# 201 2 Annual Report to the Oregon Public Utility Commission

ENERGY TRUST OF OREG ON APRIL 1 5 , 201 3

Energy Trust of Oregon 421 SW Oak St., Suite 300, Portland, OR 97204 1.866.368.7878 503.546.6862 fax energytrust.org2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 2 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## Table of Contents Page

From the Executive Director: 2012 in Review

I 2012 Activity at a Glance 5

II Background, Mission and Goals 7

III Highlights of 2012 Activities 9

IV Revenues and Expenditures 20

V Savings and Generation 22

VI 201 2 Performance Measures 25



## Appendix

Energy Trust Program Descriptions 27

NW Natural Industrial Demand

- s ide Man agement Program 30

201 2 Energy Trust of Oregon Board of Directors 31

Board Development Guidelines 35

201 2 Advisory Council Members and Meetings 36

201 2 Customer Service Data 38

201 2 Utility Activities Supported by SB 838

- authorized Funding 41

Energy Trust of Oregon 2012 Annual Report NW Natural Washington 53

Energy Trust 201 2 Audited Financial Statement Attachment2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 3 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## FROM THE EXECUTIVE D IRECTOR: 201 2 IN REVIEW

I am pleased to submit this comprehensive report to the Oregon Public Utility Commission detailing Energy Trust of Oregon 2012 annual results. This report highlights the breadth and depth of proven programs combined with innovative market solutions Energy Trust designed and delivered. This summary also contains important information about the costs and benefits of Energy Trust investments on behalf of Oregon utility customers, and highlights full achievement of the minimum OPUC annual performance
measures establ ished for us.

To summarize, Energy Trust 2012 results surpassed annual stretch savings goals for electric and natural gas efficiency, and exceeded contract Integrated Resource Plan goals for each utility we serve. While keeping administrative and program support costs at 5.4 percent of the year’s revenue, we increased acquisition of the cheapest energy resources available by 12 percent for electric savings and 22 percent for gas savings compared to 2011. We also installed 3.4 times more renewable energy ge neration than in 2011, further diversifying Oregon's future energy sources through small

- scale development of abundant solar, wind, hydro power , bio power and geothermal resources. I’m pleased to report that increased savings and generation came at a lower c ost than anticipated in our 2012 budget, reflecting careful
attention to cost

- management throughout the year. For utility customers, this adds up to more affordable and cleaner energy being secured at a lower cost.

In 2012, Energy Trust further extended o ur diverse portfolio of program offerings for all types of customers through multiple innovative pilot approaches. We motivated residential customers to change energy consumption behaviors with Personal Energy Reports highlighting home energy use compared to nearby homes of similar size. Commercial and industrial customers were engage d through highly effective, low

- cost Strategic Energy Management approaches, realizing savings through improved facility operations and maintenance. Support for on

- bill financing and repayme nt of energy

- efficiency upgrades continued through our working relationship with Clean Energy Works Oregon

, while we also supported development of MP ower Oregon , an on

- bill re payment program for multifamily p roperty owners . Working closely wit h the Oregon Department of Energy, we helped schools identify energy

- saving projects and secure funding through Oregon’s Cool Schools program.

Investments like these during the last five years have allowed us to increase annual electric savings by 84

per cent and grow annual natural gas savings by 125 percent. Since 2009, when our renewable energy role shifted to smaller scale projects, annual gener ation increased 91 percent . I believe success like this increasingly stems from listening and responding to what cus tomers say they need. Part of our effort in the last year was to make it even simpler for people to make clean energy decisions that unlock dollar and energy savings and renewable energy options for them. The information, technical assistance,
financial in centives and opportunities we promote are more refined and targeted, leading to more customers stepping forward to take action than ever before.

These accomplishments create real benefits and lasting changes for our state. Clean and sustainable energy is now woven into the fabric of Oregonians’ daily lives and demonstrated in their personal values
and decision

- making. Energy Trust is proud to participate as a leader in this change , working closely with our collaborating utilities and many others to delive r value to those we serve.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 4 of 63 April 15, 2013 As we move into our second decade, we will continue emphasis on low

- cost operations and maintenance improvements, expand financing opportunities to targeted audiences

, grow market penetration of highly
efficient new home and comm ercial building construction, achieve greater geographic diversity and participation, support program delivery through our contractors, advance adoption of new technologies and offer greater access to online tools. These and other new approaches are delive red with engagement and leadership from our board of directors, Conservation and Renewable a dvisory c ouncil members,
P ortland General Electric , Pacific Power, NW Natural, Cascade Natural Gas, OPUC, O regon Department of Energy , Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and of course, our staff

, our program contractors and our trade and program allies . We thank you all for the many ways you shape and strengthen our performance, making the record

- breaking results of this past year possible.

Sincerely,

Margie Harris
Exec utive Director2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 5 of 63 April 15, 2013 $154 $172

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Expenditures(millions)

$5 $6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Q4 YTDExpenditures(millions)

110 124

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

YTDGeneration (aMW)

28 35

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

YTDSavings (therm millions) Actual Budget 

## I 2012 ACTIVITY AT A GLANCE

Savings and Generation

Expenditures

2002

- 2012 Progress toward 2014 goals 52.9 48.8

41.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

YTDSavings (aMW) Electric Efficiency

5.9 5.7

4.8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

YTDSavings (therm millions) Gas Efficiency

5.0 14.7

3.9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

YTDGeneration (aMW) Renewable Energy

$127 $144

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

YTDExpenditures(millions)

$22 $23

0 5 10 15 20 25

Q4 YTDExpenditures(millions)

368 479

0 100 200 300 400 500 600Savings (aMW) Energy Savings
Stretch goal
Conservative goal

(77%) (81%) (88%) Gas Efficiency Electric Efficiency Renewable Energy Total Administrative Renewable Energy Energy Efficiency

### Residential activity in 201 2

New homes and major remodels 2,634

New manufactured homes 99

Weatherization retrofits 10,841

Single-family site-built 8,025

Manufactured or mobile 2,816

Solar electric installations 1,112
Home Energy Reviews 3,515

Total Sites 16,990
Heating systems 5,186

Water heaters 1,284

Solar 64
High-efficiency products 32,496

Washing machines 20,954

Dishwashers 573
Refrigerators and freezers 10,969
High-efficiency lighting* 825,646
Refrigerators, freezers recycled 20,271
Energy Saver Kits provided 48,257
Total Other Activity 107,494 * Lighting excluded from totals



### Commercial activity in 201 2

New Buildings sites served 317

New construction 193
Major renovation 76
Tenant improvement 33

Existing Buildings sites served 3,215

Operations and maintenance 646

Custom 1 214
Lighting 1,589
Prescriptive/standard 2 766
Existing multifamily sites served 1,080
Solar water heating sites served 9

Sites with technical assistance 890

1 The most common custom improvements are building controls and HVAC.

2 The most common prescriptive/standard improvements are foodservice and grocery equipment 

### Industrial/agricultural activity in 201 2

Projects with savings 972

Custom capital 1 109

Custom O+M 2 20

Strategic Energy Management (SEM) 3 17

Industrial lighting 314

Small industrial 4 145

Prescriptive 5 286

Studies 84

1 Top improvement s are compressed air system improvements, process upgrades

2 Equipment modifications to improve efficiency

3 Savings from no

- cost or low

- cost operational steps (i.e., turning off equipment when not in use) identified through trainings in SEM approaches/disciplines

4 Targets users with gas or electric costs un der $25,000/year; top improvement s are irrigation system improvements, compressed air system improvements

, HVAC

5 Top improvement s are sprinklers, replacement gaskets, nozzles



### Renewable Energy activity in 201 2

Biopower projects 5

Solar electric installations 1,243

Residential 1,112

Commercial 131
Other renewable projects 6

Wind projects 2
Hydropower projects 4
Geothermal projects

--
Total 1,254



### Other activity in 201 2

Calls 34,752

Website visits 574,900
info@energytrust.org inquiries 1,704
Customer complaints 9
Trade ally roundtable meetings 18

Attendance 850
News stories in print, broadcast 3802012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 7 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## II BACKGROUND, MISSION AND GOALS

A

. Background
Since March 2002, Energy Trust has invested public purpose funds from utility customers so all can
benefit from e nergy

- efficiency improvements and renewable energy generation. Our work reduces energy waste, delivers the lowest cost energy resource utilities can buy to meet customer needs, and builds a cleaner, more sustainable energy future that helps our local and state economy. We are funded by and provide services to Oregon c ustomers of Portland General Electric, Pacific Power, NW Natural and Cascade Natural Gas, along with NW Natural customers in southwest Washington.

An independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, Energy Trust serves the residential

, commercial and
indust rial customers of our affiliated utilities. We offer information, technical assistance and financial incentives, motivating customers to select higher efficiency products and equipment, install and develop renewable energy systems, make building improvemen ts and better manage their energy use . Our

customers derive direct benefits from these clean energy investments and activities, often seeing immediate cost savings on their utility bills

.

Energy Trust ’s approach to program management , design and delivery supports innovation while providing value for ratepayers and maintaining low administrative and program support costs

. Most of our

energy

- efficiency programs are competitively bid and managed by contractors. O ur Production Efficiency

program for industrial and agricultur al customers and all renewable energy programs are internally managed by our staff . For most programs, Energy Trust leverages specialized local businesses already serving customers in the marketplace . Energy Trust supports and leverages a network of more than 2, 7 00 trade ally contractors, allied professionals and participating retailers throughout the state who are familiar with Energy Trust incentives and can help customers access them

. This approach supports our region’s energ y services sector and fuels green jobs within the region

.

Our work is shaped with advice from two advisory councils comprised of stakeholders and is led by an independent, diverse board of directors whose members volunteer their time and expertise. We comply with legal requirements set forth in our contract with the Oregon Public Utility Commission and consistently achieve the minimum performance measures establishe d to guide our operations and results. Our inclusive and transparent approach includes op en meetings and published agendas, minutes, evaluations, budgets and financial statements.

Each year, in developing the next year’s budget and action plan, we establish goals for electric and natural gas energy savings and renewable energy generation in consultation with PGE, Pacific Power,
NW Natural and Cascade Natural Gas . Our annual goals are linked to the integrated resource plans, or IRPs, established by each of our collaborating utilities and acknowledged by the OPUC.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 8 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## B

. Purpose Statement

En ergy Trust provides comprehensive, sustainable energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy
solutions to those we serve.



## C. Vision Statement

Energy Trust envisions a high quality of life, a vibrant economy and a healthy environment and climate for generations to come, built with renewable energy, efficient energy use and conservation.



## D. 201 4 Strategic Plan Goals

1. Save 479 a verage megawatts of electricity

2. S ave 34.7 m illi on annual therms of natural gas
3. P roduce 124 a verage megawatts of electricity from new renewable generation



## E. Five

- year Activities 20 10

- 2014

1. Accelerate energy

- efficiency investments

2. Support a variety of renewable energy technologies
3. Encourage innovative technologies

4. Support industry and business infrastructure to deliver energy efficiency and renewable energy

5. Provide excellent customer service
6. Consider overall balance and equity among programs and initiatives

7. Communicate the value of energy savings and renewable resource generation
8. Maintain an effici ent, effective and transparent organization2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 9 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## III HIGHLIGHTS OF 201 2 ACTIVITIES

A. General highlights

Annual results 1 2

• 201 2 annual results exceeded Energy Trust’s annual stretch goals for both electric and gas efficiency savings and exceeded the renewable energy generation conservative goal

.

• Energy Trust met every OPUC performance measure in 2012 . Elec tric and gas efficiency savings exceeded OPUC performance measures, along with annual levelized life

- cycle costs.

• Savings results exceeded contracted Integra ted Resource Plan targets for all four collaborating utilities and surpassed utility

- specific stretch goals for PGE, Pacific Power and NW
Natural . Energy Trust achieved 99 percent of its stretch goal for Cascade Natural Gas.

• Electric efficiency projects completed in 201 2 saved 52.9 aMW of electricity at a levelized cost
of 2.7 cents per kilowatt hour. This sav ings is 8 percent above the 201 2 stretch goal and 2 8 percent over the conservative goal . Compared to 20 1 1

, 201 2 electric savings are greater by 12 percent

. At 2.7 cents per kilowatt hour, t he 201 2 levelized cos t of obtaining such high savings

was well within the OPUC ’s performance measure of 4.4 cents per kilowatt hour

.

• Gas efficiency projects completed in 201 2 s aved more than 5.9 million annual therms of

natura l gas 3 at a levelized cost of 37 cents per therm. Gas savings exceeded the 201 2 stretch goal by 4 percent and the conservative goal by 23 percent. Gas results for 201 2 are 2 2 percent higher than 201 1 gas savings. At 37 cents per annual therm, the l evelized cos t of 201 2 gas savings is well within the OPUC measure of 52 cents per therm.

• Renewable energy projects achieved 5.05 aMW in new generation in 2012. This volume exceeds the annual conservative goal by 28 percent and is 3.4 times higher than renewable generation installed in 2011. A record 3.3 aMW came from solar el ectric projects.

• Energy Trust maintained low administrative cos ts at 5.4 percent of total revenue, in full compliance with the OPUC performance measure of 9 percent. It obtained an unmodified ( previously “ unqualified ” ) financial audit opinion and strong c ustomer satisfaction ratings in 2012, meeting additional OPUC performance requirements.

• Kick

- Start bonus offers to help offset declining state energy tax credits were in place for
the first half of 2012. Activity remained strong after they were discontinued, as did the notable growth in EPS TM

- rated new homes

, suggesting some improvements in the economy

.

• Strategic Energy Management initiatives continued to diversify, engage more participants and pr oduce more results. Building on the success of SEM for industrial customers, this strategy
was offered for the first time to commercial customers in 2012.

• The OPUC approv ed a two

- year exception to cost

- effective ne ss requirements requested by Energy Trust for several specific gas and electric measures , stemming from the low cost of natural gas.

1 This document reports net savings, which are adjusted gross savings based upon results of current and past evaluations.

2 This report includes the best available energy savings data as of the date of submission. Energy savings reported here for pe riods prior to January 1 , 2012, may be different than previously reported as a result of applying updated evaluation factors to Ene rgy Trust funded program savings in Oregon through our annual true up process. The full True Up 2012 Report is available online at www.energytrust.org/library

.

3 The gas savings do not include NW Natural results in Washington. These results are reported i n Appendix 5 , pages 53

- 63

.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 10 of 63 April 15, 2013 • The OPUC issued new rules permitting Energy Trust and its collaborating utilities ( PGE, Pacific Power, NW Natural and Cascade Natural Gas ) to revise their data sharing agreements

. The new rules allow Energy Trust and utilities to share information that will enable Energy Trust
to better serve customers

.

• Energy Trust continued supporting pilots t o test innovative financing and enhanced

se rvice approaches, including behavior

- focused P ersonal E nergy R eports to motivate homeowners to save energy, Clean Energy Works Oregon and Oregon Cool Schools, the latter involving collaboration with the Oregon Department of Energy.

• During 201 2 approximately 2, 7 00 Oregon and Washington trade ally contractors

, allied professionals and retailers participated in Energy Trust’s T rade A lly N etwork . Three hundred trade and program allies were added in 2012. Attendance at quarterly roundtable meetings a nd trainings around the state continued to grow.

