**Utility Sounding Board (USB) Meeting Summary**

**August 9, 2006**

**USB members in attendance:**

-   Brent Barclay -- Columbia River PUD

-   Bruce Etzel -- Benton REA

-   Jay Himlie -- Mason Co. PUD #3

-   Keith Lockhart -- Springfield Utility Board

> *Attending via phone:*

-   Van Ashton -- Idaho Falls Power

-   Mike Little -- Seattle City Light (p.m., only)

-   Kathy Moore -- Umatilla Electric/PNGC

-   Tom Schumacher -- Benton PUD *(via phone)*

> *Not attending: Mary Smith -- Puget Sound Energy*

**BPA staff in attendance at various times:**

-   Jack Callahan (Meters)

-   Bruce Cody (RTF issues)

-   Adam Hadley

-   Mark Johnson

-   Ken Keating

-   Margaret Lewis (EER)

-   Karen Meadows

-   Ottie Nabors (PTCS)

-   Rosalie Nourse

-   Jean Oates

-   Mike Rose (Acting Manager, EE Contract Administration \-- PTR
    System)

-   Tim Scanlon (Commercial)

-   Grant Vincent

-   Mira Vowles

**[Regional Technical Forum (RTF) Recap of August 8 Meeting (Bruce
Cody)]{.underline}**

Bruce Cody briefed the USB on the RTF August 8 meeting.

-   The proposal to contract with the New Buildings Institute to serve
    as project contract manager for Phase II of Regional Roof Top HVAC
    Research Project was approved with the condition that funding is
    available (estimated budget is \$191,000). This is an exploration to
    obtain more information and understanding and then a definitive
    methodology for improving the efficiency of rooftop unit operation.
    The contractor will develop energy and demand savings verification
    protocols for energy efficiency measures for these systems.

-   A proposal for monitoring and verification of savings from grocery
    store refrigeration controls was accepted on a 10-project pilot
    basis. Third party ([National Resource Management,
    Inc.](http://www.nrminc.com/Company_Overview.html)) M&V has been
    completed on four projects. For three of the four projects, savings
    exceeded estimates by 20 percent. Although savings are apparent at
    the meter, the savings don't justify end metering. It takes a lot of
    "windshield time" and analysis time for this M&V; it's very labor
    intensive. A program like this can't be run on a custom metered
    verification basis.

> Overall, assumptions, the calculator method, and the measure list are
> reasonable. It will take 27 cents to get a volume of stores to
> participate. The RTF accepted the proposal to extend the pilot for one
> year. A project of this type would be considered a custom project,
> using the NRM calculator as an estimation of savings.

-   Based on cost data from a number of USB members, The RTF determined
    that Low-Income Prime Window Replacements are cost-effective. (See
    table below from BPA's [Supplement to the Draft Post-2006
    Conservation
    Guidelines](http://www.bpa.gov/Energy/N/projects/post2006conservation/doc/Post2006-SupplementalGuidelines.doc#__RefHeading___Toc143580065)
    that explains policy changes/eligibility of these windows that are
    based on the RTF determination.)

**Low-Income Window Replacement Measure Eligibility *(BPA Table)***

  ----------- ------------------ --------------------------------------------
  **Heating   **House Type**     **Existing Window Condition**
  Zone**                         

  1           Single Family      Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  1           Manufactured Home  Single glazed only

  1           Multifamily        Single glazed only

  2           Single Family      Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  2           Manufactured Home  Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  2           Multifamily        Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  3           Single Family      Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  3           Manufactured Home  Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.

  3           Multifamily        Single glazed with wood or double glazed
                                 metal frame.
  ----------- ------------------ --------------------------------------------

-   Discussion was held on a New Commercial Building Lighting rebate
    program and what would be the appropriate baseline for energy
    savings. One option is to use a baseline of Code LTD 1.0 in Oregon
    and Washington, and use the calculator for existing commercial
    buildings to determine savings use and savings by building type and
    area. Other options are to use the [Commercial Lighting Power
    Density
    calculator](http://www.nwcouncil.org/rtf/supportingdata/ComLightNewCalc.XLS)
    that is posted on the Northwest Power and Conservation Council
    (Council) web site. There is also a 1996 cohort assessment that
    could be used, although the research was less stringent then than
    now. (1.2 lighting density) The lighting calculator will be updated
    as new information becomes available.

