Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Staff Report 187-10
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: APRIL 19, 2010 REPORT TYPE: INFORMATIONAL SUBJECT: Customer Programs Managed and Delivered by the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department This is an informational report, and no action is required. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES CMR: 187:10 The City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU) is engaged in managing and delivering a variety of customer programs. These programs are focused on efficiency, renewable energy, research and development and reliability areas. Many of the programs are administered with third -party partners. While the majority of programs are funded through utility department funds (either public benefit or supply resources), a few have at least partial funding originating from the federal stimulus funds. This report serves as a complete and updated informational summary of these customer programs, both utility -funded and grant -funded. The annual report regarding the Demand Side Management (DSM) programs in Palo Alto was presented to the City Council as an informational report on January 11, 2010 and is included in Attachment A, and a copy of the statewide publicly owned utility report to the California Energy Commission (CEC) on program achievements is included as Attachment B. BACKGROUND The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009 (ARRA) was enacted by Congress to preserve and create jobs and promote economic recovery, to assist those most impacted by the recession, to provide investments needed to increase economic efficiency by spurring technological advances, and to make investments that will have long term economic benefits. The US Department of Energy (DOE) has allocated the California Energy Commission $226 million in ARRA funding for the State Energy Program (SEP). The City of Palo Alto has received funds to partially pay for two efficiency programs through this program. In addition, CPAU is helping the CEC in promoting an appliance efficiency program (Cash4Appliances), for which the CEC received federal stimulus dollars to implement. The ARRA also funded the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG) Program, created by Congress in 2007, with an appropriation of $3.2 billion. The EECBG Program provides federal grants to local governments, Indian tribes, states and territories to reduce energy CMR 187:10 Page 1 of 5 use and fossil fuel emissions, and for improvements in energy efficiency. The EECBG Program is administered by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The City was awarded $663,000 in Fall 2009 to assist in developing the Home Energy Reports for residents and to expand its LED street light project. These programs have been added on to the existing utility customer programs. Due to the great variety of grants and programs in process, staff is providing a program summary to Council. DISCUSSION Below is a brief summary of the programs currently being provided by CPAU to customers. The programs are split into the following categories: residential customer programs, business customer programs, renewable energy programs, and all others. Information on the utilities for which programs are available, the name of the program, a brief description, the partners with which CPAU is implementing the programs, and the sources of funding are all included in the summary. Customers Utilities Impacted & program Name Description Partners Residential Customer Programs Funding Residential Electric, Water, and Gas Smart Energy Program Rebate customers for purchasing and installing energy efficient appliances, insulation, furnaces, pool pumps, water heaters, and other items. Electric Public Benefit Funds Residential Electric Cashel' Appliances Co -promote statewide short-term additional rebate program for efficient refrigerators, washing machines, and window air conditioning systems California Energy Commission (CEC) Stimulus Funds through CEC Residential Electric Refrigerator Recycling Rebate customers $35 for an old working refrigerator. Unit recycled. JACO Environmental Electric Public Benefit Funds Residential Electric Light Emitting Diode (LED) Spring Light Program Rebate two LED lights for customers to purchase at hardware stores. Customers then to provide feedback on the two lamps. Palo Alto Hardware, Peninsula Hardware, and Stanford Electric Electric Public Benefit Funds Residential Gas, Water Residential NewElectric, Construction Rebate Rebate customers who exceed City's Green Building Ordinance requirements up to $900. Development Platuirng Department Electric, Gas, and Water Public Benefit Funds Residential Electric and Gas Low Income Residential Energy Assistance Program (REAP) An energy specialist visits residents' homes and performs a free energy audit. Recommendations are given for energy saving measures. Replacements and repairs are made to insulation, weather stripping, lighting, refrigerators, and furnaces (if needed). Synergy Electric and Gas Public Benefit Funds Residential Electric and Gas Rate Assistance Program (RAP) 25% discount off the electric and natural gas bills of customers who qualify due to medical or income need. Electric and Gas Funds Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Project Pledge One-time payment of utility bill costs to residents in a crisis situation from funds donated by other utility customers. Customer donations Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Residential Home Energy Audit On -Line energy audit of household energy use. In -home water wise audit available. Aclara Electric Public Benefit Funds CMR 187:10 Page 2 of 5 Customers & Utilities Impacted Program Name Description Residential Customer Programs Partners Funding Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Residential :. Electric,; Gas, and Water. Residential Electric and Gas Residential Electric and. Gas Green@Home CaliforniaFIRST. Narne to be developed (TBD); Countywide BE Program Training and Workshops Acterra provides free in -home energy audits and electric meter information (blue line power monitors). Statewide 'consortium .through counties to provide loans to residents to install efficiency measures. Loans to be repaid through property taxes. TBD, but expected to be joint energy efficiency programs! Reports toresidents comparing' usage with similar homes Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Residential Water Water Conservation Programs Workshops and presentations throughout the year on energy and water conservation issues for the public. Work with Santa Clara Valley Water District to ensure customers receive audits and rebates for water conservation projects, including toilet replacements, washers, lawn replacements, and other areas. Acterra Renewable. Funding, Santa Clara County, Ecology Action, and many others Various Santa Clara Valley Water District Electric Public Benefit Funds Electric Public Benefit. Funds and Stimulus Funds through the CEC and Sacramento County Electric Public Benefit Funds and Stimulus Funds through the CEC Stimulus funds and Electric Public Benefit Funds Utility Public Benefit Funds Water Utility Public Benefit Funds Customers Utilities Impacted Small Business Electric and Gas & Program Name Right Lights+ Description Business Efficiency Programs Contractor performs energy audit on facility, recommends changes, assists customer in making upgrades, and completes paperwork for rebate. Partners Ecology Action Funding Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric and Gas Commercial Advantage Program (CAP) Rebates on installation of the following energy efficient equipment types: lighting, HVAC, chillers, boilers, food service, refrigeration, office equipment, appliance, & custom saving programs. Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric, Gas and water Business New Construction Rebates Rebates for new construction exceeding City and state energy requirements. Development Center and Planning Department Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric Data Center Efficiency Program Rebates for server virtualization and other data center efficiency measures. Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric and Gas Commercial & Industrial Energy Efficiency Program Commissioning and installation assistance for large businesses installing efficiency measures. Enovity Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds CMR 187:10 Page 3 of 5 Customers Utilities Impacted Business Electric and Gas & Program Name Efficiency Programs for Commercial Kitchens Description Business Efficiency Programs Partners National Resource Management Funding Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit and Supply Funds Direct installation assistance for efficiency measures in commercial kitchens. Business Water Water Conservation Programs Work with Santa Clara Valley Water District to ensure customers receive audits and rebates for water conservation projects. Santa. Clara Valley Water District Water Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric Electric Efficiency Financing Program for Businesses Provide financing for installation of electrically efficient equipment and systems for small businesses. TBD Request for proposals to Implement Out Now Electric Utility Calaveras Reserve Business Electric and Commercial Efficiency PrGas Beongrharking Provide benchmarking of commercial customers on energy use to provide recommendations for reduction. TBD—Request for proposals to N element Out w Electric and Gas Utility Supply Funds Business Electric, Gas, and Water Training Various training and workshops for business customers. Various Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric, Gas, and Water Large Customer Facility Manager Meetings Training on a variety of efficiency measures, from chillers to LEED certification on buildings. Various Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Business Electric, Gas, and Water MeterLinks On -Line access to metered utility usage for large customers. Automated Energy Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds Customers Utilities Impacted & Program Name Description Partners Renewable Energy Programs Funding All Electric Customers PV Partners Rebates for installation of solar electric (PV) systems. Electric Utility DSM and Supply Funds All Gas Customers Solar Water Heating Rebates for installation of solar water heating systems. Center for Sustainable Energy Gas Utility DSM and Supply Funds All Electric . and Gas Customers Ground Source Heat Pump Information to help customers implement ground source heat pump systems. Electric and Gas Utility Public Benefit Funds All Electric Customers PaloAltoGreen Supports wind and solar generation by purchasing renewable energy credits up to 100% of a customer's energy usage. 3Degrees Customer Program Receipts CMR 187:10 Page 4 of 5 Customers & Utilities Impacted Program Name Description Partners Funding Other Programs All Light Emitting Customers Diode (LED) Street Lights Electric Customers Plug -In Rebate Tested LED and Induction street lighting fixtures. More will be installed in a test area around Colorado Avenue for viewing and commenting. 27 LED fixtures have been obtained from the following: General Electric, Philips, Beta and LRL. Rebates for customers who install fuel cells, cogeneration, wind, and other renewable and high -efficiency power generation technologies. Pacific Northwest National Labs Federal Stimulus'` and Electric utility Funds -' Electric Utility Supply Funds RESOURCE IMPACT This is an informational report of ongoing activities. No additional resources are being requested at this time for implementation of the programs. When new programs or partners are instituted, the information is sent to Council for review and approval. POLICY IMPLICATIONS These programs conform to the Council approved Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Guideline which recognizes cost-effective energy efficiency measures as the principle electric resource and requires that they take priority over the purchase of renewable and conventional supply sources. Energy efficiency also enables the community to reduce its carbon footprint and will help achieve the Council approved greenhouse gas reduction targets by 2020. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This informational report does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), thus no environmental review is required. ATTACHMENTS A. City of Palo Alto Utilities Demand Side Management Program; Energy Efficiency, Water Conservation and Renewable Energy Measures for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 B. Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector A Status Report: March 2010 REPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR 187:10 ‘,...JOYCE KINNEAR Manager, Utility Marketing Services TOM AUZENNE Assistant Director, Customer Support Services VALERIE 0 N Director of Uti i ies Page 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT A. "- CITY OF PALO ALTO 1\` UTILITIES Inspired by a brighter tomorrow.. December 2009 DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROGRAM GOALS FOR ENERGY AND WATER DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS 3 Program Successes 4 GOALS AND ACHIEVEMENTS IN FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 4 Savings Goals and Achievements as a Percentage of Total Utility Consumption 6 DSM and Renewable Programs: Updates 7 Efficiency Programs Delivered by Third Party Agencies 7 Third Party Evaluation, Measurement and Verification 8 Local Renewable Generation Installed in Palo Alto 9 Federal Government Stimulus Funds under the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant 9 Research and Development Projects 10 EXPENDITURES BY CATEGORY FOR CPAU DSM PROGRAMS 10 APPENDIX A: CPAU ENERGY REPORT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION 11 APPENDIX B: QUANTITATIVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM ACHIEVEMENTS 12 APPENDIX C: HISTORICAL EXPENDITURES ON DSM AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM S BY UTILITY AND MAJOR FUNCTION 13 APPENDIX D: DEMAND SIDE PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS 15 ii City of Palo Alto Utilities Demand Side Management Program Results for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 Executive Summary This is an annual report with historical information on expenditures and energy savings from the efficiency programs, solar electric installations, and other Demand Side Management (DSM) implemented by the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU). The report provides a summary of program achievements, including the information on effectiveness and energy efficiency potential that is to be provided to the California Energy Commission (CEC) in first quarter 2010. Details on the information provided to the CEC are included in Appendices A, B, C, and D. This report also compares achievements against the goals developed by the City in its Ten Year Energy Efficiency Portfolio Plan, first adopted in 2007 and scheduled to be updated in early 2010. Other requirements at the state and local level are included, as well. Council Policies and Program Goals for Energy and Water Demand Side Management Programs The City Council approved a Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan on April 2007 (CMR:216:07). This plan developed a number of goals to meet the City's Climate Protection policy, support the Long Term Energy Acquisition Plan or LEAP (CMR:169:06), the Gas Utility Long Term Plan or GULP (CMR:345:03), the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (CMR:431:05 and 455:05) as well as state legislation mandating that energy efficiency be the first priority in seeking utility supply (Senate Bill or SB 1037 and Assembly Bill or AB 2021 among others). According to the legislation, the Energy Efficiency plan is to be updated and reported to the CEC every three years. Staff is currently reviewing the potential for energy savings and will report to the Utilities Advisory Commission and City Council with recommendations by the end of the first quarter of 2010. The specific energy efficiency goals in the Plan are as follows: 1. Pursue all energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost-effective, reliable, and feasible. 2. Use a community -wide perspective in program design/evaluation criteria. 3. Aim to reduce average bills. 4. Design programs for broad participation to promote equity. 5. Utilize an integrated "systems" approach to program design. 6. Track and report program effectiveness. 7. Explore technologies and rates to encourage demand reduction, conservation, and load shifting. 8. Be innovative, tailor programs to Palo Alto's needs. In addition, the Loading Order for energy purchases (AB 2021) requires that utilities procure first cost-effective energy -efficiency, then renewable energy, and then low -pollution electricity from other sources of generation. Cost-effectiveness of energy -efficiency programs for the Loading Order is determined by the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test. 3 of 16 In water conservation, the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan states that it is the goal of the City to continue to look for opportunities, innovative technologies and cost effective programs that best utilize the water conservation budget. It is estimated that these water conservation programs will help reduce water purchases from San Francisco Public Utilities Commission by 4% by the year 2030. Staff is currently updating the plan for 2010 and will include Council directives to the City Manager to work to reduce water usage by 20% by 2020 (Colleague's memo on 9/21/2009). The City's Climate Protection Plan, approved in December 2007 (CMRs:211:07 and 435:07), in its third chapter, outlines a number of ways that the Utilities Department can assist the rest of the City in meeting sustainability goals. To assist in meeting these goals, the state and local requirements mentioned above, and the needs of the community, CPAU works to ensure the following items are achieved in its environmental programs: 1. Implement programs to support renewable power generation that increase resource diversity and minimize adverse environmental impacts from electric generation and operation of the utilities' systems. Enable customers to install solar electric (photovoltaic) and solar water heating systems to provide renewable power at the customer location. 