savings opportunities, and an action plan for implementing
measures. If any capital measures are identified as the result of the program, these are
documented so that the Program Administrator can recommend the appropriate Rocky
Mountain Power program to the customer.
Follow-up engineering support is provided periodically for a year to track the action
items identified in the Action Items Report but also to support the customer in developing
a tracking system to monitor energy use performance. The objective is that through a
combination of tools and coaching, the facilities can become somewhat self-sufficient at
tracking system energy use.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting 5-7
69 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
5-B
Attachment IPUC I
4.
5.
Approximately a year after the Action Items Report is delivered, a frnal inspection is
conducted and a report prepared to document the measures that were ultimately
implemented and the resulting energy savings (Verification Report).
The Industrial RCx program track is implemented as follows:
l. Program Administration and/or Energy Management Provider staff provides an initial
screening of the facility. Includes a meeting with the customer to determine the alignment
of the program with their objectives and organizational readiness. If the site is determined
to be a good candidate for IRCx and the customer agrees to participate, the customer
signs a participation agreement with PacifiCorp. Services, schedules, and potential
incentives are outlined along with customer commitments.
2. The Energy Management Provider works with the customer to set up a system for
tracking energy use and other variable that affect system energy use (such as
production levels, feedstock characteristics). This system establishes the baseline
profile and tracks performance over time. The tracking system may be tied into an
existing utility energy monitoring system or plant control system, since customers
may be used to interfacing with those systems on a regular basis.
3. The Energy Management Provider works with the customer to set up a monitoring
and reporting methodology that works in conjunction with the tracking system set up
above. The standard approach is to follow a top-down multi-variable regression
model at the meter level. Models could be set up at the facility and/or system level.
Energy Management Provider staff performs an on-site facility and system
assessment. A report is produced, which includes a detailed action item list.
Action items are implemented under the direction of the customer with support from
the Energy Management Provider.
6. The Energy Management Provider conducts a final inspection at the end of the study
to document the implemented measures and associated energy savings.
7 . Tracking data is assessed to determine annual sustained savings and incentive
payment. PacifiCorp incentives are paid based on actual first-year performance.
Customer responsibilities primarily include the following activities:
o Supporting installation of meter monitoring equipment
o Allowing facility access to production and energy data.
. Specifying internal staff involvement in the project.
o Undertake implementation activities related to the action items identified by the
implementation contractor.
Energl' Management Providers for Industrial Recommissioning: IRCx should be
delivered through specialized engineering firms, with experience providing this service
and with understanding of industrial systems. The existing Recommissioning Service
Providers may have the necessary skills and/or additional providers may be required.
Pers istent Comm ission i ng Im plementation Steps
Persistent commissioning is similar to Recommissioning and in fact incorporates an
abbreviated recommissioning study. However, PCx differs in that it uses technology to
70 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
mine savings from an ongoing stream of data from building management systems.
Whereas RCx projects typically involve short-term monitoring of BMS data as well as
additional data points (usually with temporarily installed data loggers), PCx uses a
longer-term approach, typically at least three years.
The PCx program track is implemented as follows:
l. Program Administration and/or EMP staff provides an initial screening of the facility.
This includes a meeting with the customer to determine the alignment of the program
with their objectives and organizational readiness. The customer completes the program
application, with assistance from the Program Administrator or EMP staff. If the site is
determined to be a good candidate for PCx, the application is accepted. The customer
signs a participation agreement with PacifiCorp. Services, schedules, and potential
incentives are outlined along with customer commitments.
2. Energy Management provider sets up a perrnanent connection to the building BMS.
Additional hardware is added as needed to capture whole-building energy use and
establish data-streaming from the BMS, including control signals (e.g., fan on/off), sensor
readings (e.g., duct pressure, outside air temperature), equipment status (e.g., damper
open, fan speed, valve position), and energy consumption (e.9., kW used). Other
monitoring equipment may also be added to capture a large number of facility operating
parameters (e.g., temperatures, pressures, air and water flow rates, electric power
demand, valve positions, equipment vibration levels, and liquid levels in tanks).As a
result of this step, the Energy Management Provider and the customer may have access to
a "dashboard" that allows the customers and the implementation contractor to view the
data.
3. Energy Management Provider conducts an accelerated building recommissioning using
the information gathered through these tools to identify measures, calculate savings, and
estimate implementation costs. This includes preparation of a plan that describes the
measures recommended to be implemented.
4. Customer reviews recommendations and implements approved low-cost/no-cost
measures. AIso, the Energy Management Provider trains the facility O&M staff on the
measures to help ensure persistence. An RCx Implementation Report is prepared that
documents savings expected to accrue from all work performed.
5. Energy Management Provider provides ongoing commissioning to ensure efficient
building operations persist, to detect new building faults as they arise, and to account for
measurement-based energy savings. A summary report is prepared periodically
(typically, each month) that summarizes all opportunities to achieve energy savings,
quantifies the potential savings, and tracks actual savings that result when O&M actions
are taken.