> The RTF recommended moving forward on a New Commercial Building
> Lighting rebate program, which includes high performance T8s and
> occupancy controls. Five technologies that are clearly not standard
> practice will be promoted. The lighting savings will be based on a
> modified existing building calculator, using local code as a baseline.

-   Discussion was held on retail prices and impact on
    Cost-Effectiveness of ENERGY STAR Manufactured Homes -- the RTF
    determined this measure is cost-effective in all climate zones.

-   Revised deemed savings and cost-effectiveness of ENERGY STAR
    Dishwashers -- The analysis of cost and savings is murky; different
    analysis methods yielded different results. The specs need to be
    revised due to a baseline change. Issue tabled until January 2007.

-   Revised Deemed Savings and Cost-Effectiveness of ENERGY STAR
    Freezers and Refrigerators -- all measures were determined by the
    RTF to be cost-effective.

-   The tentative date for the next RTF meeting is September 19, 2006

**[Planning, Tracking, and Reporting System (Mike Rose)]{.underline}**

Mike Rose attended the meeting to receive USB feedback on the PTR
system, which is the mechanism BPA customers use to report conservation
activity. The system is undergoing continuous tweaking to fix problems.
This includes periodic re-programming to incorporate changes to BPA
conservation policies and measures.

-   USB concerns expressed include:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   A report that should have taken about an hour, took four hours to
    complete. Testing the system is fine, but when we're told it's up
    and running, my expectation is just that.

-   The problems aren't consistent. For example, last week a low-income
    duct sealing report returned an error, although doing the same thing
    a month ago or this week worked.

-   Custom lighting proposal for the Conservation Rate Credit (CRC) -- I
    used the calculator, saved it, then tried to upload the data; the
    system wouldn't let me upload. I called the PTR "designers," who
    walked me through the process. It still didn't work last night.

-   Why are customer account numbers required for each refrigerator
    rebate? Why enter them individually, rather than as a batch? One USB
    member said that Nora changed something, and now he can do
    refrigerators as a batch.

-   One USB member entered "multiple" for the customer name to avoid
    having to enter a customer name for every residential appliance
    rebate.

-   There is no need to duplicate record keeping. State utilities are
    expected to keep records, including customer names and account
    numbers, but don't make it a reporting requirement.

-   BPA shouldn't request the customer address and other identifying
    information that wasn't required for earlier programs, i.e.,
    pre-Conservation Augmentation (ConAug). *(BPA response: It may not
    be needed for deemed measures, but would be for custom.)*

-   The C&RD system had a space where the utility could input its own
    reference number in each cart which is associated with that
    job/location/or record.

-   A report number is generated once it is submitted.

-   This system is supposed to be easier and quicker. Instead, the
    utility budget for administrative costs is lower and yet the time
    required for reporting has tripled.

-   Utilities don't need anything "back" from the system. They have
    their own record keeping procedures and files. Most USB members feel
    they don't need a PTR query function, although one said such a query
    should be able to produce a summary report -- something like the old
    C&RD report.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Related issue: Since oversight is required, utilities have customers
    sign a form that states that the customer agrees to an oversight
    visit in order to receive an incentive.

-   BPA responses not stated above include:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   A lot of information that is marked with a **\*** (required field)
    won't be required in October, e.g., detailed end-user information.

-   We can probably make a break between deemed and custom projects as
    to the amount of customer information required.

-   The issues we hear are: (1) the volume of information required is
    ridiculous, and (2) the PTR is a poorly functioning system; we need
    better quality control.

-   The only information to be entered into the PTR system for CRC
    pre-October 1, is for Early Start activity.

