1 EE Evaluation Report on 2009 Bridge Funding Period California Public Utilities Commission November 22, 2010 Energy Division Energy Efficiency Evaluation

2 Meeting Agenda 1:00 PM -1:10 PM Introductions (Tagnipes). 1:10 PM - 1:15 PM Background (Franzese) 1:15 PM – 2:15 PM Updates Made (Various) 2:15 PM – 2:20 PM Results (Franzese/Best) 2:20 PM - 2:50 PM Q & A 2:50 PM - 3:00 PM Comment process (Franzese) 3:00 PM – Adjourn

3 Background Commission Directives for the 2009 Bridge Funding Period D –1-Year bridge funding period in 2009 for certain programs carried over from –Use 2005 DEER values to determine a baseline and 2008 DEER updates for reporting and evaluating performance in 2009 D –Use results from impact evaluation reports as primary inputs for calculating energy savings for 2009 bridge funding programs –Programs and measures continued from were considered for updates –Programs and measures new for 2009 were passed through –Updates were for those eight specific parameters identified in the Performance Basis Protocol issued on January 11, 2006 ALJ Ruling

4 Residential Logic used to update Residential records

5 Small Commercial Prioritization –The parameters for measures included in the study (virtually the same measure going by a different name) or were updated using the results from the HIM Impact Evaluations. –DEER values were applied to EULs. –Pass thru values were applied where no better parameter update could be made. Major differences between ERT and 2009 ERT –High Bay occupancy sensors in SDGE’s programs were a major percentage of the program savings. –High Bay occupancy sensors were passed thru because they were not studied in the program evaluation. Lighting updates (by measure name, program and building type) –Delta watts (by measure name) X Hours of Operation (by program and building type) = Savings –New combinations of the measure name, program, and building type existed in The UES for the new combinations were calculated using the results.

6 Major Commercial SBW Major Commercial Study (SBW_MC)  8270 records across SCE2517, SCG3513, SDGE3010 and SDGE3025 updated with UES, NTGR and IRate results ADM Commercial Facilities HIM Study (ADM_ComFac)  In SCE2517, 3618 refrigeration records updated with UES and IRate results and 4688 records updated with NTGR Itron Small Commercial HIM Study (Itron_SmCom)  2372 lighting records in program SCE2517 updated with UES, NTGR and IRate results Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER)  541 records in SCE2517 updated with NTGR and 8463 records in SCE2517 and SCG3513 updated with EUL..

7 Major Commercial Percent kWh and therms affected by updates

8 Commercial Retro-commissioning SBW Retro-Commissioning Study (SBW_RCx) –120 records among 8 PGE programs and 198 records among 2 SCE programs updated with UES and NTGR results KEMA Non-Res New Construction Study (KEMA_NRNC) –11 measures in PGE2006 NRNC updated with UES and NTGR results; 8 of those measures part of “Whole building – new construction” HIM Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER) –309 PGE records and 1 SCE record updated with EUL values from DEER

9 Commercial Retro-commissioning Percent kWh and therms affected by updates In all cases IRate was set to one. For measures receiving updates for UES and NTGR, all energy savings were accounted for in the UES values.

10 Specialized Commercial Updates were applied only to the same HIM measures contained within the same program (EDPrgID) as Measure names were different in 2009 than , but the measures were still associated with the proper EDMeasureGroup Irate and NTG Parameters applied by Program Within Programs the Climate Zone specific UES values were applied No new data was collected and no new values were calculated

11 New Construction/Codes and Standards Non-Residential New Construction –Only the UES (unit energy savings) and NTGR (net-to- gross ratio) parameters were updated using evaluation results Residential New Construction –Only the UES (unit energy savings) and NTGR (net-to- gross ratio) parameters for Whole House measures in the NCCS Residential New Construction (RNC) were updated –SDGE3007 did not rebate any Whole House measures, so all ex-ante parameters were passed thru –Due to complications with the different databases and the small magnitude of savings it was determined that all values for PG&E 2009 would be passed through.