• In 201 2 the net economic impacts of Energy Trust expenditures, energy savings and renewable energy generation added $230 million to the local economy, including $64 million in wages, $19 million in income to small businesses and employment equivalent to 1,370 full

- time jobs lasting a year. 4

Cumulative and total annual results

• Since 2002, annual sav ings total 368 aMW of electricity and 28.2 

### million annual therms of natural gas, e qual to 77 per cent of our 2014 elect ric goal and 81 percent of the 2014 gas goal. ( Total s include 2 1 aMW of savings from self

- direct customers.)

• Since 2002, annual generat ion equals 110 aMW of renewable energy, approxi mately 88 percent of the 201 4 goal of 124 aMW

.

• Total electric savings and generation since 2002 represent enough clean energy to power nearly 370,00 0 Oregon homes. Total gas savings represent enough fuel to heat approximately 55,6 00 Oregon homes with natural gas for a year

.

• Since 2002, Energy Trust has cumulatively added $2.7 billion to the local economy, including $793 million in wages, $155 million in small business income and employment equivalent to 22,400 full

- time jobs lasting a year. 5

• A ir quality improvements stemming from Energy Trust investments have kept more than 8.4
million tons of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere , the equivalent of remo ving nearly 1. 5 million

cars from Oregon roads for one year

.



## B. Residential sector highlights

• Combined r esidential sector savings exceeded the sector’s 2012 electric stretch savings goal by 5 percent and met its gas savings goal.

• Residential sector savings represented 30 percent and 43 percent, respectively, of Energy Trust’s electric and gas savings in 2012. Nearly 17,000 new and existing homes received Energy Trust services in 2012. In addition, approximately 39,000 efficient hea ting equipment and other appliances were purchased in 2012, and more than 20,000 old refrigerators and freezers were recycled.

4 5 The net economic benefit of Energy Trust expenditures, savings and generation is calculated from an independent analysis by ECONorthwest completed in 2012.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 11 of 63 April 15, 2013 • In 2012, six Personal Energy Reports were sent bimonthly to 60,000 residential

customers served by both PGE and NW Natural, completing the second year of this behavior change pilot. The reports provide data on the recipient’s home and similar homes nearby, motivating the recipient to take energy

- saving actions.

• Recipients of the Personal Ene rgy Reports collectively have saved more than 17 million kWh and 344,000 therms by reducing household energy use. Additional testing is planned in 2013 to assess the persistence of these savings over time and to expand the offering to targeted Pacific Powe r customers with high annual usage . Average savings per participating
household in 2012 were 184 kWh and six therms.

• Expanded outreach to trade allies in 2012 included

— in addition to quarterly roundtable
sessions

— the formation of trade ally stakeholder groups and a Home Performance with
ENERGY STAR ® conference attracting more than 100 attendees. An offer to supply compact fluorescent light bulbs and water conservation devices for trade allies to install in their customers’ homes drew 26 participating con tractors , resulting in additional cost

- effective savings at sites served by these trade allies.

Existing Homes

• Existing Homes surpassed 2012 stretch savings goals for three utilities

— PGE, Pacific
Power and NW Natural

— and achieved 95 percent of the stretch savings goal for Cascade
Natural Gas.

• Shifting more program delivery to trade allies was a focus in 2012. Energy Trust increased its support for business development, cooperative marketing, equipment reimbursement, training and online enrollment a nd incentive forms. Th is empowered the program’s 560 trade allies to reach more customers at lower cost to Energy Trust. Support for
this transition will continue in 2013.

• The program supported weatherization retrofits for approximately 8,000 homes in 2012

, including 1,650 comprehensive, whole

- house retrofits through the Home Performance with
ENERGY STAR track . Approximately 1,250 of the Home Performance retrofits were provided through Clean Energy Works Oregon

— which works with Energy Trust to demonstrate financing and ot her enhanced services for whole

- home energy retrofits. 6

• Key single measures driving overall savings were gas hearths, ENERGY STAR gas tank water heaters and ductless heat pumps. Approximately 1,200 efficient gas hearths were installed in 2012, compared to 1,000 in 2011

. The gain is attributed to successful marketing through utility communications and retail point

- of

- sale materials.

• Customized Energy Saver Kits were introduced in 2012, a strategy to address the transition from incandescent lamps to CFLs that is being accelerated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which sets new federal efficiency standards for light
bulbs , necessitating a shift toward specialty bulbs. In place of th e standard kit with four CFLs previously in use, customers now receive a customized assortment of CFLs, specialty bulbs
and water

- saving devices based on answers to a short online questionnaire about their
home. More than 48,000 kits were delivered in 2012

.

• Online H ome E nergy R eviews proved popular in 2012, the first full year they were promoted along with in

- home and phone reviews. More than 65 percent of Home Energy

6 Energy Trust totals vary from Clean Energy Works Oregon’s due to data entry timing.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 12 of 63 April 15, 2013 Reviews in 2012 were completed through use of the online tool , reducing program costs and speeding customer connection to trade allies.

• Savings Within Reach, serving moderate

- income homeowners, continued to grow in
2012. Nearly 640 homes participated, a 41 percent increase over 2011. Matching incentives up to $1,000 per home from the Energize Clackamas initiative w ere a significant factor in this growth.

• Energy Trust supported energy

- efficiency education in 331 Oregon schools during 2012 through delivery of the LivingWise educational kits with a curriculum developed by Energy Trust , provided free to sixth

- grade teachers. Using the curriculum, more than 20,000 students studied energy

- efficiency opportunities and installed CFLs and water

- saving devices
in thei r homes, resulting in corresponding energy savings.



### • The program d eveloped a methodology and approa ch for an Existing Home EPS, working with Energy Trust’s Conservation Advisory Council and key stakeholders to design

a n energy performance rating product that maintains fuel neutrality and is technical ly
credib l e . In fall 2012 , the program worked with Earth Advantage to deliver “ Introduction to
EPS ” trainings to Home Performance with ENERGY STAR trade allies

, and to customize the Earth Advantage sof tware tool to electronically submit customer projects for Energy Trust paperless incentive processing.

• Existing Homes began transitioning to a new Program Management Contractor, Fluid, in fall 2012, following a competitive proposal solicitation and review. The tran sition will continue through Q1 2013.

New Homes and Products

• New Homes and Products achieved 80 percent and 91 percent , respectively, of its 2012 electric and gas stretch savings goals . Results in Cascade Natural Gas territory exceeded stretch goal.

• In 2012 the program supported 1,320 highly efficient new homes with EPS , an energy performance score developed by Energy Trust

— nearly double the program goal

. Thirty

- nine percent of these homes were submitted in Q4. The total number of EPS

- rated new homes since inception in 2009 now exceeds 3,000.

• EPS

- rated homes gained a 25 percent market share in 2012, same as in 2011 , even though a new, more stringent code taking effect in 2012 raised energy

- efficiency specifications by 10 percent. The slowly recovering economy gets some credit for this success, along with Energy Trust market support for builders and verifiers.

• Sol A ire Homes built a residence in Central Oregon with a best possible EPS of zero

, the lowest score the program has seen. The home is the first “net

- zero energy” home to
receive an EPS.

• By the end of 2012, most EPS

- rated homes were scored by independent verifiers rather
than the program. Energy Trust collaborated with NEEA to re cruit and train 30 independent verifiers during 2012

— one example of Energy Trust work to transition elements of the program to the market.

• The 2012 air sealing pilot treated 340 new homes that did not participate in EPS. The pilot is expected to transition to a regular offering in 2013 and continue supporting insulation2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 13 of 63 April 15, 2013 and drywall subcontractors to decrease the air leakage in new homes that do not pursue an EPS.

• Savings from efficient home p roducts were lower than expected in 2012, reflecting a
slowdown in CFL retail sales and the conversion by a major retailer of specialty CFLs to LED lamps in the last quarter of 2012. Al though selling in lower volumes , LED sales accounted for about 8 percent of fourth quarter savings from retail lighting.

• “Carry Home Energy Savings” kits and CFLs were distributed through strategic
collaborations

. C ommunity action agencies serving Oregonians in need distributed

a pproximately 5,400 kits in 2012 . In addition, PGE distributed CFLs and efficient
showerheads thro ugh its community offices.

• Energy Trust participated in the Western Regional Utility Network, in which utilities from
seven states and the Bonneville Power Administration , BPA, seek to align their work with retail and manufacturers on point

- of

- sale ligh t ing messaging, instant rebates and efficiency specifications for refrigerators and clothes washers.



## C. Commercial sector highlights

• Commercial sector savings achieved 120 percent of the 2012 electric stretch savings goal and 127 percent of the gas stretch savings goal.

• Commercial savings represented 4 2 percent of Energy Trust electric savings and 42 percent of gas savings in 2012. Approximately 4,600 sites wer e served during 2012, representing a wide variety of business types and widely dispersed locations throughout areas served by Energy Trust. Since 2009 commercial sector savings have more than doubled.

• Considerable penetration into small commercial market s was achieved in 2012 across both commercial programs. Recognizing the potential, programs focused their offerings for smaller commercial enterprises by specific market type.

• Existing multifamily sites served in 2012 is more than double the number in 2011. The growth is attributed to incentives paid to distributors to buy down the cost of high

- efficiency appliances and equipment marketed to multifamily property owners and manag ers.

• Programs focused on tools and training to help customers make a business case for energy efficiency and prioritize possible projects, supported by Program Management Contractors

.

• While the economy remains a factor for this sector, programs are gain ing traction

. More participants are returning with follow

- on projects. Both Existing Buildings and New Buildings are employing account management with larger customers to sustain relationships and support repeat participation. Programs are focusing on tool s and training to help customers make a business case for energy efficiency and prioritize possible projects.

• Energy Trust supported Oregon ’s Cool Schools initiative , in collaborat ion with the Oregon Department of Energy

, providing schools with audits and project assistance. Energy Trust reached out to approximately 30 districts in 2012. Eight of these districts completed projects in
2012 , and more are expected to complete in 2013.

• Overall, the commercial sector served 9 0 K

- 12 school facilities in 2012, and 33 additional
school projects initiated in 2012 are scheduled to complete in 2013.

• Energy Trust continued engagement in MPower Oregon , an on

- bill financing pilot developed in collaboration with local, regional and nat ional organizations. The first capital projects from this initiative are expected to begin during the second half of 2013.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 14 of 63 April 15, 2013 Existing Buildings

• The program met its 2012 electric stretch goal and exceeded its gas stretch goal by 38 percent.

• The pipeline for 2013 is stronger than ever before in the program’s history, representing potential savings of 50 million kWh and 1.1 million annual therms. Energy Trust attributes the robust pipeline to the combined effect of expanded business development outreach and

cu stomers’ growing confidence in a stabilizing economy.

• Existing Building’s Kick

- Start bonus attracted 1,385 projects in 2012 by offering a 20 percent bonus for projects enrolled by June 29, 2012, intended to help counter uncertainty about Oregon
business e nergy tax credits. Savings from these projects represent 14 percent of 2012 commercial sector gas savings and 26 percent of annual electric savings.

• Operations and maintenance projects accounted for a growing portion of 2012 results, 26 percent of gas savi ngs and 6 percent of electric savings. These included rooftop HVAC unit tune

up projects, which increased by 29 percent in 2012 compared to 2011. Additional savings came from SEM participants.

• In 2012, its first year, seven of the commercial SEM pilot’s n ine participating companies completed projects, achieving combined savings of 6 million kWh and 127,000 therms. These results represent an average of 5 percent electric savings and 7 percent gas savings from behavioral and operations improvements at each s ite , aligning well with SEM results in the
industrial sector.

• A large share of activity in 2012 came from sites less than 10,000 square feet

— 30 percent of measures and 44 percent of the sites participating in Existing Buildings

.

• Other important contributi ons to 2012 Existing Buildings savings came from Building Operator Certification scholarships and the Plu g Load initiative, which provides incentives to computer manufacturers to produce more energy

- efficient models of computer desktops, monitor
and server s.

• Four projects in a comprehensive lighting pilot, managed in coordination with NEEA, completed in 2012. The pilot offers richer incentives and helps building managers install projects with comprehensive upgrades to lighting and lighting controls. The fou r projects saved 213,000
kWh

— 72 percent more savings than would have been expected had they followed the typical practice of incremental lighting upgrades.

• Savings from retrofit of multifamily properties grew in 2012. Compared to 2011, electric savings increased 33 percent and gas savings increased 106 percent, reflecting the continued growth in custom opportunities identified through studies conducted in 2011.

• High

- performance showerheads and faucet aerators were installed in more than 21,000 multifamily housing units and accounted for the majority of multifamily savings in 2012. Compared to 2011, the proportion of these installations declined, reflecting growth in custom track projects,

common

- area lighting and distributor incentives intended to lower appliance retail prices.

• Relationships with major multifamily property management owners and companies , along
with instant

- savings measures, custom measures and incentives paid to distributors, resulted in
hist orically high savings from multifamily projects with minimal growth in 2012 incentive expenditures.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 15 of 63 April 15, 2013 • The program selected a new Program Management Contractor, ICF International, in 2012. The transition to ICF will be complete by the end of Q1 2013. Multif amily efforts continue being managed by Lockheed Martin under a separate contract

.

New Buildings

• New Buildings closed the year at or ahead of stretch goals

— 190 percent of the program’s 2012 stretch electric savings goal and 100 percent of its 2012 stretch gas savings goal.

• The program closed 3 17 projects in 2012 , a 4 percent increase over 2011, and enrolled another 385 projects for future completion.

• Data centers were a significant source of highly cost

- effective savings in 2012 and are well represented in the pipeline for completion in future years. In response to Oregon’s unprecedented growth in data centers over the past several years, New Buildings launched a data center offer that streamlines the process for obtaining incent ives and meets the needs of projects ranging from office buildings using less than 10 kW to server “farms” drawing power in excess of 10 MW.

• Small buildings represent a relatively large portion of projects and savings

— 85 percent of all projects in 2012 were small commercial buildings

— accounting for 30 percent of electric savings (excluding small data centers) and 50 percent of gas savings. Small commercial buildings are 70,000 square feet or less in size; many small comme rcial properties served by Energy Trust are less than 20,000 square feet.

• Four projects from the 2009 Small Commercial Pilot completed in 2012. Results from the pilot informed the development of new offers described below.

• To better serve the most common types of small commercial buildings, the program developed and began offering market

- specific packages with tiered incentives for restaurant, multifamily, office, school and retail buildings. The offers are comprehensive packages of
measures with modeled savings that eliminate the need for more costly integrated design for small projects, which typically use a design

- build approach.

• As the economy strengthens, New Buildings is assisting a growing number of industrial projects. New Buildings often assists with the building shell, while Production Efficiency supports manufacturing processes and equipment.

• A solar

- ready initiative, designed in 2012 for launch in 2013, will help train architects and engineers in designing buildings for easier retrofit with s olar electric and water heating systems.

• The number of program allies has grown to 71 firms, broadening the program reach to more easily serve new customers. Program allies include architects, engineers, green building consultants, developers and others.

• New Buildings helped prepare the market to meet more stringent requirements of the Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code and future code upgrades through work with trade and program ally networks and organizations such as the American Institute of Architects and Cascadia Green Building Council.



## D

. Industry and agriculture sec tor highlights
Production Efficiency

• Production Efficiency ended 2012 at 92 percent of its stretch electric savings goal and 76 percent of its stretch gas savings goal. Gas savings for 2012 were lower than expected because delays in two large gas projects moved completion into 2013.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 16 of 63 April 15, 2013 • Industrial savings represented 28 percent and 15 percent, respectively, of Energy Trust’s electric and gas savings in 2012. Participating sites represent a broad range of industry types and
sizes and are well distributed across the state, with strong participation from both rural and urban

areas.