**[New Construction Regional Focus Group and New Buildings Institute
(Tim Scanlon/Mira Vowles)]{.underline}**

The purpose of the New Construction Regional Focus Group (FG) is to
learn about existing Commercial New Construction programs, discuss what
else is needed and what role BPA can play for regional continuity. The
FG was an outgrowth from the Northwest Power and Conservation Council\'s
Regional Coordinating Committee and the region's need to capture energy
savings in commercial new construction. Tim discussed the August 2 FG
meeting, where the FG identified a prescriptive measure list and
incremental cost database as priority needs. A prescriptive measure list
is being developed, which will be presented to the RTF once it is
finalized. *(Charlie Grist (NPCC) sat in on the FG meeting and is
supportive of a spring 2007 target date for a pilot offering.)*

The next FG meeting of will be November 7, from 10 a.m. - 3 p.m. in
Seattle. Mira clarified that while USB members are welcome to attend
meetings, members of the FG are utilities with existing Commercial New
Construction programs.

-   USB comments include the following:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   All utilities have the same new commercial construction issues and
    would like regional conformity.

-   A prescriptive list would be valuable. We don't want BPA to design a
    program -- just make deemed measures (or for custom projects)
    available to utilities. Utilities would then design their own
    programs.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Mira gave a brief summary of the [New Buildings
    Institute](http://www.newbuildings.org/) Advanced Building
    Guidelines, which were presented at the FG meeting. *(The USB agreed
    that this NBI offering wouldn't be their highest priority.)*

**[Commercial New Construction Lighting Spreadsheet (Craig
Ciranny)]{.underline}**

Craig Ciranny explained the purpose of the Commercial New Construction
Lighting spreadsheet and some of its features.

-   The spreadsheet is for the FY07 Commercial and Industrial Commercial
    New Construction Lighting Offer, which will be available October 1,
    2006 through September 30, 2007.

-   The spreadsheet will require the space type and area for each type
    of measure to calculate the savings, but this information will not
    affect the credit/reimbursement rate. It will be used to evaluate
    this limited offering for FY08. Actual measure costs will be
    requested, but not required.

-   Utilities can use the spreadsheet to do estimates for end-users
    without uploading the spreadsheet to the PTR system. The tool is
    designed to be saved on a utility employee's hard drive. Once that
    is accomplished, the utility can do an "as-built" version and upload
    it to the PTR system. It doesn't require re-entering the information
    into the PTR. The tool will be available on the PTR around October
    1.

**[Circuit Rider (Tim Scanlon)]{.underline}**

Tim Scanlon updated the USB on the circuit rider approach for commercial
lighting.

-   This approach is focused to where:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   There is untapped lighting potential.

-   Utilities are willing to spend their CRC/CAA budgets or other funds
    on achieving this untapped lighting potential.

-   There is sufficient staff time to devote to achieving this untapped
    lighting potential.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The Circuit Rider will focus on salesmanship, on the job training,
    and assistance to get utilities up to speed.

-   BPA plans to have the Circuit Rider(s) working with utilities
    beginning in mid-September.

-   The program will be limited to utilities with a large commercial
    base.

-   The marketing materials developed for this program might be
    available to share with utilities that do not have a large
    commercial base.

-   If the Circuit Rider approach is cost-effective it might be used for
    other sectors or areas.

-   A Lighting Strategy Brown Bag conference call is scheduled for
    August 16.

**[2007 Utility Workshop (Mira Vowles)]{.underline}**

The 2006 Utility Energy Efficiency Workshop was well-received, and
utilities expressed interest in having a 2007 Workshop. The 2007
workshop will be May 17^th^ and 18^th^ and to create an opportunity for
utilities to network and share their energy efficiency program delivery
strategies. A USB chairperson is needed. Kathy Moore was the chairperson
in 2006. Only three current USB members will still be members of the USB
at the time of the 2007 Workshop. Duties of the chairperson include
participation in planning conference calls -- starting bi-monthly and
moving to weekly in 2007. The chairperson will help plan the workshop
and introduce the USB and welcome participants to the Workshop.

Mira will send an e-mail soliciting interest in the chairperson
position.

The workshop will be held in the same location as last year -- the Lloyd
Center DoubleTree in Portland. *In a previous meeting the USB said that
Portland is the most convenient city to fly into from remote locations.*

Mira solicited input from the USB about the 2007 Workshop. Suggestions
for topics and other workshop comments from the USB include:

-   Networking and presentations give utilities ideas for leveraging
    programs.

