1. Provisional Protocol and Research Plan: Non-Residential Lighting Retrofits Regional Technical Forum November 18, 2014

2. The saga continues... Started March, 2012 Significant work on protocol in subcommittee Brought before the RTF several times – Working through provisional protocols at the time – Never complete with regards to clear research needs and adherence to Guidelines January 16, 2013 – Sent back for major revisions September 2014 – RTF sent back to better coordinate with ongoing and planned research 2

3. Outline for today Overview Subcommittee Recommendation Highlighted areas Request for Direction 3

4. Overview 4

5. Overview: protocol application Non-Residential Lighting Retrofits Lots of different building types and space-uses within buildings Lots of different lighting technologies and control strategies Measures include lamp/fixture changes as well as controls – Example 1: Covert T8  LED in an office space – Example 2: Covert T8  LED and install motion sensors in an office space Protocol must account for savings due to both lamps/fixtures/ballasts and controls. 5 “Controls are the new plastics!” - Plenary speaker, ACEEE 2014 Summer Study

6. Overview: protocol strategy Protocol uses interview of building representative to get rough proxy for lighting system usage… – Hours of occupancy, or – Stated hours of use (burn time), or – Other (What is the right target?) Provisional research to compare interview-based figures to metered HOU (burn time) – Parameters needed to get from interview data to burn time estimates – Necessary parameters depend on interview target 6

7. Since September… R&E Subcommittee discussed two basic options Interview for hours of occupancy of each space – Provisional research estimates parameters to get from stated HOO to estimates of actual HOU (burn time) Interview for hours of use of each lighting system – Provisional research estimates parameters to get from stated HOU to estimates of actual HOU (burn time). – R&E subcommittee recommended this approach Lighting Subcommittee rejected interviewing for burn time (HOU), recommended occupancy (HOO) 7

8. Occupancy vs. Burn Time What would we want the interview to find for the Council meeting room? – Open for business 8 hours per day, M-F – Actually used maybe 3 hours per day, M-F – What would building representative really know? – For consistency, we want the 8 hour figure. Terminology is tricky: – Hours of Occupancy? – Hours of Operation? – Business hours? – Need to pick terminology for interview guide 8

9. Today’s plan 1.Describe subcommittee recommendation – How it works – What are its limitations 2.Ask for RTF head-nod: The recommended approach is likely to improve savings estimates in terms of simplicity and/or reliability. Potential improvements outweigh expected limitations. Staff / CAT should adapt protocol materials (Provisional Protocol, Research Plan, Interview Guide, and Savings Calculator) to reflect the recommendation. 9

10. Highlighted Areas Interview guide wording – Need to standardize (ASAP) – Hard to capture what we want succinctly – Current Staff/CAT proposal keeps instructions minimal but includes clarifying examples Provisional research limitations – Do we need pre- and post- meter data? – Precision / Granularity / Sample size trade-off 10

11. Lighting Subcommittee Recommendation 11

12. Simplified method: Interview 12 Interview guide asks for Hours of Operation separately for each space in a project… – Space 1: Open office on 4 th floor, – Space 2: Private offices in Suite 400, – Space 3: Hallways Enter number of hours for each day of week Can enter more than one weekly schedule to capture seasonality Need to clarify what Hours of Operation means

13. Simplified method: Interview Hours of “Operation.” In many cases, hours of operation equals business hours, plus time for cleaning and after-hours events. See examples for common exceptions. Example 1: Private office with a single major usage period (the occupant's workday), which is about 8.5 hours long – Suppose cleaning is negligible most days for the offices in this example. – Then Hours of Operation is 8.5 for typical workdays. Example 2: Open office where early-birds start arriving around 7:15AM and late-bird linger until around 6:30PM. – Suppose cleaning takes 30 minutes each evening for the office in this example. – Then Hours of Operation is 11.25 + 0.50 = 11.75 for typical workdays. 13

14. Simplified method: Interview Hours of “Operation.” Question is about how the space is used, doesn’t generally change pre-/post-. Doesn’t attempt to account for intermittent lights-out periods throughout the day. – Want to know one shift versus two shifts – Don’t want to know if people turn off lights for lunch Doesn’t seek to make the most of the owner or occupant's knowledge; sacrifices site-specific insight for uniformity and simplification. 14