2. Follow the City's Climate Protection Plan and work to decrease greenhouse gas emissions in the City of Palo Alto through the energy and water efficiency and renewable energy programs. 3. Provide the DSM programs in a manner that creates value to the community and meets all applicable legal requirements. 4. Assist all City Departments in achieving optimal energy and water efficiency at City facilities by paying a portion of costs to reduce energy and water use through rebates and assist in implementing new energy and water related technologies for the benefit of the City and community. 5. Support research and development of emerging technologies to speed up market acceptance, allowing energy efficiency and water conservation services and products to compete in the open market. 6. Assist low-income residents in helping them to pay their electric and natural gas bills and in installing efficient appliances and other measures. 7. Determine the best energy and water saving programs to offer Palo Alto customers by collecting input from community organizations, businesses and other City departments. Program Successes Goals and Achievements in Fiscal Year 2008-2009 • The Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan set a target of 2,800,000 gross kilowatt hours (kWh) in first year electric savings in 2009 or 0.28% of annual sales. Actual net first year savings for projects completed in FY 2008-2009 were 4,667,711 kWh (equal to 51,425,595 kWh over equipment lifetime) or 0.47% of annual electric sales. The actual level of electric savings continues to exceed goals. • Gross savings figures are the kilowatt hours of energy saved by customers through implementation of programs based on state and local standards for new equipment, i.e. if an old refrigerator is replaced, gross savings are based on the legally allowed amount of electricity produced by any new refrigerator and comparing that figure (not the electricity used by the old unit) with the rated performance of the actually rebated appliance. Net savings take into account such factors as free ridership, which 4 of 16 accounts for those customers who would have made the upgrade anyway, without the impact of the utility program. • Gas savings goals for 2009 were projected to be 86,400 therms or 0.28% of total sales, based on first year savings for measure implementation. Actual first year savings from efficiency programs were 148,403 therms. This level of natural gas savings through efficiency programs represents 0.49% of total utility load. Goals were achieved for this past fiscal year, primarily related to the new solar water heating program and an enhanced emphasis on business natural gas and process energy usage at larger facilities. • The 2005 Urban Water Management Plan lists saving goals as 0.37 million gallons per day (MGD) or 3.35% of total consumption by 2010 (which is estimated to be 0.34% of savings of the equipment's lifetime or 180,548 CCF). Actual achieved was 52,815 CCF (or 528,150 CCF for expected lifetime savings). Since total sales of water were 5,395,125 CCF, the first year savings represented 0.98% of total consumption. Goals for all three utilities were achieved this fiscal year. The new ten-year electric potential study will provide new recommendations to enhance efficiency programs to continue to increase electric savings. With the implementation of the Solar Water Heating rebate last year as well as enhanced natural gas efficiency rebates, conservation in this commodity is expected to greatly increase in upcoming years. Efforts in the water DSM program are also being expanded to help meet the state's long-term water shortages. Achievements are shown below in two tables. The first table shows savings by kilowatt hour, therms, or CCF for individual customer programs and then the total for first year savings and expected lifetime savings. Staff continues to report on lifetime cumulative savings as this was the key metric used in the 2007 Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan. Updates to the potential available for energy and water saving in the upcoming ten year period are currently being developed with the results being used to update the City's Ten Year Energy Efficiency Plan for the period 2010 to 2019. 5 of 16 Savings By Program: Water Savings (CCF) Gas Savings (Therm) Net Electric Savings (kWh) Residential Commercial Residential Commercial Residential Commercial # Paid Residential Energy Assistance Program (REAP) - 2,800 535,7076 625 Residential Smart Energy - 30,133 362,060 ' 1 283 Refrigerator Recycling 421,893 271 Residential CFL's Included with Smart Energy 590 Refrigerator Recycling Included with Smart Energy 235 Water with Santa Clara Valley Water District 18,777 34,038 Water efficiency 9 327 Measures with gas savings 6,570 Water efficiency measures with electric savings 2 131 e Commercial 9 94,639 1,869,334 20 Solar Water Heating 725 - 3,100 7 Right Lights 1,834 . 1,476,586 246 1g` Year Annual Savings Totals 18,777 34,038 42,985 103,043 1,319,660 3,348,051 3,277 Water (CCF) Gas (Therms) • Electricity (kWh) Total Commodity 1 Year Savings 52,815 146,028 4,667,711 Total 19` Year Savings Goals 18,055 86,400 2,800,000 Total 21108-2009 Sales 5,395,125 30,582,964 995,682,782 Total Est. Lifetime Savings 528,150 1,460,280 51,425,595 Total Lifetime Savings Goals 180,548 864,000 28,000,000 Note: Rebate programs are further described in Exhibit D. Savings Goals and Achievements as a Percentage of Total Utility Consumption Utility Annual Savings Goal Annual Savings Achievements Electric 0.28% • 0.47% Natural Gas 0.28% 0.49% Water 0.34% 0.98% 6 of 16 DSM and Renewable Programs: Updates A listing of each of the DSM and renewable energy programs at the City of Palo Alto is given in Appendix D at the end of this report. The table lists the name of the program and an overview of each general program category. During the course of the past fiscal year some changes were made to DSM programs to support customers in making efficiency improvements. In particular, business efficiency programs were enhanced with two new programs delivered by third party contractors. Through Enovity, the Commercial & Industrial Energy Efficiency Program (CIEEP) offers expert engineering support at no cost to CPAU business customers. The Program's experienced team helps customers identify and implement energy efficiency upgrades that will result in energy savings and operations and maintenance improvements at their facilities. Programs Delivered by Third Party Agencies In order to increase the number and range of efficiency programs available to customers in the past few years, CPAU has contracted with several third party agencies. Over the past two years, in particular the number of these third party managed programs has increased. Below is a listing and brief description of each program. Note that the CIEEP program did not begin during the year in the status report, so information is preliminary. • Commercial and Industrial Energy Efficiency Program (CIEEP): This program, which began in mid -2009, is delivered by Enovity, Inc. It provides technical services and cash incentives to identify, quantify and implement electric and natural gas efficiency projects for commercial and industrial customers. The program provides valuable professional services at no -cost audits and review for CPAU commercial and industrial customers with buildings larger than 30,000 square feet and/or greater than 50 kW maximum electric demand. Customers are then assisted through the implementation and rebate application process. Specific areas of focus for CIEEP activities include: HVAC systems, process (including compressed air and steam systems), controls, domestic hot water, and lighting controls and energy efficient lighting retrofits. Typically these are implemented through control setting changes, hardware repair, and installation of new equipment. • Green@Home Energy Audits: Delivered since 2008 by a local non-profit, Acterra, this program sends a two -person team of trained volunteers to visit single family resident's homes for a scheduled 2.5 hour audit. During the visit, the Green@Home team offers the following energy -saving upgrades: provide and install a retractable clothesline; choose a place for three compact fluorescent light bulbs; optimize water heater and refrigerator temperatures; install faucet aerators and low -flow showerheads; show residents how to measure and adjust tire pressure; install up to five outlet or light switch gaskets; and measure energy draw of home electronics. • Meterlinks.: This program has been available since 2002. Delivered by Automated Energy, Inc., this program makes electric and natural gas usage information at 15 minute intervals available for larger business customers through on-line software. This software has tables and graphs of energy usage at each meter, thus allowing customers to control their electric and natural gas consumption. Staff is reviewing the possibility of expanding this program to more business customers. • On -Line Energy Audits: Working with Aclara since 2004, this on-line analysis tool allows residents to identify the ways that they can reduce energy and water usage. • PaloAltoGreen: Since 2003, CPAU has worked with 3Degrees to provide a voluntary program to support and increase the supply and use of wind and solar renewable energy. Over 20% of customers are involved in this nationally awarded program. 7 of 16 • Refrigerator Recycling: JACO Environmental has provided this service to remove and recycle older, but working refrigerators and freezers for Palo Alto residents since July 2006. • Residential Energy Assistance Program: Beginning in July 2005, CPAU has offered a service through Synergy Companies to improve the energy efficiency of the homes of lower income residents in Palo Alto. The program can provide insulation, weather stripping, showerheads, compact fluorescent lighting, programmable thermostats, and even repair or replace refrigerators and furnaces, if needed. • Right Lights+: CPAU has worked with the non-profit company Ecology Action, since 2006 to deliver this program of assistance to small businesses in Palo Alto. These businesses receive fast, free, unbiased, expert assessment and recommendations tailored to their needs in the areas of lighting, refrigeration, and vending equipment. Last year, in 2008, this program was enhanced through a contract with National Resources Management to provide low cost or free efficiency measures to commercial kitchens. • Solar Water Heating: The California Center for Sustainable Energy (CCSE) has administered the Solar Water Heating Program (SWHP) since 2008. The incentives in this program are paid to qualified, licensed contractors to promote the installation of clean, renewable solar water heating systems. For residential systems, the incentive is up to $1,500 per dwelling unit. For larger systems, the incentive is a function of multiplying three variables: $20 for closed -loop systems; Solar Orientation Factor; and Production rating of the specific SWH collector. The maximum incentive for businesses is $75,000. • Water Efficiency Programs: Through an ongoing operating agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a variety of water audits, landscape and irrigation rebates, and incentives for appliances, toilets/urinals, and operational reductions are provided to all customers. Third Party Evaluation, Measurement and Verification To meet the requirements of state law, a third party consultant was also contracted with to provide evaluation, measurement and verification services (EM&V) for the public benefits programs. The consultant, Summit Blue, completed its first report in this area early in 2009. The report found that Palo Alto has very well run residential and commercial DSM programs. The program offerings to its customers are extensive and comprehensive. A customer survey as a pat of the EM&V process found very high satisfaction levels for the residential Smart Energy program. Customers also felt that the rebate levels were sufficient. The impact evaluation efforts for the residential sector confirmed the claimed levels of energy savings reported by CPAU for these programs. The impact evaluations for the non-residential programs were verified overall with an actualization rate of 124% (actual savings were greater than those reported). The report pointed out a number of issues that affected this realization rate. • The most important is the issue of building client turnover with the potential result of remodeling and the loss of the energy efficiency improvements in the commercial Right Lights program. • The refrigerator gaskets appear to be an effective addition to the Right Lights program. • However, installed CFLs were found to be no longer in use for a variety of reasons. Here, Summit Blue recommended that screw -in CFLs be dropped from the Right Lights program with the only CFL option being CFL fixtures. Screw -in CFLs can become uninstalled easily. All in all, electric efficiency results were actually found to exceed those reported to the California Energy Commission (CEC). A second annual EM&V report is currently being completed and will be delivered to the CEC, as required, by March 2010. 8 of 16 Local Renewable Generation Installed in Palo Alto Solar Electric (Photovoltaic or PV) The PV Partners Program continues to be one of the most successful in the state. The City received awards from three different organizations in 2009 for the solar activities of the City, its residents, and its businesses. Environment California, a statewide nonprofit environmental group, analyzed the amount of solar power installed to -date in California on a city by city basis. This organization announced that Palo Alto as a city is home to one of the largest numbers of solar roof installations as well as largest amount of solar (in kilowatts) in the state. The NorCal Solar Association presented the Mayor with an award for being one of the top three cities in Northern California in the categories of Total Watts Installed and Watts per Capita Installed during the calendar year 2008. Finally, the Solar Electric Power Association acknowledged the City of Palo Alto as being the electric utility with the third highest rate in the country in the category of Total Solar Watts Installed per Customer during the calendar year 2008 category. Utilities and Building Departments approved the installation of 49 systems in FY 2008-2009, for a total of 1.07 megawatts of installed solar electric capacity. As of June 30, 2009 there are 342 PV installations with the total capacity of 2,204 megawatts (1.1% of Palo Alto system peak load). Solar Water Heating (SWH) CPAU launched the solar water heating (SWH) program in May 2008, ahead of a state law requiring natural gas utilities to offer solar water heating incentives. This program offers rebates of up to $1,500 for residential systems and up to $75,000 for commercial and industrial systems. The rebates are calculated based on three factors: $20 per square foot of collector area for closed -loop systems, solar orientation factor, and the production rating of the specific SWH collector. The rebate is paid to the contractor, who uses the rebate to reduce customers' upfront costs. Both contractors and customers are required to go through training on the rebate process, a good functioning SWH system, and how to ensure that the systems are well maintained. All installations are inspected for quality and program compliance by an independent contractor. In Fiscal Year 2008-2009, seven rebates were paid, with an additional 11 in process. The rebates paid totaled $8,230 and resulted in 3,100 kilowatt hours of electricity and 725 therms saved each year. PaloAltoGreen The award winning program, PaloAltoGreen, has been in place in Palo Alto since 2003. The program allows businesses and residents of the city to sign up for the nation's top -ranked voluntary renewable energy program, PaloAltoGreen. These customers purchase 100% wind and solar energy, in the format of renewable energy credits from sources in California and other western states. As of December 2009, over 20% of Palo Altans remain in the program. Due to the economic downturn, "churn" in the program has increased, as more customers leave the program. Sign-ups have remained high, keeping the total percentage participation rate at nearly the same levels as in the previous year. Federal Government Stimulus Funds under the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant The Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG) program was created by Congress in 2007 and was funded for the first time by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 with an appropriation of $3.2 billion. The EECBG Program is administered by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). On March 26, 2009, DOE announced the EECBG formula grant allocations, and the City of Palo Alto was eligible to receive up to $663,000. Funds were actually received on October 27, 2009. 