BURLINGTON ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT

2012 Energy Efficiency 

Annual Report

Burlington Electric Department

585 Pine Street • Burlington, VT 05401

Phone 802.658.0300 • Fax 802.865.7400
Table of Contents

1 Introduction & Summary .................................................................................................. 1

2 Overview of EEU Services Results................................................................................ 14

2.1 Non Resource Acquisition......................................................................................... 18

2.2 Business Services Overview...................................................................................... 21

2.2.1 Business New Construction .............................................................................. 26

2.2.2 Business Existing Facilities................................................................................ 32

2.3 Residential Service Overview................................................................................... 37

2.3.1 Residential New Construction.......................................................................... 41

2.3.2 Existing Homes................................................................................................... 47

2.3.3 Retail Products.................................................................................................... 53

3 Heating and Process Fuels Activity............................................................................... 58

4 Appendix............................................................................................................................ 62

4.1 Definition and End Notes.......................................................................................... 62

4.2 Design Review Guide ................................................................................................ 65
List of Tables

Table 1: All Business & Residential DSM History....................................................................... 11

Table 2: All Business DSM History.............................................................................................. 12

Table 3: All Residential DSM History .......................................................................................... 13

Table 4: EEU Business & Residential - Total Resource Benefits................................................. 15

Table 5: EEU Business & Residential - Summary........................................................................ 16

Table 6: EEU Business & Residential - End Use Summary ......................................................... 17

Table 7: Non-Resource Acquisition .............................................................................................. 20

Table 8: EEU Business - Total Resource Benefits........................................................................ 23

Table 9: EEU Business - Summary ............................................................................................... 24

Table 10: EEU Business - End-Use Summary .............................................................................. 25

Table 11: EEU Business New Construction - Total Resource Benefits........................................ 29

Table 12: EEU Business New Construction - Summary............................................................... 30

Table 13: EEU Business New Construction - End Use Summary ................................................ 31

Table 14: EEU Business Existing Facilities - Total Resource Benefits ........................................ 34

Table 15: EEU Business Existing Facilities - Summary ............................................................... 35

Table 16: EEU Business Existing Facilities - End Use Summary................................................. 36

Table 17: EEU Residential - Total Resource Benefits .................................................................. 38

Table 18: EEU Residential - Summary ......................................................................................... 39

Table 19: EEU Residential - End Use Summary........................................................................... 40

Table 20: EEU Residential New Construction - Total Resource Benefits .................................... 44

Table 21: EEU Residential New Construction - Summary ........................................................... 45

Table 22: EEU Residential New Construction - End Use Summary............................................. 46

Table 23: EEU Residential Existing Homes - Total Resource Benefits........................................ 50

Table 24: EEU Residential Existing Homes - Summary............................................................... 51

Table 25: EEU Residential Existing Homes - End Use Summary ................................................ 52

Table 26: EEU Efficient Products - Total Resource Benefits ....................................................... 55

Table 27: EEU Efficient Products - Summary .............................................................................. 56

Table 28: EEU Efficient Products - End Use Summary................................................................ 57

Table 29: Heating and Process Fuels Activity............................................................................... 61

Table 30: Summary Report Table Template ................................................................................. 62

Table 31: End Use Report Table Template ................................................................................... 63
List of Figures

Figure 1: Impact of DSM on Total City Energy Use ...................................................................... 3
1

1 Introduction & Summary

2012 Highlights & Overview

The Burlington Electric Department (BED) is pleased to submit the following report to 

the Burlington Electric Commission, the Vermont Public Service Board and the Vermont 

Department of Public Service, summarizing the implementation of energy efficiency 

programs in the City of Burlington for the year 2012. BED remains committed to 

offering its customers high quality and affordable energy services and a secure, 

environmentally sound supply of electricity into the future. Energy efficiency continues 

to play a major role in achieving this goal, and is the cornerstone of the BED resource 

acquisition strategy that is described in its 2012 Integrated Resource Plan. 

Energy efficiency has been clearly shown to be Vermont’s least expensive future energy 

supply resource over time, and is every day a greater environmental imperative. The 

Burlington Electric Department is owned by all the citizens of Burlington, who have 

been unequivocally clear that the option for future supply that they prefer above all 

others is the pursuit of additional cost-effective energy efficiency.

Burlington voters in 1990 approved an 11.3 million dollar bond to fund energy efficiency 

programs that supported successful program activities through 2002. Since 2003, BED 

customers (like all other Vermont electric customers) pay a small monthly charge that 

supports these “Energy Efficiency Utility” programs. When these funding sources are 

considered along with customers’ direct investment, $42 million has been invested in 

energy efficiency efforts sponsored by BED over the last 23 years. This is comprised of 

about $19.3 million spent by BED on all of its energy efficiency efforts during that 

period, combined with another $22.8 million in matching expenditures by its customers. 

The willingness to invest their private funds in these investments is a testament to the 

value that BED customers place on these services. 
2

As Figure 1 indicates, the overall effect has been dramatic. Annual electricity 

consumption in 2012 was about 5.3% lower than in 1989 (it was 4.7% lower in 2011 and 

2% greater in 2010 and 2009). During the same 2012 period, statewide use of electricity 

increased by 8.1%. It is important to recognize that population growth was similar for 

Burlington and the state (8% v. 11% respectively), but statewide job growth was greater 

than Burlington’s (17% v. 5%) which can explain some portion of the variance. 

However, the consistent delivery of affordable energy efficiency services has helped to 

meet the needs of a growing local economy over the last 23 years with less electricity 

than was used then! As a result, energy efficiency investments save Burlington 

consumers about $10 million of retail electric costs annually. 

Energy efficiency expenditures are made almost entirely locally, typically in the form of 

professional services, skilled trades employment, and equipment purchases. Not only is 

the value of the City’s building and energy-using equipment improved, but locallyretained dollars are “multiplied” many times over by subsequent consumer spending. 

Absent these energy efficiency expenditures, these funds would have gone toward the 

purchase of electricity and enhanced infrastructure to satisfy increased demands on the 

City’s electrical system. Most of these dollars would have been exported out of state, 

and many out of the country. Energy Efficiency is a win-win situation for the city of 

Burlington through increased local economic activity, and through the avoidance of 

increasingly costly electricity purchases, their associated infrastructure growth and 

capital expenses, and their environmental impacts.
Figure 1: Impact of DSM on Total City Energy Use

During 2012 alone, BED saved 

measures installed, which will result in 7

installed measures (2012 measures have a weighted average lifetime of 

equivalent to providing ener

for 12 years. During 2012, total BED program spending was $

customers spent an additional $1,

investments in their homes an

Harder to quantify, but of increasing importance to the ratepayers of Burlington are the 

environmental impacts avoided by decreasing the need for electricity. Thanks to the 

energy savings (6,428 MWh) generated by energy efficiency programs in 

Burlington will have avoided the release of 

Considering the difficult economic conditions our customers have been experiencing 

over the past several years, BED is 

200 

250 

300 

350 

400 

450 

500 

1979 1981 1983 1985 1987

Gigawatt-hours

City Energy Use

City Energy Use Without DSM

This chart demonstrates the impact BED's energy efficiency efforts have had on annual energy 

consumption in Burlington. The area between the purple and blue lines represents the amount of 

energy saved by Burlington consumers from 1989 through 2012 from energy efficiency 

implementation.

: Impact of DSM on Total City Energy Use

alone, BED saved 6,428 Megawatt hours (MWh) of energy from efficiency 

measures installed, which will result in 75,040 MWh of savings over the useful life of the 

measures have a weighted average lifetime of 12 years). This is 

equivalent to providing energy to about 1,250 average Burlington residential customers 

, total BED program spending was $1,756,743 and participating 

customers spent an additional $1,968,113 of their own to fund energy efficiency 

investments in their homes and facilities. 

Harder to quantify, but of increasing importance to the ratepayers of Burlington are the 

environmental impacts avoided by decreasing the need for electricity. Thanks to the 

) generated by energy efficiency programs in 201

Burlington will have avoided the release of about 41,970 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)

Considering the difficult economic conditions our customers have been experiencing 

BED is encouraged that it met 90% of savings projections in 

1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

City Energy Use

City Energy Use Without DSM

This chart demonstrates the impact BED's energy efficiency efforts have had on annual energy 

consumption in Burlington. The area between the purple and blue lines represents the amount of 

energy saved by Burlington consumers from 1989 through 2012 from energy efficiency 

3

Megawatt hours (MWh) of energy from efficiency 

MWh of savings over the useful life of the 

years). This is 

average Burlington residential customers 

and participating 

of their own to fund energy efficiency 

Harder to quantify, but of increasing importance to the ratepayers of Burlington are the 

environmental impacts avoided by decreasing the need for electricity. Thanks to the 

2012 alone, 

tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). 

Considering the difficult economic conditions our customers have been experiencing 

% of savings projections in 

2007 2009 2011

This chart demonstrates the impact BED's energy efficiency efforts have had on annual energy 

consumption in Burlington. The area between the purple and blue lines represents the amount of 
4

2012. BED projected 7,259 MWh savings and achieved 6,428 MWh. BED’s projected 

budget for 2012 was $1,879,931 and $1,756,743 was spent, about 6% less than projected. 

BED’s cost for saved energy was slightly higher than projections. BED estimated it 

would spend $259 per annualized MWh saved, and instead spent $273 per annualized 

MWh. BED’s administrative costs as a percentage of total program costs remained 

consistent with historical performance; about 17% of the budget was used to defray 

program operation costs. 83% was spent on direct technical assistance and incentives to 

customers.

Annual fluctuations in any energy efficiency program’s performance depend on a 

variety of human and business cycle dimensions that are hard to quantify and even 

harder to predict with precision. The decision to move forward with an energy 

efficiency project is ultimately the individual customer’s. Customers consider a wide 

variety of factors in their decision-making process, including their perceptions of local 

and national economic conditions and trends, their availability of funds and competing 

interests for the use of those funds, fluctuations in their business functions and volumes, 

and the opinion of off-site consultants and decision makers. The decision to move 

forward with an energy efficiency project is ultimately the individual customer’s. Given 

the small size of BED’s system, the loss of only a few new construction projects can have 

a dramatic impact on its annual budgets and savings estimates. 

Year-to-year fluctuations in program results reflect the relative unpredictability of 

energy efficiency program timing, and support the notion that annual projections are no 

more than carefully-crafted estimates. In the long run, the performance of BED's energy 

efficiency programs continues to meet the expectations laid out in BED’s Integrated 

Resource Plan of 2012 and prior planning documents dating back more than 20 years. 

This report includes coverage of BED’s program activities related to the thirteenth year 

of operation of the State's — and the nation's — first Energy Efficiency Utility (EEU). 