Persistent commissioning includes the following elements:
o Continuous monitoring of the building points, 24 x7 x365
o Use of sophisticated fault detection and diagnostic software to mine the data for
performance issues
o Issue notification when hazardous or non-optimum (i.e., "energy wasting") conditions are
detected
o Analysis by trained engineers
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
71 of95
5-q
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Attachment IPUC I
. For all issues identified, assignment of costs to these issues (typically excess energy
spend) and setting of priorities
o Actionable recommendations to building operators, focusing on no-cost and low-cost
measures
o Delivery of savings across all energy commodities (electricity, gas, fuel oil, centralized
chilled water or steam, etc.)
o Tracking of project status and savings
Energy Management Providers for Persistent Comrnissioning: Persistent
Commissioning should be delivered through specialized engineering firms, with
experience providing this service and with data acquisition and analysis. The existing
Recommissioning Service Providers may have the necessary skills and/or additional
providers may be required.
lssues, Risks, and Risk Management Strategies
One issue common to all three O&M Technical Program tracks is getting measures
implemented. Even after potential O&M measures have been identified, they may not be
readily implemented because facility teams are often constrained by time, budget, and
expertise. The following strategies can help overcome this barrier to measure
implementation:
o Ensure during the screening phase that the team has executive support to focus time and
resources on energy savings measures.
. Spend time with the team to understand the priorities and constraints. Efforts can then
mesh with the team's needs, while encouraging them to meet their own goals.
e Provide a consistent process with regular check-ins.
o Support the team as needed with additional calculations, implementation suggestions,
vendor selection, and occasionally vendor management.
In addition to this challenge, PCx and Industrial RCs each have their own unique issues,
discussed below.
lndustrial Recommissioning Specific lssues
Industrial RCx has two unique issues:
. hlaintaining Savings. Maintaining savings after the first year is one of the main
challenges to the program. The implementation team plays a critical role in
maintaining open lines of communication with the customer during the sustained
savings period. It is imperative that the team builds a strong relationship with the
energy champions at each facility and establishes a regular meeting schedule during
the account planning process.
. Data and S{&V Requiremcnts. The customer is, at minimum, required to report
energy and production data at the end of each year. Additionally, the customer is
obligated to report any significant changes (plant expansion, changes in product lines,
etc.) in the operation of the target system or facility that might affect the relevance of
the savings estimates. Such changes may trigger an adjustment to the baseline model,
which would be reviewed and approved by the implementation team.
5-10
72 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
During the sustained savings period, the customer is encouraged to maintain a record of
activities or events that impact energy intensity in a positive or negative direction.
PCx Specific lssues
There are three challenges to persistent commissioning:
o Making the business case. In general, Persistent Commissioning projects have three cost
components: an upfront deployment cost, an ongoing cost of the service, and an
occasional cost of implementing measures (this is lower than with many projects because
of the focus on no-cost and low-cost measures). It has been shown that utility or agency
programs have a big effect on decision-making since they reduce the out-of-pocket cost
to the customer. The increasing volume of buildings that have adopted this approach is
also helpful, as the market has moved from early adopters to the early majority, where
cautious facility teams can rely on solid case studies over multiple years.
. Connecting the IIMS. Persistent commissioning relies on a steady data-stream from the
building. This is not always straightforward, although technology improvements have
made it easier in recent years. With some buildings, the best approach is to screen out
customers with an old BMS system or an overloaded IT staff.
o Ensuring Information Securi$'. Persistent commissioning tends not to send any data
into the building. In addition, the IT team can use multiple different protocols to export
the data from the building, alongside their own firewall protections.
Site-Level Data Requirements
Ensuring that appropriate information is in place and subsequently managed will support
the customer's use of data to manage energy as a controllable cost and enable PacifiCorp
to properly demonstrate true savings. Customized data requirements for each project will
be developed and specified in the customer participation agreement. (General M&V
protocols will be spelled out in the program manual). Example data requirements include:
. The customer authorizes PacifiCorp to provide their energy usage data to the Program
Administrator and Energy Management Provider. Hourly usage data are not required, but
for Industrial RCx in particular, hourly usage data, together with other data such as
production data, may enable better correlation of energy use with operations.
o The customer will provide this data for the three years, or as much history as is available,
preceding program participation.
o For recommissioning, during the building screening stage, the Program Administrator
needs to ensure that the buildings are able to provide trend data. Program experience
from other utilities indicates that some building automation systems may be unable to
provide trend data, which requires additionaltime and expense to upgrade the systems or
install data loggers. The need for obtaining trend data from buildings should be
communicated clearly to building owners and facility staff.
o The Program Administrator will train Energy Management Providers in standardized
calculation methodologies for computing energy savings, stating clearly the specific
information and detailed documentation requirements. The Program Administrator
should set uniform and consistent provider expectations and provide a forum for
discussion and answering questions. Also, the Program Administrator needs to set up
explicit protocols for service provider rigor.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
73 of 95
5-1 1
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
99.[JetlLcgl Ptggrgrs
Attachment IPUC I
During program implementation, ensure that the analysis and calculations underpinning
savings calculations prepared by the Energy Management Providers meets expectations
of Program Administration staff, so as to avoid multiple time-consuming reviews by
multiple parties.
Ensure that savings calculations are very well documented, while clearly stating the basis
of the calculations such as facility descriptions, occupancy and energy consumption
assumptions, measurements, use of appropriate weather data, and equipment descriptions
and usage. At the same time, the work required to document energy savings should not be
burdensome.
Set up a rigorous two-step quality control process. The first stage of review can be done
by the Program Administrations staff for each Energy Management Provider's first
several (e.g., five) investigations. If the review results seem satisfactory, further review of
that provider's work can be undertaken on a random sampling basis. The second stage
review should be undertaken by an independent third-party.
o Ensure that evaluation is being conducted from a system perspective, rather than a
component perspective.