9 of 16 Due to the EECBG timing constraints and limitations, the staff review team recommended to Council (CMR:239:09) that only those new technology demonstration projects that were already of interest to the community, and which had received preliminary City approvals, be included in the application. The two demonstration projects developed for the EECBG application included the early replacement of High Pressure Sodium (HPS) street lights on selected streets with Light Emitting Diode (LED) streetlights and the implementation of a Home Energy Report for residential customers. The EECBG funds to be allocated to the LED Streetlight Project and the Home Energy Report project are $450,000 and $213,000 respectively. Research and Development Projects During fiscal year 2007-2008, R&D achievements included working with the Palo Alto Medical Foundation to install a customer -sited wind generation system and undertaking an LED/Induction Streetlight pilot project in town. Staff has been evaluating alternative streetlight technologies that are considered more energy efficient and can result in lower operating costs than the existing High Pressure Sodium (HPS) streetlights installed throughout the City. For the streetlight pilot project, a number of Light Emitting Diodes (LED) and induction fixtures have been mounted around City Hall as well as on the residential streets of Colorado and Amarillo Avenues since late June. The light output from both LED and induction fixtures are much whiter than that of the HPS lights. After a period of feedback solicitation and a citizen tour of the test locations, it appears that an LED Tight with light with a warmer color output should be used for a future test before moving forward with a fuller implementation of these lights throughout the City. Expenditures by Category for CPAU DSM Programs Palo Alto has expended about $16 million for Demand Side Management Programs between Fiscal Year 2003-2004 and 2008-2009. For the Fiscal Year 2008-2009, just under $4.5 million was spent from public benefit and supply funds. CPAU estimates that it will spend about $6 million in fiscal year 2009 to 2010 from the operating budget and transfers from reserves for DSM programs. Of this money, $4.8 million was from electric public benefit and supply budgets, about $800,000 from natural gas public benefit, and just under $500,000 from water. The most heavily pursued programs fund energy efficiency and water conservation measures, and these programs consumed just below 53% of expenditures during the entire period under review. In the area of renewable energy, CPAU has supported solar photovoltaic and other renewable energy programs at about 32% of all program funds. Low income program and Research and Development (R&D) were 4% and 1%, respectively. The remainder of the funds was used for Key Account Management services and program administration, as shown in Appendix C. 10 of 16 Appendix A: CPAU Energy Report to the California Energy Commission The information below will be included with a California Municipal Utilities Association report to the California Energy Commission. The report, required by state law, shows the success of Palo Alto's energy efficiency programs in reducing electric consumption. Efficiency programs are required to be the first resource used by the electric utility. The programs are also required to be cost effectiie, which in state terms means that the programs achieve a TRC score of at least 1.0. Palo Alto's programs are cost effective and do report an effectiveness ratio two and one half times the state's required level. Pato Alto Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Units Install ed Resource s ourc� Savings Summary Net Net Gross Net Demand Peak Annual Annual Savings kW kWh kWh (kW) Savings Savings Savings Net Lifecycle kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Reduction s (Tons) Appliances 290 2 2 48,006 38,405 384,048 212 HVAC 22 2 1 8,550 6,840 123,120 79 Appliances 343 3 3 15,092 12,074 156,957 87 Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting 8,953 427 89 1,023,296 818,637 9,222,662 4,927 Pool Pump 7 5 3 9,800 7,840 78,400 43 Refrigeration 658 71 71 559,874 447,899 8,062,186 4,373 HVAC 81 5 5 19,180 15,344 306,881 173 Water Heating Comprehensive Process 1 2,262 1,810 21,715 12 HVAC 203 7 7 1,157,899 926,319 9,889,412 5,265 HVAC Lighting 3,412 354 321 2,199,922 1,759,938 19,379,044 10,732 Process Process Refrigeration 21 65 65 787,197 629,758 3,770,540 1,988 HVAC Process 7 896 717 9,318 5 Comprehensive 24 883 883 2,664 2,131 21,312 11 Other 10 SubTotal 14,032 1,825 1,452 5,834,639 4,667,711 51,425,595 27,908 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.45 TRC is Total Resource Cost Test where a score greater than 1 equals benefits are greater than costs for the entire utility system. TRC for FY 07/08 Programs was 3.05, compared to TRC for FY 08/09 of 2.45. This means that more efficiency is being completed at levels increasingly above the "low hanging fruit." Advocates such as the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) continually push for utilities to perform all efficiency measures that exceed 1.0 in the TRC calculation. 11 of 16 Appendix B: Quantitative Electric Efficiency Program Achievements This appendix includes a variety of specific program results, including customers assisted, electricity saved, and greenhouse gas reductions from this work. The electricity saving results are reported to the California Energy Commission (CEC) by total program category. That information is listed below. In addition, the department maintains a listing of individual measures delivered to residential customers. In the table below, note that some water saving programs (the COM- SCVWD programs referenced below) do save electricity and natural gas, primarily through a reduction in hot water heating. Staff reports on the electricity savings achieved through the water programs to the CEC. COM-Com. Advantage COM- Right Lights RES- Online Audit Net Cross Net Net Lifecycle Annual Net Annual Lifecycle GHG Energy Demand Energy Energy Reduc- Total Savings Savings Savings Savings tions Utility Resourc kWh (kW} (kWh} (kWh} (Tons) ($IkWh) a ($/kWh 2,336,667 1,845,733 229 1,869,333 21,935,960 11,906 200 1,476,586 11,380,475 6,227 .03 .07 05 .08 RES- REAP Low Inc 669,634 206 535,707 6,688,353 3,575 .06 .06 RES- Smart Energy 979,941 308 783,953 11,399,495 6,188 .04 .04 GEN- Gen T&D COM-SCVWD 2,664 883 2,131 21,312 . 11 .27 1.64 Note: Renewable energy programs, such as PV Partners or the Solar Water Heating Program, are not reported to the GEC as energy efficiency measures. However, it should be noted that the installation of solar systems does reduce the consumption of commodities, both electricity and natural gas, purchased from the utility. 12 of 16 Appendix C: Historical Expenditures on DSM and Renewable Energy Programs By Utility and Major Function Historical costs by utility and program function are listed below. The information is given from Fiscal Year 2003-2004 through Fiscal Year 2008-2009 for comparison purposes. Historical Costs by Utility and Cost Center 'E[ectric.PB• C Admin Efficiency ©SM Electric ', , Renewable Electric Customer Accts E[ectric R&Q Electric Low Income; Gas PBC Admin Efficiency - Gas "! DSM Gas Customer Accts ?' .Gas R&D Gas Low Income` Water PBC Admin Water Efficiency Water Customer Accts Ele 2003-2004 2004-2005 Fiscal Year 2005- 2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 Total 128,020 $ ,129,28,8 $' 164 141 1";199,220 $1,,094,768" 205,002 „ $ 258,025 103,983 $ "61,297 $,^ 617:6 78,682. $.: ..8,526. ...$: 7,774 $ " 1,993 $..' 1,575 $ 196 $,'. 4,449 113,548 $ ;;190,934 ; $ 41,603 $ 6,866 $ '' 13,596 $ 5,411 4,763 54,075 $ 30,974 $ 61,592 6,214 $' . 5,989 $ 7,256, 81,470 $ ;140,2.1 728,930 31,049,955 1,-126,50 8,"726 9,145 1,219,982 17,832 f s 4,354 384,312 $1,027,445.90 ,566,7 1,210,982 $ 290,110 $ . .. 8,543 ., 6 432 486.38 5,525,222.86 518 11727 127,022 94 $ 132,117 ...,$ ';148,169; $ 168,189 $ 450,466 88 $.:.41,179 " .$;' 86,914 $ 52,131 $ 186,444.39 $ :119,135 .. $ 125,052 $ 215,489 $'> 805,760.60 $ ', 12,359 $ 3,846 $ : 53,841 $ $ 12 380 $ 9,769 $ : 13,626 " " $ $ 50,549 $ 56,256 $: 83,597 $ $ $ - $ $ $ 66,802 $:211;460 $ 331,315 95; 919.47 40;537 72_: 190;4 • 0164 $ 756,218.02 7,865 $ 17,509 $ " 57,521 $ 102,353.65 Total $ 1,897,187 $1,795,585 $2,600,737 $2,437,163 $3,091,314 $4,436,413 $ 16,258,398 13 of 16 An overall summary of program expenditures in a functional breakout, combining all three utilities, is shown below in both a graphical and tabular format. DSM Prira n Exnenditures 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 R&D ES Efficiency ® Renewable Energy LI Low Income Admin • Key Accts 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 5,000,000 14 of 16 Appendix D: Demand Side Program Descriptions Customer Class Program. Name Admini- strator Description Residential Electric, Water, and Gas Smart Energy program UMS Staff Rebate customers for purchasing and installing energy efficient appliances, insulation, furnaces, pool pumps, water heaters, and other items. Electric Refrigerator Recycling JACO Rebate customers $35 for an old working refrigerator. Unit recycled. Residential Electric, Gas, Water Residential New Construction Rebate UMS Staff Rebate customers who exceed City's Green Building Ordinance up to $900. Residential Electric and Gas Low Income Residential Energy Assistance Program (REAP) Synergy An energy specialist visits residents' homes and performs a free energy audit. Recommendations are given for energy saving measures. Replacements and repairs are made to insulation, weather stripping, lighting, refrigerators, and furnaces (if needed). Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Residential Home Energy Audit Aclara On -Line energy audit of household energy and water use. Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Green©Home Acterra Acterra provides free in -home energy audits and electric meter information (blue line monitors). Residential Electric, Gas, and Water Training and workshops Various Contractors and Staff Workshops on energy and water conservation issues for the public. Residential Water Water Conservation Programs SCVWD Work with Santa Clara Valley Water District to ensure customers receive audits and rebates for water conservation projects. Small Business Electric and Gas Right Lights+ Ecology Action Contractor performs energy audit on facility, recommends changes, assists customer in making upgrades, and completes paperwork for rebate. Business Electric and Gas Commercial Advantage Program (CAP) UMS Staff Rebates on installation of the following energy efficient equipment types: lighting, HVAC, chillers, boilers, food service, refrigeration, office equipment, appliance, & custom saving programs. Business Electric, Gas and Water Business New Construction Rebates UMS Staff Rebates for.new construction exceeding City and state energy requirements. Business Electric Data Center Efficiency Program UMS Staff Rebates for server virtualization and other data center efficiency measures. Business Electric and Gas Commercial & Industrial Energy Efficiency Program Enovity Commissioning and installation assistance for large businesses installing efficiency measures. Business Electric and Gas Efficiency Programs for Commercial Kitchens National Resource Mgmt Direct installation assistance for efficiency measures in commercial kitchens. Business Water Water Conservation Programs SCVWD Work with Santa Clara Valley Water District to ensure customers receive audits and rebates for water . conservation projects. Business Electric, Gas, and Water Training Various training and workshops for business customers. Business Electric, Gas, and Water Large Customer Facility Manager . Meetings UMS Staff & Others Training on a variety of efficiency measures, from chillers to LEED certification on buildings. Business Electric, Gas, and Water MeterLinks Automated Energy On -Line access to metered utility usage for large customers. 15 of 16 RENEWABLE PROGRAMS at City of Palo Alto Utilities All customers Electric PV Partners UMS Staff Rebates for installation of solar electric (PV) systems. All Customers Gas Solar Water Heating UMS Staff with Center for Sustainable Energy Rebates for installation of solar water heating systems. All Customers Electric and Gas Ground Source Heat Pump UMS Staff Help customers implement ground source heat pump systems. All Customers Electric PaloAltoGreen 3Degrees Supports wind and solar generation by purchasing renewable energy credits up to 100% of a customer's energy usage. 16 of 16 'ATTACHMENT B CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ASSOCIATION CPA NONhIEAN CALEFIM1IA POWER AEENLY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 1 II. Reported Energy Savings Methodology 2 Ill. Overview of Energy Efficiency Programs 21 IV. Program Results and Observations 28 V. Demand Reduction Programs 39 VI. Conclusions and Lessons Learned 41 Appendix A: Description of Utility Programs 42 ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL POWER 43 ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES 49 AZUSA LIGHT & WATER 56 CITY OF BANNING ELECTRIC UTILITY 60 CITY OF BIGGS 64 BURBANK WATER & POWER (BWP) 67 COLTON ELECTRIC UTILITY (CEU) 73 CORONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER (CDWP) 78 GLENDALE WATER AND POWER (GWP) 81 GRIDLEY MUNICIPAL UTILITY (GMU) 88 CITY OF HEALDSBURG 92 CITY OF HERCULES MUNICIPAL UTILITY (HMU) 96 CITY OF INDUSTRY 99 ISLAND ENERGY 100 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT (IID) 104 LASSEN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (LMUD) 110 LODI ELECTRIC UTILITY (LEU) 113 CITY OF LOMPOC 117 LOS ANGELES DEPT OF WATER & POWER (LADWP) 121 MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT 130 MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT 133 MORENO VALLEY UTILITY 137 CITY OF NEEDLES 140 CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES 143 PASADENA WATER AND POWER (PWP) 149 PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOP (PSREC) 156 ii PORT OF OAKLAND 160 RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITY 163 REDDING ELECTRIC UTILITY (REU) 166 RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES 171 ROSEVILLE ELECTRIC (RE) 180 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD) 186 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE 192 SILICON VALLEY POWER 196 TRINITY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 203 TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT 205 TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT 212 UKIAH PUBLIC UTILITY 217 CITY OF VERNON LIGHT & POWER 221 VICTORVILLE MUNICIPAL UTILITY SERVICES 224 Appendix B: Program Energy Savings Potential and Targets 225 Appendix C: References to Documents Supporting Report 262 Appendix D: List of Available Evaluation Reports 264 iii Acknowledgements it is impossible to list all of the nearly 100 people throughout the public power community involved in the development of Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector: A 2010 Status Report. The California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their substantial contributions to completing this effort: Project Managers: Scott Tomashefsky, Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) David Reynolds, Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) David Walden, Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) NCPA Public Benefits Committee SCPPA Public Benefits Committee Chair: Mary Medeiros McEnroe, Silicon Valley Power Nancy Folly, Turlock Irrigation District Rob Lechner, City of Lodi Meredith Owens, Alameda Municipal Power Marlee Mattos, City of Biggs Rob Hickey, City of Gridley Mary Kammer, City of Lompoc Lindsay Joye, City of Palo Alto Utilities Joyce Kinnear, City of Palo Alto Utilities Bryan Cope, City of Redding Jessica Nelson, Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Coop Anthony Kekulawela, Port of Oakland Martin Bailey, Roseville Electric Rachel Radell, Roseville Electric Scott Terrell, Truckee Donner Public Utility District Steven Poncelet, Truckee Donner Public Utility District Elizabeth Kirkley, City of Healdsburg Jim Brands &Alecia Dodd, Efficiency Services Group Chair: Craig Kuennen, Glendale Water & Power Jeanette Meyer, Burbank Water & Power Jan Roosevelt, Anaheim Public Utilities Ed Murdock; Anaheim Public Utilities Paul Reid, Azusa Power & Light Himanshu Pandey, City of Banning Gerald Katz, City of Colton Phil Falkenstein, Imperial Irrigation District Thomas Gackstetter, Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power Renaldo Reyes, Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power Michael McLellan, Riverside Public Utilities Rebeccah Goldware, Riverside Public Utilities John Hoffner, Pasadena Water & Power Anthony Serrano, City of Vernon Light & Power CMUA Energy Services & Marketing Committee Michael Bacich, Chair, Riverside Public Utilities George Hanson, City of Moreno Valley Jim Parks, Vice Chair, SMUD Michelle Pierce, City of Moreno Valley Vanessa Lara, Merced Irrigation District David Brownlee, City of Needles Jill Thompson, Merced Irrigation District Richard Oberg, SMUD Peter Govea, Modesto Irrigation District Rob Johnson, City of Corona Theresa Phillips, Lassen Municipal Utility District Vanessa Xie, City of Pittsburg John Ballas, City of Industry Glen Reddick, City of Hercules CMUA would especially like to thank NCPA, SCPPA, and all of its members participating in this project, once again committing the staff resources and technical assistance that are necessary to complete this project on schedule for the fourth consecutive year, on behalf of California's public power community. iv Executive Summary California Senate Bill 1037 (Kehoe), signed into law in September 2005, established several important policies regarding energy efficiency. Among the many provisions of the law is a statewide commitment to cost-effective and feasible energy efficiency, with the expectation that all utilities consider energy efficiency before investing in any other resources to meet growing demand. Assembly Bill 2021 (Levine) added to these policies by requiring the establishment of 10 -year energy efficiency targets on a triennial basis. Public power supports these policies and partners with state agencies and the environmental community to aggressively pursue all cost-effective energy efficiency. Doing so is even more critical at this juncture, as the California Air Resources Board (CARB) aggressively looks to implement the state's greenhouse gas reduction program, assuming that energy efficiency programs will provide more than 10 percent of the total reductions needed for California to return to 1990 emission levels by the year 2020. This report, Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector: A 2010 Status Report complies with Section 6 of the statute, requiring each publicly -owned utility (POU) to "report annually to its customers and to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, its investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction programs." Forty POUs are submitting energy efficiency data in compliance with the provisions of the legislation. In addition to the traditional data contained in past reports, this edition provides updated energy efficiency targets, providing estimates that have either been adopted by local governing boards or are at this point preliminary and based on internal utility analyses. The California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA), in partnership with the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA), began a collaborative effort in October 2005 to develop an evaluation tool to measure energy efficiency program effectiveness and report program savings