Statewide energy efficiency programs are today operated by the non-profit service 

provider “Efficiency Vermont” (EVt). Thanks to a long history of successful program 

implementation, BED serves as the City’s own EEU and delivers the majority of these 
5

programs within the City of Burlington, continuing to build on its past success in 

helping Burlington’s consumer-owners achieve energy efficient electric use. 

Since the inception of the EEU concept in 2000, BED has shared planning and program 

design work with EVt. This relationship has helped to shape a seamless and transparent 

set of programs to the mutual benefit of both organizations and Vermont ratepayers. 

BED and EVt annually update a detailed coordination plan that seeks to maximize the 

benefits of synergism to both organizations. The marketing and outreach power of 

Efficiency Vermont over the past thirteen years has helped to heighten the awareness of 

energy efficiency and building performance issues among all Vermonters, including 

Burlingtonians.

BED recognizes that much of its success comes from effective working relationships not 

only with EVt, but also with its partners Vermont Gas Systems (VGS) and the 

Champlain Valley Weatherization Service (CVWS). A very cooperative relationship 

with the VGS has helped to develop a complete suite of thermal energy efficiency 

measures available to Burlington customers, and VGS’s willingness to work with BED to 

promote electrical energy efficiency programs to its natural gas customers has been a 

noteworthy strength of its joint energy efficiency program offerings. BED looks forward 

to continuing this partnership in 2013 and beyond. CVWS continues to successfully and 

cooperatively provide a comprehensive set of energy efficiency services to their 

customer base. BED and VGS will continue to work with CVWS in the coming years to 

gain more program participation from the always-challenging private landlord rental 

market, which comprises a large percentage of low-income housing in the Burlington 

area.

As part of our EEU responsibilities since 2010, the PSB has directed BED to offer 

technical assistance and incentives for weatherization improvements for BED customers 

that heat with oil, propane gas and wood (unregulated heating fuels). The program 

funds come from BED’s direct participation in the ISO-NE Forward Capacity Market 

and a portion of the statewide RGGI auction funds (FCM /RGGI). Based on Vermont 

statute, these funds are limited to energy efficiency projects. 
6

BED also continues to perform substantial analysis of energy efficiency and demand

response impacts on its system as part of the BED Integrated Resource planning and 

reporting process. BED updates all of its energy efficiency and demand response 

planning assumptions on a 3-year basis. BED is responsible for reacting with 

appropriate program design modifications to the changing market conditions that 

impact customers’ decisions about undertaking energy efficiency upgrades. 

2013 Program Development Outlook 

The difficult economic conditions that our customers have been facing over the past 

several years have presented BED with challenges that have required modifications to 

program incentives in particular to help motivate participation. BED (often in 

collaboration with EVT) began to increase incentives for mostly commercial custom 

projects in 2010 to encourage higher levels of overall participation and deeper savings 

per project. Given the uncertainty of a return to previous market conditions, BED 

estimates that higher incentives will be necessary in 2013, and potentially beyond, in 

order to approach meeting its savings targets. 

BED will continue to test all program design assumptions and pursue all strategies to 

make programs as cost-effective as possible. However, BED estimates that yield rates 

will be declining in coming years. Baselines, a term used to describe a state of energy 

efficient construction required by law, are increasing, due to more stringent state energy 

codes and federal standards. This results in declining increments of potential savings to 

pursue through advanced technology upgrades driven by program activities. 

As a result of changing market conditions, BED performed a great deal of planning and 

preparation in 2012 that will allow several efforts to begin in earnest in 2013 and beyond 

including: the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) pilot program for residential 

customers, UVM’s $13 Million dollar Green Revolving Loan fund for energy efficiency 

upgrades and BED’s grant from the U.S. Depart of Commerce Economic Development 

Agency (EDA) that allows BED to offer on-the-bill financing for eligible electric energy 

efficiency measures to commercial customers. 
7

For a number of years BED has investigated financing options for customers to help 

them more easily participate in our energy efficiency programs and comprehensively 

treat their energy footprint, including electric energy efficiency, fossil-fuel based 

weatherization, and the installation of renewable generation. BED has heard from its 

customers that, while they appreciate the technical assistance and cash incentives from 

BED to make electrical efficiency improvements, up-front capital is not always available 

to move forward with recommended efficiency projects. BED believes that creative 

financing tools will help customers get over this hurdle and help BED meet its 

aggressive energy savings targets. This issue is, of course, not unique to Burlington, and 

is under active discussion throughout Vermont. 

BED has tackled a portion of this problem with its recently- announced start of an OnBill financing (OBF) service for business customers to make electric energy efficiency 

upgrades. A $1 million dollar grant to BED from the U.S. Department of Commerce 

Economic Development Agency to start a revolving loan fund was made available with 

the assistance of Senator Sanders and his staff. OBF gives BED’s business customers the 

option to finance electric energy efficiency improvements, and repay the loan on the 

electric bill. This option requires no out-of-pocket expense and the loans can be 

structured so that the monthly energy savings are greater than the monthly loan 

payment, creating an immediate positive cash flow for the business. 

Since 2009, BED has collaborated with Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VEIC)

and a coalition of energy efficiency advocates statewide to launch the PACE program 

allowing residential customers to finance eligible all-fuels energy efficiency and 

renewable energy projects and repay the loans through their property tax bills. For a 

number of administrative, financial and political reasons, PACE has been delayed 

throughout most of the Vermont, and, for that matter, nationwide. The statutory rules 

governing Vermont’s PACE opportunity today have limited the program to owneroccupied residential buildings with a $30,000 project maximum and very strict 

underwriting guidelines. 
8

The PSB has recently granted BED’s request to use a portion of its FCM /RGGI dollars 

($175,000) to create a pilot PACE loan fund to test whether the PACE model can increase 

fossil fuel weatherization participation levels among the targeted population. BED has 

the authority to offer the PACE option to all eligible residential customers that meet the 

underwriting criteria. BED estimate that somewhat less than 30% of our residential 

consumers are eligible for the program and this will comprise the target of these efforts. 

In spite of these limits, the first project is underway in April 2013, and we plan to 

expand this effort as soon as we are sure the program mechanism is completely ready. 

BED is pleased that it has a portion of the financing program capital provision solved, 

and is actively engaged in identifying the additional funding sources that would allow 

PACE-eligible customers to pursue eligible renewable energy projects. With this in 

place, PACE could be a program that would address all of our customers’ energy 

upgrade issues in one comprehensive financing program. While most energy efficiencybased PACE loan packages will feature a positive cash-flow design, in the case of certain 

renewable energy options, a small monthly customer subsidy may be required. This 

aspect is not unlike many “green” pricing products that utilities nationwide have 

recently offered, in which program participants pay a small premium to purchase 

renewable energy through their electric energy supplier. BED will continue to refine 

this effort in 2013. We hope also to offer the repayment of the PACE loans on the BED 

electric bill, much in the same way as we will for the OBF commercial program.

BED is also continuing the focus on summer peak demand. The challenge for BED is to 

reduce its growing summer air-conditioning peak load, a goal that has increasingly 

absorbed the attention of BED’s resource planners. In 2012, BED was able to achieve 957

KW of summer coincident-peak demand reduction, about 7% higher than the projected 

target of 898 KW. Over the 2009-2011 EEU three-year program performance cycle, BED 

was able to achieve 3,203 KW of summer coincident-peak demand reduction, about 4% 

higher than the projected target of 3,087 KW. 

In addition to traditional energy efficiency measures that focus on reducing peak 

demand, BED initially engaged in 2007 in demand response (DR) efforts supported by 
9

the New England Independent System Operator (ISO-NE). ISO-NE offers customers 

ongoing financial incentives to reduce peak electric use through load curtailment and

the use of on-site generation during its peak load periods. BED worked in partnership 

with a demand services provider, EnerNoc, Inc., to help enroll key customers in the ISONE program. To date, this partnership has enrolled 10 BED accounts for about 2.1 MW 

of potential load reduction capability at peak load hours. New air quality standards 

may impact the viability of the DR program in the future. 

BED is also pleased to see a continually growing amount of photo-voltaic (PV) systems 

in Burlington. Like DR, this technology helps to alleviate the summer peak issues. 

Currently, there is about 950 KW of installed PV capacity through net-metering, 

standard offer or direct purchase power agreements. We currently have twenty-five 

customers taking advantage of BED’s solar rider tariff that was approved by the PSB in 

November 2011.

Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), smart grid and a new realm of potential 

customer energy use empowerment tools will be deployed over 2013. BED is excited to 

explore the extensive possibilities for enhanced interaction with its customers and the 

potential benefits and capabilities Smart Grid technology will bring them. BED is

launching its customer energy education web presentment software (Energy Engage) 

during the early summer of 2013. This software includes “dashboards” that present 

energy usage details and energy efficiency- related technical advice and efficiency 

program opportunities to customers. 

Energy Minder is a 3-year experimental collaboration between UVM and BED to 

integrate a “social networking tool” with BED’s meter data management and web 

presentment systems. The goal of this experiment is to evaluate the utility of an energy 

efficiency social network in which behavior is both tracked and driven by interactions 

(questions and answers) among participants within a web-based social network, without 

typical utility “expert” intervention. Social networks are known to be an important driver of 

behavior change. Their advent has had clear and measurable impacts on social behavior, but 

much of their use is currently limited to leisure activities. Social & peer pressure has been shown 
10

to have some impact on energy efficiency behavior, but has not been extensively evaluated as a 

means of meeting energy efficiency goals.