12 PGE Fabrication, Process and Manufacturing Tracking records were divided into three categories: pump-off controllers (POC), non-POC electric measures, and gas measures. Realization rates and net-to-gross ratios were derived for each category, by stratum. Updated 2009 records for all programs using the RR and NTGR estimated in the program cycle. The same measure categories and strata boundaries as in were used for this purpose. Exceptions 19 New Construction records, updated by the NCCS Contract Group; and 3 RCX records, updated by the RCX Contract Group. Both the NCCS and RCX Groups used evaluation results to update their respective records.

13 Southern California Industrial and Agricultural SCE2509 –In , SCE adjusted claims using a realization rate of.89 –In 2009, SCE did not use the.89 adjustment –In order for the realization rates to be applicable to the 2009 program year the following adjustments were made: The 2009 records were updated using the adjusted RR and the NTGR estimated in the program cycle. The same strata boundaries as in were used for this purpose

14 Southern California Industrial and Agricultural SCE2510 –Agricultural: The gross impacts for the 2009 records were passed through, as in the evaluation. The 2009 tracking records were updated using the NTGR estimates –For Pump Testing, SCE used a completely different set of impacts in 2009 as compared to , as reflected in the 2009 Workpapers Since the 2009 impacts were different, the results could not be used to update 2009 records for this program The 2009 ex-ante impacts were passed through

15 PGE Agricultural PGE2001 project records were adjusted; other 3rd party program records were passed through. Installation rates – assumed to be 100% as install rates were picked up in realization rates for the evaluation. Unit Energy Savings (UES) –Included savings: realization rates from the evaluation were applied to gross savings from the tracking system. –Omitted savings (savings from a fuel that weren’t accounted for in tracking): per-unit savings from the evaluation were applied to each record from the tracking system. Interactive Effects - consistent with the evaluation, no interactive effects were calculated Net-to-gross ratios (NTGRs) – results from the evaluation were utilized; NTGRs varied by kW, kWh, and therms. Effective Useful Lives (EULs) – tracking system results were passed through. –..

16 Standardized Program Tracking Database There were 170 programs in , 153 in 2009 There were 38 programs in that were not in 2009 There were 21 programs in 2009 that were not in SPT db stats from compared to 2009: 2006 – SPTdb4,328,7631,695,907 SPT3,755,2041,642,198 E3_Claim20,68613,657 Number of records

17 ERT Application Changes from ERT to the 2009 ERT –New E3 Engine used (all used 4g2, except for SDGE used 4g3) Years change: –Years removed from Input tab. –Year 2009 is now where 2006 used to be. –New years added New avoided cost tables New load shapes consistent with DEER Upstream Payments field added to the Export tab. –Replaced IOU claims table with 2009 claims table –Revised VBA code and queries: Reference new 2009 IOU_E3 tables instead of 2008 tables. Modified code to adjust quantities into Q42009 (year 2009 for SCE) where the paid date is after 12/31/2009. Added Upstream Payments field to the comparison queries and Results_Savings_Claim table to capture Upstream Payments output from the E3s.

18 Results Evaluated Energy Savings 2006 – 2008 Net 2009 Net2009 Gross First YearMW GWh 4,0971,5382,401 MMTherms LifecycleGWh 42,73616,00024,486 MMTherms

Market Distribution of Savings Electricity Natural Gas 19

20 Results Cost Effectiveness PGESCESDGESCGStatewide TRC PAC

21

Program Cycle Comparison

23 Progress Against Goals Electricity

24 Progress Against Goals Natural Gas

25 Q & A 30 minutes

26 Timeline for Comments - Report posted Friday, November 12, WebinarMonday, November 22, Comments DueFriday, December 10, Post comments to - Go to Topic “ 2009 Energy Efficiency Bridge Funding Evaluation Report” - Click on “View/Add” - Click on “Add a comment or question”

27 Thank You Questions