in a consistent and comprehensive manner. In December 2006, the first joint POU report on energy efficiency was submitted to the California Energy Commission (CEC). This collaboration continues today, and this fourth report takes into consideration several reporting modifications made in response to the enactment of California Assembly Bill 2021. POU's long-standing commitment to energy efficiency is an extension of fundamental principles dedicated to social and environmental responsibility, ensuring reliability, and keeping rates low for the communities that we serve. Even with this commitment, the cost for each utility to deliver energy savings can vary dramatically from year-to-year, depending upon the customer base of the individual utility, the climate zone in which the utility is located, physical size of the service territory, and customer desires to invest in energy efficiency. The principal findings and conclusions of this analysis are as follows: • POUs continue to make major investments in energy efficiency, despite being impacted by the worst economic recession to affect California in decades, During FY08/09, POUs spent $146 million on energy efficiency programs, a 41 percent increase in spending compared with the previous year, and nearly three times the amount spent on programs just three years earlier. v • Reductions in electricity consumption are equally impressive. In the most recent reporting year, peak demand dropped 117 megawatts and more than 644 million kilowatt-hours were saved, continuing a dramatic upward trend in terms of annual increases in savings. • California's POUs have invested over $367 million on energy efficiency programs since 2006, representing direct investment in local community infrastructure, supporting economic development, and the creation of a robust green job workforce. • Public power energy efficiency programs provide nearly four dollars of societal benefits for every dollar spent. Applying the Total Resource Cost (TRC) societal test, the weighted average cost effectiveness for all publicly owned energy efficiency programs in FY08/09 was 3.80, higher than the 3.15 estimate reported in the previous year. To put the number in the appropriate context, previous programs authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for the investor -owned utilities have ranged between 1.6 and 2.4.1 • The 15 largest POUs account for nearly 97 percent of public power's total energy efficiency savings. • Lighting continues to dominate public power energy efficiency programs, accounting for more than half of total energy savings achieved. • California's POUs exceeded their collective energy efficiency targets in FY08/09. Among the entire group, the utilities realized 101 percent of their savings. During the first three years in which efficiency targets were being monitored, public power reached 84 percent of their cumulative targets. • Smart -grid related programs will experience significant acceleration in the public power arena with the awarding of $175 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Energy under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. 1 A value greater than or equal to 1.0 indicates that the program is cost effective. vi I. Introduction The California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) submits this fourth report providing an update on the status of publicly -owned utility (POU) energy efficiency programs in California, including the development of 10 -year energy efficiency targets. As a practical matter, the report complies with Section 6 of Senate Bill 1037 (S81037) and Section 3 of Assembly Bill 2021 (AB2021), which require each POU to: "Report annually to its customers and to the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, its investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction programs. A report shall contain a description of programs, expenditures, and expected and actual energy savings results." Beyond the statutory requirements, the report has one other critical objective in the energy policy arena. It is intended to provide legislators and policymakers with a comprehensive look into how public power is aggressively pursuing energy efficiency in a manner that is not only consistent with the state's energy loading order but also balances the important roles and responsibilities required of the local governing boards that oversee each utility. Forty utilities are documenting their activities in the energy efficiency arena, including the 39 utilities who have participated in the previous three reports as well as the City of Victorville, which joins the collaboration for the first time in 2010. The following report contains several sections designed to provide detailed analysis beyond this introduction. Section 11 provides a technical description of the methodologies used by the public power community to report energy savings and calculate 10 -year energy efficiency targets. Since previous reports have documented the energy reporting tool in detail, much of the discussion in this report will focus on the development and use of the California POU Energy Efficiency Resource Assessment Model (Cal EERAM). Section I II moves away from the technical discussion of the previous section, highlighting the range of public power energy efficiency programs currently available to customers. Included in this discussion will be a snapshot of utility best practices, multi -utility collaboration efforts, and a brief synopsis of programs being developed that rely on funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), including the deployment of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and the development of the smart grid. Section IV offers a numerical summary of energy efficiency savings stemming from current POU energy efficiency programs as well as a summary of each utility's 10 -year energy efficiency targets either already adopted by each utility's local governing board or provided on a preliminary basis, subject to board approval at a later date. The section will share perspectives about key variables impacting these results, including economic uncertainty and customer behavior. It should be noted that specific individual program data and summaries are included in Appendix A. Detailed information regarding utility 10 -year energy efficiency targets can be found in Appendix 8. Demand reduction programs are highlighted in Section V, with the last section offering principal conclusions and insights about the direction of future reports. 1 II. Reported Energy Savings Methodology This section provides a technical discussion of the analytical tools developed by the public power community to report its energy efficiency savings and develop energy efficiency targets. Over the last several years, public power has significantly invested in the development of tools and resources for. POUs to use when reporting the results of their energy efficiency programs. KEMA, Incorporated (KEMA) and Energy and Environmental Economics (E3) have provided public power with their considerable expertise in this effort. These resources allow all California POUs to measure energy efficiency program effectiveness and report program savings in a consistent and comprehensive manner. In early 2009, NCPA and the SCPPA obtained the services of KEMA to evaluate the latest changes to the Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER), simplify and streamline the measures as appropriate, and then provide the results for input into the E3 Reporting Tool. The 2009 KEMA Report2 is an update to the existing report initially published in 2006, and subsequently updated in 2008. KEMA was originally scheduled to complete the report update by May of 2009; however, they were unable to do so due to numerous issues surrounding the 2008 DEER update. In order to capture as many changes as possible, the final KEMA report was delayed until December. Ultimately, 27 measures3 originally planned to be updated in the 2009 KEMA Report were not available from DEER. The E3 Reporting Tool is a sophisticated Excel spreadsheet model used to report the results of utility energy efficiency programs. The model contains a database of over 5,000 energy savings measures. In late 2009, the measure database was updated based on the final 2009 KEMA Report. The most significant change to the model (referred to as the 2010 E3 Reporting Tool) were updates to measure attributes (e.g., energy savings, useful life) for the majority of measures. The changes align the measure attributes with the latest information available from DEER. Other changes to the model include a natural replacement/early retirement option for applicable measures, updated net to gross reference table (based on DEER), and various minor improvements to simplify data input. The 2010 E3 Reporting Tool will be used to report program results beginning with FY 2009-2010 programs. So that reporting data remains consistent and comparable to program goals, future updates to both the KEMA Report and E3 Reporting Tool are currently planned to coincide with the triennial update schedule for efficiency program target -setting in 2013. However, interim updates to the KEMA Report may be provided earlier, depending on available data and need. 2 3 KEMA Incorporated. Measure Quantification Statewide Savings and Cost Report, December 2009. For the list of measures not updated, see Appendix Al of the 2009 KEMA Report. 2 Energy Efficiency Program Targets In 2006, AB2021 expanded upon several of the energy efficiency policies adopted through 5B1037. Among them, Section 3 of the statutes requires publicly owned utilities to: "On or before June 1, 2007, and by June 1 of every third year thereafter, each local publicly owned electric utility shall identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and shall establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction for the next 10 -year period." In compliance with AB 2021, each POU established and submitted efficiency savings targets in 2007. In order to meet the triennial requirement for updating targets, CMUA, in partnership with NCPA and SCPPA, initiated a collaborative framework for 36 POUs to further analyze market potential and update individual utility program targets. To that end, a consultant was hired to develop an energy efficiency resource model for estimating efficiency savings potential. The California POU Energy Efficiency Resource Assessment Model (CaJEERAM) is an energy efficiency potential model designed to estimate technical, economic, and market energy efficiency potential for a utility's service area. Developed by Navigant Consulting (formerly Summit Blue Consulting), the model forecasts energy savings and demand reduction potential within the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors for years 2011-2020. Customized versions of the model were created for 36 POUs, but not SMUD and LADWP.4 Table 1 identifies each custom model created by utility name and California climate zone designation. LADWP and SMUD are evaluating their targets on a separate track. See each utility's respective narratives in Appendix B for more details. 3 Table 1: CaIEERAM Efficiency Potential Models 4 yy.� 3gyyiq PA0.Y«iYAid4� ..:-5 tlit i.S6S"9 Y.�IPB�6 °"&Y"YYBGfdYB S B>$ -:,,,g11° 9 w k "Z'f h Y„yy P I I ima i"C t: � Pm e� :w " 3 3 t "tiiY S ..e.., ( - i.`«. .>.. .,. , . s �' 9 R. Pte` �� p: g. mT.,..._ —.a.,_ C:d '; �fl 7 r'i f E yp�{, yp 9, _ . '° I 49 as . Alameda 3 Moreno Valley 10 Anaheim 8 Needles 15 Azusa 9 Palo Alto 4 Banning 15 Pasadena 9 Biggs 11 Pittsburg 12 Burbank 9 Plumas Sierra 16 Colton 10 Port of Oakland 3 Corona 10 Rancho Cucamonga 10 Glendale 9 Redding 11 Gridley 11 Riverside 10 Healdsburg 2 Roseville 11 Hercules 3 Santa Clara 4 imperial 15 Shasta Lake 11 Lassen 16 Trinity 16 Lodi 12 Truckee 16 Lompoc 5 Turlock 12 Merced 12 Ukiah 2 Modesto 12 Vernon 8 CaIEERAM is an Excel spreadsheet model based on the integration of energy efficiency measure impacts and costs, utility customer characteristics, utility load forecasts, and utility avoided costs and rate schedules. Excel is used as the modeling platform to provide transparency to the estimation process. Using Excel also allows the model to be customized to each client's unique characteristics, and can accommodate their ability to provide specific model input data. The model utilizes a "bottoms -up" approach in that the starting points are the study area building stocks and equipment saturation estimates, forecasts of building stock decay and new construction, energy efficiency technology data, past energy efficiency program accomplishments, and decision maker variables that help drive the market scenarios. CalEERAM does not estimate annual market energy efficiency potential based on a diffusion curve. Instead, the model calculates market potential based on a decision maker adoption rate algorithm. CalEERAM estimates energy efficiency resource potential for three perspectives. Each perspective provides "net" estimates of resource potential: • Technical Energy Efficiency Potential represents the amount of energy efficiency savings that could be achieved when not considering economic and market barriers to customers installing energy efficiency measures. Technical potential is calculated as the product of the energy efficiency measures' savings per unit, the quantity of applicable equipment in each facility, the number of facilities in a utility's service area, and the measure's current market saturation. 4 Technical potential estimates include energy efficiency measures that may not be cost-effective, and technical potential does not consider market barriers such as customers' lack of awareness of or willingness to implement energy efficiency measures. Technical energy efficiency potential estimates, while not realistically obtainable, are used to establish the outer boundary of what can be achieved through energy efficiency programs. • Economic Energy Efficiency Potential represents the portion of the technical energy efficiency potential that is "cost-effective," from a societal perspective, as defined by the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test. Economic potential does not consider market barriers that limit a voluntary utility efficiency program's success in encouraging customers to install energy efficiency measures. • Achievable Energy Efficiency (Market) Potential is an estimate of the portion of the economic energy efficiency potential that could be attributed to a utility energy efficiency program, recognizing the effect of a limited set of market barriers. Market energy efficiency potential is modeled to vary with specific parameters, such as the magnitude of measure incentives and customer awareness and willingness to adopt energy efficient measures. Within the Achievable Energy Efficiency Potential assessment, the individual measures are modeled by expected type of energy efficiency program design. Three program design options are included in CalEERAM: Replace on Burnout, Retrofit, and New Construction. Replace on Burnout (ROB) means that an energy efficiency measure is implemented only after the existing equipment fails. An example would be purchasing an energy efficient clothes washer after the existing clothes washer fails. Retrofit means that an energy efficiency measure could be implemented immediately. For instance, installing a low flow showerhead is usually implemented before the existing showerhead fails. Replacing incandescent lamps may be a retrofit but can be treated as a ROB because of the relatively short lifetime for incandescent bulbs. New Construction means that a measure is installed when the building is first constructed. Baseline technologies for new construction measures may be different than those for _ retrofits, with different energy impacts and incremental technology costs. Additionally, the incremental implementation costs for new construction measures are often lower than retrofits because, in new construction, a technology is being installed, regardless of efficiency, and the incremental cost to install the efficient version is typically small. Within CaIEERAM, several financial tests and calculations are performed. The primary test is the TRC test. The present value of avoided costs (the benefits) is divided by the technology cost and the program administrative costs. A TRC value greater than or equal to 1.0 indicates that the resource is cost effective. CaIEERAM utilizes the TRC test to identify which of the technically achievable measures are economically achievable. Measures with a TRC of 1.0 or higher are included in economic potential. The model allows for, under limited conditions, certain measures to be included (or excluded) in the economic potential regardless of its cost effectiveness. The model also calculates several additional cost effectiveness parameters: the Utility Cost Test, the Participant Cost Test, simple customer payback, and levelized measure costs. Simple customer payback is used in the model's decision maker adoption rate algorithm. The payback calculation takes measure cost less the incentive received, and divides it by first 5 year energy bill savings. The energy efficiency supply curves are based on the energy efficiency measure cost per kilowatt hour levelized over the lifetime of the measure. It is calculated by multiplying energy efficiency measure costs by the Capital Recovery Factor (CRF) then dividing by the first year kWh savings. CaIEERAM Model Inputs and Outputs Figure 1 illustrates the flow of information in and out of Ca1EERAM. The model can be segregated into three sections. • Utility Service Area Inputs: - Utility specific information on rates, avoided costs, load and building stock forecasts, and historical levels of DSM achievement. Customer data including building/equipment characteristics, decision maker awareness of conservation measures and if aware, willingness to install. Technology data including measure level impacts and costs, measure life, incentive levels, administrative costs, and net -to -gross estimates. • Model Calculations: - Develop technical potential based on the inputs above. — Develop economic potential by screening technical potential with the TRC test. Develop market potential based on available economic potential, calibration targets, and the decision adoption methodology, detailed in the sections below. • Model Outputs: - Tables and graphs on technical, economic, and market potentials. - Both cumulative and incremental market potential estimates by planning year. The incremental values are used to define annual goals. - Both cumulative and incremental administrative and incentive cost estimates by measure and planning year - Market potential supply curves. 