The remaining pages on this report provide details on BED’s delivery of the following 

EEU services in 2012:

 Business New Construction 

 Business Existing Facilities

 Residential New Construction 

 Existing Homes

 Efficient Products 

 Heating and Process Fuels (Residential and Commercial)
11

Table 1: All Business & Residential DSM History*

-------- Participants -------- ------------------------------------------ Costs ----------------------------------------------- -------------------- Savings --------------------

Admin Services Incentive Evaluation Participant Program Mwh Lifetime Winter Summer

Total Mwh Kw Kw

1991 391 $356,563 $0 $273,437 $6,015 $1,091,190 $1,727,205 3,703 52,103 1,224 0

1992 330 $334,066 $0 $264,615 $14,711 $1,104,050 $1,717,442 3,595 72,723 1,385 0

1993 1,343 $344,326 $0 $501,991 $107,646 $2,052,045 $3,006,008 9,198 133,079 2,634 0

1994 734 $367,600 $0 $197,054 $46,172 $927,802 $1,538,628 3,304 32,558 991 0

1995 827 $255,770 $0 $149,865 $16,666 $1,584,811 $2,007,112 6,764 31,402 1,650 0

1996 774 $215,329 $0 $118,006 $44,318 $500,363 $878,016 2,285 38,654 0 358

1997 735 $143,184 $0 $122,189 $6,011 $848,380 $1,119,764 2,665 39,091 0 714

1998 692 $204,588 $0 $107,140 $353 $731,707 $1,043,788 3,202 43,971 0 822

1999 675 $214,782 $0 $101,224 $1,529 $331,985 $649,520 1,300 14,174 0 358

2000 1,364 $334,762 $97,067 $148,162 $0 $761,673 $1,341,664 3,130 37,211 443 387

2001 1,410 $425,123 $129,955 $208,178 $59,637 $609,115 $1,432,008 3,094 41,258 398 341

2002 1,824 $469,263 $192,143 $407,057 $2,352 $1,178,695 $2,249,510 4,438 63,159 444 520

2003 1,897 $305,283 $365,691 $236,762 $19,006 $538,589 $1,465,331 3,346 56,332 346 361

2004 1,484 $253,037 $302,017 $271,856 $19,067 $638,819 $1,484,796 3,500 46,856 625 557

2005 1,977 $242,385 $351,009 $260,806 $5,904 $970,437 $1,830,541 4,948 69,570 630 630

2006 2,188 $221,862 $352,886 $381,706 $42,057 $702,575 $1,701,086 6,254 83,951 813 891

2007 2,045 $255,856 $375,480 $441,352 $52,025 $1,353,651 $2,478,364 9,679 128,022 1,206 1,158

2008 6,392 $447,867 $412,037 $578,245 $65,159 $1,187,671 $2,690,979 7,299 72,402 1,178 889

2009 1,181 $317,257 $371,233 $452,901 $67,667 $1,959,977 $3,169,035 5,679 64,416 765 811

2010 1,638 $378,153 $339,569 $1,102,597 $54,283 $781,528 $2,656,130 6,492 75,954 1,223 1,148

2011 1,027 $310,536 $381,043 $1,372,682 $69,742 $1,020,842 $3,154,845 7,191 68,153 1,333 1,000

2012 1,244 $296,104 $425,616 $1,035,051 $63,671 $1,968,113 $3,788,555 6,428 75,050 1,118 957

Total 32,172 $6,693,696 $4,095,746 $8,732,876 $763,991 $22,844,018 $43,130,327 107,494 1,340,089 18,406 11,903

(*Note: All tables in this report reflect a reduction in MWh savings claims as a result of the final VT-DPS annual savings verification process).
12

Table 2: All Business DSM History

-------- Participants -------- ------------------------------------------ Costs ----------------------------------------------- -------------------- Savings --------------------

Admin Services Incentive Evaluation Participant Program Mwh Lifetime Winter Summer

Total Mwh Kw Kw

1991 3 $130,784 $0 $1,849 $0 $2,157 $134,790 31 93 30 0

1992 16 $149,138 $0 $119,535 $4,063 $454,104 $726,840 246 24,388 227 0

1993 164 $162,366 $0 $305,473 $35,559 $1,308,524 $1,811,922 5,587 72,218 1,421 0

1994 104 $238,153 $0 $163,733 $21,690 $630,639 $1,054,215 2,242 14,970 626 0

1995 163 $199,835 $0 $142,342 $9,480 $1,368,954 $1,720,611 6,137 21,386 1,615 0

1996 151 $151,409 $0 $50,423 $28,498 $355,217 $585,547 1,233 16,150 0 334

1997 160 $78,321 $0 $96,959 $5,612 $757,774 $938,666 2,300 33,565 0 669

1998 164 $141,258 $0 $65,048 $50 $615,144 $821,500 2,767 37,930 0 734

1999 162 $150,772 $0 $71,501 $0 $270,056 $492,329 1,051 10,895 0 338

2000 145 $176,552 $56,070 $80,108 $0 $613,597 $926,327 2,438 28,712 309 334

2001 127 $255,082 $99,310 $84,729 $43,248 $384,763 $867,132 2,064 26,581 240 240

2002 113 $284,826 $112,447 $238,866 $252 $912,280 $1,548,671 2,888 43,183 224 392

2003 144 $154,937 $243,386 $148,306 $9,503 $254,905 $811,037 2,193 32,975 122 162

2004 142 $115,796 $192,327 $140,234 $3,928 $507,253 $959,538 2,505 35,419 335 394

2005 133 $133,542 $208,860 $202,143 $0 $814,001 $1,358,546 3,751 57,787 342 397

2006 150 $112,917 $240,425 $261,310 $24,533 $575,467 $1,214,652 5,094 73,084 503 652

2007 151 $125,761 $244,030 $280,213 $33,320 $977,132 $1,660,456 6,530 104,174 482 763

2008 115 $113,641 $250,666 $304,252 $43,576 $904,640 $1,616,775 3,264 48,407 386 386

2009 105 $173,789 $224,900 $305,352 $44,608 $1,743,182 $2,491,831 3,781 51,336 336 555

2010 228 $168,765 $249,094 $849,801 $35,630 $458,549 $1,761,839 3,489 52,358 511 673

2011 220 $162,357 $277,034 $972,032 $47,704 $335,095 $1,794,222 2,787 37,950 421 521

2012 323 $153,822 $307,898 $721,047 $49,516 $1,667,503 $2,899,786 4,215 54,786 494 680

Total 3,183 $3,533,823 $2,706,447 $5,605,256 $440,770 $15,910,936 $28,197,232 66,593 878,347 8,624 8,224
13

Table 3: All Residential DSM History

-------- Participants -------- ------------------------------------------ Costs ----------------------------------------------- -------------------- Savings --------------------

Admin Services Incentive Evaluation Participant Program Mwh Lifetime Winter Summer

Total Mwh Kw Kw

1991 388 $225,779 $0 $271,588 $6,015 $1,089,033 $1,592,415 3,672 52,010 1,194 0

1992 314 $184,928 $0 $145,080 $10,648 $649,946 $990,602 3,349 48,335 1,158 0

1993 1,179 $181,960 $0 $196,518 $72,087 $743,521 $1,194,086 3,611 60,861 1,213 0

1994 630 $129,447 $0 $33,321 $24,482 $297,163 $484,413 1,062 17,588 365 0

1995 664 $55,935 $0 $7,523 $7,186 $215,857 $286,501 627 10,016 35 0

1996 623 $63,920 $0 $67,583 $15,820 $145,146 $292,469 1,052 22,504 0 24

1997 575 $64,863 $0 $25,230 $399 $90,606 $181,098 365 5,526 0 45

1998 528 $63,330 $0 $42,092 $303 $116,563 $222,288 435 6,041 0 88

1999 513 $64,010 $0 $29,723 $1,529 $61,929 $157,191 249 3,279 0 20

2000 1,219 $158,210 $40,997 $68,054 $0 $148,076 $415,337 692 8,499 134 53

2001 1,283 $170,041 $30,645 $123,449 $16,389 $224,352 $564,876 1,030 14,677 158 101

2002 1,711 $184,437 $79,696 $168,191 $2,100 $266,415 $700,839 1,550 19,976 220 128

2003 1,753 $150,346 $122,305 $88,456 $9,503 $283,684 $654,294 1,153 23,357 224 199

2004 1,342 $137,241 $109,690 $131,622 $15,139 $131,566 $525,258 995 11,437 290 163

2005 1,844 $108,843 $142,149 $58,663 $5,904 $156,436 $471,995 1,197 11,783 288 233

2006 2,038 $108,945 $112,461 $120,396 $17,524 $127,108 $486,434 1,160 10,867 310 239

2007 1,894 $130,095 $131,450 $161,139 $18,705 $376,519 $817,908 3,149 23,848 724 395

2008 6,277 $334,226 $161,371 $273,993 $21,583 $283,031 $1,074,204 4,035 23,995 792 503

2009 1,076 $143,468 $146,333 $147,549 $23,059 $216,795 $677,204 1,898 13,080 429 256

2010 1,410 $209,388 $90,475 $252,796 $18,653 $322,979 $894,291 3,003 23,596 712 475

2011 807 $148,179 $104,009 $400,650 $22,038 $685,747 $1,360,623 4,404 30,203 912 479

2012 921 $142,282 $117,718 $314,004 $14,155 $300,610 $888,769 2,213 20,264 624 277

Total 28,989 $3,159,873 $1,389,299 $3,127,620 $323,221 $6,933,082 $14,933,095 40,901 461,742 9,782 3,679
14

2 Overview of EEU Services Results

Similar to 2011 with the slower economic conditions, 2012 proved to be a challenge for achieving savings 

goals in all markets but overall we achieved about 90% of the total annual MWh goal and 107% of the 

summer coincident –peak KW goal. BED projected 7,259 annualized MWh savings and achieved 6,427

annualized MWh, 90% of the MWh annual goal. BED projected 898 coincident-peak summer KW savings 

and achieved 957 KW, 107% of the annual summer goal. 

BED spent $1,756,743 in 2012, which is about 6% less than the projected budget of $1,879,931. In total, 

BED’s EEU Services implementation saved 6,427 MWh of energy annually from installed measures that 

will result in 75,040 MWh savings over the equipment's useful life; 2012 measures have a weighted lifetime 

of 12 years.

In the first thirteen years of the Vermont Energy Efficiency Utility both organizations have exceeded 

savings estimates in most years and have done so at a lower cost per MWh than anticipated. Energy 

efficiency is now being delivered at a total utility cost of about $.03 per kilowatt-hour statewide. When 

compared with other energy sources, energy efficiency remains the state’s best bargain for future supply

and the expenditures stay largely in the Vermont economy. Avoiding electric generation also avoids the 

associated air emissions and other environmental impacts that impact Vermont and the region. 
15

Table 4: EEU Business & Residential - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $8,743,732.50

Fossil Fuel Savings $374,645.50

Water Savings $708,712.85

TRB Total $9,827,090.62

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 6,310 71,711

Generation MWh 6,427 75,041

Meter Demand Kw 3,758 38,010

Generation Peak Summer Kw 957 11,206

Generation Peak Winter Kw 1,118 11,886

Water Savings 7,421 79,457

Fuel Increase 991 35,031

O+M Savings $343,761 $2,786,916
16

Table 5: EEU Business & Residential - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 1,067 1,387 23,815

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $249,867 $250,020 $3,625,441

Implemntation $3,853 $18,547 $1,970,667

Planning $11,166 $1,650 $106,711

Marketing $39,426 $25,860 $773,098

IT $6,224 $0 $211,957

$310,537 $296,077 $6,687,875

BED Service Costs

Participants $378,664 $425,616 $4,081,329

Trade Allies $0 $0 $11,761

$378,664 $425,616 $4,093,090

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $1,302,846 $1,032,200 $8,676,636

Trade Allies $9,697 $2,850 $51,229

$1,312,543 $1,035,050 $8,727,865

BED Total Costs $2,001,743 $1,756,743 $19,508,830

Evaluation Costs $69,651 $63,671 $763,900

Participant Costs $936,239 $1,968,114 $22,761,775

Total Program Costs $3,007,633 $3,788,527 $43,034,505

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 7,208 6,428 107,512

Lifetime mWh 68,153 75,040 1,340,070

Winter peak Kw 1,333 1,118 18,405

Summer Peak Kw 1,100 957 12,002

mWh / Participant 7 5 5

Weighted Lifetime 9 12 12
17

Table 6: EEU Business & Residential - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 212 200.38 184.68 2,804.71 12.98 97.68 2,373.25 0.00

