Guidelines for RTF Measure Costs and Benefits Guidelines (formerly Cost and Non-Energy Benefits Guidelines) Proposal of Guidelines to the Regional Technical Forum March 13, Ryan Firestone, Navigant Consulting

Overview Objective “develop electric energy efficiency measure cost estimating and non-energy benefits guidelines” Timeline – August 2011 – January 2012 : work with subcommittee to develop draft guidelines – January 2012: presented draft guidelines to RTF – January 2012: contract extension to complete guidelines and flesh out the appendices – February 2012: revisions in response to January RTF feedback and two additional subcommittee meetings – March 2012: Navigant proposes revised guidelines at RTF meeting – Now through end of April: Navigant to work with subcommittee to finalize guidelines as needed Products – Draft guidelines – Summary sheet: summarizes details of analysis and results – Checklist: confirms that guidelines have been followed 2

History Contract awarded: early August Subcommittee meetings: every 3 weeks Ongoing: subcommittee feedback on draft guidelines 3

Process Process: – Get initial input from subcommittee – Draft guidelines – Feedback and revision – RTF presentation (January ‘12) – Additional subcommittee feedback and revisions (focus on appendices) Evolution of Guidelines: – Initial focus on elements (what’s in?/what’s out?), data sources, analysis methods (analyst perspective) – Later drafts focus on RTF process and requirements (RTF perspective) Discussion of elements, data sources, and analysis methods currently included as appendices – Most significant work since the January RTF meeting has been to the appendices 4 Draft guidelines are posted on the subcommittee website:

Feedback from January RTF Meeting Feedback at January RTF meeting: – Change “negligible” to “de minimis” in discussion of excluded elements – Provide more examples to sections: Section Data sources appropriately reflect the measure. Section Analysis methods are appropriate to the measure and datasets. Appendix 5: Methods – Add “as appropriate” to the end Section 1.1 sentence "However, costs and benefits should be estimated and documented as described in these Guidelines.“ – Add guideline 3.2.1“The dataset is provided in the Measure Assessment Workbook, or otherwise made readily available.” No RTF feedback in the two week comment period following the January meeting 5

Modifications to Appendices Most significant work since the January RTF meeting has been to the appendices: – Elements –standardized to provide a definition for each element and any clarification on what is or is not included in this element – Methods – removed definitions of methods, focused on the strengths and weaknesses of methods, along with examples of appropriate applications of methods – Data sources – added a section on preferred data characteristics, standardized the section on data sources to provide a definition, strengths, weaknesses, and additional considerations for each data source 6

Status Status: – Current draft has been approved by the subcommittee for proposal to the RTF The only topic without unanimous consent is if (and how) residential occupant labor should be monetized – Budget remains for one additional subcommittee meeting and round of revisions, if needed 7

Dissenting Opinion Should residential occupant labor be monetized? – Examples: Incremental cost: filter replacement on HPWH Incremental benefit: CFL vs. incandescent – Are these monetizable? The majority of subcommittee members did not think so – If so, what rate should be used? Rate should be appropriate for the type of work conducted: Minimum wage? Going rates for day labor? 8

Guidelines [see Guidelines] 9

Summary Sheet [see Summary sheet] 10

Checklist [see Checklist] 11

Standard Information Workbook [see Standard Information Workbook] 12

Proposal 13

Decision Subcommittee Recommendation: Adopt this document as the Operative Measure Cost and Benefits Guidelines. 14