. After participation in the PacifiCorp energy management program, the customer will
continue to acquire and analyze energy related data, and make energy management
decisions based on this information.
EM&V Requirements
Because the program design recommends that incentives be paid on verified energy
savings (see below), third-party verification of reported project-level savings will be
required. The program design assumes that this function will be provided by an
independent evaluation firm under contract to the Program Administrator.
In addition, an independent third-party contractor will be hired to evaluate the impact of
the program. The contractor will use the measurement and verification data collected by
the program implementer to determine gross savings by project and customer for both
demand and energy.
A comprehensive process evaluation will be conducted in the first year to develop
program logic models, identify strategies that have been successful, customer
satisfaction, and opportunities to improve program participation and increase savings.
The evaluation contractor will use best practice methodologies when conducting process
evaluations including, but not limited to, stakeholder interviews, customer surveys,
program-ally interviews, tracking systems review, and assessment of quality assurance
and quality control. Subsequent evaluation will be done in the third year to determine the
effect of program improvements.
Impact evaluation data will include the hourly data collected as part of customer
measurement and verification, production data, operating conditions, any significant
changes to the facilities that would affect energy use, such as a new building addition or
change in process.
Marketing and Outreach
Marketing and outreach efforts can be integrated into efforts for the existing Rocky
Mountain Power programs. All three Technical O&M tracks will be marketed directly to
5-t2
74 of 95
www.enernoc.com
Attachment IPUC I
-,** o9ll_Iellr:relfrgerer:
customers and by leveraging industry associations and other trade allies in the
area. Outreach activities should include the following:
. Email campaigns to both customers and trade allies
. One-one-one meetings with targeted customers
. Webinars
. Trade Ally workshops
. Trade association conferences
. Utility customers conferences
. Advertising in management and trade journals
Marketing and outreach should highlight the non-energy benefits of the program. For
RCx and PCx these benefits including improved comfort, improved air quality, and
reduced occupant complaints. For Industrial RCx, benefits include increased productivity
and emphasis on preventative O&M versus responding to equipment failure.
Additional marketing details are included in the Task 4 Implementation Plan.
Projected Energy Savings and Participation
Table 5-4 shows the estimated savings based on the market charucterization and
assessment described in Chapter 3.
Table 5-5 provides an approximate number of businesses projected to participate in O&M
Technical programs. Note that because customers do not immediately begin producing
savings, the number of customers recruited in a given year will be higher than the
numbers shown in the table.
Table &4 Estimated Annual Energy Savings (Mwh/yr)
RCx cumulative energy
savings 14 42 98 191 303
lndustrial Sys. RCx cumulative
energy savings 68 191 388 628 857
PCx cumulative energy
savings 10 29 68 132 210
TotalO&M Technical
cumulative energy savings 9t 262 554 9sl 1,369
RCx incrementalenergy
savings 14 28 56 93 't12
lndustrialSys. RCx
incremental energy savings 68 123 197 239 229
PCx incrementalenergy
savings 10 19 39 64 78
TotalO&M Technical
incremental energy savings 91 171 292 397 419
Note: Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
75 of 95
5- 13
tD PAC-E-'t4-08
IPUC 8
O&M- Technical Programs
Attachment IPUC 8
Table *5 Estimated Number of Participating Sites/year
Note: Fractional site numbers indicate less than a full year of participation as program ramps up.
Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding.
Customer lncentives
Customer incentives are provided by covering all or part of the cost associated with
Energy Management Provider technical services. In addition, customers may receive a
performance-based incentive related to verified energy savings. Performance-based
incentives are particularly well suited to PCx and IRCx programs because they share the
risks and reward among the various parties and can help provide additional motivation
for Energy Management Providers and customers to pursue all energy-saving measures
over the multi-year project duration. The utility pays only for verified savings achieved,
which reduces the risk should a particular project provide less savings than originally
anticipated. This program design recommends the incentive structure shown in Table 5-6.
Table $6 Recommended Customer lncentives
I Recommissioning/lndustrial r' Recommissioning
100% of cost of RCx or lRCx Study
(EMP services)
Cost of industrial system monitoring
equipment if required
Cash incentive of
$0.02lkwh of verified first-
year savings
I
L
l
l
:
:
i
; Cash incentive of
| $0.02lkwh of verified first-
I year savrngs
l
Persistent Commissioning
100% of cost of PCx Study (EMP
services, including EMP labor to
enable acquisition of building data)
Cost of hardware and software to
monitor building energy use and
operating data on an ongoing basis
RCx cumulative sites 0.1 o.4 1.0 2.0 3.1
lndustrial RCx cumulative sites 0.4 1.1 2.3 3.7 5.1
PCx cumulative sites 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5
TotalO&M Technical
cumulative sites 0.6 1.6 3.5 6.0 8.8
RCx incrementalsites 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.0 '1.2
lndustrial RCx incremental sites 0.4 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.4
PCx incremental sites 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2
TotalO&M Technical
incremental sites 0.6 1.',|1.8 2.6 2.8
5-L4
76 of 95
www.enernoc.com
Auachment IPUC I
0&M Technical Programs
Customer Costs
For the O&M Technical Programs, customer costs are related to time
well as to the cost of implementing measures. Table 5-7 and Table 5-8
costs.