Clothes Drying 13 70.97 79.38 1,111.28 9.34 7.04 -1,368.45 0.00

Clothes Washing 326 55.51 70.71 989.98 9.87 7.44 49.49 2,515.60

Consumer Electronics 1892 174.53 199.60 1,113.05 23.71 18.43 0.00 0.00

Dishwashing 9 0.28 0.32 4.11 0.04 0.02 1.08 10.35

Hot Water 197 139.42 85.73 1,071.76 36.65 18.78 362.68 4,794.80

HVAC 7 118.27 133.72 2,005.87 1.07 51.15 0.00 0.00

Lighting 1953 4,340.46 4,327.80 40,381.26 875.02 611.37 -2,022.86 0.00

Motors 2 28.29 31.84 477.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Other 1 4.94 4.20 42.03 0.82 1.51 0.00 0.00

Other Efficiency 1 0.04 0.03 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00

Refrigeration 292 79.01 87.84 1,403.40 11.65 10.00 1.47 9.40

Space Heating 24 62.65 66.43 1,071.55 20.55 0.83 -162.74 0.00

Ventilation 158 1,034.90 1,155.18 22,563.86 116.58 133.20 1,737.90 0.00

Total 6,309.64 6,427.46 75,040.70 1,118.29 957.45 971.82 7,330.15
18

2.1 Non Resource Acquisition 

The following section highlights BED’s Non Resource Acquisition (NRA) activities for 

2012. NRA activities are those that do not directly achieve immediate energy savings but 

are essential to the operation and administration of BED’s EEU services and to the longterm success of future efficiency savings and innovation. The NRA categories were 

developed collaboratively with the PSD and EVT as part of the Demand Resource Plan 

Process and approved by the Public Service Board.

BED NRA activities include: education, smart grid and AMI, applied research and 

development, planning and reporting, evaluation, policy and public affairs, information 

technology and general administration. 

Education- This category captures BED’s work throughout the year on general energy 

efficiency education that is geared toward building awareness that leads customers to 

take action to reduce energy use through efficiency or conservation. BED provides 

education to – builders and contractors, real estate professionals, K-12 students and 

teachers, college and universities and the general public. 

Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) - Smart Grid- Advanced metering 

infrastructure (AMI), smart grid and a new realm of potential customer energy use 

empowerment tools are being deployed over 2013 in most of Vermont. BED is excited to 

explore the extensive possibilities for enhanced interaction with its customers and the 

potential benefits and capabilities AMI technology will bring them.

Applied Research and Development- This work includes BED’s collaboration with EVT 

or other entities on applied research and development activities designed to optimize 

the creation of cost‐effective solutions to meeting BED’s long‐term resource acquisition 

goals. 
19

The main focus of applied R&D is in the following three areas:

• Field‐testing new implementation strategies such as social networking

• Technology demonstrations

• Research of emerging technologies and innovative efficiency implementation 

strategies

Planning and Reporting- To help keep the Vermont Public Service Board, the 

Department of Public Service, and other stakeholders, informed about BED’s EEU 

activities, BED submits monthly, quarterly, and annual reports and an annual plan to 

the Board and DPS.

Evaluation- Determining the accuracy of BED’s savings claims, evaluation is a critical 

aspect of BED’s responsibilities as an EEU to Burlington rate payers. There are several 

evaluation activities that BED participates in to help BED continually improve savings 

quantification methods.

Policy and Public Affairs- This NRA activity captures BED’s participation in 

discussions about energy efficiency and EEU related issues that typically occur 

throughout the year with regulators and other stakeholders.

Information Technology (IT)- BED’s on-going IT initiative mainly consists of 

continuing the support of and improvement to the DSM database system for the 

collection and processing of project data and program information critical to tracking, 

reporting and planning functions. There is a fairly regular need to alter measure savings 

characterization, existing tools or add new tools and functionality to the system which 

helps us to better understand and respond to changes in the Burlington marketplace. 

Administration- This NRA category captures BED’s annual activities and costs for the 

overall management of EEU programs not specific to the individual programs and 

includes: general staff meetings, coordination of program implementation across all 

program functions and managing and monitoring overall performance and spending. 
20

Table 7: Non-Resource Acquisition

Program Year to Date Costs

Annual 

Budget

% of Annual 

Budget

Education and Training $34,094 $30,401 112%

Smart Grid and AMI $4,765 $42,312 11%

Applied R & D $3,978 $7,000 57%

Planning and Reporting $22,442 $30,612 73%

Evaluation $24,753 $27,327 91%

Policy and Public Affairs $10,883 $12,352 88%

Information Technology $22,408 $23,287 96%

General Administration $26,017 $23,990 108%

Total $149,340 $197,281 76%
21

2.2 Business Services Overview

This section of the report contains information on BED's Business EEU Services: Business 

New Construction and Business Existing Facilities (Market Opportunities & Retrofit).

Overall, 2012 results in business services exceeded savings projections. BED projected 

4,068 megawatt-hour (MWh) savings in 2012 while achieving actual annual energy 

savings of 4,215 MWh, 4% over projections. BED’s cost to deliver EEU business services 

in 2012 was $1,182,768, below the budgeted amount of $1,357, 770 by 13%. 

Considering the weak national and statewide economic conditions over the past several 

years, the 2009-2011 EEU performance period results were relatively positive as BED 

achieved 92% of the three-year MWh goal and exceeded the summer cpKW goal by 7%. 

The positive savings results in 2012 indicate that the economy may be improving in the 

greater Burlington region.

It is often difficult to forecast savings and expenses in the C&I sector in Burlington. This 

is due to the potential for completion of a few large unexpected projects by one or two 

customers, dramatically exceeding projections and budgets. On the other hand, savings 

goals may just as unpredictably be missed due to delays or cancellations of planned 

significant projects.

As we look at the 2013-2014 period, commercial lighting technologies continue to 

improve. Higher quality LED products are becoming more widely available and costeffective wireless lighting control systems are also emerging. BED will also continue 

field testing of a continuous building monitoring model to help determine 

implementation costs and potential energy savings. The long term goal is to ensure that 

buildings continue to operate in an energy efficient mode long after the final building 

functional testing is completed and the contractors have left. A tool that helps to ensure 

the persistence of the energy savings over the life of the equipment is worth exploring. 

It is not uncommon to find larger commercial buildings that suffer from energy 

performance issues that could have been quickly resolved if the building had the correct 
22

automated processes in place to monitor energy usage trends, equipment failures or 

operator errors made to the energy management system. Often building operators, in 

an attempt to balance occupant comfort issues negatively impact energy performance. 

The correct set-up and monitoring of the building energy management system could 

help to optimize the balance between occupant comfort and energy performance. 

It is an open question as to whether or not continuous building monitoring could be 

developed into a measure to claim savings. However, even if a savings methodology 

cannot be developed, there is great value in understanding the process better to be able 

to inform customers of the value and for BED to have a better understanding of the 

persistence of savings over time.

The model is based on having a skilled entity monitor energy data (often the same 5 

minute interval data being collected for the DR programs) from selected electrical 

meters, or building energy management systems, to help facility managers more 

promptly and accurately look at energy usage and trends. Key features include –

benchmarking, load shedding, monthly energy analysis, real-time energy alerts and 

alarms. The potential is to help reduce demand and find low-cost/no-cost opportunities 

to shed usage in areas that may be using excessive electricity and to monitor usage to 

ensure the savings stay in place. 
23

Table 8: EEU Business - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $5,627,599.43

Fossil Fuel Savings $627,868.02

Water Savings $0.00

TRB Total $6,255,467.35

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 3,761 49,093

Generation MWh 4,215 54,776

Meter Demand Kw 966 12,001

Generation Peak Summer Kw 680 8,859

Generation Peak Winter Kw 494 6,317

Water Savings 0 0

Fuel Increase 2,575 56,711

O+M Savings $221,725 $1,908,345
24

Table 9: EEU Business - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 221 323 1,518

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $139,689 $122,413 $1,872,028

Implemntation $1,301 $13,880 $1,234,559

Planning $6,646 $834 $62,003

Marketing $10,457 $16,695 $249,926

IT $4,172 $0 $110,564

$162,266 $153,822 $3,529,080

BED Service Costs

Participants $275,135 $307,899 $2,697,491

Trade Allies $0 $0 $6,780

$275,135 $307,899 $2,704,271

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $991,285 $719,997 $5,754,385

Trade Allies $7,790 $1,050 $18,708

$999,075 $721,047 $5,773,093

BED Total Costs $1,436,475 $1,182,767 $12,006,444

Evaluation Costs $46,330 $49,516 $439,396

Participant Costs $318,764 $1,667,503 $14,933,120

Total Program Costs $1,801,570 $2,899,786 $27,378,960

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 2,804 4,215 66,610

Lifetime mWh 37,950 54,776 878,328

Winter peak Kw 421 494 8,623

Summer Peak Kw 521 680 8,223

mWh / Participant 13 13 44

Weighted Lifetime 14 13 13
25

Table 10: EEU Business - End-Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 23 181.06 170.98 2,557.19 8.86 92.88 2,373.25 0.00

Hot Water 1 2.36 2.66 2.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

HVAC 7 118.27 133.72 2,005.87 1.07 51.15 0.00 0.00

Lighting 803 2,355.12 2,678.60 26,475.95 353.77 403.03 -1,462.91 0.00

Motors 2 28.29 31.84 477.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Other 1 4.94 4.20 42.03 0.82 1.51 0.00 0.00

Other Efficiency 1 0.04 0.03 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00

Refrigeration 12 19.28 20.61 262.74 3.80 1.83 0.00 0.00

Space Heating 2 46.20 49.92 748.74 12.98 0.07 -73.70 0.00

Ventilation 3 1,005.33 1,122.39 22,203.03 112.90 129.48 1,737.90 0.00

Total 3,760.89 4,214.94 54,776.06 494.21 679.95 2,574.54 0.00
26

2.2.1 Business New Construction

Program Description

This service helps commercial and industrial builders and developers incorporate the 

most energy efficient products and systems possible when building or renovating. It is 

designed to help customers exceed the City of Burlington's required Guidelines for 

Energy Efficient Construction (which adopted the statewide CBES energy code as of 

January 1, 2007). By working directly and early in the process with designers and 

owners, BED assists in the choice of energy efficient systems and construction 

techniques that meet business and energy needs. 

The program offers financial incentives for the installation of cost effective efficiency 

measures. Eligible participants gain technical assistance, verification services and 

financial incentives to help with efficient equipment costs. BED's Business New 

Construction service addresses all energy (especially electricity) consuming equipment, 

components or practices, including motors, lighting, heating, ventilation, airconditioning (HVAC) and control packages.

