1. Regional Technical Forum End-use Load Shape Business Case Project Project Initiation Meeting Portland, OR March 5, 2012

2. Agenda  Introductions  KEMA project team  Objectives and approach  Challenges  Schedule, deliverables, next steps 2

3. 3 Introductions

4. 4 KEMA Project Team

5. Additional KEMA Contribution

6. 6 Objectives and Approach

7. Objectives  Develop the business case for a comprehensive PNW electric end-use data collection study – Assessment of Regional Interest and Need – Assessment of the No Action Option – Assessment of National and Out-of-Region Resources – Assessment of Updates since 2009 KEMA Study – Analysis of Options for Proceeding with Study – Assessment of Each Option for Proceeding with Study – Recommendations of Most Viable Options

8. Objectives  Primary and Secondary Objectives of RTF Subcommittee Members – Essential components – Wish list components  Supporting Criteria – Extent of characteristics data – Data quality needs  Expectations of the study – Current thinking on what path to take

9. Assessment of Regional Interest and Need  KEMA will build on 2009 findings  Conduct initial stakeholder webinar – Brainstorm with stakeholders about the specific information that will be necessary to develop the business case – To refine the list of questions to be used in the individual interviews  Stakeholder interviews – Telephone  Deliverables – Draft interview guide and list of proposed interviewees – Summary and findings memo – Prioritization of end-uses to be covered

10. Assessment of Regional Interest and Need  Prioritization of data needs – Sectors: Res, Commercial, Institutional, Industrial – End-uses: cooling, heating, water heating, lighting, etc.  Prioritizing applications for end-use data: planning, cost- effectiveness, target marketing and evaluation – DSM Efficiency and DSM Potential – Demand Response – Market Research – Load Forecasting  End-use forecasting, transformer loading, micro grid – Conditional Demand Analysis – Smart Grid Applications  Pricing feedback, bill presentment, interval data delivery (fee)

11. Data Collection: Stakeholder Interviews  25 Pacific NW Region  10 National

12. Assessment of the No Action Option  Apply our findings from the 2009 study and the findings from the interviews  Compare and contrast ELCAP-era factors to current environment

13. Assessment of National and Out-of- Region Resources  This assessment will incorporate KEMA’s and other industry expertise in developing end-use resources, including: – New England Energy Efficiency partnership (NEEP) – Various state and regional Technical Reference Manuals (e.g. Massachusetts, New York, and PJM) – DSM potential studies (e.g., BC Hydro) – Other experience from utility end-use projects using both primary and secondary source data

14. Assessment of Updates Since 2009 KEMA Study  Puget/NEEA updated summary of load shapes  Follow up with entities that reported significant studies in the planning stages in 2009  Follow up with regional utilities’ load research staff through our past and current project work as well as our involvement in industry load research groups (e.g., the Western Load Research Association)  Address updates pertaining to data reliability requirements, data collection methods, quality assurance, organization, storage, and user access

15. Analysis of Options for Proceeding with Study  Review the region’s priorities  Identify feasible methods of regional data development such as – Joint end-use data collection, with significance testing for transferability – data transfer – some or all load shape components – modeled data – metering of new samples  Metering options and rough estimates of segmentation and sample sizes will be considered  Identify the options for data format, organization, storage, quality assurance, and archival

16. Assessment of Each Option for Proceeding with Study  A clear assessment of each option in terms of: – Cost – Benefits – Risks  Will include realistic timelines associated with each option  KEMA will demonstrate the benefits and disadvantages to certain development approaches through effective presentation options, including tables and graphics

17. Recommendations of Most Viable Options  KEMA will develop a recommendation and specification for establishing and maintaining a regional end-use load data and load shape archive.  The recommendation will be broadly based, covering: – hardware – software – data management – documentation – user needs

18. Challenges  Determining specific value of end-use load shapes – EE/DR – Forecasting – Rates – T&D planning – Customer benefits – Others

19. Challenges (continued)  End-use load shape vs. measure savings shape  Need effective sample designs as part of cost calculations  Design and contents of load shape library to meet needs of stakeholders  Others?

20. Schedule Note: This is the original schedule as proposed in January. Kickoff is actually occurring one month later than this schedule.

21. Deliverables  Final work plan  Draft interview guide and list of proposed interviewees  Memo summarizing the interviews, including general findings  Draft and final report 21

22. Communication  Status updates to RTF staff either weekly (during key time periods) or bi-weekly (during less critical time periods)  Monthly web conferences for status reports to subcommittee, including meeting minutes  Utilize the RTF subcommittee’s web page for file sharing

23. Next Steps  Finalize work plan  Initial stakeholder webinar  Develop interview guide  Determine final list of interview candidates 23

24. End sheet Thank you for your attention.