Table &7 Customer Time Requirements
commitments, as
address customer
Participation in initial site study
Review findings and determine response
Total hours
Participation in initialsite study, project enablement, and
findings
response to initial
Two hours/month for meetings to review findings, determine response
Total hours
Table 5-B Customer Cost to lmplement ldentified Measures
I ndustrial Recommissioning measures with payback less than one year, with a
minimum recommended total implementation cost of
$10.000
i
I Customer must be willing to implement identified
measures with payback less than one year, with a
minimum recommended total implementation cost of
$10,000
Customer incurs cost of upgrading BAS if necessary
(range of $10,000 to $50,000)
Persistent Commissioning
Assuming that the total costs of employees, including benefits, are $1OO/hour, for 84
hours the total customer cost would be $8,400 for the first year. For PCx, the customer
will spend approximately 24 hours/year (valued at $2,50O/year) on activities to maintain
and deepen savings. Although this is not required for the RCx and IRCx programs, the
customer in these cases could also spend approximately 24 hours in subsequent years to
maintain savings.
60
24
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
77 ol95
5-15
lD PAC-E-'|4-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technjcal Proqrams
Attachment IPUC 8
Budgetary S pecifications
The following elements were taken into account when developing the budget for the
O&M Technical Programs:
o Program Administrator labor
. Energy Management Provider costs (including equipment required for obtaining data
from building systems)
o Marketing and customer recruitment
These roles will ramp up in activity over time. Table 5-9 shows anticipated PacifiCorp
and Program Administrator labor hours, expressed as full time equivalents (FTEs) for the
combined O&M Technical Program tracks. The PacifiCorp program manager is assumed
to have responsibility for overseeing the Program Administrator and facilitating
integration of the program with existing PacifiCorp staff. The Program Administrator, as
discussed above, delivers the program and manages its administrative functions, such as
marketing, customer recruitment, and results tracking. At PacifiCorp's discretion, this
responsibility could be handled entirely by PacifiCorp staff, performed by a third-party
contractor, or shared between PacifiCorp and a third-party contractor.
Table *9 O&M Technical Program Administration Labor
Utility Program Manager 0.01 0.01 o.o2 0.02 0.02
Program Administrator
Program Manager 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04
Sales Support 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03
AnalysUContract
Administrator 0.00 0.01 0.01 o.o2 0.02
Engineer/Technical Staff 0.01 0.02 o.o2 0.03 0.04
Total Program Administrator 0.04 0.06 0.09 0.11 0.12
5-16
78 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-I4-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
O&M Technical Programs
Based on program participation projected by the marketing assessment, the budgets for the
individual tracks are shown in Table 5-10 through Table 5-12 along with the customer costs.
Table 5-13 shows the total budget for all O&M Technical Programs combined.
Table &10 Recommissioning Budget
Utility Labor Costs $333 $692 $1,034 $1,384 $1,682 $5,124
Program Administration Costs
Program Manager $278 $577 $1,193 $2.034 $2,s18 $6,599
Sales Support $333 $461 $954 $1.220 $1,511 $4,480
AnalysUContract Administrator $83 $173 $358 $610 $755 $1,980
Engineer $777 $1,345 $2,226 $3,796 $4,700 $12,846
Total Program Admin. Labor
Costs il,472 $2,556 $4,73,l $7,660 $9,485 $25,904
Other Services
Energy Management Providers $1,383 $2,841 $5,814 $9,830 $12,076 $31,944
Marketing and Outreach $10,000 $4,076 $4,1 53 $4,232 $4,313 $26,775
Tracking $269 $21 5 $338 $501 $599 $1,923
Evaluation $539 $429 $676 $1,003 $1 ,1 99 $3,845
Total Other Services $12,191 $7,561 $10,981 $15,566 $18,187 $64,487
Total lmplementation Cost (less
incentives)$13,996 $10,809 $16,746 $24,611 $29,354 $95,515
Customer lncentives $277 $568 $1 ,1 63 $1,966 $2,415 $6,389
Total Budget $14,273 $11,377 $17,909 $26,577 $31,769 $,l01,904
Customer Costs (prior to incentives paymenl
Labor $1,166 $2.422 $s,009 $8,542 $10,576 $27,715
Measure I mplementation $553 $1 ,1 36 $2,326 $3,932 $4,831 $12,778
Total Customer Costs $1,719 $3,558 $7,335 $12,474 $15,407 $40,493
EnerNOC Utility Solulions Consultrng
79 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Table &11 lndustrial Recommissioning Budget
Attachment IPUC I
Utility Labor Costs $950 $1,773 $2,112 $2,076 $2,016 $8,927
Program Administration Costs
Program Manager $1,187 $2,217 $2,437 $3,051 $3,019 $1 1,910
Sales Support $950 $1,182 $1,949 $1,831 $1,811 $7,723
AnalysUContract Adm inistrator $237 $443 $731 $915 $906 $3,233
Engineer $2,216 $3,448 $4,548 $5,696 $5,635 $21,s43