• The number of projects completed in 2012 equaled last year’s high volume , reflecting the strength of the program’s increasingly diversified and streamlined , packaged offerings. Custom projects continued to provide the majority of the sector’s 2012 savings, representing 53 percent of electric and 46 percent of gas savings. Streamlined projects, delivered through trade allies, provided 25 percent of electric and 42 percent of gas savings. Strategic Energy Management initiatives provided 2 2 percent of electric and 12 percent of gas savings for 2012.

• The Kick

- Start bonus, offered in the first half of 2012 , incented companies to quickly approve and begin to implement projects, despite uncert ainty about state energy tax credits, by offering a 20 percent higher payment for ordering equipment within 90 days of project approval. Approximately one

- third of the program’s 2012 savings benefitted from this offer.

• The program has seen six years of con tinuous growth of savings in the high

- tech sector

, with more than 30 million kWh saved in 2012. A large part of those savings came from the first phase of a large new construction project, approved by the Energy Trust Board of Directors, which brought in m ore than 15 million kWh in savings in 2012.

• The first 10 Scientific Irrigation Scheduling projects completed in 2012 , helping farmers
across the state save energy and water by using soil monitors and weather station data to understand evaporation rates and fine

- tune irrigation.

• I n their fourth year in 2012 , behavior

- based SEM offerings have reached maturity, continuing to attract more participants and produce growing results. Industrial Energy Improvement is the program’s longest running SEM offering, providing year

- long intensive training and technical support through a peer network, o r cohort, model. Corporate SEM provides similar training, technical support and incentives and is delivered one

- on

- one. The Core Improvement pilot is a
scaled version of IEI for smaller industries.

- Eight manufacturers participating in the fourth IEI cohor t

— ranging from metal producers
to wastewater treatment facilities

— secured more than 16 million kWh and over 80,000 annual therms. Direct savings from IEI derive from low

- and no

- cost operational changes, while additional savings are expected from an improv ement in customers’ motivation and execution of larger projects. A preliminary analysis of the first two years of IEI ( 2009 and 2010) suggests participating sites doubled the number of capital energy

- efficiency projects implemented after completion of the effort compared to prior years.

- Corporate SEM served six sites in 2012. Corporate SEM is well suited for larger sites located in areas of the state that lack the critical mass of participants for a cohort based approach, or for single companies with multi ple sites seeking to create their own smaller
cohort.

- The first cohort of the C ore Improvement pilot enrolled 12 small to mid

- sized industries during the fall . During the recruitment process, a nother 15 companies expressed strong
interest in participating in the next cohort tentatively planned for 2013. I n addition to the operations and maintenance savings some participants are already seeing, several capital projects have spawned from the first cohort. Energy Trust is one of the first in the nation to
off er SEM for small manufacturing.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 17 of 63 April 15, 2013 - Semi annual Breakfast of Champions events helped create a learning community among current and former participants in SEM offerings. The Breakfast of Champions brings together energy champions and executive sponsors from more than 40 companies for ongoing training, networking and peer

- to

- peer coaching. These events help keep participants focused on their SEM programs, deepen their understanding of SEM practices and provide new ideas for continuous energy improvement.

• Drawin g upon results of the sector’s first market research study , in 2012 the program implemented a detailed plan to increase participation and savings by improving ongoing communication between the program and participants, including:

- Distributed the first two issues of a quarterly customer e

- newsletter, The Champion

, to 2,500 program participants and others. The newsletter provides information about program changes, new opportunities, technical updates, a calendar of training events, customer
success stories an d project case studies. The Champion had high open and click

- through rates and engaged readers as distant as Europe and China.

- Expanded communication generally , recruited customer champions as speakers at events and trainings, and leveraged customer referr als to help drive participation among other
industries.

- Co

- sponsored the second annual Oregon Leaders Awards for industrial energy efficiency with the Oregon Department of Energy, NEEA and BPA

.

• Energy Trust continued its collaboration with the Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies , ACWA, to educate wastewater treatment staff on SEM practices and promote energy independence , including efficiency and renewable energy opportunities

.



## E

. Renew able energy highlights

• The preliminary 2012 annual total of 5.05 aMW in new generation exceeds the annual conservative goal by 28 percent

— and is 3.4 times higher than 2011 renewable energy generation.

• A record 3.29 aMW of 2012 installed generation came from solar electric projects

— both from large

- scale installations with power purchased by utilities and from standard residential and commercial systems. More than 5,000 solar electric systems have been installed with Ener gy Trust support since 2003.

• The sector utilizes a portfolio approach and manages limited funding to support a range of technologies. This approach allows the sector to remain flexible enough to respond to changing markets and pursue successful projects.

• Two requests for proposals were issued in 2012 for non

- solar projects in Pacific Power territory. T wo projects from the first RFP received funding commitments. No viable proposals
resulted from the second RFP.

• In 2012 Energy Trust committed funding for 1. 12 aMW of generation from 85 projects expected to complete in 2013 and beyond.

• Energy Trust provided project development assistance to 18 projects across the range of

non - solar technologies in 2012. T he funding was used for feasibility studies, grant

- writ ing, permitting and project design.

• OPUC, in collaboration with Energy Trust, developed a multifaceted renewable energy performance metric for 2013.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 18 of 63 April 15, 2013 Solar

• In 2012 1,240 standard solar projects received an Energy Trust incentive , resulting in 10 percent more new generation than in 2011

— even though Energy Trust’s average solar incentive rate dropped by 45 percent.

• Three large ground

- mounted solar projects were completed in 2012:

- The 1.8 MW Baldock project, sponsored by the Oregon Department of Transportat ion and
located at an I

- 5 rest area near Wilsonville , provides power to PGE

.

- The 5.7 MW Outback project in Lake County generates power for PGE.

- The 2.6 MW Black Cap project, also in Lake County, produces power for Pacific Power.

• Community

- led bulk buy pro jects featured less prominently in 201 2 compared to 2011 and
2010 . There were 517 bulk

- purchase installs in 2010, 315 in 2011 and 243 in 2012.

• Meanwhile, the number of residential third

- party owned systems grew to 55 percent of residential systems install ed, compared to 38 percent in 2011 and none in 2010. In this model, a
third

- party business owns and maintains solar electric systems on residential rooftops. Homeowners lease the systems and receive the energy benefit, while the business receives the
lease payments, tax credits and depreciation.



### • Another financially focused model, a production

- based incentive, is administered by Oregon
investor

- owned electric utilities and permits a limited number of customers to be paid directly for solar generation , without support from Energy Trust. Energy Trust helps customers understand this option through information on the website and monitors projects in this program to assure they do not receive Energy Trust incentives.

Biopower

• Dairy gas biopower moved fo rward in 2012. Energy Trust supported Revolution Energy Solutions projects at two dairies in the Willamette Valley.

• Municipal wastewater treatment facilities increasingly turned to biopower and are a key market segment for the Biopower program. With suppo rt from Energy Trust, Medford and Pendleton installed biogas generation at their wastewater treatment plants in 2012. Pendleton accepts grease trap waste from the surrounding area to augment the fuel from its treatment plant.

• Energy Trust partners with AC WA in reaching out to municipal wastewater treatment managers. The collaboration has borne fruit . I n Oregon,10 out of 28 wastewater treatment plants use anaerobic digestion for electricity production , including three supported by Energy Trust, while nationally only one in 10 do so

.

• A demonstration of a wood waste gasifier , which creates synthetic gas from biomass without combustion, was installed in Wallowa County, in combination with an organic Rankine cycle

power ge nerator.

• Commitments were made in 2012 to 0.69 aMW of new biopower generation in future years. In addition, Energy Trust expects 2.32 aMW of generation from biopower projects receiving commitments in past years but not completed as of the end of 2012.

• Ene rgy Trust hosted a Biogas Working Group meeting in April. This was a valuable opportunity for different market players to share their successes and challenges and to learn about business opportunities in the biogas community.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 19 of 63 April 15, 2013 Other R enewables

• The Small Wind offering underwent several significant changes in 2012 designed to improve the ability to predict system performance and to encourage optimal turbine siting and hub height.
Incentives were refocused on higher production, not capacity.

• Although the red esign was underway, two small wind projects completed in 201 2 totaling 30 kW in capacity. Both were installed in PGE service territory and are owned by small agricultural producers.

• Outreach to prospective small wind turbi ne customers

— on hold during program revisions

— restarted by the end of the year with a series of Energy Trust wind seminars in wind

prone locations like Pendleton and Coos Bay, and Energy Trust presence at several farm fairs.

• Energy Trust collaborated with similarly focused organizat ions across the country to form the Interstate Turbine Advisory Council

, which has issued a unified list of certified and proven small wind turbines eligible for incentives.

• The hydropower initiative supported four projects that completed in 2012 : a small project on an Eastern Oregon ranch, a municipal water project and two projects at irrigation district sites.

• New commitments were made in 2012 for projects that will produce 0.98 aMW of new generation when completed in future years, including a geotherma l electric project at the Oregon Institute of Technology campus in Klamath Falls. An additional 0.35 aMW of power w ill be generated by yet

- to

- complete projects with earlier commitments.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 20 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## IV REVENUES AND EXPENDI TURES

• Received $ 144.8 million in Oregon public purpose and incremental revenues during 20 1 2

.



### • Invested $ 154.1 million (including carryover funds from prior years )

, 11 percent more than in
20 1 1

. Of this amount, $90.8 million, or 59 percent, was for incentives.



### • Paid $ 90.8 million in incentives for energy

- efficiency and renewable energy projects

.



### A. Revenues Oregon Energy Trust revenues for 20 1 2 were below budget by $ 9.3 million

, or 6 percent

. Most of the shortfall is in gas and indicates the lower cost of gas, which is reflected in rates and therefore in public

purpose revenues.

Source Annual Actual Revenues Annual Budgeted Revenues

Portland General Electric 36,153,224 $ 34,426,653 $

PGE Incremental 39,630,039 $ 42,722,373 $

Pacific Power 25,168,039 $ 26,790,600 $

Pacific Power Incremental 23,533,277 $ 24,891,198 $

Cascade Natural Gas 1,369,612 $ 2,936,997 $

NW Natural 17,375,847 $ 18,983,061 $

NW Natural Industrial DSM 1,614,516 $ 3,420,205 $

Total 144,844,553 $ 154,171,087 $



### * Incremental revenues are those authorized under SB 838 to suppo rt capturing additional cost

- effective energy efficiency savings.



### B. Expenditures

E lectric efficiency spending was below budget by $ 14. 6 million for 201 2 , or 1 2 percent

. G as expenditures
for 20 1 2 were $ 2.6 million, or 10 percent

, below budget

. Savings results for 2012 were greater than the budget had assumed, while the cost per unit saved w as below budget assumptions. Renewable energy program spending was $0.8 million, or 4 percent, below budget for the year.

Type Actual Annual Expenditures Annual Budgeted Expenditures
Energy Efficiency Programs 127,170,657 $ 143,927,826 $
Renewable Energy Programs 21,817,901 $ 22,642,985 $

Administration 5,135,474 $ 5,682,716 $

Total 154,124,032 $ 172,253,527 $2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 21 of 63 April 15, 2013 Source Actual Annual Expenditures Annual Budgeted Expenditures

Portland General Electric 82,558,328 $ 92,410,385 $

Pacific Power 46,489,608 $ 52,138,735 $

Cascade Natural Gas 1,912,771 $ 2,686,656 $

NW Natural 21,258,786 $ 22,156,478 $

NW Natural Industrial DSM 1,904,540 $ 2,861,273 $

Total 154,124,032 $ 172,253,527 $



### C. Incentives paid

Quarter PGE Pacific
Power NW Natural Cascade
Natural Gas PGE Pacific
Power

Q1 4,157,072 $ 3,968,024 $ 1,680,134 $ 102,078 $ 3,879,801 $ 1,172,015 $ 14,959,123 $

Q2 6,555,714 $ 4,272,000 $ 2,580,331 $ 129,716 $ 2,431,195 $ 1,042,570 $ 17,011,526 $

Q3 6,211,712 $ 2,969,153 $ 2,296,724 $ 158,309 $ 1,884,030 $ 833,089 $ 14,353,018 $

Q4 19,702,000 $ 9,509,360 $ 5,922,672 $ 682,248 $ 6,518,700 $ 2,096,974 $ 44,431,955 $

Total 36,626,498 $ 20,718,537 $ 12,479,862 $ 1,072,350 $ 14,713,726 $ 5,144,648 $ 90,755,622 $ Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy

Total2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 22 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## V SAVINGS AND GENERATI ON

A. Electric efficiency savings

In 20 1 2

, electric efficiency programs saved 52.9 aMW

, 8 percent above Energy Trust’s 20 1 2 stretch goal
of 49 aMW

. From 2002 through 2012 , these programs have achieved total annual savings of 368 aMW

, i ncluding 2 1 aMW of savings from self

- direct custome rs

— representing 77 percent of Energy Trust’s strategic 201 4 goal

. 7 This is equivalent to powering 285,45 0 Oregon homes for a year. The 52.9 aMW

w ere acquired at a levelized cost of 2.7 cents per kilowatt hour

.

PGE Pacific Power
aMW aMW

Commercial 12.97 9.11 22.08 46,055,710 $ 2.6 ¢

Industrial 9.28 5.41 14.70 26,237,111 $ 2.6 ¢

Residential 9.98 6.11 16.09 34,185,277 $ 3.0 ¢
Total Electric Efficiency Programs 32.23 20.63 52.86 106,478,099 $ 2.7 ¢ 2012 Electric Efficiency Savings Total Savings
aMW Expenses Levelized Cost/kWh



### B

. Gas efficiency savings

In 20 1 2

, gas efficiency programs saved 5.9 million annual therms of natura l gas, 4 percent more tha n Energy Trust’s 20 1 2 stretch goal of 5.7 million annual therms. Since gas progr ams began in 2003, total
annual savings of 28.2 million annual therms have been realized, accounting for 81 percent of the 201 4 goal of 34.7 million annual therms

. This is equivalent to providing gas heat to about 55,6 00 homes for a

year

. The 5.9 million annual therms were acquired at a levelized cost of 37 cents per therm

.

NW Natural Cascade
Natural Gas
Therms Therms

Commercial 2,315,126 161,154 2,476,280 $ 9,084,321 34 ¢

Industrial 758,325 121,062 879,387 $ 1,879,381 25 ¢

Residential 2,411,197 148,853 2,560,050 $ 14,112,395 44 ¢
Total Gas Efficiency Programs 5,484,647 431,070 5,915,717 $ 25,076,096 37 ¢ 2012 Gas Efficiency Savings Total Savings
Therms Expenses Levelized Cost/Therm



### C

. Renewable energy generation

R enewable energy generation totaled 5.0 5 aMW for the year

, exceeding Ene rgy Trust’s 2012
conservative goal of 3 .9 aMW by 28 percent

. R esults for 2012 are 3.4 times higher than new generation
from 2011. To date, annual renewable energy generation from 2002 through 2012 totals 110 aMW , or 88 percent of the 201 4 generation go al of 124 aMW

. 8 This is equivalent to po wering 84,550 Oregon homes for a year.

