1. Small and Rural Utility Technical Needs Study:

2.  Acknowledgements  Project objectives  Project methodology  Key findings and recommendations  Utility responses  Utility segmentation  Existing measures  Desired measures  Priorities 2

3.  Small and rural utilities across the region that took the time to meet and provide valuable feedback  The RTF SRR subcommittee that provided input and guidance throughout the project 3

4.  Determine what technical assistance the RTF can offer small/rural utilities to address the unique circumstances of their service territories  Identify program and infrastructure barriers faced by small/rural utilities  Develop and prioritize recommendations 4

5.  Review reporting databases  Identify criteria for “small,” “rural,” and “residential”  Select utilities based on review of reporting databases  Develop interview guide based on review of reporting databases and the project objectives  Interview 20 utilities  Analyze interview results  Develop recommendations based on interview findings 5

6.  Small (<15 aMW)  Rural (LLD recipients)  Residential (> 60%) 6

7. Utility CategoryTotal Small43 Rural56 Small/rural18 Small/residential13 Rural/residential12 Small/rural/residential9 All Small and/or Rural77 Selection Criteria: Small, rural, residential status Volume of savings Patterns of measure implementation of various utilities Climate Availability of adjacent conservation infrastructure Residential vs. commercial 7

8. 8

9.  Focus on technical characteristics of conservation efforts:  Development of deemed measures  Technical specifications  Simplified M&V protocols  Help identify program barriers faced by small/rural utilities (for RTF approved measures/protocols)  Review measures implemented by the utility  Discuss staff resources, incentives paid, and measures not reported to the PTR  Develop list of measures the utility is interested in implementing  Assess available conservation infrastructure 9

10.  The utilities should be segmented in order to zero in on unique challenges and opportunities  The utilities by and large want measures/programs that:  Are deemed and easy to implement  Achieve high savings  Don’t change very often  Utilities focus on deemed measures and appear to require process improvements and strategic support, rather than technical changes to measures  Many utilities are not aware of what the RTF or NEEA do 10

11. 11

12. 12

13. 13

14.  Measure recommendations  Regional collaboration and communication  Prioritization 14

15.  Utilities with their own programs, developed and marketed to their customers  Generally larger with conservation staff resources of at least 1 FTE  Specific program offerings outside of PTR, sometimes not reported  Specific recommendations to RTF to support their programs and approaches  Often have a medium-large agricultural customer base  35% of respondents 15

16.  Utilities using PTR as main guideline  Utility programs developed around PTR  Utility programs designed as required by specifications within the utility structure  Few custom measures (if any) except as delivered by third party providers  Most recommendations focused on the need for more measures that are “deemed and provide lots of savings”  45% of respondents 16

17.  Utilities with no defined program or implementation approach  React to customer or contractor requests  Provide pass through incentives from PTR  Would implement new measures if they appeared  Develop no custom measure  Usually staffed at under.25 FTE or less (much less)  20 % of respondents 17

18.  The utilities should be segmented in order to zero in on unique challenges and opportunities  Type 1 utilities will respond to different programs and new initiatives  Type 1 &2 utilities need more variety in deemed RTF measures  Type 3 utilities may not respond to anything  Type 3 utilities need more direct assistance from BPA  The utilities by and large want measures/programs that:  Are deemed and easy to implement  Achieve high savings  Don’t change very often  Type 2 utilities focus on deemed measures and appear to require process improvements and strategic support, rather than technical changes to measures  Many type 2 and 3 utilities are not aware of what the RTF or NEEA do 18

19.  Staffing: Median conservation staff size-.65 FTE  No type one utilities are below this level  Staff size not always critical  Remoteness: Many utilities remote from all major markets or contractor resources  Utilities more than 100 miles from a major market  Half of our respondents  Size: Median size of these utilities 22.8 aMW  Correlated to staff size but not completely  Some “Type 1” utilities are smaller while some “Type 3” utilities are larger 19