Total Program Administration
Labor Costs $4,s90 $7,290 $9,665 $11,493 $11,370 $44,409
Other Services
Energy Management Providers $6,796 $12,563 $20.473 $25,332 $24,715 $89,879
Marketing and Outreach $10,000 $4,076 $4,1 53 $4,232 $4,313 $26,775
Tracking $474 $564 $810 $964 $947 $3,759
Evaluation $948 $1,129 $1,620 $1,928 $1,894 $7,519
TotalOther Services $18,217 $18,332 $27,056 $32,457 $31,870 $127,931
Total lmplementation Cost $23,757 $27,396 $38,833 $46,026 $45,256 $181,267
Customer lncentives $1,359 $2,513 $4,095 $5,066 $4,943 $17,976
Total Budget $25,{16 $29,908 $42,928 $51,092 $50,t99 s199,243
Customer Costs (prior to incentives payment)
Labor $3,324 $6,207 $10,234 $12,815 $12,678 $45,258
Measure lmplementation $2,718 $5,025 $8,1 89 $1 0,1 33 $9,886 $35,952
Total Customer Costs $6,042 $11,232 $18,423 $22,948 $22.564 $81,209
5-18
80 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Table *12 Persistent Commissioning Budget
Utility Labor Costs $55 $1 14 $171 $286 $278 $904
Program Administration Costs
Program Manager $86 $179 $246 $336 $416 $1,263
Sales Support $55 $76 $158 $202 $250 $740
Ana lysUContract Adm inistrator $14 $29 $se $101 $125 $327
Engineer $128 $222 $368 $627 $777 $2,123
Total Program Administration
Labor Costs $283 $s06 $831 $1,266 $1,567 $4,453
Other Services
Energy Management Providers $1,918 $3,944 $8,070 $13,634 $16,724 $44,290
Marketing and Outreach $10,000 $4,076 $4,1s3 $4,232 $4,313 $26,775
Tracking $249 $1 81 $281 $416 $491 $1,617
Evaluation $498 $361 $561 $831 $982 $3,234
Total Other Services $12,665 $8,562 $13,065 $19,113 $22.510 $75,915
Total lmplementation Cost $13,003 $9,182 $14,067 $20,664 $24,356 $81,272
Customer lncentives $1 92 $394 $807 $1,363 $1,672 $4,429
Total Budget $13,{95 $9,576 $14,874 $22,028 $26,028 $85,70{
Customer Costs (prior to incentives payment)
Labor $1 93 $400 $828 $1,411 $1,748 $4,580
Measure I mplementation $384 $789 $1,614 $2,727 $3,345 $8,858
Total Customer Costs $576 $1,189 $2,442 $4,138 $5,092 $13,437
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
8'l of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC I Attachment IPUC 8
O&M Technical Programs
Table 5-13 Total Budgetfor All O&M Technical Programs
Utility Labor
Costs $1,338 $2,580 $3,317 $3,746 $3,975 $14,955
Program Administration Gosts
Program
Manager $1,5s1 $2,972 $3,876 $5,421 $5,953 $19,772
Sales Support $1,338 $1,720 $3,06'l $3,253 $3,572 $12,943
AnalysUContract
Administrator $334 $445 $1,'148 $1,626 $1,786 $s,539
Engineer $3,122 $s,016 $7,143 $10,119 $11,112 $36,511
TotalProgram
Administration
Labor Costs
$6,345 ${0,352 $15,228 $20,419 $22,422 $74,766
Other Services
Energy
Management
Providers
$10,097 $19,347 $34,357 $48,796 $53,516 $1 66,1 1 3
Marketing and
Outreach $30,000 $12,228 $12,460 $12,697 $12,938 $80,324
Tracking $992 $960 $1,429 $1,881 $2,038 $7,299
Evaluation $1,984 $1 ,e19 $2,857 $3,762 $4,075 $14,598
TotalOther
Services $43,073 $34,454 $51,103 $67,136 $72,567 $268,333
Total
lmplementation
Cost
$50,756 $47,386 $69,647 $9{,301 $98,965 $358,055
Customer
lncentives $1,828 $3,47s $6,064 $8,396 $9,031 $28,794
Total Budget $52,583 $50,861 $75,711 $99,697 $107,996 $386,848
Customer Costs iprior to incentives payment)
Labor $4,683 $9,028 $16,071 $22,768 $25,002 $77,5s2
Measure
lmplementation $3,6ss $6,950 $12,129 $16,792 $18,062 $57,587
TotalCustomer
Costs $8,338 $15,979 $28,200 $39,560 $43,063 $135,139
5-20
82 of 95
www.enernoc.com
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
O&Y Te:lnicaI Programs
Measure Life
The program design assumes a three year measure life for O&M Technical Programs.
lm plementation Schedule
The schedule for program implementation appears in Table 5-14.
Table 5-14 Proposed O&M Technical Program lmplementation Schedule
Assign PacifiCorp program manager and staff Upon submittalof program plan to Commission,
anticipated 4Q,2012
Select and contract with Program Administrator
(PA) or hire and train internal PacifiCorp PA staff
I mmediately upon program approval, ariticipated
1Q, 2013
Pre-rollout program development:
Prepare marketing materials and incentive
applications
Develop activity and incentive processing
protocols
ldentify qualified Energy Management Providers
Train Energy Management Providers
Program rollout:
Launch consumer marketing and outreach
Allprogram services
Prepare reports:
Documentation of program activities and progress
toward goals by PA
Reports to Commission
Monthly throughout program implementation
period
Quarterly, and annually each July 15
Conclude program operation for this planning
cycle
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
83 of 95
5-21
rD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
84 of 95
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
APPENDIX I a
Attachment IPUC 8
REFERENCES
Bonneville Power Administration, BPA E3T 201I Energy Management Technicol Advisory
Group Final Report, February 2012.