15. Simplified method: Savings 15

16. Provisional research Basic research question: How does Actual HOU (burn time) relate to interview-based Hours of Operation? For systems without change controls, savings depends on a single HOU ratio: ∆kWh = ∆kW x HOO x R XYZ For systems with only controls changes, savings depends on Delta between ratios: ∆kWh = kW x HOO x (R MANUAL - R XYZ ) (Don’t expect much precision for these Delta’s) HOU ratios may differ a lot between different space types and control types – Would like to have different estimates for different scenarios – Probably have to live with some heroic aggregation too 16

17. Provisional research Plan is to use post-only (or post-mostly) meter data. Sample a mix of space uses and control types. Estimate lots of separate HOU ratios, like this: 17 Space typeControl typeSample size* Uncontrolled HOU (stated)* Metered HOU* HOU Ratio* Private officeManual32 8.5 7.8 0.92 Private officeOccupancy20 8.6 6.4 0.74 IndustrialManual 913.113.2 1.01 Parking garageManual1210.511.0 1.05 Parking garageOccupancy 810.1 5.3 0.52 ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ClassroomManual18 8.2 7.5 0.91 ClassroomDaylight /occ.15 8.4 6.4 0.76 * All figures are fake, made up for illustration!

18. Highlighted areas 18

19. Plan for interview guide update Minimize scripted verbal instructions, clarify intent through examples. Like this: Hours of “Operation.” In many cases, hours of operation equals business hours, plus time for cleaning and after-hours events. See examples for common exceptions. Example 1: Private office with a single major usage period (the occupant's workday), which is about 8.5 hours long – Suppose cleaning is negligible most days for the offices in this example. – Then Hours of Operation is 8.5 for typical workdays. Example 2: Open office where early-birds start arriving around 7:15AM and late-bird linger until around 6:30PM. – Suppose cleaning takes 30 minutes each evening for the office in this example. – Then Hours of Operation is 11.25 + 0.50 = 11.75 for typical workdays. 19

20. Limitations: Right-on-average Objective is savings estimates that are right- on-average across lots of different projects. May be very wrong for individual projects. Custom evaluations (not using the protocol) would probably remain the preferred option for particularly large projects. 20

21. Limitations: Post-mostly research Without pre-/post- metering, we don’t get to see actual changes in HOU that are due to controls – Instead, see HOU for some sites with control X and HOU for other sites with control Y – Not ideal for inference about ∆HOU – But not as big a deal for fixture/lamp savings May be able to get small sample of pre-/post- meter data for reality check (mileage may vary) 21

22. Limitations: Granularity May need to group some space/control scenarios together – Example: “Gym or classroom or school library with occupancy sensor and/or daylight sensor” – Calculate a single (weighted) HOU ratio for aggregated scenario May need to exclude some scenarios from the protocol if we don’t get them in the sample and don’t want to group them with others. Might increase sample, improve protocol over time (beyond initial provisional research period) Recommend checking assumptions when BPA study is complete (mid-2015) 22

23. RTF Direction 23

24. Direction The recommended approach is likely to improve savings estimates in terms of simplicity and/or reliability. Potential improvements outweigh expected limitations. Staff / CAT should adapt protocol materials (Provisional Protocol, Research Plan, Interview Guide, and Savings Calculator) to reflect the recommendation. This direction only affects the allocation of staff resources – the RTF will decide whether to approve the re-drafted protocol after reviewing completed materials. 24

25. Additional Slides 25

26. Building TypeSpace Use Type Automated Control Type AssemblyAssembly spaceNone College / University ClassroomOccupancy sensor StairwayBi-level occ. Sensor Parking Garage / ExteriorParking garage, exteriorOccupancy sensor Industrial / ManufacturingIndustrial None Office Private officeOccupancy sensor Conference-copy-, mail-, restroom Occupancy sensor Open officeDaylight sensor StairwayBi-level occ. sensor RetailRetail sales areaNone K-12 School Classroom Occupancy sensor, Daylight sensor StairwayBi-level occ. sensor WarehouseAisle lightingOccupancy sensor 26 High-priority building/space/control combinations