-   Have fewer topics, less repetition, and more time for networking
    between sessions.

-   Have a session on how the rules (new conservation initiatives) have
    changed.

-   Have a session on what is and is not working.

-   Introduce roundtables that focus on one subject, which could develop
    into ongoing "Implementer" conference calls on programs like ENERGY
    STAR New Homes. Implementer conference calls could address such
    issues and concerns as "NEEA and ENERGY STAR go out into a utility's
    service territory, and the utility doesn't know about it." "The
    NEEA/ENERGY STAR program is fuel blind; my board/manager doesn't
    want to pay \$170 to send me to a gas-heated home."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Comments on the "Implementer" Conference Call concept:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   There's not enough time to discuss issues in-depth at roundtables.

-   Many utilities can't travel, which limits participation.

-   What about an interactive, online presentation. Co-ops don't have to
    drive for two days to participate. Charge a fee to offset the impact
    on the EE Infrastructure Budget.

-   Ongoing conference calls might work for a single topic, such as
    commercial and industrial lighting; new construction; Agriculture;
    Program Rules (FAQs). Post FAQ's to the BPA Moderated Forum. A BPA
    employee could present the rules and steps, etc; then the utility
    rep could present their experience. EERs could send their customers
    an e-mail that lists potential topics.

-   Are there other players, e.g., PGE players in CRC? \[BPA: Most IOUs
    use the CRC for residential or renewables.

**[Verification of Self-funded Conservation (Karen
Meadows)]{.underline}**

Karen Meadows opened a discussion on the verification of utility
self-funded conservation. The Long Term Regional Dialog Policy Proposal
proposes that each utility's high water mark will be based on the
utility's 2010 load. However utilities can add 100 percent of utility
self-funded and 50 percent of BPA funded conservation back in before the
utility's High Water Mark is determined. BPA is working on a method for
verifying self-funded conservation. BPA would have to verify the utility
reported conservation is cost-effective and that the savings are real.

-   USB Comments:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Have utilities report self-funded conservation in the PTR with the
    audit process at the end of the fiscal year. PTR needs to be
    modified to accommodate custom proposals. \[Karen: the PTR allows
    that now, but there must be a BPA-approved M&V plan.\]

-   Utilities that are self-funding conservation should pay for their
    own audit.

-   Utilities need a summary of how this will work. \[Karen: BPA will
    send the page numbers of the four pages that address this in the
    Long-Term Regional Dialogue, as well as a link to that information.

-   In the RTF discussion on August 8 it was stated that measures funded
    by the ETO don't all meet the cost-effectiveness test.

**[Grocery Store Initiative (Karen Meadows)]{.underline}**

BPA is in the process of developing the Grocery Store Initiative.
Further information on how the program will be structured should be
available in September.

-   The current model includes BPA paying for PECI to audit stores where
    utilities have signed up for the initiative. PECI will develop a
    marketing strategy to work with the utility and bring in local
    vendors to do the actual work. Utilities can use their CRC to pay
    for the work after they pay PECI.

-   Features will include:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Quick sign up;

-   It works for small utilities; and

-   If two PECI employees aren't enough, BPA *could* hire more.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   USB:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   One USB member complimented BPA on getting this initiative through
    -- not an easy task.

-   Do utilities have the option to use their admin allowance for
    measures? \[Yes.\]

-   This is a Third Party hybrid model; it's almost like TSP.

-   Do utilities decide what their incentive is, or does PECI pay end
    users a set amount?

-   We need to know how to budget for this, e.g., what would it cost for
    a Fred Meyer or a Mom & Pop, etc.?

-   [NRM](http://www.nrminc.com/Company_Overview.html) has a chart of
    how much their four projects cost.

> **National Energy Action Plan**
>
> The [National Action
> Plan](http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/actionplan/report.htm) web pages
> include an article about the [Wal-Mart Sustainability
> Goal](http://www.walmartfacts.com/FactSheets/7262006_Sustainability.pdf),
> which is "to be supplied 100 percent by renewable energy; to create
> zero waste; and to sell products that sustain our resources and our
> environment."