Bonneville Power Administration, Energy Efficiency Energy Smart Industrial, "Energy
Smart Industrial (ESI) Track & Tune Component Review," Spring 2012.
California Commissioning Collaborative, California Commissioning Guide: Existing
Buildings, June 2006.
California Commissioning Collaborative, "Commercial Wole Building Performance: How
to Make it Work in Colifornia, " workshop findings, May 2012.
Consortium for Energy Efficiency, Industrial Energt Management Program Case Studies,
June 2012.
Consortium for Energy Efficiency, Summary of Commercial Whole Building Performance
Programs: Continuous Energt Improvement and Energt Management ond Information
Systems, May 2012.
Danielle Gidding and Lauren Gage, "Oh, Behave! Fitting Multi-Sector Behavioral Programs
into Utility Frameworks," 2010.
Richard Hart, "Where's the Beef in Continuous Commissioning? Results from 140 Buildings
in Commercial Property and Higher Education," presented to the ACEEE 2012 Summer
Study, August 2012.
Heschong Mahone Group, Inc., Non-Residentiol Process Evaluation Study: Attachment 2-
Program-Specific Evaluafron& conducted for San Diego Gas & Electric, March 2012.
Ted Jones, Kim Crossman, Jennifer Eskil, and John Wallner, "The Evaluation of Continuous
Energy Improvement Programs in the Northwest: an Example of Regional Collaboration,"
20tt.
J. Granderson, MA Piette, B. Rosenblum, L. Hu, et al, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, Energlt Information Handbook, Applications for Energ,,-Efficient Building
Operations, LBNL 5272 E, 2011.
Robert D. Luneski, "A Generalized Method for Estimation of Industrial Energy Savings from
Capital and Behavioral Programs," 201 l.
David W. Mclntosh, Connecticut Light & Power and the 2008 Retro Commissioning
Program, April 2008.
Evan Mills and Paul Mathew, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Monitoring-Based
Commissioning: BenchmarkingAnalysis of 24 UC/CSU/IOU Projecfs, June 2009.
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
85 of 95
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8
References
Attachment IPUC 8
Jane S. Peters, Robert A. Scholl, Research Into Action, Inc., and David M. Wylie P.E., ASW
Engineering Management Consultants, Inc., Process Evaluotion of the 2006-2008 Southern
California Edison Retrocommissioning Program, May 2009.
John Robert and Bing Tso, "Do Savings from Retrocommissioning Last? Results from an
Effective Useful Life Study," presented to the ACEEE 2010 Summer Study, August 2010.
Rocky Mountain Power, 201I Annual Energt Efficiency and Peak Reduction Report - Utah,
May,2012.
SBW Consulting, Lnc.,2006-08 Retro-commissioning Impact Evaluation, February 2010.
SBW Consulting, lnc., Impact and Process Evaluation Final Report for QUEST's 2004-5
Building Tune-Up Program (SCE Program #1117-04; PG&E Program #1119-04), arch
2007.
Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, ETC Group. LLC, and American Council for an
Energy-Efficiency Economy, November 2008.
Bing Tso, Michael Baker, and Phillipus Willems, "Results from a Comprehensive Impact
Evaluation of the 2006-08 California Retro-Commissioning Portfolio," presented to the
ACEEE 2010 Summer Study, August 2010.
The CADMUS Group Inc., BPA Energt Smart Industrial Program: Early Evaluation Report,
June2012.
The CADMUS Group lnc., NEEA Msrket Progress Evaluation Report #6: Evaluation of
NEEA's Industrial Initiative, January 2011.
The CADMUS Group Inc., PacifiCorp Recommissioning 2007-2008 Utah Program
Evaluation, November 20 I 0.
A-2
86 of 95
www.enernoc.com
lco
rr,o,
ot-@
oiC2.3
Co(..,
c.e
f
oa
2
)
(J
zLoc
LLJ
bH .,*d
f€HFEg,,
5:siE EE€taiEsE
gEEEgEE
EErEEIEg
C9o)O =-cH.oE E e UE= E* o or#l.U .^iY O EUrr^ v OpE8ix! 3€ s
B€ E
=EEE(E ti CDO (E 6Ec " (Ee oE cO O C O)O ra (UE ar Gl Ce A-.:E=c:(DO)>r(E L = 0) o cgE a.= E H'fr
Hfr'H gEE
feExEHp
.E *b e eE=s,EA b b E'E
EE: ft:gI
;
-gooo
oct)oco
E
CDLocoo-c
Lo
o
(5q)
E,B 3-
IEHEE
I:oo
aui, -tgE
9ft8 siE',Bd;"rEEgg-,
SEEE EEE;E
:=EEEEEiEfiE o-o o o-o.iJ EE
ooo_b
OeOENC@a- o>,co=
E a.9.E :' +:.==o,>(Eo
ts $Eor: f
a$tu;peEo\ c c.g o-(,
E:E H; *P
Io
(,F
fieEI o'E -L O)
$ sE>-#-=-oE )o\
= (U0) o<r,
$sFgflggll
a El5t519
*HE,3fl*lfl
Eego Egfr
HgsE E
o)
C)oo
cB
cB
bo
C)
o
oo
U)
xo
,io'e
o
o
CSoah
C)L
U)
>.
rr)
c)
o)N
L(n
tr
U)
o
>.
tr
(B
t<oo
I!o.