7 Savings from self

- directed efficiency projects count toward the goal of achieving 479 aMW of electric savings by 2014. To date, 21 aMW of savings have been achieved by large commercial and industrial c ustomers via self

- directed funding. Electric savings also include transmission and distribution savings.
8 Renewable energy generation numbers include transmission and distribution savings, where appropriate.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 23 of 63 April 15, 2013 Biopower 0.34 0.98 1.32 1,714,204 $ 1.2 ¢
Solar Electric Program 2.32 0.97 3.29 19,202,942 $ 5.4 ¢
Other Renewable Programs 0.00 0.43 0.44 1,652,691 $ 3.5 ¢
Total Renewable Programs 2.66 2.39 5.05 22,569,837 $ 4.2 ¢ 2012 Renewable Energy Generation Total Generation
aMW Expenses Levelized Cost/kWh Pacific Power
aMW PGE aMW



### D. Progress toward annual efficiency goals by fuel type

Goal % Achieved

2.7 ¢ Conservative 41.45 aMW 128% per KWh Stretch 48.77 aMW 108%

37.3 ¢ Conservative 4,828,295 therms 123% per therm
Stretch 5,680,346 therms 104% Natural Gas $25,076,096 5,915,717 therms Expenditures Savings Levelized
cost Energy Trust Annual Goal

Electric $106,478,099 52.86 aMW2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 24 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### E. Progress toward annual efficiency goals by utility

Goal % Achieved Goal % Achieved

26.77
aMW

31.50
aMW

14.68
aMW

17.27
aMW
4,457,803

therms
5,244,474

therms
370,492
therms
435,872
therms Conservative

Stretch

Conservative

Stretch

Conservative 102%

141%

119%

123%

105%

Cascade
Natural Gas $1,912,771 117% 431,070
therms 38.8 ¢
Per therm 368,445
therms 116%

99% Conservative

Stretch NW Natural $23,163,325 130% 5,484,647

therms 37.1 ¢
Per therm 4,221,268
therms Stretch Pacific
Pow er $40,152,835 135% 20.63
aMW 2.6 ¢
Per kWh 15.33
aMW Annual IRP Goal

Portland General
Electric $66,325,264 32.23 26.11 123% Expenditures Savings Levelized Cost Energy Trust 2012 Annual Goal

aMW 2.8 ¢
Per kWh aMW 120%



### F. Electric efficiency results for SB 1149 and SB 838 funds
Energy Trust will complete an analysis of the allocation of 2012 savings and related costs to SB 1149 vs SB 838 funding sources, along with the summary of SB 838 expenditures by utility, in summer 2013

. We
will then issue an adden dum to the 201 2 Annual Report with th ree SB 1149 and SB 838 tables :

1. 2012 SB 1149 savings and costs (total and by sector)

2. 2012 SB 838 savings and costs (total and by sector)
3. 2012 SB 838 utility expenditures (total and by utility)

As in past years, Energy Trust has engaged a third party to review energy consumption data provi ded by
utilities and determine whether a project should be funded by SB 1149 (all sites using electricity from PGE or Pacific Power are eligible) or SB 838 (limited to sites using less than one average megawatt annually). In future years, with the benefit of access to utility data permitted under the new 2012 data

sharing rules and subsequent Energy Trust

- utility agreement s , we will be able to perform this analysis internally.



### See Appendix p. 41 for a report prepared by Pacific Power on utility activities funded through SB 838 . See Appendix p. 47 for a report on the same topic prepared by PGE

.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 25 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## VI 20 1 2 PERFORMANCE MEASURES

The Oregon Public Utility Commission establishes minimum performance measures for Energy Trust in a variety of categories

. Minimum savings and generation figures for energy

- efficiency programs and renewable energy programs are set at an aggregated level rather than at a n individual program or sector level. This allows Energy Trust to pursue different program strategies in the residential, commercial and
industrial sectors as market forces and technological advances change.

The following OPUC minimum per formance measures apply to Energy Trust 20 1 2 results

.

Electric Efficiency Performance Targets

• Electricity efficiency savings of at least 41 aMW in 2012

Exceeded , with 52.9 aMW saved in 2012

• L evelized life

- cycle cost should not exceed 4.4 cents per kWh

Well within requirement , with 20 1 2 average levelized life

- cycle cost = 2.7 cents per kWh

Natural Gas Efficiency Performance Targets

• Natural gas efficiency savings of at least 4.5 million annual therms in 2012

Exceeded, with 5.9 million annual therms saved in 2012

• Average levelized life

- cycle cost should not exceed 52 cents per therm

Well within requirement , with 20 1 2 average levelized life

- cycle cost = 37 cents per therm

Renewa ble Energy

– **no renewable energy metric for 2012**

Financial Integrity

• Receive an unqualified financial opinion from an independent auditor on annual financial

statements

Full compliance, with an unmodified (unqualified) financial audit opinion for 20 1 2

Administrative/Program Support Costs



### • Keep administrative and program support costs 9 below 9 percent of annual revenues

Well within requirement , with 20 1 2 administrative and program support costs at 5. 4 percent of
annual revenues

9 Program support costs are defined as all p rogram costs except the following accounts: program management, program incentive, program payroll and related expenses, call center and program outsource services.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 26 of 63 April 15, 2013 Customer Satisfaction

• Demonstrate greater than 85 percent satisfaction rates for:

- Interaction with program representatives

- Overall satisfaction

Energy Trust calculated customer satisfaction from telephone surveys of participants soon after project completion . Results for major programs are averaged to determine satisfaction rates. This analysis determined a 94 percent satisfaction rate for interaction with program representatives
and a 9 1 percent overall satisfaction rate. See Appendix p. 3 9

.

Benefit/Cost Ratios



### • Report benefit/cost ratios for larger conservat ion acquisition pr ograms for 201 2 10

Program Combined Utility System Benefit/Cost Ratio Combined Societal Benefit/Cost Ratio

New Homes and Products 1.8 2.0 Existing Homes 2.2 1.8 Existing Buildings 2.4 1.7 New Buildings 3.5 2.5 Production Efficiency 3.0 2.0

NEE A 3.7 1.2

10 By law, Oregon public purpose funds may be invested only in cost

- effective energy effici ency measures

— that is, efficiency measures must cost less than acquiring the energy from conventional sources . Cost

- effective programs therefore have a ratio greater than 1.0.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 27 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## A PPENDIX

Energy Trust Program Descriptions

**Existing Buildings.** Helping the wide range of businesses in existing commercial buildings manage their energy costs requires an equally broad selection of technical services and financial incentives. Existing Buildings offers incentives for improvements including lighting, HVAC, controls, boilers, solar water heating, foodservice equipment and insulation, as well as customized solutions and operations and

ma intenance improvements. Technical services include energy surveys, project planning and technical analysis, contractor referrals, project facilitation and post

- installation assistance. Portions of the program are offered to NW Natural customers in Washingt on. Existing Buildings began in 2003 and was implemented in 2012 by Lockheed Martin Services, Inc.

Multifamily property managers have a menu of offerings for financial and service incenti ves for both in

unit and common

- area improvements. Technical servic es include direct

- installs of compact fluorescent light bulbs and faucet aerators in the tenant spaces , energy surveys and custom incentive solutions, as well as cash incentives for common

- area lighting, appliances , insulation, windows and HVAC. Multifamil y moved to the commercial sector in 20 10 and was implemented in 2012 by Lockheed Martin Services, Inc.

**New Buildings.** This program provides incentives for energy

- efficient design and equipment to support
construction of high

- performance commercial new bu ildings and major renovations of all sizes and types of buildings . Participants can leverage a comprehensive set of services and incentives. These include early design and energy modeling assistance and a wide array of standard and customized equipment
inc entives, including modeled savings incentives for whole

- building approaches. Incentives are offered for projects that achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ( LEED ) certification or save energy
in excess of the 201 0 Oregon Energy Efficiency S pecialty Code requirements. Pilot efforts in 2012 supported net

- zero energy design and small commercial projects, and led to developing simple, streamlined “good, better, best” incentive packages for small retail spaces, offices, schools, multifamily

prope rties, groceries and restaurants. Post construction, Energy Trust can help cover costs of earning
ENERGY STAR ® certification. New Buildings began in 2003 and is implemented by Portland Energy Conservation, Inc.

**Existing Homes.** Homeowners and renters can take advantage of energy

- saving recommendations, referrals to qualified trade ally contractors and cash incentives for qualified improvements including weatherization; electric, gas and solar water heaters; and heating equipment. The program supports
marke t

- based Home Performance with ENERGY STAR, a diagnostic assessment conducted by Building
Performance Institute

- certified contractors , and Savings Within Reach, designed to provide greater
assistance for moderate

- income homeowners. The program offers a web

- based home energy profile for residential customers, as well as phone

- based and in

- home energy reviews. Customized Energy Saver Kits may be ordered online. The program is testing behavior change strategies through a pilot sending quarterly Personal Energy Reports to a sample of customers. Existing Homes supports referrals to Clean Energy Works Oregon, an initiative offering financing and repayment options for comprehensive home retrofit projects. Portions of the program are offered to NW Natural customers i n Washington. Existing2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 28 of 63 April 15, 2013 Homes has been offered since 2003

. The program was implemented in 2012 by Conservation Services Group

.

**New Homes and Products.**  New Homes seeks to expand the market share of energy

- efficient homes in Oregon by creating homebuyer demand and training the contractors who build them. Qualified n ew homes Energy Trust supports receive an EPS TM rating. EPS is an e nergy p erformance s core us eful in guid ing homebuyers, just as a miles

- per

- gallon rating helps consumers shop for cars. New
Homes provides builders with tiered incentives tied to increased efficiency levels and incentives for integrating solar. In addition to builders, the program w orks with architects and real estate professionals, and encourages the sale of energy

- efficient manufactured homes by local retailers. Products offers include cash incentives for purchase of ENERGY STAR qualified clothes washers, refrigerators, freezers,
l ighting and showerheads, and for the recycling of old refrigerators and freezers. The program also promotes the Change a Light, Change the World CFL fundraiser for schools and nonprofits, provides

energy

- saving kits to food pantries to deliver to their cli ents, and distributes showerheads through water bureaus and districts throughout the state. Portions of the program are offered to NW Natural customers in Washington. New Homes and Products began in 2004 and is implemented by Portland Energy Conservation, Inc.

**Production Efficiency.** Industrial and agricultural businesses of all types and sizes look to Production Efficiency for technical services and cash incentives to help them identify and implement electric and natural gas energy

- efficiency projects and practices . Energy Trust engages highly skilled industrial energy engineers to advise Oregon businesses on how to make the most of opportunities to reduce energy

related operating costs while improving productivity, product quality and environmental perform ance. The

program works closely and consultatively with industries long

- term, helping these businesses employ best practices and continuously improve their energy performance. Production Efficiency began in 2003 and is managed internally.

**Solar Electric.** This program helps homeowners, businesses and governments supplement their electricity needs with on

- site solar generation. The program provides cash incentives for net

- metered solar electric installations, educates consumers about solar purchasing and fi nancing options and ensures high

- quality installations through design review and verification. When additional funds are available, the program also supports custom, large

- scale solar projects. The program aims to develop a long

- term, stable market for sol ar in Oregon by building consumer awareness, sponsoring technical training for the trades and supporting state and local efforts to reduce costs and streamline permitting practices for solar. Solar Electric began in 2003 and is managed internally.

**Biopowe r.**  The Biopower program provides financial incentives, cost

- shared grants for feasibility studies, technical assistance and other support for projects that generate electric power from organic residues. Eligible fuels include biogas from sewage treatment f acilities, food processing and agriculture, and the organic fraction of municipal solid waste; solid organic fuels from mill waste, forest and field residues, and urban wood waste; landfill gas; and dedicated energy crops available on a renewable basis. Th e goal of the program is to expand Energy Trust’s portfolio of biopower projects and to improve market conditions for the development of these projects. Biopower began in 2005 and is managed internally.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 29 of 63 April 15, 2013 **Other Renewables.** This program provides support for renewable energy projects that generate electricity using wind, hydropower and geothermal technologies. The program provides custom incentives for projects with generating capacities of 20 megawatts or less and a standard incentive program for
small wind systems up to 50 kilowatts in capacity. Custom incentives are calculated after a thorough,
multi

- disciplinary technical and financial review of project applications. To ensure projects are well executed, incentives are paid upon successful project completion and inspection. In addition to incentives, the program offers various kinds of project development assistance for the early stages of projects. This includes financial and technical assistance for feasibility studies, resource characterization,
site assessments, anemometers, grant

- writing, initial design, permitting and interconnection cost development. The goal of the program is to expand Energy Trust’s renewable energy portfolio across a range of technologies and to improve market conditions. O ther Renewables started in 2003 and is managed internally.

**Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.** NEEA is a nonprofit organization working to maximize energy efficiency to meet our future energy needs. In 2012, Margie Harris, Energy Trust executive direct or,

serve d as vice chair of the NEEA board of directors. Beginning mid

- year, she stepped in as acting chair to fill a vacancy. NEEA is supported by and works in partnership with Bonneville Power Administration, Energy Trust and more than 100 Northwest util ities for the benefit of more than 12 million energy consumers. NEEA uses the market power of the region to accelerate innovation and adoption of energy

efficient products, services and practices. NEEA has delivered market transformation savings under

cont ract to Energy Trust since 2002.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 30 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## NW Natural Industrial Demand

- side Management Program

Since 2009

, Energy Trust has provided service to NW Natural’s Schedule 31 and 32 non

- transport customers, funded through a special rate adjustment mechanism rather than through the public purpose charge. Program costs and therm savings for these customers in 201 2 are included in the body of this annual report as a portion of NW Natural savings and reported separately below.

Program/Customer Type 2012 Annual Therms Saved 2012 Expenditures 2012 Levelized Cost Production Efficiency 625,287 1,158,969 $ 22.9 ¢ Existing Buildings 275,501 620,472 $ 21.8 ¢ New Buildings 63,895 125,099 $ 14.5 ¢
Grand Total 964,683 1,904,540 $ 21.4 ¢2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 31 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## 201 2 Energy Trust of Oregon Board of Directors

PRESIDENT

— John Reynolds

, Eugene, is a professor of architecture emeritus at the University of Oregon and a fellow of the American Institute of Architects . He has been involved in energy issues in Oregon since 1972, when he was elected to the Eugene Water and Electric Board. Since then, he has served as chair of the American Solar Energy Society

, president of Solar Energy Association of Oregon
and member of the bo ard of the International Solar Energy Society. He has served on the Oregon Alternate Energy Commission and the Energy Committee of the Building Codes Structures Board. John has served as president since 2008 and has served on the board since Energy Trust’ s inception 11 years

ago.

VICE PRESIDENT

— Debbie Kitchin , Portland, is the co

- owner of InterWorks LLC, a construction

company engaged in commercial tenant improvement and renovation and residential remodeling
services. InterWorks is an award

- winning contra ctor specializing in sustainable building practices. Prior to joining the family business in 1996, Debbie served as senior economist for the Northwest Power Planning Council for 15 years and was a regional economist for the Bonneville Power Administration for three years. Debbie is treasurer of the Portland Business Alliance, vice president of the Central Eastside
Industrial Council and a board member of the Portland Building Owners and Managers Association. She is a past president of the Portland Commercia l Real Estate Women. This is Debbie’s second term as vice president.

SECRETARY

— Rick Applegate , Portland, is the principal at Applegate Consulting, specializing in natural resource policy, environmental banking and restoration, strategic planning and facilitation. During the 10 years he served as Portland Harbor Superfund administrator for the City of Portland , Rick was responsible for coordinating the city’s work on the lower Willamette River clean up. He served as administrative assistant and in senior legislative positions in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Since then he has worked for more than 30 ye ars on energy and environmental issues, principally as an advocate for salmon and their watersheds. He was the fish and wildlife director for the Northwest Power Planning Council, W est C oast c onservation d irector for Trout Unlim ited, assistant regional adm inistrator of the Habitat Conservation Division and senior policy advisor at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service. He was the chair of the U.S. Southern Stakeholders Pacific Salmon Treaty Negotiations and a member of the Pacific Northwest Comprehensive Energy Review. Rick h as served as secretary since November 2011.

