1. WG 1: Measuring what matters December 5 th meeting

2. Review sub group recommendations Customer data –And building data –Meter level and sub meter –Load shapes Products, services Market Characterization Evaluation results

3. Summary Survey: Regional role – not full agreement as to the scope Committee Recommendation: $8 - $10 Million / year; 4-5 FTE Some projects to generate data that doesn’t exist, needs update, new needs Advise on data collection needs, protocols Coordinate Data gathering/aggregation Plus Clearinghouse Summarizing Interpreting and creating a user friendly result Making sense of the varied data sources Help facilitate coordinated strategies for region

4. DATA:Where Currently at Regional Level Primary Customer/Meter DataUtilities Customer and Building CharacteristicsUtilitiesNEEA States/ govt Products and ServicesBPANEEARTF Measure dataRTF.BPAutilities Market CharacterizationNEEAUtilitiesBPA Evaluation Utilities/ ETORTFNEEA *BPA-past ldrship Note: No clear “winner”

5. Role of the RTF Review Current role What it’s not Recommendation from Staff

6. Options 1.Propose resources in alignment with current mission. Look for solutions elsewhere 2. a. Propose resources more in alignment with the vision for Products and services (e.g. a portion of the regional data collection and/or coordination) b. Similarly, align other data coordination with other existing organization 3. Propose RTF take on the whole enchilada Pros and Cons?

7. Considerations for who-ever Governance –Setting priorities Funding Source Responsiveness

8. Other Workgroups struggling with the “entity” question Work group 2: Pros and Cons of emerging technologies in one of the existing entities, as well as those of a “new entity”

9. wg 2/ET: NEEA ProsCons Established organization of significant size Electric-centric - Looking at adding Gas Large enough to absorb tasks without significant modification Funding does not allow for R&D/'dry holes; tied to results Good Track Record Would require new advisory Group Wide support and buy-in BPA may not support ET function in NEEA Representation of Already managing and assimilating Abe to share results Focus on technology and business of EE Market Assessments

10. wg2, ET BPA ProsCons Establish ET Group with Structure IOUs not represented, nor gas utilities Network with national entities, incl. Fed. Labs Federal entity has restrictive contracting Good source of funding May not be able to have non- federal board for oversight competitive procurement Focusses more on T&D emerging tech than EE Becoming more fiscally transparent Currently about a dozen projects underway

11. Wg 2/ET RTF ProsCons RespectedCurrent role narrow Independentvery limited staff Accountable to Council, and therefore Statesrelies on volunteers Technical focus RTF needs to make decisions at arm's length from actual work

12. Wg 2/ET New Entity ProsCons Designed specifically for the function Compete with existing entities for limited resources - Staff and funding Overlapping mission with others

13. Recommendations for additional work to inform decision-makers –Mapping data needs to the current users throughout region, beyond at the regional level. Including further role for states –More comprehensive inventory of what data exists and being developed; where and possibilities for getting access to it now that new EE needs are identified