Natural gas is almost universally available in Burlington. To insure comprehensiveness 

in building and system designs, BED coordinates with Vermont Gas Systems (VGS) on 

all projects. The two utilities notify each other when projects are identified or when 

major changes are considered by the developers or the design teams. This partnership is 

mutually beneficial to both organizations and the ratepayers. 

BED maximizes the adoption of energy efficient systems and techniques through 

proactive outreach and recruitment. As both an electric distribution utility and a 

municipal department with a role in the City’s design review process, BED is in a unique 

position to identify new construction and major renovation before significant design 

efforts begin. BED coordinates this effort with other city agencies including the city’s 

Planning & Zoning Department and its Department of Public Works. See the Design 

Review Guide (Attachment A) for an example of our coordinated efforts.
27

BED continues to support enforcement and provide administration of the Guidelines for 

Energy Efficient Construction for the City of Burlington, VT (adopted CBES), the energy 

code for all new construction and renovation in the City. The benefits of the Business 

New Construction program have evolved into a very important facet of the city’s 

economic development efforts. Because BED is involved in the very earliest stages of 

project development, the benefits of energy efficiency are packaged along with other 

attractive elements that entice businesses to locate facilities in the city, enhancing 

employment growth and economic development in Burlington.

Project Highlights

The annualized megawatt-hour (MWh) savings for 2012 were 505, about 15% higher 

than the projection of 439 MWh. Total BED program costs were $245,377, 26% greater 

than the budgeted amount of $193,977. 

2012 saw a slight improvement in the economy and construction permits. As we noted 

in recent Annual Reports, the poor economy dramatically impacted new construction 

starts. The expansion and renovation of the Community Health Center, on Riverside 

Avenue, was the largest completed project in 2012 followed by the renovation of UVM’s 

Aiken building and the expansion at the ECHO aquarium and science center. 

Variance Discussion

Customers make business decisions independent of BED’s program budgeting efforts, 

and we fully anticipate that year to year efforts will be “lumpy”, and show dramatic 

swings in performance. Long-term average results are a better indicator of what can be 

expected on an annual basis than any given year’s data. 

Program Changes

For 2013, BED will continue to advance the “building energy model” approach option for 

new construction projects. In order to best estimate the energy efficiency potential of a 

project, building energy modeling software is used to compare the energy performance of 
28

a building that meets CBES to a model of the final energy efficient building design. The 

energy savings claimed for a project is a result of comparing the two building model runs 

along with final inspection of the buildings. This approach assumes that the efficient 

model correctly knows the occupancy rates, hours of operation, set-points for 

temperature, lighting control schedules and plug-loads from various equipment. 

BED is initiating a tiered incentive approach that pays part of the incentive at project 

completion and then the remaining incentives after about one year of comparing actual 

billing history data to the energy efficient model. It often takes a year or longer for 

commercial buildings to be fully occupied, equipped and debugged of any performance 

issues. This approach will allow for more accurate savings claims and ensure that the 

building operator is encouraged to optimize the performance of the building. 
29

Table 11: EEU Business New Construction - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $1,068,907.40

Fossil Fuel Savings $396,356.00

Water Savings $0.00

TRB Total $1,465,263.40

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 472 6,789

Generation MWh 505 7,243

Meter Demand Kw 191 2,802

Generation Peak Summer Kw 154 2,288

Generation Peak Winter Kw 59 854

Water Savings 0 0

Fuel Increase 2,290 34,343

O+M Savings $1,962 $29,344
30

Table 12: EEU Business New Construction - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 6 15 162

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $52,145 $42,635 $317,747

Implemntation $1,222 $0 $126,485

Planning $2,097 $205 $15,847

Marketing $3,306 $8,906 $156,473

IT $1,179 $0 $41,038

$59,949 $51,746 $657,591

BED Service Costs

Participants $58,164 $44,906 $818,913

Trade Allies $0 $0 $0

$58,164 $44,906 $818,913

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $39,042 $148,724 $1,061,386

Trade Allies $0 $0 $336

$39,042 $148,724 $1,061,722

BED Total Costs $170,155 $245,377 $2,538,225

Evaluation Costs $0 $0 $34,579

Participant Costs $1,598 $367,199 $3,586,389

Total Program Costs $158,753 $612,576 $6,159,193

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 148 505 13,725

Lifetime mWh 2,223 7,243 217,931

Winter peak Kw 22 59 1,096

Summer Peak Kw 28 154 1,742

mWh / Participant 25 34 85

Weighted Lifetime 15 14 16
31

Table 13: EEU Business New Construction - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 1 147.02 137.50 2,062.57 8.36 69.09 2,373.25 0.00

Lighting 16 325.41 367.69 5,180.28 50.97 85.15 -83.72 0.00

Total 472.43 505.20 7,242.86 59.33 154.23 2,289.53 0.00
32

2.2.2 Business Existing Facilities

(Market Opportunities & Retrofit Services) 

Program Description

Business Existing Facilities, Market Opportunity Service (MOP) targets naturallyoccurring equipment changeovers to secure energy savings in the equipment 

replacement market. Targeted equipment includes lighting, heating, ventilation, 

cooling, water heating, refrigeration, motors and drives, controls and industrial process 

applications. This program offers prescriptive and custom tracks, with technical 

assistance and financial incentives that encourage the adoption of cost effective, high 

efficiency alternatives to standard efficiency equipment. 

BED and EVt offer prescriptive incentives (fixed incentives for specific eligible 

measures) for building lighting, refrigeration economizers and controls, motors, unitary 

HVAC equipment and dual enthalpy economizers for unitary HVAC units. BED and 

EVt also participate jointly in the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership to further the 

market transformation of motors, lighting and HVAC equipment. Incentives for aboveaverage energy efficient equipment are supplied to wholesalers, contractors, and 

customers at the time of equipment replacement. 

Non-prescriptive cost-effective measures or combinations of measures are eligible for 

custom incentives. Custom incentives are designed to capture as many potential lost 

opportunity resources as possible, while maximizing program delivery resources. BED 

staff and trade allies serving Burlington (including: equipment vendors, manufacturers, 

suppliers, contractors, architects and engineers) market the program to potential 

participants.

As natural gas is the predominant heating fuel in Burlington, BED works closely with 

Vermont Gas Systems (VGS) to encourage a comprehensive approach to energy savings. 

BED and VGS staff is committed to bringing appropriate projects to each other’s 
33

attention. This partnership is mutually beneficial to both organizations and our mutual 

ratepayers. 

Business Existing Facilities, Retrofit Service offers energy efficiency services that have 

been provided by BED staff for well almost two decades. Building retrofit entails BED 

staff and/or trade allies examining customer buildings and systems to identify energy 

efficiency opportunities for the customer. When promising projects are identified, BED 

staff prepares analyses for the customer showing the costs and benefits of potential 

energy efficiency measures. This service is offered to all business customers – from the 

smallest retail store to the largest commercial and industrial facility. Given BED’s long 

history of delivering this service, the program has reached a high level of maturity and 

customer acceptance. Facility managers have learned to rely on the program benefits 

and the technical assistance offered by BED staff. 

Program Highlights

The annualized megawatt-hour (MWh) savings for 2012 were 3,710, about 2% higher 

than the projection of 3,629 MWh. Total BED program costs were $937,971, 19% under 

the budgeted amount of $1,157,793. 

The Business Existing Facilities 2012 End-Use Activity table shows diversity in the end 

use savings but lighting and controls was once again the leader. Commercial lighting 

measures are strongly coincident with summer loads and thus provide significant 

avoided peak energy costs to BED. BED projected 415 coincident-peak KW savings and 

achieved 526 coincident-peak KW, 27% over the goal for 2012. For the 2009-2011 

program EEU performance period, the three-year MWh goals were exceed by 12% and 

the summer cp-KW goal by 34%. 

Variance Discussion

Overall, the Business Existing Facilities services performed well in the 2009-2011

performance period considering the weak economy and continued to perform fairly well 

in 2012. As close to 75% of all kWh sales are to the commercial class these are important 
34

markets to work effectively with and this was one of the main drivers in BED applying 

for the EDA On-Bill financing grant. Strategies that encourage these customers to 

pursue energy efficiency improvements are crucial to helping BED meet savings 

projections in the years to come. 

Table 14: EEU Business Existing Facilities - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $4,558,692.03

Fossil Fuel Savings $231,512.02

Water Savings $0.00

TRB Total $4,790,203.95

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 3,288 42,305

Generation MWh 3,710 47,533

Meter Demand Kw 776 9,199

Generation Peak Summer Kw 526 6,571

Generation Peak Winter Kw 435 5,462

Water Savings 0 0

Fuel Increase 285 22,368

O+M Savings $219,764 $1,879,001
35

Table 15: EEU Business Existing Facilities - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 215 308 1,356

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $87,544 $79,777 $1,554,281

Implemntation $79 $13,880 $1,108,074

Planning $4,549 $629 $46,156

Marketing $7,152 $7,790 $93,453

IT $2,993 $0 $69,526

$102,316 $102,076 $2,871,489

BED Service Costs

Participants $216,971 $262,992 $1,878,578

Trade Allies $0 $0 $6,780

$216,971 $262,992 $1,885,358

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $939,243 $571,273 $4,692,999

Trade Allies $7,790 $1,050 $18,372

$947,033 $572,323 $4,711,371

BED Total Costs $1,266,321 $937,391 $9,468,219

Evaluation Costs $46,330 $49,516 $404,817

Participant Costs $330,166 $1,300,304 $11,346,732

Total Program Costs $1,642,816 $2,287,211 $21,219,767

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 2,656 3,710 52,885

Lifetime mWh 35,727 47,533 660,397

Winter peak Kw 399 435 7,527

Summer Peak Kw 493 526 6,481

mWh / Participant 12 12 39

Weighted Lifetime 13 13 12
36

Table 16: EEU Business Existing Facilities - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 22 34.04 33.47 494.62 0.50 23.79 0.00 0.00

Hot Water 1 2.36 2.66 2.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

HVAC 7 118.27 133.72 2,005.87 1.07 51.15 0.00 0.00

Lighting 787 2,029.71 2,310.91 21,295.67 302.80 317.88 -1,379.18 0.00

Motors 2 28.29 31.84 477.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Other 1 4.94 4.20 42.03 0.82 1.51 0.00 0.00

Other Efficiency 1 0.04 0.03 0.25 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00

Refrigeration 12 19.28 20.61 262.74 3.80 1.83 0.00 0.00

Space Heating 2 46.20 49.92 748.74 12.98 0.07 -73.70 0.00

Ventilation 3 1,005.33 1,122.39 22,203.03 112.90 129.48 1,737.90 0.00

Total 3,288.46 3,709.74 47,533.20 434.88 525.72 285.02 0.00
37

2.3 Residential Service Overview

This section of the report contains information on BED's Residential EEU Services: 

Residential New Construction, Existing Homes, Efficient Retail Products and Heating 

and Process Fuels services. 