>'-o
U0) -.;.NU
LLdo
d, o<S sf-= o*z
=iv,O oo!
LLt.=oL' '(nd 9nfi EElrl ., bouJ ;PE HE.
x
CfZ.UJo-o-
@o\i
IIJoo{ rro-5oq
@(Jf(L
tro
Ecoo
o
Eoq
Uoc
oca.
3
roo)
o
@co
iNA
=).ct
o,CEfaocoo.>()=
SE
o'=e;68
Ee
EgE'=
8E
=!o6
LOGE9.E=oE(JE Lo oNo U,-aE e
a ,O,9
BB O> >o-3. o
L!>\n€
BrE5E;tocD- -.=€- 3< U!-
fr Eg- >'Eo-o(r,.= >
aLoo)
lJ)
Lo
(f)
isssggasgiEagEIg
cti o(E-C !o ->Eg=a
E 5E EL c.i=b Rtse
EE-=3
SFAF
_cL
=o-
E;.coooXo)Eo-o-oEo-OEocLrG
oACD L)cF0)
EE BxEt
E EFrE O
* *E u I
gHEEggEg
oo-apS.= I, A.
oboov=
s.E EtoU,(E
*s-,gflg'r
ilalrJlo -!l 'r'E c >61t o ol-l
i -EelEl
Y o o- ol >.1l-ccEl Yltu LrJ : il ol
6.oHEbFx
E PE€(,) r,rJ > C)
@of(L
oEco(!
-:(o:
E:co c.o !i
:a+€()co:#e g,ed#
1r)o)
o
o)@
lri'
C,,iclui=iolclor(JioICie
!f,lol(,i>.I i1Jt-I ',jll
I t-.t
zLldllctu
@
OlI
cc)EEoo
@o+
u,(Jo( c-:4lo(L
9 : EE
EgE iEFVAILJo o; E c, oE.cZ.o-c'<
SE,i; M H g
E:gEEIsat [#e
EHEgE$
E 8E H AS
=o_bur
=€Ysb9NT9ooo(,loilIgno.EoE;Er=O
8 gg
=.c oi)ail g=
E e=Eb6&63
9PEE_'<oag s8
EFb;
E E HE'i6 .!r = iiEE Et
E EEe=<L()(l)CD.Y
E'oS-oo(E0-tso
PoEC"(E.=
2'g
o
.ctg
(E
o
o
oz
es€l :l
FSHg 3isE$g
a$
PEfi=
Eoq
U
CL
0)Cq
roo)
ooo)
co
3o
o)ao
Q >o
QE OgPooFo_bE988a
E SE3L.= '-o>;>(EF'= al, c,6€-o(J'= 2.Et>s"dP5ooESE5 b-tr
!0)
oo
=.Y
.v,oo
--Uloooo*_8
t'd
9E-3g
=btxcH8e
oo)
.E
oo
(E
=Ec(E
Eo)o
E
oo
o
-c
=.Yoqo@
OObs=)ExasEd
-c ->, o
E8=
EEr
=caaffifa'EF_OPEYo Ic oF H
fis=EE.2 i5.s'd
E TE5PEdO'= drC;eu cooz. o @to
x=o6ro_n()O lggE 9o-o oE s.;EqEH .,sEvo0)cO.E -L (Eq)= !g tro = 6(l)JlI (,E
Go)'trc.4E
E'Jc --oo E.c c-cOEE(tr'= -p5tq96
L'E (l)E.9 hoxEooo-
oo
JooYrf,I,-
o
CDLoJ
E
.9=E'coo!,ooo
o
o
E
o
E SHEs:oro 6 6 o!Q
€EIEEE
=; 5s5*-NE " () O
E#E*EE
SEEEBE
o
E'()coo.=o cEh o-c
E(U=g F^o -oU)
EE6-i e'E6E a+=Eoao
o.No
8rEEg-c)otroE
=8
369E
EBg
5 PH^- a(J >.--O qrErbELUcO(L r.u c)
I9cDsbCOo oE
=:o tr ou9FEro669(/)@C) o-
ofo
=c
co-ob
EEE'N>r'=TE
a) o60
>t>l(Jl
-l
s c#ldlcolor.9 >l.=fra
.O EEI
E5H
CD.= o,o.=
coSErrro F
8HE(Ltrto
o) o)
cc
-.9 E, .9CO c On\a a -.E =
:.E q'e,\
E E1i'E H EE866886=
co(Jl(L
tr(,
EEo(u
L(o
Ei6CoL
:a+E(-) co ;Se gor&
ln
xotr
Lo
oooo-c
osoo-(,ceo.Y>-6s
E'!9 or
€EEbo! cL#8.96ED ---c. A-; .rt€888'5 c'd+:ALLV- f cLooEoo.q xf autr oEI i eiO-c (57-
3E=-=I He g
o o-E x(4).rroo
-Ye(E()oout --o'6'Pga'5- O(E(a-Eool>= oPE-o
HEH
P H3
=E;;59F o)=o.= c)(I):o o
€ Eiuo (l,5 0(,lE-v o
c.9=!,coo
E'ooo
E
o
E sHES;ao 6 5 oo
EEIEE EErEsE *
EgE#gE
SEEEBE BgEfiiEEE
oooooLoxoto
!
o
-o-iJt, -k6EHE=E E*t€BHai *s
3E $EtE, b#
rfragsE rE r
8EE€gE;EI
oltso
o
oz
E 8eI d=
E E 3E
E H€gl.lJxro
8PE*E ;;g*3BH5l,
o).s
folr '6
.1 .tQ E56Ee(LtsEq'LIJOO9tL(r() 6.