TREASURER

— Dan Enloe , Portland, is supply chain manager at Intel Corporation in Hillsboro, where he has worked in varying capacities since 198 4. Prior to 1984, he was on active duty in the U.S. Navy and
served as a nuclear submarine officer. Since leaving active duty, he served with the Naval Reserve

, completed six reserve command tours and retired as a captain in 2009 . He is a member of the Naval Reserve Association, the American Legion and the Navy League. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy with a degree in electrical engineering, Dan holds two patents. Dan has served as treasurer since
November 2011

.

Joe Benetti , Coos Bay, is a long

- time restaurant owner and civic leader. He is chair of the Southwest Oregon Regional Airport Commission and a board member and past chair of the Oregon Restaurant and2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 32 of 63 April 15, 2013 Lodging Association. He served three terms as mayor of Coos Bay, 12 years as a Coos Bay city c ouncilor and six years as city council chair. In other public service positions, Joe served on and chaired the Coos Bay

- North Bend Promotions Committee, the Coos Bay Urban Renewal Agency and the Coos County Urban Renewal Agency. He also has served on the e xecutive board of the Bay Area Chamber of Commerce and currently represents the airport commission on that board. His restaurant, Benetti’s Italian Restaurant, is located on South Broadway in Coos Bay.

Julie Brandis , Corvallis, is the director of corporat e relations for the Oregon State University Foundation. She connects local, regional and national companies to the university through its first comprehensive fundraising effort, The Campaign for OSU, by matching their research and employment needs with
int ernationally recognized researchers and high

- achieving OSU students. Previously, she spent 17 years as the energy lobbyist for Associated Oregon Industries, Oregon’s largest business advocacy organization, including during the period of time when SB 1149 w as negotiated and enacted.

Ken Canon , Myrtle Creek, founded in 1981 the Industrial Customers of Northwest Utilities, a regional trade association focused on electric energy issues. Since retiring from that role in 2005, Ken chaired a
committee that examin ed the performance of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance and also managed the Northwest Energy Efficiency Task Force. Earlier in his career, while working for Associated Oregon Industries, he drafted and helped enact Oregon’s Business Energy Tax Cred it. Later, he helped implement a comprehensive energy

- efficiency program at an International Paper mill. He has a long history of organizing, managing and advising nonprofit organizations. Applying his expertise to residence,
Ken built the first ENERGY STA R ® home in Douglas County. Ken, a life

- long Oregonian, was born and raised in Medford and graduated from Southern Oregon University and Willamette University College of
Law.

Jason Eisdorfer , Portland, is a greenhouse gas policy strategist for the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency serving the Pacific Northwest. He serves as the senior technical consultant and advisor to BPA on the development and implementation of strategic objectives, policies and prog rams related to global, national and state greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide issues. He served as legal counsel and energy program director of the Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon from 1994

- 2008. At CUB, he represented residential consumers in numerous rate cases and policy dockets before the Oregon Public Utility Commission. He has co

- authored legislation related to electric utility operations and to climate change, including the Oregon Renewable Energy Act and the Climate Change Integration Act, both o f 2007. He is an adjunct professor at Lewis and Clark Law School and the University of Oregon School of Law. Prior to joining CUB, he was an attorney with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of General Counsel, and served an appointment as a s pecial a ssistant U.S. a ttorney. He received his law degree from the University of Oregon School of Law and received certificates of completion in the Environment and Natural Resources Program and the Ocean and Coastal Program. He received his Bachelor of Arts
de gree from the University of Chicago. Jason resigned from the board in May 2012 after accepting a position with the OPUC.

Roger Hamilton , Eugene, is a consultant with Western Grid Group, an organization that promotes transmission access for renewable energy projects across the West. He also consults with The Resource Innovation Group on climate change adaptation and mitigation. He owns and operates a cattle and hay
ranch in south

- central Oregon. He has spent many years in public service as a Klamath County2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 33 of 63 April 15, 2013 c ommissioner, an advisor on energy and watersheds to Governor John Kitzhaber and an Oregon Public Utility c ommissioner. He has also served on the Oregon State Parks Commission and the National Association of Public Utility Commissioners. He currently serves on the board of directors of the Regulatory Assistance Project.

Julie Hammond is the branch manager of Beecher Carlson in Bend. She has more than 20 years experience in the insurance industry. Julie recently served Deschutes United Way as campaign chair. She brings a customer service orientation, small business perspective and regi onal representation to her
service for Energy Trust. Julie resigned from the board in March 2012.

Anne Haworth

- Root , Medford, is co

- owner and general manager of EdenVale Winery and Eden Valley Orchards, a destination winery, historic pear orchard and even ts center in southeast Medford. A second tasting room called Enoteca is located in Ashland. An award

- winning entrepreneur, she developed the concept and helped found the Oregon Wine and Farm Tour, an agritourism coalition of Southern Oregon wineries, histo ric farms and specialty food and cheese companies. Haworth

- Root is a graduate of Southern Oregon University, where she was student body president and chair of the Oregon Student Lobby. She pursued postgraduate studies in the Master of Commerce program at W ollongong University
in Australia.

Mark Kendall , Salem, has more than 3 3 years of experience in energy management and renewable resource development in Oregon . Prior to fo unding his own consultancy, Kendall Energy, in 2009

, he spent 19 years with the Oreg on Department of Energy working in commercial and industrial energy management policy, including serving as the governor’s appointee to the Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance board from 2001

- 2006. Before working for the state, he spent 11 years with the Eugene Water
and Electric Board. He also served on the Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standard Advisory Committee, and
facilitated the 2009 I ndustrial G reenhouse G as R eduction subcommittee of the Oregon Global Warming Commission. He received his bachelor’s degree from Linfield College with an emphasis in communications and energy management, and his master’s degree in organizational development from the Leadership Institute of Seattle City University. When Jason Eisdorfer resigned from the board in May
2012 after accepting a position at the OPUC, Mark was elected to the board in August 2012 to serve the
remainder of the three

-year term, which will expire in February 2015.

Jeff King , Portland, has a long history in the energy industry, including more than 25 years w ith the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. At the council, Jeff analyzed issues associated with the development and operation of electric power generation resources; prepared the council’s forecasts of regional power prices, generation development a nd carbon dioxide production; and staffed the Northwest Wind Integration Forum. While at the council, Jeff engaged with utilities, government agencies, power project developers and public interest groups, including service as the council’s representative o n the Energy Trust Renewable Energy Advisory Council. Prior to his position at the council, Jeff worked as a staff engineer at the U.S. Department of Energy Pacific Northwest Laboratories. Following retirement, Jeff continues part

- time consulting on energy related issues. Jeff joined the Energy Trust Board of Directors
in 2011.

Alan Meyer , Salem
, is director of energy management for Weyerhaeuser Company, a diversified forest products manufacturing company. He is responsible for coordinating energy management activities at2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 34 of 63 April 15, 2013 numerous manufacturing facilities throughout North America. Prior to joining Weyerhaeuser, he was director of energy for Willamette Industries, holding similar responsibilities. He also worked for PacifiCorp as the Oregon large industrial accounts manager. He serves on the board of directors of Industrial
Customers of Northwest Ut ilities, a nonprofit advocacy organization focused on energy policies. He has also served for more than 20 years on the City of Salem Morningside Neighborhood Association board.

Dave Slavensky , Bend, is chief operating officer for Structus Building Techn ologies, a Bend manufacturing company specializing in construction products. Prior to Structus, he worked as a manufacturing consultant with Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership, as vice president of operations at KVP in Sacramento and as a consultan t with the California Manufacturing Technology Center. He also spent five years working for Aircon Energy, Inc., an energy management and HVAC service company founded by his father. In 2007 Dave co

- founded the High Desert Enterprise Consortium, a group of companies in C entral Oregon committed to employing Lean Manufacturing principles to improve their businesses. He has conducted professional seminars in numerous process improvement techniques including Lean, Kaizen and Just

- in

- Time . Dave has been a member of the Bend Economic Development Advisory Board since 2009, and was the president of the Cascades Mountaineers in Bend
from 2008

- 2010. Dave was elected to a standard three

- year term on the board in May 2012.

ex

- officio
John Sa vage , Salem, is one of three Oregon Public Utility Commission ers . He joined the staff of the
Commission in 200 2 as Director of its U tility P rogram, after serv ing as D irector of the Oregon Department of Energy from 1993

- 2002 . He was A dministrator of the D epartment of Energy 's P olicy and P lanning
division from 1987

- 1993. He received a m aster ’ s degree in natural resource economics from Oregon State University in 1979 and a Bachelor of Science degree from O regon State University in 1975.

Oregon Department of Energy Special Board Advisor Bob Repine , Salem, then acting director of the Oregon Department of Energy, served as special advisor until December 2012, when Lisa Schwartz was appointed the Oregon Department of Energy director

. Lisa has more than 25 yea rs of experience in energy policy, regulation and education. She began state service in 1987 as assistant administrator of the Oregon State University Extension Energy Program. Joining the Oregon Department of Energy for the first time in 1995, she helped establish oversight
mechanisms for the state’s new third

- party administrator for energy efficiency and renewable energy

— Energy Trust. At the OPUC from 2002 through early 2009, she directed analysis of electric utility resource plans and competitive bidding processes, and helped develop the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard.
Before re

- joining the Oregon Department of Energy , she was senior associate at the Regulatory Assistance Project and recently served on the Western Electricity Coordinating Council’s Transmission Expansion Policy Committee.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 35 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## Board Development Guidelines

Energy Trust’s board of directors is a non

- stakeholder, volunteer board. The board oversees Energy Trust management, provides strategic and policy direction and approves the organization’s budget and major expenditures. The board carries out its oversight role collectively and through several committees. The board’s bylaws ensure that Energy Trust board meetings and other processes are clear, open and accessible to the public.

The Oregon Public Utility Commission grant agreement with Energy Trust calls for the Energy Trust board to include the skills, broad representation and diversity necessary to achieve the nonprofit’s mission.

The initial board of directors included nine members from a variety of energy and business backgrounds,
and one non

- voting ex

- officio member from the OPUC

. As board openings arise, the board consults advisory councils, individuals and collaborating organizations to identify candidates with appropria te experience from throughout the state. To allow further diversity, the board expanded its size to 13 voting
members.

The 201 2 board includes voting members with background in business (agriculture, industry / manufacturing, construction/remodeling, res taurant), private consulting, nonprofit and higher education. Members come from Bend, Coos Bay, Corvallis, Eugene, Medford, Myrtle Creek, Salem and the Portland
area. Of the 13 voting members at the end of the year, three were women . The board’s OPUC ex

- of ficio member is Commissioner John Savage. The board created an additional non

- voting position for an appointee of the Oregon Department of Energy. Bob Repine, acting director of the ODOE , occupied this “special advisor” position for most of 2012 . He was su cceeded in December by the newly appointed ODOE director, Lisa Schwartz.

All new members participate in an orientation session and are provided handbooks containing historical information, policies, plans, budgets and program descriptions. The majority of board members also participate on advisory councils and board committees. All regular board and advisory council meetings and background information are public. Advisory council and board meetings are well attended, and public comment is included in every meeting.

All regular board members complete and sign disclosure of eco nomic interest forms each year. The
OPUC ex

- officio board member and the special advisor from the Oregon Department of Energy do not receive confidential information. Once each year, board and staff members participate in a planning session to review progr ess and discuss Energy Trust’s strategic direction. Board development is a part of this public planning session, if warranted.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 36 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## 20 1 2 Advisory Council Members and Meetings

Conservation Advisory Council Jim Abrahamson, Cascade Natural Gas Brent Barclay, Bonneville Power Administration Jeff Bissonnette, Fair and Clean Energy Coalition Bruce Dobbs, Building Owners & Managers Association Joe Esmonde, IBEW 48 Wendy Gerlitz, N orthwest Energy Coalition Charlie Grist, N orthwest Power and Conservation Council Karen Horkitz, NEEA Scott Inman, Oregon Remodelers Association Juliet Johnson, Oregon Public Utility Comm ission Andria Jacob, City of Portland Don Jones, Jr., PacifiCorp Don MacOdrum, Home Performance Guild Holly Meyer, NW Natural Stan Price, Northwest Ene rgy Efficiency Council Anne Snyder

- Grassman, Portland General Electric

201 2 Meeting Dates Major Discussion Topics

February 1 5 2011 preliminary results; 2012 program initiatives and pilots; EPS for Existing
Homes

April 18 New incentive changes for Existing Homes; Industry and Agriculture 2011 trends, measures, markets and sources of savings; EPS for Existing Homes

May 16 Program Management Contractor RFPs for Existing Homes and Existing Buildings; trends in commercial sector programs; evaluations of SEM offerings; scaling up for program innovations in New Buildings

June 6 Residential trends, residential HVAC market study, Home Performance with ENERGY STAR process evaluation; MPower Oregon pilot; NEEA gas market
transformation

July 25 Mid

- year upd ate; 2013 preliminary budget concepts by sector; heat pump incentive qualification; 2011 fast feedback survey results; gas weatherization

cost

- effectiveness exceptions

October 24 2012 savings forecast; draft 2013 budgets; gas cost

- effectiveness exceptions revisited; planned incentive changes

November 28 Final draft 2013

- 14 budgets, gas cost

- effectiveness exceptions revisited; planned incentive changes; residential awareness study; New Buildings impact and process evaluations2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 37 of 63 April 15, 2013 Renewable Energy Advisory Council Jason Busch, Oregon Wave Energy Trust Megan Decker, Renewable NW Project Troy Gagliano, EnXco Robert Grott, Northwest Environmental Business Council Thor Hinckley, Portland General Electric Juliet Johnson, Oregon Public Utility Commission
Suzanne Leta Liou, RES Americas Glenn Montgomery, Oregon Solar Energy Industries Association Vijay Satyal, Oregon Department of Energy Frank Vignola, Solar Monitoring, University of Oregon Dick Wanderscheid, Bonneville Environmental Foundation Tashiana Wangler, Pa cific Power

2012 Meeting Dates Major Discussion Topics
February 15 Oregon Institute of Technology geothermal project ; competitive process for custom projects in Pacifi c Power territory ; fish passage issues for small hydro projects

April 18 Competitive process for custom projects in Pacifi c Power territory ; Revolution Energy Systems biogas project completion ; Farm Power Misty Meadow project ; Monroe Drop hydropower project ; solar budget update

June 6 Lessons learned from the competitive process ; solar market update ; changes to small wind program

July 25 Black Cap 2 MW solar project

September 12 2013

- 2014 budget themes ; wave power update ; fall competitive process ; update on solar water heating cost effectiveness

October 24 2013

- 2014 budget ; proposal for increasing early stage project assistance ; concept for solar RFP in PGE territory

November 28 Final 2013

- 2014 budget presentation ; early stage project assistance ; preview of 2013 legislation2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 38 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## 20 1 2 Customer Service Data

C all v olumes

Energy Trust’s call center received 34,752 calls in 201 2 , a 9 percent decrease from 42,275 calls in 20 1 1

. Call volumes have been trending down since 2009 as Energy Trust has released more online forms and
other web

- based customer services.