6 Figure 1: CaIEERAM Input Informati on, Model Calculation, and Mod el Output Fl ow Utility D ata Distraint Sa te - Ac videdCostE -. • Cate Schedule . Load Fcrecasts DEM r.£ratnp:isl:tne ntt 3n:t" l,^:in e harcter_stics Tenn dcg„i- Densities Wi llinyne=-s La Fv .:haee s: 'ar en esa o fT sc hn olvgy {Technology Da ta impacts COA rafts fncen tices . P= oarari rsis Ec onomic Te sts 7 ark et Potential -"N\ dinsting attic) `lased on Deter:cm meth od and Total Taril;nslwhvailalbe. ^3epc t O ut sl+ih kl r Costs /Scenarios Newand E xisiire Stccs' 'Eased en Modified De ns;rxn Parable and led= ol ocv Sivad aile, "Pepa•:ttuh kWh C osta Service repinputs _ Total Technolggy - Available by Year 'Saa.ed an B uilding Stars by -Year and the ]eita - . DE nstix gBaseline Technttogtes to DEN . • Meas ures • • Technical Potential.. and Existing Stock) Sasse d on .leasues:mpact to xesT ota` . Techn ology Acallable by ear. K En ornicPot enFiat (New and L xisa ng Stack) 'Same ea?, starlet: a3 Tcek>=iaai P men tag. brit uitl:TPC screen. - f Maidu unt Market Potential &- ewan:d E xisting Stock) 'Yam-calailat on as EL-1421,30t°ctertis[.but :44th ai'ittugnea,3 and Aa renesufactors applied. F OecisionMe4hodolc avl Scena rio Dev elopenent eci,'.i �Pi'f-Pti,^^ rA:3�S' ::ce'i nn• . dtpta ar Clime Cc -efficie nt Calibration Target s aiaxitiurr ? ';ar tPotentiai -Measure Pay Back tr.,' a.in s1e.;al-mm=hh Three curre ntly offered Eased on nayt:a£kshan3es dui t.7 inteht.s a cbanae C hanges in willingness a nd awareness Va rious Output Reports and S rapbs Utility Service Area Inputs Navigant relied on a number of data sources for model inputs. Input data are grouped as follows: • Rate Schedules by Sector — Rate schedules were provided by each utility. • Avoided Costs — For most utilities, the avoided costs were taken from the 2010 version of the E3 Reporting Tool used by publicly owned utilities for reporting their energy efficiency programs. A few utilities provided their own estimates of avoided costs. • Energy and Demand Forecasts - Energy and demand forecasts were provided by each utility. • Discount Rate — Discount rates were provided by each utility. In general, the discount rates used are the same as used in the E3 Reporting Tool. • Inflation Rate —The average inflation rate from January 2000 to September 2009 as reported by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. • Residential Housing Stock — Baseline estimates of residential building stocks were generally provided by each utility. For a few small utilities, estimates were based on an average use per dwelling from similar utilities in the same climate zone. Splitting housing stock between single family and multi -family varied by utility. Some utilities had baseline estimates, but most utilities did not. For those who did not, census data was used. • Non -Residential Building Stock— Only one utility had specific information of building square footage. For the remainder, the following technique was used: - Shares of non-residential sales by building type were developed from the utility "Quarterly Fuels and Electricity Report" submittals to the CEC. These submittals had sales identified by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code. - Average use per thousand square feet of floor space by building type and climate zone was obtained from the California Commercial End -Use Survey (CEUS). 5 - Dividing the sales per NAICS by the average use per thousand square feet created the baseline estimates of non-residential building floor space. • Residential Sector HVAC and Water Fuel Shares —Several utilities provided fuel share estimates. For the remaining utilities, the fuel share estimates were derived from the California Residential Appliance Saturation Survey6. Itron, Inc. The California Commercial End -Use Survey, prepared for the CEC, March 2006. KEMA-Xenergy. California Statewide Residential Appliance Saturation Study, prepared for the CEC, June 2004. • Estimates of Administrative Costs/kWh - A small number of utilities provided their own estimates. For the remaining, the estimates represent an average of the administrative costs/kWh as reported in the 2009 CMUA report'. • Utility Program Accomplishments in FY 2006, FY 2007, and FY 2008 — Based on the three previous versions of the CMUA report. This data was used for two purposes. First, the sum of FY 2006 - FY 2008 accomplishments was used to update the baseline densities of the efficient technologies. Second, the annual accomplishments provided guidance on appropriate 2011 target values. • Energy Efficiency Measure Impacts, Load Shapes, and Costs — Data within these categories were extracted from the 2010 version of the E3 Reporting Tool. • Baseline Estimates of Technology Density For both the base technology and the energy efficient technology, the primary source were the input files used to develop the California Energy Efficiency Potential Study conducted by Itron for the California's IOUs in 20088. For the City of Alameda, some of these baseline densities were modified based on a combination of a telephone survey of customers, conducted by Navigant, and a detailed discussion regarding saturation estimates between Navigant and Alameda staff. • Baseline estimates of Decision Maker Awareness and Willingness - The primary source was the input files used to develop the California Energy Efficiency Potential Study conducted by Itron for California's IOUs in 2008. • Net -to -Gross Values —The model accepts net -to -gross value inputs at the measure and building type level. However, Navigant relied on the values for net -to -gross included in the E3 Reporting Tool as its source for net -to -gross values. Each utility has the option to modify this input if desired. • Calibration Targets — Navigant collected energy efficiency program results for 54 publicly owned utilities: 27 municipal utilities from California and 27 municipal and cooperatively owned utilities from Connecticut, Iowa, Minnesota, and Vermont. The analysis used publicly available data from primary utility DSM annual regulatory reports and EIA FERC Form 861 baseline sales data9. Navigant categorized incremental DSM program results and baseline data by major customer sector: residential and commercial and industrial (C&I). CMUA. Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector: A 2009 Status Report, March 2009. ltron Inc. and KEMA-Xenergy. California Energy Efficiency Potential Study, prepared for PG&E, September 10, 2008. Baseline and D5M data were used from 2007, as EIA 2008 baseline data were not available. 9 • Incremental DSM results and expenditures were normalized overall and for the two major customer sectors by using baseline sales data to determine expenditures as a percentage of revenue, energy savings as percentage of sales, and peak demand savings as a percentage of peak demand. Navigant also calculated costs of conserved energy ($/kWh) and demand ($/kW) on a first year basis. The median of normalized spending, savings, and cost of savings were identified. The median is used to identify best practice organizations —those with above median savings at median or below median cost of savings. To calibrate CalEERAM, Navigant used as a guideline the median energy savings, as a percentage of sales, of the best practice organizations of the reviewed POUs that are outside California, 0.96% for C&I and 0.93% for residential. Non -Residential Building Types Assessed The Navigant Energy Efficiency Potential Model (on which CalEERAM is based) has the capability of modeling a large number of different building types. For CalEERAM, the building types assessed included three residential building types, four commercial building types and one industrial category type. The building types and categories include: • Residential new construction • Residential single family existing • Residential multi -family existing • The largest commercial sector building type by sales volume • The second largest commercial sector building type by sales volume • The third largest commercial sector building type by sales volume • The largest industrial category by sales volume • The remaining balance of sales included in the miscellaneous building type The three commercial sector building types and the single NAICS industrial category for each utility vary. The determination of which to include in CalEERAM was based on the shares of non-residential sales by building type as identified from the utility "Quarterly Fuels and Electricity Report" submittals to the CEC. These submittals have sales identified by NAICS code. The non-residential sales were sorted and the three largest commercial building types, along with the largest NAICS industrial type, were identified and specifically included in the model. The balance of non-residential sales was categorized into the miscellaneous building type. Table 2 identifies the building types and shares of non-residential sales for each of the utilities. Some of the smaller utilities don't have information available from the CEC because either they did not make the submittal (very small utilities are not required to) or some of the sales data cannot be sufficiently masked to prevent identification of specific customers. For most utilities, the largest sales were to commercial sector buildings with the most common being office buildings. Retail non-food and retail food stores were the next most common. For the industrial 10 sector, the food manufacturing industrial type was the most common, followed by computer and electronics manufacturing. Table 2: The Largest Non -Residential Building Types by Sales Volume by Utility >Itllrt Y BldgType#1 - Sates%#1 11. gType#2 ' Sales96#2 BfdgType#3 Sales%#3 ;: ... r - e largesklndustriai largest ' industrial t= Sale% �Mtscellaneoua ales%. Alameda Office 49.8% Retail - Non Food 5.9% Restaurant 5.3% Computers& Electronic 1.5% 37.6% Anaheim Office 12.0% Retail -Non Food 8.4% Hotels 6.1% Computers & Electronic 228% 5161/4 Azusa School 13.4% Office 10.9% Retail - Nan Food 9.5% Food 11,6% 54.6% Banning Retail - Food 7.7% Restaurant 7.5% Office 6.9% Computers & Electronics 13.8% 64.2% Biggs Retail- Non Food 2.0% Retail -Food 1.5% Office 1.0% Food 95.0% 0.5% Burbank Office 18.2% Medical Care 9.8% Retail - Non Food 9.0% Motion Picture& Broadcasting 349% 280°% Colton Office 17.4% Retail - Non Food 10.8% Retail - Food 5.6% Food 24.4% 41.7% Corona Office 19.2% Restaurant 7.9% Retail - Non Food 7.3% None 0.0% 65.8% Glendale Office 39.0% Retail - Non Food 14,2% Medical Care 8.4% Food 1.5% 36:9% Gridley Retail - Food 21.5% Office 21.1% Retail - Non Food 15.4% Food 14.7% 27.4% Healdshurg Office 21.8% Retail - Food 16.8% Restaurant 10.2% Food. 8.1% 43.2% Hercules Not available Not available Not available Not available 100.0% Imperial Office 21.5% Retail - Non Food 10.2% School 6.9% Food 3.4% 58.0°% Lassen School 10.0% Office 8.0% Retail - Food 8.0% None 0.0% 74.0°% Lodi Office 8.7% Retail • Non Food 7.9% Retail - Food 5.8% Food 20.3% 57.3% Lompoc Retail - Non Food 31.4% Office 16.1% Restaurant 9.3% Food 0.7% 42.5% Merced Office 10.5% School 9.6% Retail - Non Food 8.1% Food 46.4% 25.4% Modesto Office 11.0% Retail - Non Food 9.1% Restaurant 3.9% Food 34.4% 41.6% Moreno Valley Office 50.4% Restaurant 37.5% Retail - Non Food 4.0% None 0.0% 8.1% Needles Office 32.2% Hotels 18.9% Restaurant 18.0% None 0.0% 30.9% Palo Alto Office 43.0% Medical Care 10.8% Retail - Food 4.2% Computers& Electronics 16.8% 25.2% Pasadena Office 36.2% School 13.3% Medical Care 6.5% Information 5.5% 36.5% Plumas-Sierra Office 60.1% Hotels 2.7% Restaurant 1.9% Machinery 0.9% 34,4% Port of Oakland None 0.0% None 0.0% None 0.0% Transportation Support 93.0% 7.0% Rancho Cucamonga Retail - Non Food 42,5% Restaurant 10.7% Office 4.2% None 0.0% 42.5% Redding Retail - Non Food 36.9% Office 24.1% Restaurant 8.9% Telecommunications 2.6% 27.5% Riverside Office 27.5% School 14.6% Retail - Non Food 11.7% Plastic & Rubber 10.5% 35.7% Roseville - Office 22.9% Retail - Non Food 16.1% Medical Care 7.9% Computers & Electronics 26.0% 27.1% Shasta Lake Not available Not available Not available Not available 100.0% Silicon Valley Power Office 37.5% Retail - Non Food 2.1% School Y.0% Computers & Electronics 46.3% 12.1% Trinity Not available Not available Not available Not available 100.0% Truckee -Donner Not available Not available Not available Not available 100.0% Turlock Retail - Non Food 6.9% Office 5.0% School 4,6% Food 33.2% 50.4% Ukiah Office 32.3% Retail - Non Food 18.4% Retail - Food 11.1% None 0.0% 38.2% Vernon Office 1.6% Restaurant 0.3% Retail - Non Food 0.2% Food 76.7% 21.2% Model Calculations Ca1EERAM's "bottoms up" approach uses the input data listed in the previous section to calculate Technical, Economic, and Market Potentials. Calculating the estimates of Technical and Economic Potential is relatively straightforward: the estimates are the products of available building stocks, 11 technology densities, and measure impacts. For Technical Potential, it is assumed that all measures can be implemented in al] available applications at the same time. Technical potential changes by small amounts over time to reflect changes in the amount of building stocks overtime caused by new construction. Economic Potential is the subset of Technical Potential that includes only the efficient technologies that pass the TRC screen. Calculating Market Potential is unlike calculating Technical and Economic Potential. Calculating Market Potential relies on a calibrated decision adoption methodology and an accounting system that adjusts for potential double counting and for recurring participation of efficient technologies once measure life is passed. Decision Adoption Methodology One of the key features of CaIEERAM is use of a decision maker based energy efficiency measure adoption rate algorithm (DEEMARA). DEEMARA simulates consumer choice based on simple measure payback and other decision components. For each measure, by building type and by year, the algorithm estimates the number of measures implemented. The algorithm has two parts with the overall formula having the following form: Number of measures implemented = total available measure units *binary logit function *market factor *decision maker measure awareness and willingness to install the measure The first part of the algorithm includes the first three of the four variables identified in the formula above. The "total available measure units" is a variable that changes with each forecast year and has the form: Total available measure units = Available building stock * (maximum density for the competing technologies — base year efficient technology density) — running sum of previous years of efficient technology units installed The "binary logit function" identifies the share of the efficiency measures implemented each year. The logit function has the form: Share of Efficiency Measures Implemented = Exp (0.0 — Beta Constant * Measure Payback) Where: • The Beta constant represents the average influence of all excluded (non - payback) factors. • The Beta constant is allowed to be modified at the end use level (within bounds): - Larger number representing influences that speed up adoption. - Lower number representing influences slowing down adoption (such as a recession). • Measure payback is simple measure payback and is calculated for each measure, each forecast year. The "market factor" is a calibration constant that is computed in the first simulation year to adjust computed participation shares to equal the calibration targets. The calibration target needs to be a 12 value that can be reasonably expected to occur given incentive levels, the cost effectiveness of the measure, and the available resource. Navigant estimates calibration targets at the measure level based on a combination of the estimates of economic potential by measure, past program accomplishments by the utility in providing this or a similar measure, and a review of other similar utilities to see what level of accomplishments they are achieving. The second part of the algorithm includes the "decision maker measure awareness and willingness to install the measure" function. It is an exponential curve function based on the forecast year and the two input variables of decision maker awareness of a measure and corresponding willingness to purchase. • Awareness is the percentage of decision makers who are aware that a specific energy efficient technology exists. • Willingness is the subset of the aware group who are willing to install the energy efficient measure. The initial values for decision maker awareness and willingness by measure were taken from the California Energy Efficiency Potential Study conducted by Itron for California's investor -owned utilities in 200810 These Itron estimates of decision maker Awareness and Willingness are based on a combination of consumer research performed for Northern States Power in Minnesota in the mid -to -late 1990s by Itron's predecessor company, Regional Economic Research (RER), and more recent consumer research performed by California utilities. CaIEERAM assumes that the initial estimates of awareness and willingness are not static, but improve over time as consumers become both more aware of energy efficiency and more willing to purchase as technology improves. The speed by which these variables approach 100% is determined by the starting values for awareness and willingness and a decision maker curve function. The decision maker curve function takes the form: The Decision Maker Curve = Min(1, Awareness * Willingness + (1+EXP(curve midpoint in years -years into the forecast))^ -1) Where: o Decision Maker Awareness = The baseline percent of the population of eligible consumers who are aware of the technology n Decision Maker Willingness = The baseline percent of the population of eligible consumers who are both aware of the technology and willing to purchase it o Program year = The number of years after the start of the forecast o Adoption curve tipping point year = Within a measure's lifetime, the point of time on an "5" curve where the curve is at its midpoint. The "S" curve diffusion portion of the algorithm is based on changing consumer awareness of the energy efficiency measure and the customer's willingness to participate in the program overtime. Where a measure is along the curve depends on its baseline estimates of consumer awareness and willingness. If a measure is well-known and with a high level of willingness to install, then the starting point is very 10 Itron Inc. and KEMA-Xenergy. California Energy Efficiency Potential Study, prepared for PG&E, September 10, 2008. 