3 E*..2 EOE Eg= o-
=\ tJ Cn
HpEEd'E g.o
@olI
coE-coo
roo)
o
o)
cllCu
=aCoU
6co]=I
(i
P
=Pf
Uoz
ocI
Eo(.,1
U
CL0,Cq
=
lr)o)
o
NO)
ielm
ro
Lo
(f)
Lo
EsOL
E PE 63
EfEEEE
H= a= Ep
ea;;S;
=E
qt iq
AxE H a3o = xlP E,.(,L$o-'sE.otrtraEor U,9: Ul (J
6ooo+-Cofl^a;<oogr-rr)=Oa E-IEE:E 3
+4€o 9B!q.o t.Y.r- (l)
=(ECC, ., .^s g?bEg:goob EEO+ OrOCL
o
!o
ELoEoo.ooo'=
LoaoE
o
ooo
q)59voiiSrIf,ON(E
co
E,gfcro
Lo
c)
.cto(,,:ooo
EE
99,.=!5:oh.= q)oEE9EO
-L6o-6.E
P8e;3* b:(aO >o\ O^ oofN_crr) cLo ().. f6'= cr, -;;..E EoggE,o g1- oo-3;AE:EPe g=:E3*88aH orPc e c=:FEEE; eo R>o,;oo6 i i5:o d o,P
E ?=i zr> o!l oT E
HE;EEE
gEfr gEE
EEHEEE
E,
=o_o
HETgfN: 9'6
S 9,4
ol,c
=U,(EE 9li;gB;
EooLo0)
(\t
ooo
o
:o(E
:E E$r =-9.E =E>= o o
E E:gEE EE
Es;C83Efi
EE E E O:6 i
EEBEE€ EE
Lo
!
Eaoo
g(U
=q9,ffEOuo
=lr)CO F-
-PYrE E;b
E HE" 3,E i
rE€fifE*s e jk o H Qo a!:F
*;;E*au *o = 6 => aoi
EEE gi
E d)> E Y*p H E s
fi Bg;Efl
o
-oso
o
oz
N=trI
Lo.NoYoFlrJ
CDtr.=(EJolgf9OEn-'Ezo-r'E fsPd,6=
=(L<F
()
to9HiuJ=(LF
IE
8.E
A PPF P
il'E E d'E(LFdtoF
!c(U
Lo
EF-aqCtL=d)F
I!,EoI)(oE5FF
or-0
Eg
dlF
o,
.EC'6
F
@of0-
tro
E-coo
-:(oitr!
6 CrI\!t ,;
ul -}:io. Xf e ixoo-&
tD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC I
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
lD PAC-E-14-08
IPUC 8 Attachment IPUC 8
About EnerNO€ Utility Solutions Consulting
EnerNOC's Utility Solutions Consulting team is part of EnerNOC's Utitity
Solutions, which provides a comprehensive suite of demand-side management
(DSM) services to utilities and grid operators worldwide. Hundreds of utilities
have leveraged our technology, our people, and our proven processes to make their
energy efficiency (EE) and demand response (DR) initiatives a success. Utilities
trust EnerNOC to work with them at every stage of the DSM program lifecycle -
assessing market potential, designing effective programs, implementing those
programs, and measuring program results.
EnerNOC's Utility Solutions deliver value to our utility clients through two
separate practice areas - Consulting and Implementation:
o The Consulting team provides expertise and analysis to support a broad range
of utility DSM activities, including: potential assessments; end-use forecasts;
integrated resource planning; EE, DR, and smart grid pilot and program
design and administration; load research, technology assessments and
demonstrations; evaluation, measurement and verification; and regulatory
support. Our Consulting team operates independently from our
Implementation team and from EnerNOC corporate. Each client engagement
is treated with utmost confidentiality.
. Our Implementation team leverages EnerNOC's deep "behind-the-meter
expertise" and world-class technology platform to help utilities create and
manage DR and EE programs that deliver reliable and cost-effective energy
savings. We focus exclusively on the commercial and industrial (C&l)
customer segments, with a track record of successful partnerships that spans
more than a decade. Through a focus on high quality, measurable savings,
EnerNOC has successfully delivered hundreds of thousands of MWh of
energy efficiency for our utility clients, and we have thousands of MW of
demand response capacity under management.
The team has decades of combined experience in the utility DSM industry. The
staffis comprised ofprofessional electrical, mechanical, chemical, civil, industrial,
and environmental engineers as well as economists, business planners, project
managers, market researchers, load research professionals, and statisticians.
Utilities view EnerNOC's experts as trusted advisors, and we work together
collaboratively to make any DSM initiative a success.
s*€rF\i$C Utility Soirtio*s I f, S::.+*.?.:.*tCAn EnerNOC Company5l* Ygn*ri* V*l:.v i*n., S:rri- -rl,i : :::"'^*^il-'yj:::}r;a af.*k, a,5. !45$5 - - E qeoho@geollc com
EnerNOC Utility Solutions Consulting
95 of 95