In 2012, BED projected 3,191 annualized MWh residential savings while achieving 

annual energy savings of 2,213 MWh or 70% of the projected goal. BED’s cost to deliver 

residential services in 2012 was $573,975 which was 9% over budget for the year’s 

projected spending of $528,161. 

As BED explains in more detail in each program below, there are a number of factors 

that influence year to year budgets and savings projections in Burlington’s residential 

markets. 

The residential class presents particular challenges as about 60% of BED’s residential 

customers are renters and about 85% of these customers pay their electric and gas 

heating bills directly. Rental apartments are typically smaller with fewer appliances and 

lighting opportunities. BED also turns over about 35% of residential accounts each year 

due to the high percentage of students. About 85% of residential buildings use natural 

gas for space heating and domestic hot water. BED’s residential consumption is about 

24% less than the average Vermont residential customer, 34% less than the average New 

England residential customer and 55% less than the national average. 

BED will continue to test all program design assumptions and pursue all strategies to 

make programs as cost-effective as possible. Development of a PACE financing service 

can help to encourage some customers to take a more comprehensive approach to 

improving the energy performance of their buildings. The energy consumption 

information, and guidance, that will soon be available through BED’s smart grid web 

presentment tool (Energy Engage) may also help encourage more customers to take 

steps to reduce usage. 
38

Table 17: EEU Residential - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $3,116,133.07

Fossil Fuel Savings ($253,222.52)

Water Savings $708,712.85

TRB Total $3,571,623.27

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 2,549 22,617

Generation MWh 2,213 20,265

Meter Demand Kw 2,792 26,009

Generation Peak Summer Kw 278 2,347

Generation Peak Winter Kw 624 5,569

Water Savings 7,421 79,457

Fuel Increase -1,584 -21,680

O+M Savings $122,044 $878,625
39

Table 18: EEU Residential - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 846 1,064 22,297

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $110,178 $127,607 $1,753,413

Implemntation $2,551 $4,668 $736,108

Planning $4,521 $815 $44,709

Marketing $28,969 $9,164 $523,172

IT $2,052 $0 $101,393

$148,271 $142,254 $3,158,794

BED Service Costs

Participants $103,529 $117,717 $1,383,838

Trade Allies $0 $0 $4,981

$103,529 $117,717 $1,388,819

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $311,561 $312,203 $2,922,251

Trade Allies $1,907 $1,800 $32,521

$313,468 $314,003 $2,954,773

BED Total Costs $565,268 $573,975 $7,502,387

Evaluation Costs $23,321 $14,155 $324,504

Participant Costs $617,474 $300,611 $7,828,655

Total Program Costs $1,206,063 $888,741 $15,655,545

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 4,404 2,213 40,902

Lifetime mWh 30,203 20,264 461,742

Winter peak Kw 912 624 9,782

Summer Peak Kw 579 277 3,779

mWh / Participant 5 2 2

Weighted Lifetime 7 9 11
40

Table 19: EEU Residential - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 189 19.31 13.71 247.51 4.13 4.80 0.00 0.00

Clothes Drying 13 70.97 79.38 1,111.28 9.34 7.04 -144.89 0.00

Clothes Washing 326 55.51 70.71 989.98 9.87 7.44 19.05 2,515.60

Consumer Electronics 1892 174.53 199.60 1,113.05 23.71 18.43 0.00 0.00

Dishwashing 9 0.28 0.32 4.11 0.04 0.02 1.08 10.35

Hot Water 196 137.05 83.07 1,069.10 36.65 18.78 362.68 4,794.80

Lighting 1150 1,985.34 1,649.20 13,905.31 521.25 208.34 1,574.67 0.00

Refrigeration 280 59.74 67.23 1,140.67 7.84 8.17 1.47 9.40

Space Heating 22 16.45 16.51 322.81 7.56 0.76 159.96 0.00

Ventilation 155 29.57 32.80 360.83 3.68 3.72 0.00 0.00

Total 2,548.75 2,212.52 20,264.64 624.08 277.50 1,974.02 7,330.15
41

2.3.1 Residential New Construction

Program Description

This service aims to improve the efficiency of all new homes, and buildings undergoing 

substantial renovation. This includes single-family homes, multi-family homes and lowincome multi-family projects. It addresses all major end uses: space heating, water 

heating, central cooling (if applicable), ventilation, major appliances and lighting for 

high use areas. Residential New Construction (RNC) encourages builders and 

consumers to build to the Vermont Energy Star Home standard. This standard specifies 

that homes meet the Energy Star performance standard (representing over 20% savings 

in heating, cooling and hot water consumption relative to the Vermont Residential 

Building Energy Standard (RBES). 

The Vermont Energy Star Homes (VESH) standard is promoted to developers, 

architects, builders, building supply centers, equipment suppliers and consumers 

through a combination of marketing, technical assistance to builders, provision of 

energy ratings, and a package of incentives for efficient lighting fixtures, major 

appliances and ventilation equipment. 

EVt and Vermont Gas Systems continue to do great work over the years promoting 

VESH which has had direct benefits to BED. As most of the trade allies mentioned 

above build inside and outside of Burlington it has been helpful to have a joint program 

with identical participation requirements. 

BED uses several additional methods to encourage participation in this sometimes 

difficult to influence market. These include: 

BED staff attends local monthly Technical Review meetings where all new construction 

and virtually all substantial renovation projects are introduced to the Burlington 

Planning and Zoning Department staff as part of the City’s local project approval 

process. At these meetings BED explains the RNC program to the permit applicant and 

gives them program literature. BED then forwards the project information to Vermont 
42

Wise Energy Services to follow-up with the customer. For larger multi-family projects 

BED staff (in partnership with Vermont Gas Systems) work directly with the property 

owner.

 BED receives monthly “Development Case Load” updates from the Department 

of Planning and Zoning that track the progress of each of the development 

projects in Burlington.

 New and revised electric service and line extension applications help us track 

smaller renovation projects that may have bypassed the City’s permit approval 

process. All “ability to serve” letters from BED include information about energy 

efficiency services.

 BED receives a weekly electronic report from the Department of Public WorksBuilding Inspection Division (DPW) listing all trades permits issued. 

 The Burlington DPW refers projects to BED to help them ensure compliance with 

RBES (and CBES) and to assess opportunities for exceeding requirements. DPW 

requires a compliance memo from BED Energy Services before issuing the 

building permit.

Program Highlights

In 2012, a majority of RNC savings came from three large multi-family affordable 

housing projects. This is a departure from recent years where a majority of the savings 

has come from single-family major gut rehabilitation projects. In recent years, 

Burlington saw more gut-rehab type of building activity than brand new construction 

projects. These three projects, along with several others in the permit approval process, 

suggest that the economy is improving.
43

Variance Discussion

The RNC service achieved 237 MWh in annualized electricity savings for the year which 

was considerably higher than the projected 33 MWh goal. At $112,646, spending was 

also considerably higher than the projected spending of $59,480. 

As BED has reported in previous Annual Reports, RNC is a difficult market to predict 

year to year as it only takes a few projects in Burlington to adjust savings projections and 

budgets dramatically. As BED mentioned in the 2011 Annual report, “residential singlefamily building activity remains slow but multi-family activity is increasing and we 

have over a 100 units of housing enrolled at this time.” Fortunately, the building owners 

participated heavily in the program generating strong savings for 2012. 

Program Changes

In 2013, BED, EVT and VGS will continue to assist the residential market with exceeding 

RBES and will also promote low-load and net-zero building practices. BED’s residential 

new construction market is dominated by multi-family structures and most of the 

single-family work is with gut-rehabilitation projects so we will continue to develop 

strategies to work effectively with both of these markets. 
44

Table 20: EEU Residential New Construction - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $358,665.19

Fossil Fuel Savings ($174,286.35)

Water Savings $43,867.55

TRB Total $228,246.40

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 215 3,575

Generation MWh 237 3,938

Meter Demand Kw 246 3,915

Generation Peak Summer Kw 15 275

Generation Peak Winter Kw 39 693

Water Savings 366 5,113

Fuel Increase -1,165 -14,571

O+M Savings $1,297 $23,468
45

Table 21: EEU Residential New Construction - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 14 52 420

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $8,617 $26,753 $206,241

Implemntation $0 $0 $96,638

Planning $262 $132 $11,195

Marketing $1,678 $3,442 $80,325

IT $37 $0 $34,241

$10,594 $30,327 $428,639

BED Service Costs

Participants $10,498 $32,457 $440,149

Trade Allies $0 $0 $2,700

$10,498 $32,457 $442,849

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $23,182 $49,863 $313,333

Trade Allies $0 $0 $2

$23,182 $49,863 $313,335

BED Total Costs $51,274 $112,646 $1,184,823

Evaluation Costs $4,162 $3,048 $43,318

Participant Costs $1.022 $35,821 $272,625

Total Program Costs $49,459 $151,515 $1,500,766

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 15 237 1,189

Lifetime mWh 177 3,938 19,520

Winter peak Kw 4 39 297

Summer Peak Kw 1 15 208

mWh / Participant 1 5 3

Weighted Lifetime 12 17 16
46

Table 22: EEU Residential New Construction - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 1 0.39 0.46 11.47 0.00 1.87 0.00 0.00

Clothes Drying 5 63.15 70.89 992.49 7.56 5.69 -1,341.81 0.00

Clothes Washing 4 0.91 -0.11 -1.47 -0.06 -0.04 33.49 355.60

Dishwashing 9 0.28 0.32 4.11 0.04 0.02 1.08 10.35

Lighting 56 139.01 152.92 2,702.67 29.00 6.42 -17.86 0.00

Refrigeration 50 9.70 10.92 185.61 1.27 1.33 0.00 0.00

Space Heating 8 1.46 1.73 43.21 0.91 0.00 159.96 0.00

Total 214.90 237.13 3,938.09 38.72 15.29 -1,165.14 365.95
47

2.3.2 Existing Homes 

Program Description

This service aims to improve the efficiency of all existing residential buildings including 

low-income single family, market-rate single-family and all multi-family projects

(market-rate and low-income). BED offers the same existing homes service as Efficiency 

Vermont (EVt) and also works closely with Vermont Gas Systems (VGS) and the 

Champlain Valley Weatherization Service (CVWS) on many of its projects. 

Low-income buildings are addressed by a partnership with the state’s Low-income 

Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP). This partnership provides electric 

efficiency measures (including fuel switching of electric hot water and electric space 

heating) to Burlington’s low-income electricity consumers. Electrical efficiency 

measures are delivered to income-eligible electric customers at the time they receive 

thermal shell, space heating and water heating improvements from CVWS. 