13 high on the curve with little change over time expected from this portion of the decision maker algorithm. However, if both awareness and willingness are low, then this portion of the decision maker algorithm will experience change over time. The current assumption is that over time, every measure will reach 100% consumer awareness and willingness. It is possible to modify at the measure level the maximum value for consumer awareness and willingness. The change overtime and the speed of that change depend on the initial baseline estimates and the curve midpoint year. For new technologies, both awareness and willingness are typically low, simply because the technology is new. A program can be designed not only to provide incentives but also to increase awareness and promote the technology's reliability and superiority. Such a program typically has low initial participation that ramps up overtime before leveling out. in contrast, a mature technology typically has high initial willingness and awareness, and thus, participation follows a flatter trend overtime. Figure 2 illustrates the shape of the "S" curve over the ten year forecast period using different curve midpoint years. The Figure 2 illustration shows the curves for midpoint years of two, five, and eight years. Note in this example that the curve with the earliest midpoint year achieves saturation near year eight where the curves with later midpoint years do not achieve saturation by year 10. Figure 2: Decision Maker "S" Curves Exponential Curve Function using 2, 5, and 8years 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6. 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 The following example illustrates the year to year impacts of the decision maker measure awareness and willingness factors on DEEMARA: • Baseline awareness =50% • Baseline willingness = 80% • Base year adjustment due to awareness and willingness = 50% * 80% = 40% • The five year midpoint "S" curve has the following values in its first four years: — Year 1=0.7% — Year 2 = 1.8% 14 — Year3=4.7% — Year4=11.9% • Each forecast year adjustment due to awareness and willingness is the previous year's awareness and willingness value plus the "S" curve value. — Base Year = 40% — Year 1 = 40% + 0.7% = 40.7% — Year 2 = 40.7% + 1.8% = 42.5% — Year 3 = 42.5% + 4.7% = 47.2% --- Year 4 = 47.2% + 11.9% = 59.1% • The function has a maximum value of 100%, when the measure achieves total saturation. Interactive Effects and Mutual Exclusivity Double counting savings is often an unintended consequence in modeling potential estimates. This section describes the nature of this problem and CaIEERAM's two approaches to avoid this error. Double counting savings can occur two ways within a modeling structure. The first is through failing to account for interactive affects between measures; here the sum of the individual measure savings may be more or less than the effective savings of the interactive measures. The second is not accounting for mutual exclusivity between measures. The first issue between two or more non -mutually exclusive measures has been a long-standing point of discussion in the development of the DEER database. An example of this kind of double counting involves lighting measures. For cooled homes, efficient lighting reduces air-conditioning load because of the efficient lighting's reduced waste heat discharge. For the same reason, efficient lighting increases electric space heating loads. The energy impacts reported in the 2005 DEER did not account for interactive effects. However, the 2008 DEER did account for interactive effects. A review of the 2010 version of the E3 Reporting Tool indicates that measure impacts are not differentiated by heating fuel type and cooling applicability. However, the reporting tool's energy impacts represent a reduced form of values included in DEER. That is, many represent weighted averages of the different combinations of vintages and building types within a climate zone. It is uncertain if the weighting also included end -use fuel type. The energy impacts used in CaIEERAM are from the 2010 E3 Reporting Tool, and are representative of the weighting method used to develop the reporting tool values. As much as the E3 Reporting Tool accommodates these effects, CaIEERAM accommodates these effects. The second issue involves failing to account for mutually exclusive measures. An example would be the existence of different Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratios (SEER) levels for energy efficient air conditioning. There are at least two methods to address this issue. The first method is to distribute the shares of a competition group total (a set of mutually exclusive measures) among the competing technologies so that the sum equals the maximum applicability of the total. For example, consider a competition group consisting of SEER 14, 15, and 16+ technology options for central air conditioning. For this example, assume the total applicability of central air conditioning (the competition group as a whole) is 90% (i.e., 15 90% of all customers have central AC). Then, each technology within the competition group would have a share of the 90% applicability, for example, 60% SEER 14, 25% SEER 15, and 5% SEER 16+. Another method is to model only the most efficient of the competing technologies; in the example above, only SEER16+. From a conservation potential perspective, this method identifies a larger, but still realistic, potential. CalEERAM uses this approach to prevent this kind of double counting. Either of these approaches could have been used within the model, but the second method was selected to identify the true level of market potential. Distribution among an array of mutually exclusive measures with widely varying energy savings could have misrepresented the potential as being lower than actual potential. Recurring Participation Each measure included in the analysis has an expected measure life. Some of these measure life estimates extend beyond the ten years of the planning horizon while others end within the ten year period. The model assumes that each measure implemented will be replaced at the end of its measure life by another technology at least as efficient as the originally installed efficiency measure. Given that the replacement technologies are not known, it is assumed that the replacement technology is the same as the current efficient technology. These assumptions result in accounting for the continuation of the originally installed energy efficient impacts throughout the ten-year planning horizon. This is unlike other models that assume that, at the end of measure life, all or a portion of all installations return to the original baseline technology. The impact of this assumption affects Market Potential results in two ways. First, the cumulative Market Potential does not fall at the end of measure life. Second, future year incentive and administrative costs are affected significantly. At the end of measure life, the model assumes that program participants replace the equipment with new equipment meeting the same efficiency standard. Thus, cumulative energy and demand impacts are sustained with no increase in incremental impacts. Equipment replacement, however, incurs incentive and administrative costs. Therefore, for measures with measure life less than ten years, such as CFLs, the total incentive and administrative costs will rise more quickly than the incremental energy impacts. Appliance recycling is handled in a special manner. At the end of an appliance recycling measure life, the energy savings does disappear from cumulative potential and there are no recurring incentive and administrative costs. Model Output For compliance reporting purposes, the primary model outputs are found in the "Report to the CEC" tab of the spreadsheet. The model outputs for each utility can be found in Appendix B of this report. Data is provided on Technical and Economic Potential for both energy and peak demand as well as incremental annual energy and demand Market Potential estimates for the ten year planning horizon. 16 Other tables and graphs are also provided by the model, for use by utility program planners. Figure 3 identifies the various output data that is available. This information can also be found in the "Introduction" tab of the model. Figure 3: CaIEERAM Output Information Years Section 3 (Green Tab} Section 4 (Purple Tab) Summary Output and Graphs, includes four spreadsheets: - Spreadsheet "Tech&Econ Potential': Provides tables identifying the technical and economic potential results. - Spreadsheet "Market": Provides tables identifying the market potential results. - Spreadsheet "Market": Provides tables identifying the market potential results. - Spreadsheet "Graphs": Provides graphs identifying the technical, economic, market potential, and naturally occurring results. Supply Curve, includes four spreadsheets: - Spreadsheet "Res -Sup Curve": Provides tables identifying residential supply curve information and top 15 measures for the sector. - Spreadsheet "Non -Res -Sup Curve": Provides tables identifying non-residential supply curve information and top 15 measures for the sector. - Spreadsheet "All -Sup Curve": Provides combined residential and non-residential tables identifying supply curve information and top 15 measures for the utility. - Spreadsheet "Sup -Curve Graphs": Provides combined residential and non- residential supply curve graphs. Section 5 (Brown Tab) Costs and Cost Tests Section includes two spreadsheets: - Spreadsheet "Market Potential Costs": Provides tabfes identifying administrative and incentive costs for the market potential run. - Spreadsheet "Financial Costs and Tests": Provides tables that include measure and program present value lifetime costs and benefits as well as various financial tests. Caveats and Limitations Energy efficiency potential models are invaluable tools for utility program planners to use when establishing efficiency program targets. They provide a credible and technically rigorous approach to estimating the potential energy efficiency savings attributable to a utility's energy efficiency program. However, it is understood that there are many limitations to utilizing a technical model to forecast real world results11. In particular, customer willingness and awareness assumptions in potential models do not sufficiently explain consumer behavior, lifestyle, or decision -making styles that ultimately drive the success of voluntary efficiency programs. Such limitations create uncertainty that utility program planners must consider when setting realistic yet aggressive goals for efficiency programs tailored to the communities they serve. In addition to behavioral barriers, the following issues are also worth noting: 11 California Institute for Energy and Environment. Behavioral Assumptions in Energy Efficiency Potential Studies, May 2009. 17 3 • Emerging Technologies. The potential models do not include the incremental potential associated with emerging or yet to be discovered energy efficient technologies. In particular, utility program planners are very interested in the potential for solid state lighting. However, the development of uniform product specifications and affordable pricing will take time, and so it is not expected that solid state lighting will significantly contribute to utility program potential in the near future. Even so, utility planners wishing to aggressively promote emerging technologies may account for the market potential by adopting a more aggressive potential scenario, as allowed for by the model. • Policy -driven Changes. The potential model does not include future changes to codes and standards for buildings and appliances (with one exception: 2012 national standards for incandescent lighting). As policy makers continue to raise the bar for minimum levels of energy efficiency through the adoption of codes and standards, they correspondingly reduce the efficiency potential attributable to utility programs. It is certain that some of the market potential currently identified by the potential models will not be realized by the utility, but instead will be attributed to future changes in codes and standards. • Slow Economic Recovery. The economic recession creates a significant hurdle for the continued success of utility efficiency programs. Potential models do not directly attempt to gauge the impact of economic recession. Utility planners must assess the impact of the economy on their community, and adjust their program expectations accordingly. • Erosion of Energy Savings Potential Due to Intrusion of IOU Programs. Retail point of sale and product give-away programs (e.g. CFLs, consumer electronics) offered by investor owned utilities often spill over into publicly owned utility service territories. Chain stores often distribute IOU -subsidized products in stores located within public power communities. POU customers often shop at big box retailer locations outside of the POU utility service territory. The energy efficient products that are purchased and installed end up being attributed to IOU programs. For example, the new IOU statewide upstream program, the Business Consumer Electronics Program, targets energy efficient computers, televisions, and computer monitors at the retail and distributer level. Many of these products will be sold to POU customers, yet the savings will be attributed to IOU programs. Although IOU statewide and upstream programs can be a very effective means for capturing energy savings, they effectively remove a portion of the energy savings potential from POU programs. Verifying Program Results AB 2021 calls for POUs to report annually on "the results of an independent evaluation that measures and verifies the energy efficiency savings and reduction in energy demand achieved by its energy efficiency and demand reduction programs.i12 Public power has strategically responded to this directive 12 Language is contained in Section 9615(e)(3) of the Public Utilities Code. 18 in a manner that confirms the accuracy of reported savings while optimizing the exchange of program information across the entire range of public power utilities, large and small. In creating an evaluation process that provides the necessary timely feedback that utilities need to further enhance programs going forward, public power relied on the evaluation resources of the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, CPUC protocols, and the innovation and expertise of firms experienced in program evaluation. In addition, public power has collaborated to develop new program evaluation processes that meet the needs of both large and small utilities. The collaboration between NCPA and SCPPA in this regard has been critical to this success, especially for small utilities. To illustrate the value of this collaboration, two years ago, NCPA developed a framework whereby small utilities could develop evaluation plans and then undertake specific measurement and verification activities. NCPA tested this approach on a pilot basis with 12 utilities in Northern California, with positive results. SCPPA subsequently implemented a similar approach with members in Southern California last year and have further refined this effort. By the end of this year, the public power community will have produced more than 40 separate measurement and verification studies. A comprehensive listing of each evaluation report is provided in Appendix D. Unless otherwise noted, each document will be available at http://www.ncpa.comienergy- efficiency-m-v-rebarts.html. Utility Updates Regarding Independent Evaluation Activities As a practical matter, measurement and verification reports are intended to be used by utilities to understand the effectiveness of specific program areas with the purpose of enhancing programs offerings in the future. Without question, verification activities have increased significantly within the public power community. In general, many of the verification studies done to date have focused on high savings impacts measures and measures that exhibit the greatest levels of uncertainty. Key findings from the initial volume of reports submitted by POUs confirm high realization rates for utility -reported energy savings, a positive development that suggests that public power's energy efficiency reporting provides a reliable source of data to help state policymakers gauge the success of the state's overall energy efficiency efforts. Recognizing that the full array of studies is available via a Web link as noted above, the following list provides a small sample of these efforts from a number of POUs: • LADWP. LADWP retained the services of an independent third party contractor to evaluate its energy efficiency programs. The firm has completed assessing energy efficiency projects completed in fiscal year 2006-2007 (July 1 —June 30). Projects reviewed represent a random sampling from the full spectrum of LADWP's energy efficiency program portfolio. The independent third party evaluation concluded that the "...energy savings for most LADWP incentive programs showed that the baseline energy savings were achieved as projected by LADWP." Specific realization rates were reported as follows: o HVAC projects - 125 percent of reported savings o Refrigeration projects - 97 percent of reported savings o Chiller projects - 97 percent of reported savings 19 o Lighting projects - 90 percent of reported savings LADWP's verification study has already been submitted to the CEC for its review and is available in redacted form via the link provided in Appendix D. In terms of fiscal year 2007-08, a preliminary report has been submitted by the contractor, covering mostly non-residential programs. Additional work is planned to include measures implemented under the residential efficiency and other programs. The findings will be made available for review as soon as the revisions and additional M&V activities are completed. • SMUD, In concert with its commitment to significantly ramp up energy -efficiency activities over the next decade, SMUD has established a framework to develop yearly measurement and verification action plans. SMUD is planning M&V activities for all of its major programs, scheduled at fixed intervals (2-4 years apart), with the intention of evaluating all programs on a continued cyclical basis through 2017. SMUD is planning to allocate approximately 2 percent of its total energy -efficiency budget towards impact- and persistence -focused M&V studies. These studies will be conducted primarily through the use of third -party contractors, with management and oversight by SMUD's Business Planning Department. SMUD has awarded or is in the process of awarding contracts for consultants to perform evaluations of the following programs in 2010: o Residential— Multi -Family Retrofit, Appliance Efficiency, Retail Lighting, Solar Smart Homes o Commercial —Savings By Design, Prescriptive Lighting • Palo Alto. Palo Alto's most recent report was completed in March 2010, analyzing savings achieved during FY 2008-09. Its process evaluation focused on the residential Smart Energy program and its commercial RightLights Plus program. The impact evaluation covered the Commercial Advantage program and the RightLights Plus program. The energy savings from these two programs combined account for over 70% of the EE program savings. Based on the sampled customer projects, the realization rates for the Commercial Advantage Program and the RightLights Plus program were found to be 89.2% and 84.3% respectively. • Silicon Valley Power (SVP). SVP's success in achieving high levels of energy savings in the high- tech market sector was verified at a 102% realization rate in its latest evaluation report. In addition, the report characterizes co -location data centers, identifies market barriers to program participation, and makes recommendations to improve program participation for achieving higher levels of energy savings. • Alameda Municipal Power. Alameda's fiscal year 2008 verification study focused on its commercial sector, measuring the energy impacts of the commercial retrofit projects while addressing customer attitudes. it found that the lack of program awareness was the greatest barrier to program participation, while program satisfaction among participants is high. The measure realization rate from those participating in the program was 82%. 