20.  Recommendations for the RTF (in red) are a combination of utility comments and Ecotope recommendations.  Utility only findings/recommendations identified with “*”  Utility and Ecotope recommendations identified with “**”  These small/rural utilities are much more focused on process.  The measures recommendations are both technical and programmatic.  Deemed savings are important but so are savings that can be achieved in these utilities.  Incentives need to be improved for some programs to work. 20

21.  Weatherization  RTF: Make new weatherization specifications more practical for utility administration*  RTF: Improve air sealing measure to make it more usable* *  RTF: Add small commercial deemed measures (Wx)*  Stabilize window replacement measures, incentives and savings are unpredictable**  EStar New homes  Must have higher incentives to get builders attention*  Mostly a gas program, need more electric savings* 21

22.  PTCS  PTCS measures require more attention than most of these utilities can give* ▪ Contractors not available ▪ Contractors not interested ▪ Customers not impressed  Provide more training opportunities**  Provide incentives to contractors for training**  RTF: Provide alternatives to QC regime (with reduced savings)**  GSHP  GSHP seen as an important alternative for electric heating*  Customers and contractors are very interested but no current incentives*  Cost effectiveness seen as a barrier, customers will not use air source HP*  RTF: Provide some mechanism for use in MT** ▪ Develop incremental savings and costs that can be cost effective ▪ Establish “non-energy benefits” that reflect the value of GSHP in cold climates ▪ Develop a deemed measure or calculator that can be the basis of utility incentives and rate credits 22

23.  Irrigation  Irrigation energy important use for several utilities, irrigation measures are difficult to package for customers*  RTF: More individual measures need to be deemed**  RTF: Package measures to focus on specific irrigation needs**  Timing must be more flexible, adapted to customer *  Distribution Efficiency  Distribution efficiency very important to these utilities with large distances between loads**  RTF measures address these technical needs**  Direct help with design and installation required for most of the small/rural utilities** ▪ Many utilities do not have in-house engineering resources ▪ DEI needs to be clarified to these utilities to sell them 23

24.  DHPs  Program need more flexibility*  Many utilities mentioned this program as a great model*  Commercial Lighting  Commercial lighting one of the few measures for the commercial sector of these SRR utilities*  Contractors have difficulty using the current calculator*  Improve the calculator**  RTF: Add deemed measures (LEDs maybe)**  Schools  Schools represent a major commercial customer in these smaller utilities. * ▪ Directly targeting schools would make a usable commercial measure** ▪ Should be based on packages that can be presented to Schools**  RTF: Develop deemed savings for lighting packages**  RTF: HVAC and Envelope measures should be included as packages** 24

25.  Several utilities had suggestions for new measures  RTF: HPWH* ▪ Utilities want this measure as a deemed measure* ▪ Address cold climate concerns**  RTF: Wind turbines (idle) have large impact on small utilities, need measures to control this load**  Add appliances and electronics, (EnergyStar)*  TVs *  RTF: Manufactured homes recycle program**  Water heater timers and cozies*  Room AC/Dehumidifiers*  Small water heaters (30-40 gallons)* 25

26.  The RTF should develop and utilize a standard “measure review form” to assess and clearly communicate the applicability of new or revised measures to small/rural utilities.  The review form would front-load problem identification.  The review form would also provide a feedback loop to BPA or other regional organizations, providing an opportunity to build in programmatic adjustments/support for small/rural utilities as required. 26

27.  RTF, BPA, and NEEA should coordinate to develop an integrated approach to supporting small/rural utilities  What can be accomplished in 2012?  What can be accomplished by 2016?  How can the complementary capacities of these organizations be leveraged across the region to achieve specific 1-year and 5-year goals?  RTF should focus on Type 1 utilities  Agricultural measures  M&V, evaluation, and QC  Deemed commercial measures  BPA and NEEA should focus on Type 2 and 3 utilities 27

28. Ecotope Contact: Poppy Storm 4056 9 th Avenue NE Seattle, WA, 98105 (206) 322-3753 www.ecotope.com 28