This service also works closely with high usage households for energy efficiency 

improvements that can significantly reduce their energy bills. On-site energy audits, 

customer education, appliance meter loans, technical assistance, project management 

and cash incentives are all part of this service. In some cases, the high usage is driven by 

electric domestic hot water and\or electric resistance space heating. Electric space heat 

and domestic hot water have been rapidly decreasing markets in Burlington but the 

opportunity to convert to natural gas is available to the owners of some of these housing 

units, providing significant energy and cost savings. 

Over the past several years, BED and EVt have been collaborating to work more 

successfully in the private (market-rate) rental housing market (customers not eligible 

for low-income energy services) to increase both participation and the depth of savings 

per participant. Traditionally, renters (60% of Burlington’s residential customers are 

renters) have not been strong participants and the same holds true for property-owners 

where the tenants pay the energy bills directly which is the case in about 85% of 

Burlington’s dwellings. 
48

The “Rental Properties Owners” service offers free tank wraps (electric tanks only), pipe 

insulation, water saving devices, enhanced rebates for the early retirement of eligible 

refrigerators, incentives for improving mechanical ventilation along with up to fifteen 

free screw-in CFL’s per apartment. 

This service provides savings directly to the tenant but also water savings, and 

potentially maintenance savings via ventilation fans to the property owner. This service 

allows us the opportunity to develop long-lasting relationships with property-owners to 

help identify further savings from refrigeration replacements, common area lighting and 

laundry equipment improvements, weatherization and ventilation.

BED continues to offer a robust energy education service for customers that includes onsite energy audits, lending of appliance meters and custom billing history analysis. BED 

also continues to provide energy efficiency information in a variety of forums. BED staff 

also visited several classrooms in the Burlington School District to discuss energy 

efficiency with faculty and schoolchildren. 

Also, starting in 2009 and continuing today, BED contracted with VGS to install CFL’s 

and collect potential electrical energy efficiency savings information while performing

normal VGS energy audits.

Program Highlights

In 2012, 44 fuel switch projects were completed. 35 electric hot water tanks were 

switched to natural gas, 1 dwelling replaced electric heat with natural gas space heating 

equipment and 8 electric clothes dryers were switched to natural gas units. 13

customers and their contractors took advantage of rebates for ENERGY STAR furnaces 

with ECM fans and 5 more customers took advantage of incentives for ENERGY STAR 

central AC systems. 68 refrigerators were retired early and replaced with ENERGY 

STAR models, 811 CFL’s were provided and 151 automatically controlled ENERGY 

STAR bathroom exhaust fan systems were installed. 
49

BED and EVt offer incentives to the contractor and the building owner to install this 

equipment. Vermont Gas Systems offers additional incentives to install high efficiency 

space and water heating equipment along with thermal shell upgrades.

Variance Discussion

The Existing Homes service achieved 230 MWh in annualized electricity savings for the 

year, about 44% less than the projected 409 MWh. At $234,109 spending was 9% less

than BED’s projected spending of $260,325. 

It is worth noting that electric resistance space and water heating are disappearing 

markets (helped by many years of technical assistance incentives from BED to fuel 

switch to natural gas) in Burlington along with the savings from screw-in CFL’s as the 

Federal energy standards take effect. In 2012, these measures accounted for about 61% 

of the total savings. BED will continue to work with EVT and VGS on developing 

services that leverage as much cost-effective total resource benefit as possible in an 

increasingly challenging market. 

The market- rate rental property owner program has been beneficial to program goals as 

we have been able to access a greater number of rental units. However, the savings per 

unit are lower when compared to other services such as electric hot water fuel switching 

to natural gas and the cost per MWh saved is considerably higher. 

BED will continue with the campaign as about 60% of BED’s residential customers live 

in rental housing and about 85% pay their electric and heating costs directly. About 90% 

of BED’s residential rental customers use natural gas for space heating and domestic hot 

water. We will continue to leverage common area energy savings, building water 

savings, ice dam and moisture damage solutions for property-owners as part of the 

service to help develop long-term relationships with building owners.
50

BED will also continue working with UVM’s office of off-campus services. BED and 

VGS conducted energy workshops for students, staff and faculty living off-campus in 

2011 and 2012 they will be offered again in 2013. 

VGS energy specialists will continue to install CFL’s and collect potential electrical 

energy efficiency savings information for BED while performing VGS energy audits.

Table 23: EEU Residential Existing Homes - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $531,169.10

Fossil Fuel Savings ($44,426.08)

Water Savings $405,490.15

TRB Total $892,233.17

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 271 3,466

Generation MWh 230 2,895

Meter Demand Kw 268 3,459

Generation Peak Summer Kw 34 454

Generation Peak Winter Kw 64 836

Water Savings 4,895 44,104

Fuel Increase 108 -4,500

O+M Savings $3,406 $17,423
51

Table 24: EEU Residential Existing Homes - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 280 423 7,969

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $59,818 $60,547 $1,183,017

Implemntation $2,551 $4,668 $549,214

Planning $3,402 $697 $19,067

Marketing $10,925 $2,029 $307,454

IT $1,986 $0 $45,049

$78,683 $67,940 $2,103,802

BED Service Costs

Participants $92,978 $85,196 $622,643

Trade Allies $0 $0 $0

$92,978 $85,196 $622,643

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $88,145 $79,173 $1,525,186

Trade Allies $1,907 $1,800 $32,493

$90,052 $80,973 $1,557,679

BED Total Costs $261,712 $234,109 $4,284,124

Evaluation Costs $6,101 $5,180 $194,883

Participant Costs $84,879 $47,746 $4,851,507

Total Program Costs $352,692 $287,036 $9,330,514

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 331 230 20,246

Lifetime mWh 4,635 2,895 313,427

Winter peak Kw 134 64 5,572

Summer Peak Kw 55 34 887

mWh / Participant 1 1 3

Weighted Lifetime 14 13 15
52

Table 25: EEU Residential Existing Homes - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 5 0.47 0.48 7.26 0.00 1.12 0.00 0.00

Clothes Drying 8 7.82 8.48 118.79 1.79 1.35 -26.64 0.00

Hot Water 196 137.05 83.07 1,069.10 36.65 18.78 362.68 4,794.80

Lighting 143 39.20 42.72 254.80 10.05 2.78 0.00 0.00

Refrigeration 64 42.19 47.48 804.97 5.54 5.76 1.47 9.40

Space Heating 14 14.99 14.78 279.60 6.65 0.76 -249.00 0.00

Ventilation 155 29.57 32.80 360.83 3.68 3.72 0.00 0.00

Total 271.29 229.81 2,895.34 64.37 34.28 88.51 4,804.20
53

2.3.3 Retail Products

Program Description

The Efficient Products Program (EP) aims to increase sales of DOE\EPA ENERGY 

STAR® qualified lighting products, Compact Fluorescent (CFL) screw-in bulbs, CFL 

hardwired fixtures, a growing selection of LED screw-in bulbs and fixtures and 

ENERGY STAR® appliances such as clothes washers, refrigerators, freezers, and ceiling 

fans with lights, room air conditioners, dehumidifiers and televisions. Over recent 

years, EP also promotes advanced power strips for home entertainment centers, controls 

for computer internal power supplies and ultra efficient LCD computer monitors. This 

is accomplished primarily through retail stores with on-site and mail-in consumer 

rebates, but also by arranging retailer buy-downs and manufacturer mark-downs for 

products. 

The program pursues this objective with extensive outreach to retailers, such as efforts 

to encourage Vermont lighting showrooms to increase the number and variety of energy 

efficient fixtures stocked and displayed. 

EP uses a variety of marketing and promotion efforts in addition to its prominently 

displayed in-store rebate coupons including a catalog, and an on-line purchase web site 

in order to build consumer awareness and participation in the program.

Program Highlights

In 2012 alone, BED customers purchased 47,937 CFL and LED bulbs, 253 CFL lighting 

fixtures, 200 ENERGY STAR® clothes washers, 46 ENERGY STAR® refrigerators, 41

ENERGY STAR® dehumidifiers, 179 internal power supply units, 444 ultra efficient LCD 

computers monitors and 906 efficient televisions. 
54

Variance Discussion 

Savings of 1,746 annualized MWh was under the projection of 2,749 annualized MWh

for 2013 by 37%. Annual expenditures were $227,220 which is about 9% higher than of 

the projected budget of $208,355. 

BED believes that the large disparity in savings and costs from year to year in this 

program can be attributed to a number of factors including: economic conditions for 

customers, the high percentage of renters (60%) in Burlington where specialty bulb and 

appliance opportunities are more limited and the decrease in savings claims for CFL

measures due to gross to net adjustments in the Technical Resource Manual calculations. 

Program Changes

2013 will see a continued focus on promoting appliances that are the most efficient 

within the ENERGY STAR rating and a continued focus on promoting specialty bulbs 

and emerging LED products.
55

Table 26: EEU Efficient Products - Total Resource Benefits

Avoided costs of Electricity $2,226,298.77

Fossil Fuel Savings ($34,510.09)

Water Savings $259,355.14

TRB Total $2,451,143.70

Annualized Lifetime

Meter MWh 2,063 15,577

Generation MWh 1,746 13,431

Meter Demand Kw 2,278 18,635

Generation Peak Summer Kw 228 1,619

Generation Peak Winter Kw 521 4,041

Water Savings 2,160 30,240

Fuel Increase -526 -2,609

O+M Savings $117,341 $837,734
56

Table 27: EEU Efficient Products - Summary

Prior Year Current Program 

2011 2012 to date

Participants 552 589 13,908

--- Program Costs ---

BED Administration Costs

General $41,742 $40,307 $364,155

Implemntation $0 $0 $90,256

Planning $857 ($13) $14,447

Marketing $16,365 $3,694 $135,393

IT $29 $0 $22,103

$58,994 $43,988 $626,353

BED Service Costs

Participants $53 $65 $321,047

Trade Allies $0 $0 $2,281

$53 $65 $323,328

BED Incentive Costs

Participants $193,235 $183,168 $1,083,733

Trade Allies $0 $0 $26

$193,235 $183,168 $1,083,759

BED Total Costs $252,281 $227,220 $2,033,440

Evaluation Costs $13,058 $5,927 $86,303

Participant Costs $538,574 $217,043 $2,704,523

Total Program Costs $803,913 $450,190 $4,824,265

--- Benefits ---

Annualized mWh 4,058 1,746 19,467

Lifetime mWh 25,391 13,431 128,795

Winter peak Kw 774 521 3,913

Summer Peak Kw 523 228 2,684

mWh / Participant 7 3 1

Weighted Lifetime 6 8 7
57

Table 28: EEU Efficient Products - End Use Summary

Description Participants Gross Net Lifetime Winter Summer

Mwh Mwh Net Net Kw Net Kw MMBTU CCF

Air Conditioning 183 18.45 12.77 228.78 4.13 1.80 0.00 0.00

Clothes Washing 322 54.60 70.82 991.45 9.93 7.48 16.00 2,160.00

Consumer Electronics 1892 174.53 199.60 1,113.05 23.71 18.43 0.00 0.00

Lighting 951 1,807.13 1,453.56 10,947.83 482.20 199.14 -542.10 0.00

Refrigeration 166 7.85 8.83 150.09 1.03 1.08 0.00 0.00

Total 2,062.56 1,745.58 13,431.21 520.99 227.93 -526.10 2,160.00
58

3 Heating and Process Fuels Activity

(Residential and Commercial)

Program Description

The PSB has charged the EEU’s with providing thermal shell and heating system energy 

efficiency services to customers who use unregulated fossil fuel for their heating energy 

needs. This service is funded by revenues from the ISO-NE Forward Capacity Market 

(FCM) and Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) auction proceeds.