### W ebsite v isits

Energy Trust’s website, www.energytrust.org, received 574,900 visits in 201 2, a 6 percent increase over
the 543,058 website visits in 201 1

. Web traffic has increased nearly 40 percent in the past four years,
reflect ing Ener gy Trust’s increasing use of on line applications and forms , as well a s on line advertising
and social media . During 201 2

, call center staff responded to 1, 704 inquiries via info@energytrust.org,
most from residential customers , an increase of 16 percent over 2 011.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 39 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### Customer s atisfaction

Energy Trust calculated customer satisfaction from telephone surveys of a sample of participants administered soon after they received incentive checks. In 2012 the average rate of overall satisfaction with Energy Trust was 91 percent, and the rate of satisfaction with Energy Trust program representatives was 94 percent.

Table 1 . 2012 Overall Satisfaction
2012 Satisfaction Existing Buildings and Existing Multifamily 92%
Home Products 93% Existing Homes 91% New Buildings and New Multifamily 81% Production Efficiency 97%
Solar 94% Unweighted Average 91%2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 40 of 63 April 15, 2013 Table 2. 2012 Satisfaction with Program Representative 2012 Satisfaction with Program Representative Existing Buildings and Existing Multifamily 93% New Buildings and New Multifamily 92% Production Efficiency 97%
Commercial Solar 94% Unweighted Average 94%

Note: Energy Trust’s regular customer feedback survey does not ask residential participants about satisfaction with program representatives. Residential participants interact with Energy Trust representatives to a varying degree

— some have in

- home Home Energy Reviews, some call the contact center and others may n ot interact with a program representative. In general, commercial and industrial participants have more interaction with Energy Trust representatives.



### C omplaint r eport

Energy Trust recorded nine escalated customer complaints in 201 2

, 14 fewer than in 2 01 1

. This is a very small number, considering the tens of thousands of customers served . Of the nine complaints, six were from residential customers and three were from commercial participants

. One of these complaints came to Energy Trust through the Oregon Public Utility Commission

. The dramatic decrease in escalated complaints in 2012 is attributed to Energy Trust’s continuing work to improve customer experience. Customer service representatives have developed greater skill in responding to customer complaints and resolving issues without the need for escalation.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 41 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## 201 2 Utility Activities Supported by SB 838

- authorized Funding

Per agreement with the OPUC, Pacific Power and Portland General Electric report their SB 838 program support activities i n Energy Trust’s quarterly and annual reports. Content and format were developed by the utilities, following a sector outline suggested by Energy Trust, and appear here as received.



## 1. Pacific Power SB 838 Annual 2012 Energy Efficiency Activities and Results

Pacific Power / Energy Trust Year End Report

- 2012

Pacific Power utilized several approaches to support and deliver energy efficiency communications, advertising and outreach to residential and small

- and mid

- size commercial customers. 11

Voices residential newsletter insert

• Q1

o Start the year right

– save energy

o Smart power strips

o Hold on to your heat and stay warm / Energy Trust

o Choosing a better bulb / Energy Trust

o LED lighting

• Q2

o Save with Earth Day actions / Energy Trust

o Free Energy Saver Kit / Energy Trust

• Q3

o Home is where the savings are / Energy Trust

o Recycle your old fridge / Energy Trust

o No money down energy upgrades / CEWO

o One kilowatt

- hour, so many possibilities

o Weatherize your home / Energy Trust

• Q 4

o Be watt smart / Green Gifts

o Enjoy the season in a new light / CFLs / Energy Trust

Energy Connections commercial e

- newsletter

• Q1

o Your Energy Plan for 2012

o Save Now: Eight Low

- Cost Ways to Reduce Energy Use

o Fact or Fable? When a Device is Turned Off, It is Off

o Be watt smart with Building Maintenance

o Energy Management Systems: Putting You in Control

o Common Energy Myths Exposed

o Do You Have Energy Hogs in the Office?

o Programmable Thermostats: An Affordable Way to Save Energy

o Real Savings: Local Businesses Improve Lighting, Cut Costs

• New lighting lifts fitness center / Energy Trust

• Irrigation supplier pumps up savings, productivity / Energy Trust

o Fact or Fable? Daylight Saving Time Saves Energy

11 Some activities are funded outside of SB 838 funds.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 42 of 63 April 15, 2013 • Q2

o Can Saving Energy Increase Worker Productivity?

o Y our Electric Bill: The Difference Between Demand and Usage

o Ten Low

- Cost Strategies to Reduce Your Energy Bill

o Does Your Big Screen TV Equal Big Power Consumption?

o Spring Air Conditioning Maintenance Tips for Businesses

o LED Lighting: A Growing Bright Spot f or Energy Savings / Energy Trust

o Fact or Fable? Energy

- Efficient Refrigerators Use Less Power Than a 100

- Watt Bulb

o Strategies to Reduce Demand Charges

o Unloading Your Plug Load

o Get Your House in Shape for Summer

o TV Set

- Top Boxes Get Poor Ratings in Energy Efficiency

• Q3

o Preventive Maintenance Checklist for Air Conditioning Systems

o Benefits of Motor Soft

- Start Devices

o Cut Energy Waste in the Office

o How Do They Do That? Light

- Emitting Diodes (LEDs)

o While You’re Away...

o Your Electric Bill: The Difference Between Demand and Usage

o Energy Efficiency: Your Competitive Edge

o Lighting Controls: Technology Takes Flight at Local Airport

• Q 4

o Building Controls: Stay Tuned for Energy Savings

o Ten Ways to Improve Heating System Performance

o Employee Personal Appliances Erode Energy Efficiency Efforts

o Compare the Energy Costs of Holiday Lighting

o Annual Energy Reviews: Seven Things to Look For

o Making the Business Case For Efficiency

o Shrink Your Big Screen TV’s Power Usage

Energy Insights large C&I / communities newsletter

• Q1

o J& J Snack Foods enjoys savings / Energy Trust

• Q2

o Helping customers save energy at home

o Helping shape energy policy

o Local mill cuts energy waste / Energy Trust

• Q3

o Plan focuses on changing energy picture

o Pacific Power executive visits historic Oregon company / Energy Trust

o Energy Efficiency goes high tech / Energy Trust

• Q 4

o Dairy milks savings through energy efficiency / Energy Trust

o Get your watt smart open sign / Energy Trust

Bill inserts

• Q1

o Resolve to save with energy

- efficient improvements / Energy Trust

o Stay comfortable and save energy with a new heat pump / Energy Trust

o Make it your home. Get cash incentives for weatherization / Energy Trust

• Q22012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 43 of 63 April 15, 2013 o Free Energy Saver Kit. Delivered to your front door. / Energy Trust

o Be w att smart workshops

o Summertime and the saving is easy

• Free Energy Saver Kit / Energy Trust

• Other cool resources / Energy Trust

• Home Energy Review / Energy Trust

• Get cash for your old fridge / Energy Trust

• Energy

- saving tips for summer efficiency / Energy Trust

• Q3

o Turn Mr. Sunshine into Mr. Hot Water (solar thermal) / Energy Trust

o Refrigerator Recycle / Energy Trust

• Q 4

o wattsup insert

o Energy Trust Energy Saver Kit

Direct mail

• Q1

• Q2

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Southern Oregon

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Central Oregon

o Be watt smart workshops

• Q3

o Advanced Controls Heat Pump / Energy Trust

o Solar Water Heater / Energy Trust

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Hood River

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Lane County

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Marion/Polk Counties

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Benton County

• Q 4

o Clean Energy Works Oregon

– Klamath and Lake Counties

o Energy Trust Ductless Heat Pump postcard

Direct email

• Q1

• Q2

o Be watt smart workshops

• Q3

• Q4

Mass media

• TV

- Bend, Medford, Eugene and Albany/Corvallis DMAs

o Q1

o “Bike shop”

o “Cookies ”

o “Motel”

o “Little Hero”

o “Porch Light”

o “Small Changes”

o “Sweet Savings”

o “Remodel your energy bill”2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 44 of 63 April 15, 2013 o Q2

o “Little Hero”

o “Porch Light”

o “Small Changes”

o “Sweet Savings”

o “Contractor” / Energy Trust

o “Cookies” / Energy Trust

o “Motel” / Energy Trust

o “Home sweet home” / En ergy Trust

o “Porch Light” / Energy Trust

o “Remodel your energy bill” / Energy Trust

o “Washing machine” / Energy Trust

o “Small changes” / Energy Trust

o “Little hero” / Energy Trust

o Q3

o “Contractor” / Energy Trust

o “Cookies”

o “Motel”

o “Little hero”

o “Porch Light ”

o “Remodel your energy bill” / Energy Trust

o “Small changes”

o Q 4

o “ Baker/Cake”

o “Contractor

- ETO”

o “Cookies”

o “Motel”

o “Little Hero”

o “Porch Light”

o “Small Changes”

• Radio

– Bend, Eugene and Medford DMAs

o Q1

o “Marty Home Improvement Answers”

o “Phil Seal and Secure Answers”

o “Lori Lightbulb Answers”

o “Jess Conserve Energy Answers”

o “Bob Energy Efficiency Answers”

o “Home Energy Review” / Energy Trust

o “Refrigerator recycling” / Energy Trust

o “Upgrade incentives” / Energy Trust

o Q2

o “Bob Energy Efficiency Answers”

o “Marty Home Improvement Answers”

o “Home Energy Review” / Energy Trust

o “Refrigerator recycling” / Energy Trust

o “Upgrade incentives” / Energy Trust

o Q3

o “ETO Upgrade Song” / Energy Trust

o Q 4

o “ETO Home Review Song ( watt smart )”

o “Bob Answers

– energy efficiency”

o “Jess Answers

– conserve energy”2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 45 of 63 April 15, 2013 • Print

o Q1

o “Outlets”

o “ Monmouth

- In dependence Chamber of Commerce C hamber ” directory ad

o “Deschutes Library Ad” / Energy Trust

o “Fishmarket ” ad

o Q2

o “Deschutes Library Ad” / Energy Trust

o “ Stayton

- Sublimity Chamber of Commerce, guide ad” / Energy Trust

o “ Medford Chamber of Commerce, business directory ad” / Energy Trust

o “Upper Rogue Independent Magazine”

o “American Legion Baseball ” program ad

o Q3

o “Scandinavian Festival” program ad

o “Albany Chamber” directory ad

o “ Creswell Chronicle” Fourth of July directory ad

o “Oregon Jamboree” program ad

o “Bohemia Mining Days” program ad

o “Lincoln City Chamber” ad

o “Lithia Motors” ad

o Q 4

o “Lithia Motors” ad

o “Holiday Season” Cottage Grove Sentinel

o “New Year’s” Cottage Grove Sentinel

o “Ho liday Season” Douglas County News

Outdoor

• Q1

o “Push down to save”

• Q2

o “Push down to save”

• Q3

• Q4

Websites / Social Media (continuous energy efficiency and Energy Trust content)

• pacificpower.net/wattsmart

• bewattsmart.com

• Pacific Power wattsmart Facebook page

• Twitter

Call Center

• Q2

o Be watt smart workshops

– inbound

Chambers of Commerce, B usiness and C ommunity outreach: Q1

– Q4 Pacific Power has hosted multiple energy efficiency focused meetings with business and community leaders across the state utilizing existing relationships with local Chambers of Commerce and economic development groups. The meetings follow on prior Power of Main Street energy efficiency events held throughout 2011. These presentations focused on small

- to mid

- size commercial customers, particularly those in leased spaces, and how they can improve energy efficiency. Energy efficiency presentations were delivered in Power of Main Street events were held in Astoria, Coos Bay, Dallas, Hood River, Klamath Falls, Lebanon, Lincoln City, Medford, Monmouth, Pendleton, Portland, Redmond, Sweet Home and Umatilla , Oregon. The presentations highlighted Pacific Power’s2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 46 of 63 April 15, 2013 relationship wit h Energy Trust and available programs and incentives to save energy and money. Pacific Power also offered:

• A one hour on

- site walk through with Pacific Power to document information about the customer’s building and how they use energy. We reviewed lighting, office equipment, HVAC and foodservice equipment. Pacific Power also provided practical no cost/low cost ideas for saving energy and a review of which improvements were eligible for Energy Trust cash incentives. (Utilizing Energy Trust’s “Do it

y ourself” energy audit)

• Additional support for on

- site assistance from Energy Trust of Oregon and local contractors.

• Regular checkups with Pacific Power on recommended energy saving improvements.

Be watt smart Workshops

– Q2 Pacific Power produced and delivered a very successful second round of Be watt smart Workshops. The workshops were targeted to homeowners to educate them on how to manage energy use and improve energy efficiency. Locations included Medford, Grants Pass, Ros eburg, Coos Bay, Corvallis, Portland, Seaside, Hood River, Bend, Redmond, Klamath Falls, Lakeview, Pendleton and Enterprise, Oregon. Sessions were presented by Pacific Power.

Mass Media 12

2012

– Impressions (Q1

– Q4)

TV 60,743,800
Radio 4,343,000
Print 83,000 Digital 4,865,207
TOTAL 70,035,007

Outreach

Locations Chambers of Commerce, business / community groups (2012) Be watt smart / other residential (2012) TOTAL (Q1

– Q 4 )
Astoria 100

- 100
Bend

- 99 * * 99 Coos Bay 40 120 * 160 Corvallis 150 120 * 27 0 Dallas 45

- 45 Enterprise

- 17 17
Grants Pass

- 75 * ** 75 Hood River 20 30 50 Klamath Falls 125 80 * ** 205 Lakeview

- 29 29 Lebanon 65 1,000 1,0 65 Lincoln City 60

- 60 Medford 200 150 * ** 350 Monmouth 25

- 25 Pendleton 60 46 106 Portland 60 224 * ** 28 4 Redmond 25 498 * ** 523 Roseburg

- 88 * 88 Salem 575

- 575 Seaside

- 34 34

12 SB 838 funded mass media only2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 47 of 63 April 15, 2013 Sweet Home 20

- 20 Umatilla 5

- 5
TOTAL 1,575 2,610 4,185
*Sold out events

* * CEWO presentation provided

“Warm Leads” / Customer Response 2012 (Q1

– Q 4 )

“Warm Leads” provided to ETO 128 Consultations 243 Energy Saver Kits 308 * *Request for link

Other Energy Efficiency Coordination / Support

o Internal Pacific Power support for ETO programs

o Weekly / Monthly ETO coordination meetings

o ETO Conservation Advisory Council

o ETO / Utility Roundtable

o EEAST implementation

o On

- Bill Financing support

o CEWO implementation, contracting, support

o “Cool Schools” coordination

o ETO / Utility Data Transfer coordination

o Fuel Switching docket

o EE PPA docket

o Opower pilot

o 1aMW / Self Direct reconciliation

o Lloyd EcoDistrict Energy Conservation Charge filing / funding agreement



## 2. PGE SB 838 Annual 2012 Energy Efficiency Activities and Results

PORTLAND GENERAL ELE CTRIC E NERGY EFFICIENCY ACT IVITIES 2012

Commercial and Industrial
PGE used four different approaches to promot e Energy Trust programs to business customers:

1. Mass Education via Newsletters PGE utilizes its business newsletters (both print and email) to promote Energy Trust programs to business customers. PGE’s business newsletter

, Energize

, is sent quarterly to 76,000 customers in their bills. PGE’s business e

- newsletter, Business Connection, is sent bi

- monthly to 15,000 business

customers.