**[Meters and Meter Training (Jack Callahan)]{.underline}**

Jack Callahan is the manager of Engineering Services in EE. EE doesn't
have enough engineers to do all of the M&V that will be required for the
CRC and CAA. Jack described a concept to "grow" the M&V capability of
the region. The ideas are conceptual; they may not be workable, given
liability and other issues.

-   Engineering Services [proposes]{.underline} to buy 12 kilowatt-hour
    meters and package six of the meters into "kits" with training for
    up to six utility participants. The other six meters would be in a
    loaner pool and made available to utilities.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   BPA would pay half of the \$2,000 meter cost and the training cost.
    Kits would cost utilities about \$1,200 to \$1,500.

-   The kits might be available in October 2006.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Following adequate utility training, BPA or the utility could do the
    meter reading.

-   USB:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Offer the training without meters at a cost of about \$300 to
    utilities that don't need the meters.

-   The training will be useful for metering staff who don't know a lot
    about conservation.

-   Several USB members expressed interest in some, or all, of this
    pilot project, but they would like more information. \[Jack will
    send a meter cut-sheet to the USB.\]

**[USB Rotation and Other Issues (Mira Vowles)]{.underline}**

Mira presented a USB Rotation Schedule Summary, and asked for feedback
on USB protocol.

-   Is it acceptable for USB members to send an alternate? \[USB: Yes.\]

-   Quorum -- Should there be a cut-off, i.e., if less than five members
    can attend, should we cancel the meeting? \[Suggestion to take count
    on the conference call, before the face-to-face, and decide then if
    the meeting will be held.\]

**[PTCS™/Heat Pump Training (Karen Meadows)]{.underline}**

The PTCS/heat pump training requirements need to be reevaluated.

-   The amount of training is more than what was budgeted.

-   BPA planned for about 250 heat pump rebates this year with a total
    of 600 by year three of the rate period. (The USB thought this was
    far less that the actual number of rebates BPA will see. Eugene
    Water and Electric for example, did 400 last year.) \[Karen will
    check into this discrepancy.\]

-   More than 250 contractors have received the training.

-   USB:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   We have four contractors to serve two counties; we need the
    training.

-   Other utilities install a lot of heat pumps -- 300 or so.

-   Give the contractor an opportunity to read the book to see what's
    changed, and then challenge the test.

-   We won't be claiming ours through BPA because manufactured housing
    is no longer eligible.

-   Contact NEEA and the ETO. Maybe they would share costs, etc.

-   BPA could require that contractors pay for the training and when
    they complete a certain number of homes under the program, the
    utility would reimburse them.

**[General Discussion]{.underline}**

-   The BPA/EE web site is always slow, and it's hard to find things,
    such as the Brown Bag Series. \[EERs have been asked to poll their
    customers to see what problems they experience, and on what pages,
    so the BPA IT can attempt to correct any problems that are on the
    BPA side. EERs were to make sure the distinction between the PTR web
    pages and EE's web pages are clear.\]

Action Items

+------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| BPA  | -   Investigate and attempt to solve problems with the PTR    |
|      |     System; inform the USB of progress.                       |
|      |                                                               |
|      | -   BPA will send the page numbers of the four pages in the   |
|      |     Long-Term Regional Dialogue, that address the High Water  |
|      |     Mark, utility self-funded conservation issues, and Tier   |
|      |     1, as well as a link to that information.                 |
|      |                                                               |
|      | -   BPA will send a Meter cut sheet to the USB                |
+------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| USB  | -   A USB chairperson is needed for the 2007 Utility          |
|      |     Workshop. Volunteers should contact Mira Vowles at (503)  |
|      |     230-4796 or via e-mail to: <mkvowles@bpa.gov>. *(Mira     |
|      |     will send an e-mail to the USB soliciting interest in the |
|      |     chairperson position)*                                    |
+------+---------------------------------------------------------------+

Next Meetings

+-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| -   September   | Conference call, 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.           |
|     13          |                                                    |
+-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| -   October 11  | Face-to-face meeting, 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.,      |
|                 | Portland                                           |
+-----------------+----------------------------------------------------+

**Potential Agenda Items for Next Meeting:**

-   Grocery Store Initiative contract description