20 • Lodi Electric. LEU has completed its first and second year assessments of randomly selected programs and large rebates as part of its designed measurement and verification plan. For fiscal year 08-09, projected energy savings were verified for five large customer rebates and one residential program (Lodi Energy Efficient Home Improvement Rebate Program). III. Overview of Energy Efficiency Programs This section offers a first look at the wide range of energy efficiency programs offered by the state's 40 POUs, highlighting utility best practices that feature multi -utility collaboration efforts. The latter part of this section will offer a brief synopsis of programs being developed that will rely on funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Before doing so, it is important to recognize that most PQUs have actively offered energy efficiency programs well before the statutory directives of SB1037 and AB2021 formalized the reporting requirements that have been in place since 2005. POU's long-standing commitment to energy efficiency is an extension of fundamental principles dedicated to social and environmental responsibility, ensuring reliability, and keeping rates low for the communities we serve. Energy efficiency is of the utmost importance to public power system utilities. Energy efficiency is a critical element of the resource planning process, generation, transmission, distribution, and demand. Public power commitments to energy efficiency are guided by four important concepts: • Social and Environmental Responsibility. POUs place a high priority on energy efficiency, investments in renewable power supplies, low-income programs, and economic development. Local elected officials govern and regulate public power to ensure direct accountability on these important issues to customers. • Operational Energy Efficiency. Public power has important energy efficiency programs that optimize power generation, transmission, and ensure more optimal operation of the grid. • Demand -side Energy Efficiency. This is a major focus of POUs. It includes, but is not limited to: appliances, air -conditioners, building codes and standards, education, electricity management, and weatherization -- all coordinated with customer -specific programs. • Cost-effective Energy Efficiency. Cost-effective energy efficiency lowers the cost of providing electricity to our communities. POU customers are "shareholders," and benefits related to energy efficiency are realized by all customer -owners. Public Power Success Stories: Best Practices Public power commitments to energy efficiency programs are extensive and comprehensive. More than $166 million in energy efficiency programs are budgeted for the current fiscal year. POUs expect these programs to reduce peak demand by 116 megawatts and more than 630 million kilowatt-hours of energy consumption on an annual basis. A more detailed discussion of these results will be addressed in Section IV of this report. 21 Residential programs focus on energy audits, Energy Star® appliance rebates and replacements, lighting improvements, attic insulation, as well as incentives to install highly -efficient heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC). Commercial and industrial programs target lighting, HVAC, and manufacturing/ food processing equipment, and refrigeration. POUs also partner with schools and public institutions to educate residents and implement a variety of beneficial programs. Public power utilities maximize the success of energy efficiency programs and services because of their unique relationships with customers and their ability to specifically tailor programs to meet the needs of their communities. POUs are responsive to local concerns, allowing them to maximize the value of all energy efficiency programs. Public utilities are diverse, and that diversity is reflected in differing programs tailored to the needs of local constituents, taking into consideration climate zones and other factors. Common to all, however, is the desire to spend energy efficiency dollars wisely and utilize the benefits of local decision -making to create programs that are effective, innovative and forward -thinking. The 2010 report features best practices that apply to more than one utility, building on the strong network of collaboration that public power has traditionally relied upon to produce the most effective package of energy efficiency programs. Joint Action at Work — Keep Your Cool Program NCPA supports and facilitates collaboration for its members through joint action programs and projects. Strategically, NCPA pursues joint action when it produces consistency, provides for economies of scale, and allows enough flexibility to tailor solutions to meet individual member needs. An example of this strategic approach is the Keep Your Cool Program. Keep Your Cool is an energy efficiency program offered collectively by NCPA members for its business customers. The program provides for the direct installation of energy efficient measures in grocery stores and restaurants. Worn and damaged gaskets on refrigerator doors are repaired, door closers are replaced where needed, and door strip curtains are added to minimize leakage of cold air. These improvements result in an overall reduction of energy consumption and reduced monthly energy costs. The Keep Your Cool Program was originally implemented by Silicon Valley Power, and was shortly recognized thereafter as a best practice by NCPA's Public Benefits Committee. The Committee, a working group consisting of NCPA staff and member program administrators, chose to expand the program and make it available throughout all NCPA utility member communities. NCPA negotiated favorable rates and executed an enabling agreement with the service contractor for the measure installations. NCPA provides overarching program administration, directs coordination and program rollout, and ensures all program issues are resolved in a timely manner. Utility program administrators market the program, manage customer relations, inspect field installations, and ensure overall customer satisfaction is achieved. Phase one of the program was completed in 2009. The program has been a success, providing for high levels of customer satisfaction with greater than anticipated customer demand for program services. 22 Phase two of the program will provide a more comprehensive offering of refrigeration measures, and will likely be expanded to over 17 POU service territories. Additionally, lessons learned through this successful collaborative program implementation will be used in future programs offered through NCPA. Home Energy Reports SMUD, Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena, and Palo Alto (via ARRA funding) are four utilities offering a residential program called Home Energy Reports. This new service, offered by °Power, recognizes the power of providing comparative usage information to consumers. The Home Energy Reports will show consumers how they stack up in terms of electricity usage compared to 100 "neighbors." Neighbors are defined as households in relative proximity who share important housing characteristics, including square footage and number of household members. In a pilot study conducted by SMUD, energy reductions of about 2.5% were reported. Burbank's City Council approved the program for two years, where every household in Burbank will receive an average of six comparative reports during that time. Burbank plans to deploy the program during the first half of this year. Glendale started its program on July 1, 2009, and will be delivering 125,000 Home Energy Reports to customers during the first year. The Glendale program is supported by ARRA EECBG funds, and initial results are positive. Glendale is working with °Power to modify its program to incorporate data from its new Smart Grid system as that data becomes available in 2010. Glendale is also working with °Power to develop Home Water Reports that will be available in 2011. Youth Education Programs The majority of POUs actively support and promote educational activities for students to learn the basics of energy science, energy conservation, and energy efficiency. The following provides a few examples of utility best practices in the education arena. Youth Energy Summit The Youth Energy Summit (YES) prepares students by providing them with the tools to become civic - minded energy advocates. The event was primarily sponsored by SMUD, Roseville Electric, Lodi Electric, and the LegiSchool Project at California State University, Sacramento. Additional support was provided by NCPA, Quantum Energy Services, and the Resource Action Programs. During the two-day event in January 2009, students learned from highly regarded energy experts on subject matters such as alternative transportation, solar and wind energy technologies, new technologies in energy efficiency, climate change, green jobs, and energy -related policies. The nearly 100 students who participated put their newly acquired skills to use by completing energy -related service learning projects in their community. Students documented and shared their experiences with legislators and the general public at the State Capitol on Earth Day in April. Based on presentations to a panel of judges, the top seven student teams were awarded scholarships. Based on the event's success, the YES program is being offered again in 2010. 23 LivingWise Program Azusa, Burbank, Glendale, Lodi, Roseville, and Truckee Donner PUD are among the POUs offering the LivingWise Program, an approach where students learn about energy and water conservation in their classrooms. The knowledge and tools they obtain in the classroom are taken home and shared with families and friends, reinforcing the lessons learned. LivingWise provides students and their families with the tools needed to audit and retrofit their homes, generating immediate and lasting energy resource savings. Green Allowance Program Glendale Water & Power is launching the Green Allowance Program, a new web -based service designed to give kids the tools and motivation to champion energy conservation and help them to earn a green "allowance". The program includes an innovative and kid -friendly website, www.greenallowance.com, which provides practical ideas and customized assignments for kids, showing how they can save energy and, in turn, save money. Kids are encouraged to make a deal with their parent to share the savings on their electric bill —savings that are calculated and programmed to show up on their home computers on a monthly basis. The program is being developed through SCPPA's agreement with Green Allowance, LLC, with additional SCPPA members planning to participate in the near future: The Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) In addition to the range of best practices described above, public power will soon have a one-time opportunity to enhance its program offerings during 2010 and 2011, courtesy of the federal government. ARRA, signed into law in February 2009, provides more than $60 million to 29 municipal communities in California, under the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program (See Table 3 on the next page) and $175 million in smart grid funding. Each area is addressed below. Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program For cities with a population exceeding 35,000, the dollars are provided to municipalities directly by the U.S. Department of Energy. Small cities, however, receive their funding directly from the CEC. As of mid -March, it is expected that most of the dollars that are targeted for use will be available by the beginning of summer. It should be noted that all Public Utility Districts and Irrigation Districts are not eligible for such funding. At first glance, it might appear that all of these dollars are available for utility energy efficiency programs and easily deployed. However, this is not necessarily the case. The range of programs funded under the EECBG is based on 14 criteria established by DOE in the original solicitation. While some of the criteria fall in line within the scope of traditional utility programs —such as energy audits and building retrofits, it also allows for the dollars to be used for transportation -related programs, technical support services, renewable energy technology deployment on government buildings, and for combined heat and power. In addition to not being constrained by the provisions of the state's energy loading order, the dollars are 24 not necessarily controlled by the municipal utility. As an example, LADWP will be receiving $ 3.5 million from the City's $37 million Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, for rebates related to residential whole house fans, cool roofs, window shading, and commercial building retro-commissioning incentives. The remaining funds will address projects identified by the city that are not under the control of the utility. In Pasadena's case, none of the City's funds were allocated to the utility. Rather, the Public Works Department received them for street light retrofits. Table 3 ARRA Funding Provided to Cities Energy Efficiency and Smart Grid Programs Alameda Anaheim Azusa Banning . . . ...... . . ......... .. . . .... ... .... . Biggs Burbank Colton . ......... .......... ...... ..... ......... .... Corona Glendale Gridley Hercules Industry Lodi Lompoc Los Angeles Modesto (D :...:.:...:.:..:.:.:.:..:..:.:..:::::.::.:..:..:.:....:..::..:. Moreno yalley Palo Alto Pasadena Pittsburg Rancho Cucamonga . . ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Redding Riverside Roseville Santa Clara . . . . .... ...... . . . .......... . .. ... ... Shasta Lake SMUD Ukiah Victorvi Ile Total 640,600 .....::.:.: .:....:.....:...:.....:. 3,254,800 191,600 1,103,000 485,400 1,454,200 1,883,700 586,200 165,600 37.017.900 1,684,300 663,000 1/507,800 565,500 1,597,700 892,700 .. ..... .... ...... ............ . . 2,850,600 1,073, 700 1,180,900 58,636 $ 127,506,261 1,029, 700 59,828,900 $ 165,509 $ 25,000 '. $ 20,000,000 35,407 i 135,630 25,000 1,493,149 82,741 $ 527,923 $ 174,895,435 Despite these caveats, a significant level of DOE funding will be used for energy efficiency programs managed by the utility. Due to the ease of certain program implementation which allow for direct purchases of specific equipment and labor -related rules regarding prevailing wages, many of the utilities 25 receiving funding dedicated a portion of their energy efficiency funding to street light replacement activities. A list of programs describing EECBG activities being funded by ARRA are documented for each participating utility in Appendix A. Other Energy Efficiency Programs Funded by ARRA Another element of ARRA funding which will help municipal utilities is being provided from the CEC through its State Energy Program (SEP). Under the SEP, the CEC is providing up to $226 million in stimulus funding to provide municipal financing, commercial and residential retrofits, and low -interest loans for energy efficiency projects, all of which have produced significant interest from municipal government. To date, the CEC has awarded $110 million toward these projects, with SMUD receiving the largest allocation of funding ($19.9 million) for its Home Performance program. The program includes a variety of local agencies and community college districts. Other awards for municipal financing and related activities include many of the counties served by publicly -owned utilities. In terms of low -interest loans, the City of Los Angeles received a $3 million loan last September to fund the installation of energy efficient streetlights. Finally, public power will be coordinating efforts with the CEC as it deploys its Cash for Appliances program. Under the program, approximately $35 million will be made available to enhance rebates for room air conditioners, clothes washers, and refrigerators. The program is expected to begin in late April and will include both public power and investor -owned utilities. Smart Grid Program Funding In 2009, five public power utilities (Anaheim, Burbank, Glendale, Modesto Irrigation District, and SMUD) received nearly $150 million in awards from DOE to address smart grid development. Anaheim Anaheim has begun the implementation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure/Meter Data Management System (AMI/MDMS) as a component of Anaheim's preparation for Smart Grid and to provide a platform to support compliance with anticipated regulatory and legislative requirements related to drought, demand -response, energy efficiency, and time -based rates including Time of Use, Critical Peak Pricing and Critical Peak Rebates. This project is intended to replace all electric and water meters with state-of-the-art smart meters with two-way communications. It will also support in -home communications with home appliances, air conditioning systems, pool pumps, and in -home displays and web access to provide customers with real-time or near -real-time information to facilitate improved management of electric and water consumption. Burbank Burbank's program includes deployment and integration of multiple and secure Smart Grid infrastructure systems and control processes designed to accelerate the modernization of the local grid and address these challenges. BWP -- with its compact service territory, high customer density, and favorable climate —sees itself in a good position to develop a full-scale Smart Grid deployment that will 26 serve as a model for other utilities to emulate. Its program includes the following primary projects, all of which will be initiated over the next few years: 1. Secure Wi-Fi Mesh Network. 