BED and EVT established a working partnership in early 2009 that serves BED’s HPF 

customers. BED customers have access to the same services and incentives as those 

customers in the rest of the state including: 

 Home Performance with ENERGY STAR- The EEU’s collaborate to deliver HPF 

savings to residential customers through a network of Building Performance 

Institute (BPI) certified contractors installing comprehensive home energy 

thermal improvements. The unregulated fossil fuel residential market is 

relatively small in Burlington due to the high saturation of natural gas (over 85% 

of residential buildings use natural gas for space heating and domestic hot water) 

but there are streets and neighborhoods that Vermont Gas Systems does not 

serve mostly due to rock ledge issues. 

 Replacement of Commercial Heating Systems – BED customers are eligible for 

the same incentives as EVT customers for the installation of oil and propane 

boilers and furnaces in commercial buildings up to 10,000 square feet at time of 

replacement. BED and EVT share the same rebate form which helps to inform all 

contractors and distributors that this is a statewide offer. BED estimates that this 

is a very small market within Burlington as over 95% of commercial buildings 

are served by natural gas. 

 Commercial Building Performance- Technical assistance and incentives to assist 

small businesses and rental property owners in improving the insulation and 

comfort of their buildings. Energy audits and improvements are performed by a 

participating Building Performance Institute (BPI) certified contractor. 
59

Program Highlights

There were seven residential HPwES completions in 2012 and one commercial 

completion with total savings of 245 MMBTU’s. The residential projects consisted of 

five single-family homes, one owner-occupied two-family home and one condominium. 

Variance Discussion

The limited unregulated fossil fuel market in Burlington, as well as the housing 

characteristics of the potential unregulated fuels market, has presented challenges in 

meeting savings targets in 2012. 

The potential single-family market is made up of homes that are predominately located 

in the more affluent Burlington neighborhoods where the properties have been well 

maintained and updated over the years. The City of Burlington’s energy efficiency code 

(established in 1991) for new construction and renovation may also be a contributing 

factor. There is a limited potential condominium market (heated mostly by LP-gas) but 

it also presents challenges as there are a higher percentage of renters in the two largest 

associations so the rental property–owner will need to participate. 

BED is exploring several ways to increase participation. The majority of the oil and LP 

users are in condominiums. Redrocks and Ledgewood condominium associations 

include about 250 units that represent the largest concentration of unregulated heating 

fuel users in Burlington. VGS has been clear that they will not serve these 

neighborhoods due the rock ledge issues.

As we have not been successful in reaching this market with our normal outreach 

efforts, we have designed a pilot effort for 2013 to see if a more direct and hands-on 

approach with condominium associations increases participation.

Shelter Analytics has been working for the past two years with South Burlington’s 

Climate Action Committee and VGS on a focused condominium weatherization effort 

that has shown good results. Shelter acts as communications agent between the 
60

program and the condominium associations (and individual owners). They help them 

to get weatherization proposals from qualified weatherization contractors, understand 

the incentive program and help to manage the work.

BED is also finalizing preparations to launch the Burlington PACE pilot effort using 

Board approved HPF (Non- Resource Acquisition) funds up to $175,000.00 to capitalize 

projects. Pilot participants will meet all PACE program statewide eligibility 

requirements, including underwriting requirements and placement of a property lien. 

PACE pilot projects will be backed by the statewide loan loss reserve fund. 

VGS customers are eligible to participate in this PACE pilot effort but they only have 

access to the standard incentives available from VGS and not augmented by BED’s HPF 

funds.

BED planned to begin the PACE pilot earlier in 2012 but there were several delays 

mostly due to the establishment of agreed upon statewide underwriting requirements. 
61

Table 29: Heating and Process Fuels Activity

Period Costs for HPF Savings Residential Commercial Total

 Year to Date Costs $16,908 $1,871 $18,779 

 Annual Budget $54,898 $18,299 $73,197 

 % of Annual Budget 31% 10% 26%

HPF Savings Results

 MMBTU Year To Date 181 64 245

 MMBTU Annual Goal 408 148 556

 % of MMBTU Annual Goal 44% 43% 44%

HPF Non-Resource Acquisition

Program Year to Date Costs Annual Budget

% of Annual 

Budget

Education and Training $2,073 $2,500 83%

Applied R & D $0 $300 0%

Planning and Reporting $522 $650 80%

Evaluation $63 $650 10%

Policy and Public Affairs $4,726 $3,600 131%

Information Technology $492 $500 98%

General Administration $602 $850 71%

PACE $1,447 $175,000 1%

Total $9,925 $184,050 5%
62

4 Appendix

4.1 Definition and End Notes

Tables 30 and 31 are templates to help explain the appropriate footnotes for each 

program and summary table throughout this report. 

Table 30: Summary Report Table Template

Prior 

Year

Current 

Year 

2012

Projected 

Year 

2012

Projected 

Year 

2012

Program 

To Date

(1) (2) (3)

Participants

 (4)

 

 

Program Costs

BED Administration Costs (9)

 General (10)

 Implementation (11)

 Planning (12)

 Marketing (13)

 IT Development (14)

BED Service Costs (15)

 Service to Participants (16)

 Service to Trade Allies (17)

BED Incentive Costs (18)

 Participants (19)

 Trade Allies (20)

BED Total Costs (8)

Evaluation Costs (23)

Participant Costs (21)

Total Program Costs (26)

Benefits

 Annualized MWh (27)

 Lifetime MWh (28)

 Winter Peak KW (29)

 Summer Peak KW (30)

 MWh/Participant (31)

 Weighted Lifetime (32)
63

Table 31: End Use Report Table Template

Description Participants

Gross 

MWh

Net 

MWh

Lifetime 

MWh

Winter

Net KW

Summer

Net KW MMBTU CCF

(33) (35) (36) (34) (37) (38) (39) (40)

Footnotes for the report table templates:

(1) Verified activity for the current reporting year. For savings this figure will be the estimated savings for 

measures actually implemented and verified for the current report period. Savings should be reported in 

MWH, at generation and net of all approved adjustment factors, except as otherwise noted.

(2) Estimated portion of the three-year savings and costs projected for the current report year. This footnote 

should identify the source of the projections. Projections for categories footnoted (4) to (7), (21) to (26) and 

(28) to (32) will be provided if available. 

(3) Program to date activity. For participation [(4) to (7)], the program to date column should count each 

customer (premise) only once, regardless of participation in previous years. The executive summary should 

count each customer (premise) only once, even if a customer was served by more than one program.

(4) Number of customers with verified installations during the current report period. Customer is defined 

as a unique premise as defined by the utility, with one exception. For master-metered, multifamily 

buildings, customer is defined as a dwelling unit.

(8) Total costs incurred by Burlington Electric Department during the current report period. All costs in 

nominal dollars, (9) + (15) + (18).

(9) Subtotal of all administrative costs detailed in the categories below, (10) + (11) + (12) + (13) + (14).

(10) Costs include general management, budgeting, financial management and legal costs directly 

associated with program implementation (such as contract review).

(11) Implementation management and administrative costs include costs related to business development 

and customer service, data management, and other program administrative costs directly related to 

implementation.

(12) Costs related to program design and planning, program screening and other similar functions.

(13) Costs related to marketing and outreach.

(14) IT development and maintenance costs do not need to be broken out by program, i.e., this category 

may be filled in only on the executive summary page.

(15) Subtotal reflecting total implementation costs, (16) + (17).

(16) Costs related to conducting audits or analyses, preparing the package of efficiency measures, contract 

management and post project follow up.

(17) Costs related to educational or other support services provided to entities other than individual 

program participants, such as trade allies, manufacturers, wholesalers, builders, and architects.

(18) Subtotal reflecting total incentive costs, (19) + (20).

(19) Direct payments made to participants to defray the costs of specific efficiency measures. If a program 

employs a shared savings mechanism or loan system, this category should include the utility share of the 

measure and carrying costs projected over the payment period, net of all projected participant payments.

(20) Incentives paid to manufacturers, wholesalers, builders, or other stakeholders.

(21) Total costs incurred by participants related to BED activities during the current report period. This 

category includes the participant contribution to the capital costs of installed measures and to specific DSMrelated services, such as technical assistance or energy ratings.
64

(23) Evaluation costs, excluding tracking and reporting expenditures.

(24) Total program costs, (8) + (21) + (22) + (23).

(26) Total expenditures associated with the delivery of direct services to participants and trade allies, 

including all BED, participant and third party costs.

(27) Annualized MWH savings at generation and net of all approved adjustment factors (e.g., free riders, 

spill over) for measures installed and verified during the current report period.

(28) The lifetime estimated MWH savings for measures installed and verified during the current reporting 

year, at generation and net of all approved factors. (Estimated annualized savings times the life of the 

measure).

(29) Estimated impact of measures at time of winter system peak, at generation, net of adjustment factors.

(30) Estimated impact of measures at time of summer system peak, at generation, net of adjustment factors.

(31) Annualized MWH savings per participant, net at generation, i.e., (27) / (4).

(32) Average lifetime, in years, of measures in the program weighted by savings, i.e., (28)/(27).

(33) Number of customers with verified installations of measures within the end use, utility grouping.

(34) The total annualized MWH saved, at generation, net of adjustment factors, should add up to the savings 

reported in the line item footnoted as (27).

(35) The total lifetime MWH saved, at generation, net of adjustment factors, should add up to the savings 

reported in the line item footnoted as (28).

(36) The total annualized MWH saved, gross at the customer meter.

(37) The total winter coincident KW, at generation, net of adjustment factors, should add up to the savings 

reported in the line item footnoted as (29).

(38) The total summer coincident KW, at generation, net of adjustment factors, should add up to the savings 

reported in the line item footnoted as (30).

(39) Total MMBtu estimated to be saved (positive) or used (negative) for alternative fuels as a result of 

measures installed in the end use.

(40) Total water saved (CCF) (positive) or used (negative) due to measures installed in the end use.
65

4.2 Design Review Guide
66