Energize: The winter edition of Energize featured “F ive energy

- smart moves” and Ask the Expert: “Now’s the time to upgrade fluorescent lighting.” The spring edition of Energize featured “Win a $3000 energy upgrade! Save energy and control costs with Save More, Matter MoreTM,” “Better light, lower costs, Real

- life savi ngs: ATALIER DREISEITL+PLACE” and Ask the Expert: “How smart grid will help your business.” The summer edition of Energize featured the Save More, Matter More TM 

### campaign and the2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 48 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### 2012 sweepstake winners. The fall edition of Energize featured a story about h ow smart strips create savings for businesses and another article on how “LEDs light the way to savings”

.

Business Connection: The February Business Connection featured: “F ive energy

- smart moves,” “Time to upgrade fluorescent lighting” and “Kick

- Start bo nus incentives.” April Business Connection featured “Win a $3,000 energy

- efficiency upgrade! Join our Save More, Matter More TM 

### campaign to save energy, control costs,” “Video guide: Which lights do you have? Old T12s or energy

- saving T8s

– how to tell th e difference” and “Five ways we can help you go green. Simple, sustainable savings: How to help the earth and your bottom line.” The August Business Connection also featured an article called “Save More,
Matter More TM 

### winners: Hundreds of businesses join e nergy

- saving campaign”. December Business Connection featured an article called “Smart strips=smart savings” as well as a story called “LEDs save 75% for retailer”.

2. Mass Market Campaign: April

– M ay 2012 PGE launched its fifth annual Save More, Matter More (SMMM) campaign in the spring in an effort to feed the project pipeline earlier in the year. The campaign ran from April 1 through May 31. PGE continued utilizing the support of our contact center and outreach through Green Mountain Energy business re ps. The campaign included targeted direct mail and a “bangtail” insertion in the bill, both of which encouraged customers to return a form to enroll in the campaign or get a free energy consultation.

189 customers entered the sweepstakes for a $3,000 ene rgy

- efficiency retrofit and 487 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation. There were 464 SMMM Webpage hits. PGE sent 71 qualified leads to Energy Trust.

3. Direct Regional Mail January 2012 PGE launched the first Direct Mail for the Winter EE Campaign in January to 4,997 customers . The focus and tactics were the same as the successful Fall EE Campaign which produced 10% more qualified leads by offering on

- site consultations versus phone or email consultations. A targeted direct mail letter w as sent to previously untapped geographic areas within PGE’s service territory encouraging customers to request on

- site consultations focusing on zip codes that were not included in the Fall EE Campaign. The major channel for the Winter Campaign was direct mail. 119 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation and PGE sent 28 qualified leads to Energy Trust

February 2012 PGE also launched an email blast in February to 1,524 customers who had an email address on file that previously received a consultation but did not go on to the Energy Trust as a lead. The email was sent to customers who have expressed interest in EE in the past that we wanted to make aware of new incentives, including the Kick

- Start Bonus. The email informed customers of new incentives and was designed to drive customers to request an energy efficiency consultation and had a 23.5% open rate.

July

– August 2012 PGE launched a T12 to T8 conversion letter that was sent to 11,000 general business customers in two rounds, one in J uly and one in August. The promotion was a final push on converting T12s to T8s since the T12s would no longer be manufactured after July 2012. Small manufacturing customers were chosen as the target chosen because they tend to take longer to make non

- pro duction decisions such as switching out lights and may not have converted yet. The letter highlighted the costs of not switching2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 49 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### and encouraged in

- person consultations while the PGE team was in the customer’s neighborhood. The second batch of letters went out to general business customers in August and was targeted at specific zip codes in our territory. There was not as much traffic as hoped from the first mailing in July. The slow response may be a result of doing another T12 lighting promotion so close to the large Save More, Matter More campaign in April/May which also focused on T12s. However, the timing of the direct mail letters was purposeful as it was a final attempt at finding the customers that haven’t converted yet given that the manufacturin g of T12s ended in July. 258 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation and PGE sent 78 qualified leads to Energy Trust

.

September

- October 2012 A light emitting diode (LED) direct mail was sent out to approximately 8,000 general business customers in September targeted at Restaurant/Lodging/Ent ertainment and Grocery/Retail. The mailing included a letter that describes the benefits of LEDs and explains how PGE can help customers choose the right LEDs in order to qualify for Energy Trust inc entives. There was also a brochure included that included a customer story about a successful LED project installation with a tear off business reply card encouraging customers to return a form to reque st a free energy consultation. The promotion began
Se ptember 18 and ended October 31, 2012. 249 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation and PGE sent 55 qualified leads to Energy Trust

.

November

- December 2012 An “In Your Neighborhood” direct mail was sent out in the beginning of November to approximately 8,000 business customers in targeted zip codes. The letter described how PGE’s energy experts can meet the customer at their business and review their systems like lighting, HVAC and other equipment as well as help connect the customer wit h contractors and Energy Trust incentives. The focus was on offering

on

- site consultations while the PGE energy experts are in the “neighborhood” of the business versus phone or email consultations. This type of promotion has proven very successful in the past. The target was chosen by specific zip codes so that the energy expert team could maximize the on

- site consultations. The promotion began November 1 and ended December 1 5 , 2012. 158 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation and PGE sent 39 qualified leads to Energy Trust

.

Through mass market and direct regional mail marketing efforts in 2012, 1,271 customers requested a free energy efficiency consultation and PGE sent 271 qualified leads to Energy Trust , for a 21.3%
conversi on rate

.

4. Personal & Face

- to

- Face Communication PGE has had a dedicated outreach pos ition in place since June 2008. In June 2010 PGE received OPUC support to hire two additional Outreach Specialist s. The Outreach Specialists develop and facilitate customer participation in Energy Trust p rograms. The results are qualified leads to the Energy Trust. The team utilizes a variety of tactics to engage customers in Energy Trust programs . Qualified leads were generated from but not limite d to the following
activities:

• Phone and on

- site consultations

• Targeted outbound customer calls

• Response to canvassing (summer

- hire and outreach rep driven)

• Response to business marketing (i.e. Save More, Matter More, direct mail, etc.)

• Response to custo mer emails (energy.efficiency@pgn.com)2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 50 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### • Customer calls to PGE Tualatin Call Center

• Business partnerships (i.e. City of Portland BEST program, Clackamas County Office of Sustainable Development , etc. )

• Chamber, Business and Trade Association presentations

• Cu stomer follow

- up after PGE Training and Education classes

• Leveraging internal networks (i.e. Key Customer Managers, Governmental Affairs representatives, Service and Design Consultants, Green Mountain Energy, etc.)

In 201 2 , the Outreach Specialists achiev ed the following results:

• 6,250 face

- to

- face, email

, phone presentations /consultations, or outreach presentations to business customers for i ncreased a wareness of Energy Trust p rograms

• 5 5 0 qualified project leads sent to Energy Trust programs

• 4 0 outreach presentations and networking events for 31 different groups or events . These activities elevate Energy Trust program awareness and engage customers in identifying potential energy saving opportunities.

o Art Institute of Portland (NW Davis)

o Beaverton Chamber

o City of Hillsboro Sustainability

o Energy Trust / PECI HVAC controls codes training

o Estacada Chamber

o ETO NC Symposium

o Good Morning Damascus

o Green Mountain Energy

o Hillsboro Chamber

o HVAC/Building Tune

- Up (PGE Training & Education)

o Institute of Real Estate Management

o Keizer Sustainability Summit

o Kenton Business Association

o Marion County Farm Bureau

o Metro Multifamily Housing Association

– Luncheon

o NAO Diversity Event (PGE Sponsor)

o PGE & North Clackamas Chamber Lighting Seminar

o PGE Training & Education

– EE fo r Small & Medium

- sized Business [twice]

o PGE Training & Education

– Energy & Water Trends

o PGE Training & Education

– Sustainable Business Bootcamp

o Portland Lights

o RTP

o Salem Chamber Greeters [three times] (once hosted at Salem Line office)

o Sherwood Chamber [ twice]

o Silverton Forum

o Tigard Chamber [three time, including Shining Stars Awards and Breakfast ]

o Tualatin Chamber of Commerce [three times]

o Tualatin Commercial Citizen Involvement Organization [twice]

o Washington County Recycle at Work Spanish

- Speaking Sust ainability Workshop

o Wilsonville Chamber

o Woodburn Greeters2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 51 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### Residential

PGE used Schedule 110 funds to enhance basic information provided through residential mass

- market channels with the following promotions:

• PGE’s residential customer newsletter, Update, is sent monthly to 610,000 customers in their PGE bills. January’s edition mentioned an overview on Energy Trust programs

– also included as a bill insert.

• PGE’s residential e

- newsletter, Home Connection, is sent monthly to about 400,000

- 412,000

cu stomers. In February, Home Connection provided an overview on Energy Trust incentives; 3,863 customers clicked through for more information.

• In February, Update featured Energy Saver Kits.

• May’s Update edition featured the Marathon water heater

– also inc luded as a bill insert. Appliance rebates were highlighted in the June edition of Update.

• In May, Home Connection mentioned solar, water heating, weatherization and appliance
incentives.

• April’s Home Connection offered information on the Home Energy Revie w program.

• High performance showerheads were mention ed in the June edition of Home Connection.

• In the July edition of U pdate, Energy Trust window incentives were mentioned. Also in July, 86,000 customers were emailed an offer for triple pane windows for the price of double pane.

• July’s Update also mentioned PGE’s efforts to provide information on Energy Trust of Oregon incentives to Spanish

- speaking customers.

• In August, Home Connection featured the Energy Trust’s Home Energy Review program.

• PGE sent e mails to 200,075 residential customers to offer Energy Saver Kits provided by the Energy Trust in November. 16,858 kits were delivered to PGE residential customers during Q4.

• A direct mail in December was sent to 106,249 residential customers offering spe cial pricing for AirGenerate heat pump water heaters installed through PGE’s plumber network. A total of 111 customers installed had heat pump water heaters in Q4.

20 1 2 Measurable Results

• 141,531 Energy Saver Kits to PGE customers in 2012.

• Starting in s pring of 2012, PGE supported the Energy Trust and local energy assistance agencies with free energy saving kits distributed during energy assistance appointments. 5,400 Energy Saver Kits distributed through local energy assistance agencies

• 9,250 free showerheads and 30,250 compact florescent bulbs, including candelabra specialty
bulbs , distributed to customers through PGE Community Offices

• 141,531 Energy Sav er Kits to PGE customers in 2012

• 13,451 PGE customers participated in the Energy Trust’s Refrige rator Recycling program

• 573 customers received the Energy Trust electric resistance water heater incentive

• 111 customers received the Energy Trust heat pump water heater incentive

• 573 customers received the Energy Trust $75 water heater incentive2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 52 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### • 174 free showerheads have been installed by PGE’s plumber network when on residential jobs in PGE’s service territory through the Ener gy Trust Direct Install program

• 102 Energy Trust window bonus incentives

• 381 Savings W ithin Reach homes have been weatherize d

• Transfers from PGE’s call center to Energy Trust 201 2 : Appliance Program (PECI): 138 , Warm Program (CSG): 360 , OPower: 512

*Energy Trust provided information on participation among PGE customers

. Weatherization measures are among electrically heated homes.

Heat Pump Activity

A PGE /Daikin heat pump promotion for a free indoor unit ran from May 1

- June 30. The offer combined distributor, PGE and Energy Trust incentives for ductless heat pumps. The campaign included 46,977 direct mail and 15,863 email w ith a reminder email. The offer drove 25 7 leads to PGE

- Approved

contractors.
A PGE/Trane heat pump promotion for a MasterCard gift card ran from August 1

- September 30. The offer combined distributor, PGE and Energy Trust incentives as well as Oregon tax cr edits. The campaign included 12,576 direct mail and 4,504 email. The offer drove approximately 55 leads to PGE

- approved

contractors.
A PGE/Airefco heat pump promotion for a free indoor unit ran from October 3

- November 30. The offer combined distributor, PG E and Energy Trust incentives as well as Oregon tax credits and contractor financing. The campaign included 34,495 direct mail, 16,252 email, and 8,000 both direct mail and email. The offer drove approximately 88 leads to PGE

- approved contractors and resul ted in 77 installed heat

pumps. With a goal of helping contractors better align with Energy Trust’s new ductless heat pump program guidelines, PGE funded and facilitated two trainings

– an all

- day class with testing and a one

- hour webinar

– to teach the co ntractors how to condition larger homes using a maximum of two indoor ductless heat pump fan coil units (heads).

PGE reinstated quality assurance inspections among PGE

- Approved contractors in 2012. The inspection

team has continued to refin e their skills through peer experience and information exchange, partnering, monitoring, mentoring and supervised ride

- alongs with the Heat Pump Technical Field Specialist, John Karasaki . Deficiencies inspectors identify in the field result in corrective actions or fail ed inspections. Corrective actions are resolved by the quality assurance specialists, and failed inspections are passed on to the Approved Contractors, requiring the contractor to fix the issue. The Heat Pump Technical Field Specialist utilizes these error s to educate the owners and staff to reduce the likelihood of the errors occurring again.

A s reported by PGE

- Approved Contractors , there were 1,650 Heat Pump installations in 2012. PGE Quality Assurance Specialists performed 290 i nspections of Heat Pump in stallations

, 49 of which required corrective action taken and 1 failed inspection.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 53 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## Energy Trust of Oregon 201 2 Annual Report NW Natural Washington
April 25, 201 3 13



## TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

I. Introduction, Background , Oversight and Goals 54

II. Annual Report Highlights 55

III. Annual Results 59

Appendi ces

1. Energy Efficiency Measure Counts and Savings 61

2. Customer Satisfaction 63

13 April 25, 201 3 , is the date this report is due from NW Natural to the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 54 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## I INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, OVERSIGHT AND GOALS

A. Introduction
This report covers 2012, the third full year that Energy Trust of Oregon provided services and incentives to residential and commercial customers of NW Natural in Washington. 14

It addresses progress toward annual goals, information on revenues and expenditures, number of completed measures and incentives paid during the year and highlights of program activity.



### B. Background At the request of NW Natural and following approval granted by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Comm ission, WUTC, Energy Trust began administering NW Natural’s
demand

- side management programs in southwest Washington on October 1, 2009. The first year was viewed as a pilot. Satisfied with results from the pilot year, in 2011 the WUTC approved Energy Trust ’s continued administration of conservation programs for NW Natural in Washington.



### C. Oversight The Energy Efficiency Advisory Group, EEAG, was created , at the direction of the WUTC, to provide advice and oversight for NW Natural/Energy Trust energy

- effici ency offerings in Washington. The advisory group is comprised of representatives from NW Natural, Energy Trust, WUTC, Washington Public Counsel, Northwest Industrial Gas Users and the Northwest Energy Coalition.



### D. Goals

NW Natural , in collaboration with the EEAG, established performance metrics for the 2012 program year. This report presents Energy Trust’s performance against those goals (see page 4).

14 Energy Trust also collaborates in Washington with Clark Public Utilities on tune

- ups of rooftop HVA C units in commercial buildings. Savings accrue to Clark Public Utilities, which provides revenue to cover Energy Trust costs. See table p. 60

.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 55 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## II. ANNUAL REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

A. Summary

• Gas efficiency measures installed in 201 2 by NW Natural’s Washington customers
saved 213,486 annual therms of natural gas

— including 107,764 annual therms in Existing Buildings, 66,810 annual therms in Existing Homes and 38,912 annual therms in New Homes. In total, this was an increase of 4.5 percent over 2011 savings.

