1. Irrigation Hardware Proposed Adoption of Deemed Savings Regional Technical Forum January 5 th, 2010

2. 2 Pictures: ETO

3. Background Deemed savings were originally approved by the RTF in September 2005. Scale of the Measures About 1 aMW and $1,000,000 in CRC credits were claimed in the 2007 and 2008. Idaho Power claimed 1.87 aMW at a cost of $1.6 million in 2007 and 2008 for its “menu” option. The RTF reviewed deemed savings in July 2009 – Original savings based on engineering estimates, but the RTF did not have the supporting calculations/information on the original savings estimates – RTF subcommittee established to: – Review/revise deemed savings estimates with documentation of assumptions – Recommend in-field studies/evaluations to true-up estimates 3

4. Background: The Existing Measures 4

5. 5 1.7 gpm 8 gpm 10 gpm 17 gpm Source: Utah State University

6. The RTF Subcommittee Members Brad Miller (BPA) Bruce Cody (RTF) Dennis Merrick (IPC) Danielle Gidding (BPA) Hallie Gallinger (PacificCorp) Jim Williams (RTF) Mike Darrington (IPC) Tom Osborn (BPA) Quentin Nesbitt (IPC) Dick Stroh (BPA) Ted Light (ETO) Adam Hadley (RTF) Rick Rumsey (Rocky Mt Pwr) Meetings October 19 th, 2009 November 4 th, 2009 December 16 th, 2009 December 21 st, 2009 Summary of Recommendations Revised deemed savings values – Documented engineering estimates Input assumptions based on: – Available studies – Experience of the group Based on literature review, technology, and experience of the group, the subcommittee believes the engineering calculations and savings estimates are appropriate No specific field studies were identified Revise Measure Costs 6

7. Available Studies Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey (2003), Volume 3, Special Studies, Part 1 – US Department of Agriculture – Issued November 2004. An Evaluation of Wheelmove Irrigation Systems Nearing the End of Practical Life in the Uintah Basin of Utah – Robert Hill,et al, Utah State University – May 8, 2007 Evaluation of low pressure center pivots, stationary laterals, spray losses, and reservoir tillage – Dennis C. Kincaid (Kimberly, Idaho) Leak Prevention – Dorrel C. Larsen, University of Idaho – January 1991 Nozzle Management and Leak Prevention for Sprinkler Irrigators – D. C. Larsen and T. S. Longley (University of Idaho) – Feb 1981 Irrigation Uniformity – Bradley A. King, Jeffrey C. Stark, and Dennis C. Kincaid (University of Idaho) 7

8. Deemed Savings – Method and Major Assumptions 8

9. Inputs – Continued 9

10. Baseline Factor Assumption Issue: These are mostly maintenance/repair measures so it’s difficult to determine a consistent baseline leakage level or application uniformity. – Some farmers are already performing this maintenance on their own in a timely manner In this “market segment”, the baseline is a good components, so baseline leakage level would be near zero. – Other farmers are waiting to perform the maintenance In this “market segment”, the baseline is a leaky system, savings would be 100% of estimate for the estimated life (5 years in most cases). – Many farmers in-between Proposed Solution: Baseline Factor set at 75% – Assumes the program participants consist of 25% - farmers who regularly maintain their system 75% - farmers who have not maintained their systems on their own – This assumption is supported by irrigation equipment dealers reporting that sales have increased for listed measures included in utility programs 10

11. Results 11

12. What we need from the RTF: A decision regarding the deemed savings, measure life, and costs: – Approve, Deny, Modify, Table, …? – Acknowledge that each utility should adjust savings estimates based on unique characteristics (i.e. pumping lift, hours of operation) of service territory 12