• Total 2012 savings met the minimum savings goal , as detailed in NW Natural’s 2012 Energy Efficiency Plan. Total program spending, including incentives, delivery and administration, was well within budget.

• An energy efficiency services group, comprised of Clark County stakeholders, continued meeting in 2012 to identify collaboration opportunities , including joint incentive offerings and coordination on outreach events and marketing . The group includes representatives from Energy Trust, Clark P ublic Utilities, Planet Clark, Clark County Department of Environmental Services and Clark County Community Development’s
Weatherization P rogram.

• As part of Energy Trust’s commitment to competitive process regarding the use of

program management contracto rs, in 2012 all three of the Washington programs were
rebid through a competitive Request for Proposals process . While there were many attractive proposals, including those from two long

- time incumbents, all three of the programs were awarded to new bidder s

. T o create administrative and cost efficiencies

, both of the residential programs (Existing Home and New Homes) will be delivered by

one contractor beginning in 2013.



### B. Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission Performance Metrics

The table below compares 201 2 annual results to 201 2 program goals, as established in NW Natural’s Energy Efficiency Plan for Washington (updated December 2011 ).

201 2 R esults C ompared to G oals

Metrics Goal 2012 Total Q1 Results Q2 Results Q3 Results Q4 Results Therms Saved 212,550

– 250,000 213,486 47,496 36,173 19,675 110,142 Total Program Costs $1,431,460

– $1,614,980 $1,156,509 $191,747 $266,693 $231,991 $466,078
Average Levelized Cost Per Measure Less Than $0.65 $0.482 $0.336 $0.594 $0.94 0 $0.417
Dollars Spent Per Therm Saved Less Than $6.50 $5.42 $4.04 $7.37 $11.86 $4.23

Total Resource Cost and Utility Costs at Portfolio Level Greater than 1.0 1.25 / 1.07 Reported Annually Reported Annually Reported Annually Reported Annually2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 56 of 63 April 15, 2013 2012 U tility C ost and Resource Cost by Program Program Utility Cost Total Resource Cost
Existing Buildings 1.3 1.0 Existing Homes 1.0 1.2
New Homes 1.0 1.5
Overall 1.07 1. 25

201 2 T otal U tility C ost and Resource Cost Program Utility Cost Total Resource Cost

NW Natural Washington
Portfolio 1.1 1.2

NW Natural Washington
Low Income 0.8 0.6

Overall 1.06 1. 20



### C. Commercial sector highlights
Existing Buildings

• Existing Buildings achieved savings of 107,764 annual therms in 2012, fa lling short of the conservative goal of 121,678 annual therms, as development timelines on three substantial projects were delayed and shifted to 2013. This has contributed to a strong 2013 project pipeline.

• A collaborative agreement with Clark Public Util ities to offer joint rooftop HVAC unit tune

- up incentives was signed in 2012. The cost share on incentives and delivery expense allows the program to capture more therms at a significantly lower cost per therm. There is no additional work required to achie ve the electric savings.

• Rooftop unit tune

- ups were the biggest driver of savings in 2012 , as 177 units were completed, totaling more than 56,000 therms or 52 percent of total Existing Buildings savings.

• Pipe insulation was also an important and cost

- effe ctive measure in 2012 , as nearly 35,000 therms were saved for less than $16,000 in incentive spending.

• While K

- 12 schools helped drive savings in 2011, public school projects slowed in 2012 in anticipation of energy

- efficiency project funding awards in lat e 2012 and early 2013 through the Washington State 2012 Jobs Now Act. The program anticipates savings from multiple school district projects in 2013.

• Few custom projects completed in 2012, partially due to the slowdown in school projects

. Consequently, the program will be restructuring its custom offering in 2013 to allow for increased funding of custom studies and better project collaboration opportunities with Clark Public Utilities.

• Commercial customers expressed satisfaction with their experience with E nergy Trust

. Four of five respondents surveyed were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall program experience.



### D. Residential sector highlights

• Residential programs achieved total savings of 105,723 annual therms in 2012, of which Existing Homes accounted for savings of 66,810 annual therms, while New Homes saved 38,9122012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 57 of 63 April 15, 2013 annual therms. These resul ts exceeded the Existing Homes conservative goal of 63,373 annual therms and exceeded the New Homes stretch goal of 34,876 annual therms by 12 percent. In total, the residential sector achieved savings that were 27 percent higher than 2011.

Existing Homes

• The program heavily promoted gas fir eplaces in 2012
, paying incentives on 76 i nstallations , a 75 percent increase over 2011.

• With 152 units installed, high

- efficiency gas furnaces accounted for 16 percent of program savings in 2012, compared to 18 percent in 2011 and 43 percent in 2010, the pilot year. This is a positive trend, given the planned federal standard change to a minimum of 90 percent annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE) on May 1, 2013, and potential loss of t he furnace incentive when high efficiency furnaces become the norm.

• The program paid 52 water heater incentives in 2012 , compared with 29 in 2011. The newly offered 0.67 efficiency factor (EF) water heaters started to show some uptake, in part due to a

su mmertime co

- promotion with NW Natural that generated 28 installations. Due to cost

effectiveness concerns, the tankless water heater incentive will not be offered for Existing Homes
in 2013.

• Efficient window installations significantly increased in 2012 , s aving more than 3,800 therms compared to 2,000 therms in 2011.

• The program delivered 992 Energy Saver Kits in 2012 , compared with 1,757 in 2011. This decrease was intended, as the program focused more on promoting core equipment improvements and weatheriza tion measures. The program also launched the Build

- Your

- Own Energy Saver Kit functionality, which includes an online ordering process that allows customers to tailor the kits to fit their specific needs. This increases the likelihood of installation and th e amount of energy savings that can be claimed per savings device.

• Public outreach events were notably more successful in 2012 compared with 2011, with more than 240 customers signing up for Home Energy Reviews.

• In 2012, the program began utilizing online media campaigns through The Oregonian, The Columbian and Comcast as a means for reaching new customers. The ads are relatively inexpensive to purchase and have proven in other programs.

• Customer satisfaction surveys show 89 percent of Existing Homes part icipants were
satisfied or very satisfied with their experience with Energy Trust in 2012

— up from 86 percent in 2011. The 143 program participants were surveyed by telephone shortly after completing energy

efficiency upgrades and receiving an incentive che ck.

New Homes

• A total of 189 ENERGY STAR ® new homes received incentives in 2012.

• Market share for the year was approximately 17 percent, a notable drop from just over 31 percent in 2011. This is likely due to increased ENERGY STAR documentation requirements that took effect in 2012, as well as the significant increase in total housing starts from 667 in 2011 to 1,117 in 2012. Due to length y construction timelines, it is not known how many of these new 2012 housing starts will be built to ENERGY STAR standards in 2013.

• In 2012 642 high

- efficiency gas clothes washers received incentives in a joint incentive offer
with Clark Public Utilities. This successful collaboration will continue in 2013.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 58 of 63 April 15, 2013 • Four tankless water heater incentives were processed in 2012.

• Clark County Food Bank agreed to deliver Energy Saver Kits through its food pantry
locations. This initiative launched in Q4 and distributed 178 kits.



### E. Trade Ally Network

• Energy Trust’s Trade Ally Network serving Washington customers continued its steady growth in 2012.

• By year end, 189 trade allies served Washington, 29 more than had been enrolled at the end of 2011 and 57 more than had been enrolled by the end of 2010. Of the 189 trade allies, 78 were based in Washington

— 21 more than at the end of 2011.

• B reakfast meetings exclusively for Washington trade allies servi ng Existing Buildings and Existing Homes we re held in Vancouver in June and December. These breakfasts have proved to
be excellent forum s , particularly on the residential side, where attendance and engagement by
trade allies continues to increase.

• B uilders receiving ENERGY STAR incentives were required to become Energy Trust trade
allies as of July 1, 2012, to ensure that proper insurance cov erage is maintained by builders. This requirement had little impact on participation.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 59 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## I II. ANNUAL RESULTS

A. Activity highlights

— sites served

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Total
Existing Commercial

School/college retrofits 4 3

-- 2 9

Other commercial retrofits 2 1 6 43 52

Studies

-- -- -- -- -- Existing Homes

Weatherization (insulation, air and duct sealing and windows) 27 43 35 74 179

Gas hearths 16 19 9 32 76

Gas furnaces 41 32 14 63 150

Water heaters 8 5 16 22 51
Home Energy Reviews 32 11 40 69 152

New Homes

Builder Option Package 30 13 37 109 189

Clothes washers 139 151 156 196 642



### B. Revenues

Source Actual Revenue YTD Budgeted Revenue YTD

NW Natural 1,261,914 $ 1,261,914 $



### C. Expenditures

Actual Expenditures YTD Budgeted Expenditures YTD Variance
Existing Buildings 401,357 $ 599,880 $ 198,523 $

Subtotal 401,357 $ 599,880 $ 198,523 $
Existing Homes 453,644 $ 525,614 $ 71,971 $

New Homes 262,977 $ 316,275 $ 53,297 $

Subtotal 716,621 $ 841,889 $ 125,268 $

38,530 $ 49,187 $ 10,657 $

1,156,509 $ 1,490,957 $ 334,448 $ Commercial Programs

Residential Programs

Administration

TOTAL

The favorable spending variances in Existing Homes and New Homes reflect success in acquiring savings at a lower cost than budgeted. The favorable variance in the Existing Buildings program was driven in part by a shift in completion dates for three larger projects into 2013. As a result, these incentives will be paid in 2013.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 60 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### Incentives paid

Actual Incentives YTD
Existing Buildings 173,116 $

Subtotal 173,116 $
Existing Homes 162,801 $

New Homes 147,609 $

Subtotal 310,410 $

483,526 $ Commercial Programs

Residential Programs

TOTAL

Incentives paid account for just under 50 percent of year

- to

- date program expense, when total program expense is adjusted down by 15 percent to account for costs that a utility

- delivered program would recover through rates. This percentage would have been higher if savings had been acquired at a higher cost per therm.



### D. Savings

Therms Saved YTD Annual Goal (Conservative) % Achieved
YTD $/Therm Levelized Cost/Therm
Existing Buildings 107,764 121,678 89% 3.85 $ 40.8 ¢
Subtotal 107,764 121,678 89% 3.85 $ 40.8 ¢
Existing Homes 66,810 63,373 105% 7.02 $ 55.6 ¢

New Homes 38,912 29,645 131% 6.99 $ 54.2 ¢
Subtotal 105,723 93,018 114% 7.01 $ 55.0 ¢

213,486 214,696 99% 5.42 $ 48.2 ¢ Commercial Programs

Residential Programs

TOTAL

While the rooftop unit tune

- up savings were achieved cost effectively, particularly due to collaboration with Clark Public Utilities, the shorter measure lives of these improvements led to a higher levelized cost
of savings for the Existing Buildings program than experienced in prior years. In total, the l evelized cost is
well below the $0.65 per therm performance metric set by the WUTC.



### E. Clark Public Utilities

— rooftop HVAC unit tune

- ups ∗ ∗

Q3 Q4 YTD
Revenue $ 3,515 $ 120,213 $ 123,728
Expenses $ 3,704 $ 69,29 1 $ 72,99 5

Incentives $ 1,575 $ 53,865 $ 55,440
Savings (kWh) 11,098 483,993 495,091
Levelized Cost per kWh 2.3¢

∗ ∗ Initiative began in Q3 2012. Electric savings in this table reflect an adjustment upward to account for reduced transmission and distribution line losses resulting from the savings.2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 61 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## APPENDIX 1: 201 2 Energy Efficiency Measure Counts and Savings

Table 1: Residential Sector Measures

Category Measure Measures Installed Total Therms Saved Air Sealing Air Sealing 28 715
Blower Door Test 40 0 **Air Sealing Total 68**  **715** Duct Sealing and Insulation Duct Insulation 9 132 Duct Sealing 65 2,176 Duct Testing 78 0 **Duct Sealing and Insulation Total 152**  **2,308** Energy Saver Kits **Energy Saver Kits Total 992**  **28,485** Home Energy Reviews **Home Energy Reviews Total 153**  **0**
Shell Insulation Ceiling Insulation 32 3,160
Floor Insulation 15 1,108
Wall Insulation 9 506
**Shell Insulation Total 56**  **4,774** Space Heating Boiler 1 44
Furnace 152 10,655 Gas Fireplace 76 7,784 **Space Heating Total 229**  **18,483** Water Heating Tank Water Heater 35 981
Tankless Water Heater 17 1,105
Water Heater Thermostat Set

- Back 19 138 Showerheads Left Behind at Home Energy Review 191 2,424 Showerwands Left Behind at Home Energy Review 49 633 Faucet Aerators Left Behind at Home Energy Review 300 2,547 Cold Water Detergent Left Behind at Home Energy Review 39 226
Water

- Saving Device Installed by Plumber 15 178 **Water Heating Total 665**  **8,233**
Windows **Windows Total 84**  **3,812**
New Homes ENERGY STAR New Home 189 18,494
Tankless Water Heater 4 260
Low

- Income Energy Saver Kit 178 1,282
Showerheads Sold at Retail 1,828 16,354 High

- Efficiency Clothes Washer 642 2,523
**New Homes Total**  **2,841 38,912** 

**Grand Total 5,240**  **105,723**2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 62 of 63 April 15, 2013 

### Table 2: Commercial Sector Measures

Category Measure Measures Installed Total Therms Saved Foodservice Equipment Gas Fryer 5 2,845
**Foodservice Equipment Total 5**  **2,845**
Shell Insulation Ceiling Insulation 2 1,049
**Shell Insulation Total 2**  **1,049** Space Heating Boiler 5 10,074 Boiler Pipe Insulation 12 34,904 **Space Heating Total 17**  **44,978** Water Heating Conventional Condensing Tank 8 1,224
Tankless Water Heater 1 196 **Water Heating Total 9**  **1,420** Rooftop HVAC Tune

- up Rooftop HVAC Unit Tune

- up DCV Control 177 56,330
**HVAC Tune**

**- up Total**  **177 56,330** 
Custom Building Operator Certification 1 1,142
**Custom Total 1**  **1,142**

**Grand Total 211**  **107,764**2012 Annual Report to OPUC Page 63 of 63 April 15, 2013 

## APPENDIX 2: Customer Satisfaction

In 2012, Energy Trust continued short telephone surveys of NW Natural customers in Washington who had participated in Energy Trust programs. Energy Trust attempted to reach 150 residential customers (participants in the E xisting Homes program) and all commercial customers served in NW Natural’s Washington service territory to determine satisfaction with their engagement in Energy Trust programs. Results from 143 residential customers and 5 commercial customers indicate a g enerally high level of customer satisfaction for both groups.

Table 1: NW Natural Washington Residential Customer Satisfaction January 1

- December 31, 2012 Residential (n=143) Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied/Very
satisfied
Overall 3% 8% 89%
Incentive application 2% 8% 90%
Turnaround time to receive incentive 11% 11% 78%

We were able to interview only 5 commercial customers (all participated in Q1 or Q2 2012) due to low project volume. Four of five respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with th eir overall program experience, interaction with program representative, and performance of equipment installed. All respondents were satisfied with the incentive amount and ease of applying for the incentive.

Table 2 : NW Natural Washington Commercial Customer Satisfaction January 1

- December 31, 2012 Commercial (n=5) Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied/Very
satisfied
Overall

- 1 4
Incentive amount

- - 5 Ease of applying for incentive

- - 5 Interaction with program representative 1

- 4
Performance of equipment installed

- - 4
Turnaround time to receive incentive

- 2 3