2. Meter Data Management System 3. Advanced Metering Infrastructure for both electric and water 4. Mission -Critical Asset Protection Program 5. Outage Management System 6. Distribution Automation 7. Customer Smart Choice Programs 8. Energy Demand Management System Glendale GWP was awarded $20 million to support its $51.3 million AMI-Smart Grid Initiative, and was the first in the nation to sign a contract with DOE to receive the grant funds. GWP has signed contracts a number of vendors. Itron will supply its Openway and Save Source electric and water smart meter systems, the Itron Enterprise Edition MDMS, and a Tropos Wi-Fi backhaul system. KEMA, Inc. will provide consulting services and project management support. Utilities Partners of America, Inc. will do the installations. GWP is on track to complete its smart meter demonstration project in the Spring of 2010, with full implementation of its smart meters completed by the Fall of 2011. The new Smart Grid System will have the following features: o Smart meters with large data storage capabilities, and two-way communication hardware and software. o A wide area network to allow two-way communications between the utility and each meter. o Distribution automation, direct load control, distributed generation, demand response, and new customer programs and service options that allow customers to take control of energy and water costs through access to real or near real time consumption information. o Meter Data Management System and systems software to integrate meter data with the utility's billing, customer information system, outage management, load control systems, and other smart grid systems. o A premise gateway that communicates to a home area network (HAN) to promote demand response, energy and water conservation, and dynamic pricing options. The City of Glendale AMI-Smart Grid initiative will provide for: a Increased use of digital information technology to improve reliability, security, and efficiency of the electric grid. o Development and incorporation of demand response, demand -side resources, and energy -efficiency resources. o Deployment of `smart' technologies (real-time, automated, interactive technologies that optimize the physical operation of appliances and consumer devices) for metering, communications concerning grid operations and status, and distribution automation. o Integration of `smart' appliances and consumer devices. o Deployment and integration of advanced electricity storage and peak -shaving technologies, including plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles, and thermal energy storage. o Provision for consumers to receive timely information and energy control options. 27 SMUD SMUD received $127.5 million from DOE, for a $308 million Smart Sacramento project that includes partners from the region including the California State Department of General Services, California State University, Sacramento, and the Los Rios Community College District. SMUD started installing advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), using Silver Spring Networks and Landis meters, during the fourth quarter 2009.- The initial 50,000 point pilot should be completed by the second quarter 2010 and full deployment of the remaining meters (over 600,000 total) will commence directly after the pilot. Full implementation is expected by the end of 2011. The AMI system will allow for two-way communication with all customers and will enable additional opportunities for energy efficiency and peak load reduction. In addition to AMI, SMUD will implement distribution automation (expected to reduce overall energy use by 2%), test dynamic rates, install approximately 250 electric vehicle charging stations, incorporate demand response capability with programmable thermostats and controls in 50,000 homes, incorporate Auto DR in many commercial facilities and test energy storage products. SMUD's smart grid project is expected to optimize the grid through enhanced load management, improved reliability, enhanced energy efficiency, and better overall system control. Additional benefits include reducing the need for additional infrastructure such as transmission lines and new generation. IV. Program Results and Observations This section provides an aggregated discussion about current and future energy efficiency programs and savings that apply to California's public power utilities. The discussion stops short of utility specifics in most cases, deferring to a more detailed overview of specific utility program descriptions, and expenditures, as well as expected and actual energy savings to Appendix A of this report. Table 4 summarizes POU energy efficiency program savings and cost information for fiscal years 2006 through 2009.13 We are pleased to report that both electricity savings and expenditures continue to increase substantially within the public power community, During FY08/09, POUs spent approximately $146 million on energy efficiency programs, a 41 percent increase in spending compared with the previous year. Reductions in electricity consumption are equally impressive. In the most recent reporting year, peak demand dropped by more than 117 megawatts, with more than 644 million 23 Imperial Irrigation District, Merced Irrigation District, Modesto Irrigation District, Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Turlock Irrigation District, and Truckee Donner Public Utility District all operate on a fiscal year that extends on a calendar year basis. As such, each utility's data for FY08/09 is actually calendar year 2009, and data for FY09/10 is actually for calendar year 2010. CMUA, NCPA, SCPPA, and CEC staff recognize this data nuance. 28 kilowatt-hours saved on an annual basis, both significantly higher than savings from programs implemented in the previous year. Table 4 Program Summary Net Peak kW Year Savings FY05106 52,552 FY06/07 56,772 FY07/08 82.730 FY08/09 117,435 Net Annual kWh Savings 169, 302, 601 254,331,659 401,919,205 644,260,232 Net Lifecycle MWH Savings 2,249,214 3,062,361 4,473,801 6,749,912 Total Utility Cost ($) $ 54,412,728 $ 63,151,647 $ 103, 907,266 $ 146, 093,107 Continuing a long-standing trend within the public power community, the majority of energy efficiency program impacts reflect public power's two largest utilities: LADWP and SMUD. Approximately 65 percent of peak savings and 68 percent of annual savings can be attributed to these two utilities in the most recent year. While LADWP and SMUD account for a significant total of public power program savings, it does not discount the importance of energy efficiency programs being offered by the rest of the state's POUs. Table 5 highlights the public power commitment to energy efficiency programs, from the largest to smallest community. Given the wide range of diversity among utilities and program offerings, the reported results show a continuing trend of increased program spending and electricity savings. During FY08/09, the remaining utilities spent more than $45 million on energy efficiency programs, reducing load by nearly 41 megawatts at the peak and more than 208 million kilowatt-hours during the year. The kilowatt-hour reduction is more than double the reductions reported just three years ago. 29 Table 5 Program Summary (excluding LADWP & SMUD) Net Peak kW Net Annual Year Savings kWh Savings FY05/06 19,292 67,766,218 FY06/07 21,174 96, 740, 737 FY07/08 37,822 171,738,010 FY08/09 40,791 208, 658,443 Net Lifecycle MWH savings 953,628 1,402,162 2,079,276 2,670, 085 Total Utility Cost ($) $ 21,921,485 $ 28, 663,125 $ 39,000,521 $ 45,476,667 Looking at it yet another way, the 15 utilities measured by annual kilowatt hours of savings provided more than 97 percent of the amount reported by the entire POU community. Table 6 provides the FY 08/09 data for the 15 utilities and shows their combined energy savings as a percentage of the total POU energy savings for the year. New to the top 15 in this report are Roseville Electric and Banning Electric Utility. Table 6 Utilities Most Heavily Influencing Energy Efficiency Savings Utility Utility . Cumulative Percent Percentage Net Peak KW Net Annual of Total of Total Savings KWh Savings Savings Savings Lo n eI ept sf ?ater?. 'owe Sacramento Muniepal Utility District EEri Pasadena Water and Power 4nRe wg4gr[ `1Jt t' ka, ie iinagi9RER§Vag AMA 25,724 { 148,027,550 23.0% 67.6% itierside Public Utilities 3,600 E, 16,052,142 2.5% 84.9% 40.6ENNOMINgrainniAla2MHAAT,,,,,t-X ,A0 -. 'OP 5,376' 30,064,452 4.7% 78.4% w: TID 1,299 13,053,661 2.0% 89.2% eR� p 0 n PAM 5 , 4Pilf iM56 �z e P ca a ;�,o .iFG°� .;..:�� rsm.�su: i°_ ...$ @:�? b....»...d.�,� ?: c§Y�§���s � x Imperial Irrigation District 3,025 11,284,942 1.8%1 1 92.8%. #00401.40RIENN X223 ; 8 5541i17 2.41 Burbank Water & Power 3,069 8,573,766 1.3/aJ 95.5%; i, lty Pala;PAiia t ltmlltf V .a Tn,ckee Donner Public Jtiliiy District 3 x�.M, ,..,�x e 'Ra8ttldg-Er6ctr,c JIejIyq, ff ° l' jar All Others 2.8% Table 7 provides a comprehensive summary of energy efficiency savings and an aggregated measure of cost effectiveness, including the 25 utilities not shown in the previous table. The table highlights a wide range of savings, which is largely a reflection of utility size and economic considerations. Four municipalities (LADWP, SMUD, Anaheim, and Pasadena) had peak savings exceeding five megawatts. Another 10 utilities (Burbank, Glendale, Imperial Irrigation District, Modesto Irrigation District, Palo Alto, Redding, Riverside, Roseville, Silicon Valley Power, and Turlock Irrigation District) have peak savings that fell in the range of 1-5 megawatts. 30 With respect to cost effectiveness, the aggregated TRCs for public power equals 3.80 in FY08/09, suggesting that public power energy efficiency programs produce nearly four dollars in societal benefits for every dollar spent. With few exceptions, TRCs for individual utilities satisfy the criteria for providing cost-effective savings to their respective communities. Table 7 Summary of Utility Results FY 08/09 Net Lifecycle GHG Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle - Reductions Savings kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) ;Alameda Municipal Power 129 2,210,896 ; 15,833,699: 8,553 Anaheim Public Utillhes 8,430 25,804 825 267,231,540 160,175 Azusa Light & Power 342 r 2,145,197 19,493,327 10,945 Banning Electric Utility 370 3,030,291 20,108,209 11,461 (Biggs 10 - 110,552. 1,031,831 553 ,Burbank Water &Power - 3,065: 8,573,768' 106,280,063 58,163 Colton Electric .. . . Utility 746 .. . ...... . .... . .... .. ..... . 2,109 . ..,. 421 T818 ....... 5,467 ....,746 Corona Dept, of Water & Power 3 7,006: 70 ,064 � 40 Glendale Water and Power 2,588 - 1.1,803,15&.; 135,724,712 75,769 .Gridley Municipal Utility 17 70 385 , 1067 565 569 Healdsburg , 86 390518 3608453 1,984 'Rercules Municipal Utility 2 • 9853 88,742 47 ,Imperial Imgabon District 3,025 11,284 942 128,216,762 77,431 ;Industry......... ;Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power Lessen Municipal Utility District 3 Lodi Electric Utility --,,Lompoc ..,.. . , . ..... .. Irrigation District Merced Imiga... . .... .... `Modesto lydgatien District Moreno Valley Utility - 285,000 2,850, 000 • 1584 Needles . .^ 6 185,959 ..... 3347 262 2,129 City of P Al to lto UBlities 1,452 4,667,711"; 51,425,595 27,908 Pasadena Water and Power _ 5,376 30,064 452 366,77%740 740 199,846 Island Energy 114 448,960 8960 962 - 4,766 .... . Rural Electric Coop 35 231,434 3 0308... ..._ ._ . ._._ _.. 37• ..._1, Plumes Sierra 587 Port of Oakland Rancho Cucamonga Munioipa Utility I 5' 12,719 i 84,340 50 Redding Electric Utility 1,481 2,297,409 , 27 143,681 15,757 Riverside Public Utilities - 3600 16,052,142 205 155,182 115,722 Roseville Electric 2,223 8,584,107' 122,851,981 $9443 Sacramento Municpal Utility District 25,724 14%027,550 : 1,209,397,924 489,860 Shasta Lake 82' 285,755; 2,479,081 1,358 Silicon Valley Power 2,184 39,627773. 716,171,743 , 391,764 Trinity Public Utility District , , E ,, 14,828 1 152,754 _ 117 Truckee Danner Public Utility District ': .mm.8, . .... Y .,- 898 � 3,575 838 - 34 52B,706 18,778 11D ! 1,299. 13,053681 Y 135,063,358 74,129 City of Light & Power 552,727. 3,785,705 2, 059 Ukiah Public Utility 83 417 2,436 139 1 38 1 21, 824 ''.Victorville ...... 939 53..... .. . . . Summary 117,435 844,260,232 6,749,912,013. 3,497,637 $55,631,778 943,122,790 - $47,338,540 6148 09%107 3.80 Note: 45 data is 5seat year, except for the foNoteng calendar year Wellies 110, Merced Modesto, Pumas &erre, SMUG, Truckee Donner, and 71D. 50,920 -; 287574,239 239 2870423,915 423 915 1,53%249 246 90 474,138 15 940,248 2,692 84; 1, 48 8,287 40 392 120 - 3 337 . ...... 134 1,834 148 1,538 030 21 751,355 11,554 2,389 14,580,8221- 163 934,070 89,211 Utility Utility Mktg, Incentives Utility Direct EM&V, and Total Utility Cast ($) Install Cast ($) Admin Cost ($) Cost ($) - TRC 149,243 i- - 360,824 510,067 + 1.93 } 1,455,176 2,447,450 371,013. 4,273,849;, 7.63: 350,800 ; 88,907 111, 36$ 550,874 2,59 ......_214 379 ...... ....... .-......... .. 163,544 397,923 ; 2.02 15,986 2, 370. ._,.., 15,932 34,287 1 3.35 z, 1,257,762 ;1 1,549,012..... 548,965 3,355,739 ........3.95 1; 333,506 - 7,000 340 508 - 31,745 - 8,000 39,745', .,,.,..0.13 i -..1,425,049 1,765,962 253,545 3,474555; 2.41'; .,.., . 45,556 2,179. 49,175 98,910 3 0.61. '+ . . . 056, 1.761 83 845 7777 37,437 125 1 250 1 250 i 2.42 1,177,436 7323 733,889 1918650 5.60 1 15,116641 33827,855 - 18,819,803 67,564,300 877.3 135,411 15507 50,166. 201,064 1.83.: 146 505 ; 100,000 246,505 ; 2,50 113,248 ; 520 1 23,604 137,372 1.81 232,981 ; 1,098 ,. 95,097 329 178. 2.16 , 1,504,803 343277 1,556,24/ 3,406,322 2.01 ;;. ._:...,.4,250 4,000 .8,250 '. ... .5.83 i 150,000 i 15,003 165,000 2.73 617,601 1, - 1,168,182 1,785,783 • 2.45 ;' 4126216 1306422- 366,222 5,798,859 2.88; 25,957 3,987 84,673 ....- 1.36,738.: ..._-209 4....... 0.89',' 24784€ 2500 27284 1.14; 1,380,954 79960.,;,_ 274,,035 ,.,1.734948. .,,2.1 �- z 1 1,598,735 995991 1646648 4239373 4.201 63,252 641,403 2,641412. 3.89 '; 16,8.81,1 0 e1 -- _ 18,171,020 33,052,140 2.51 25,792 1 10,496 40,350 77638 . .....1.83_°. 3,625 475 ' 425,378 2,550,224 6,601,076 ; 5.60 32 133 __.. 32,133 }. .:._0.02 , 31382:461373 18,467 ... �. . .. -. . 258,896 577,383'S 5.06.; 665,842: 153,267 - 590,756. 1,410,885'; 3.61 50 451 28,757 39,518 148 727 ; 1.96 271,448 - }- 271,459 542,907 :. 6.53 Table 8 reviews the aggregated results by program sector. From the tables, it is clear that lighting and cooling programs once again account for the largest share of the savings. Regarding specific program results, lighting (particularly non-residential direct installations) continues to dominate public power energy efficiency programs, accounting for more than half of the total energy savings achieved. Utility rebates account for nearly one-third of total program costs with significant dollars now spent on measurement and verification efforts. 31 Table 8 Summary by Program Sector FY 08/09 - Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) - Category _ Net Peak kW Net Annual Savings kWh Savings Net Lifecycte kWh savings Net Lifecycte GM Reductions (Tons) Utility Utility Direct Incentives Install Cast Cost (5) (5) Utility Mktg, EM&V, and Admin Cost (5) Total Utility Cost ($) Appliances Res Clothes Washers 284 673,487 8,149,905 3,897 $ 390,693 $ 380 5 574,801 $ 965,874 HVAC Res Cooling 8,936 16,689,413 280,545,127 162,477 5 5,556,830 $ 1,098,694 $ 4,519,701, $ 11,275,225 Appliances - Res Dishwashers 44 134,741 1,822,208.. 931 $ 139,718 5 140 $ 226,777 $ 366,635 Consumer Electronics Res Electronics 639 6,391,369 63,922,447 25,911 $ 1,035,163 $ 8,983 $ 681,906 $ 1,726,052 HVAC Res Heating 1 988,845 18,437,597 7,671 $ 453,378 $ 149,688 $ 603,065 Lighting. Res Lighting - 37,275 194,546,807 1,703,097,389 827,499 $ 8,892,362 $ 3,058,161 $ 3,011,462 $ 14,962,005 Poor Pump Res Pool Pump - 556 - 1,047,810 10,513,554 6,166 $ 176,559 $ 210,689 $ - 387248 Refrigeration - Res Refrigeration 4,884 31,912,924 420,084,750 221,707 $ 2,591,379 $ 8,295,316 $ 3,467,906 $ 14,354,601_ HVAC - - Res Shell - 2,419 2,311,109 40,226,422 22,227 $ 1,821,139 $ 137,256 $ 376,747 $ 2,335,141 Water Healing Res Water Heating - 53 227,713 3,703,81 1,715 $ 77,399 $ 7,744 $ 30,070 $ 115,214 Comprehensive Res Comprehensive 2,736 21,522,194 159,661,377 76,020 $ 5,038,476 $ 565,161 $ 2,148,891 $ 7652,530 Process Non -Res Cooking 1 3,781 45,370 24 $ 650 $ 448 $ 1,098 HVAC Non -Res Cooling 6,671 49,600,423 857,614,997 - 482,011 5 5,740,287 $ 186,425 $ 4,407,884 8 10,334,596 HVAC Non -Res Heating - - - Lighting Non -Res Lighting 33544 190,665,625 1,728,800,383 939,971 $ 13,785,639 $ 27,123,612 $17,788,161 $ 58,697,412 Process Non -Res Motors 5,895 23,634,567 354,695,530 199,163 $ 3,267,652 $ 1,704,165 $ 4,971,817 Process Non -Res Pumps 129 6,825,428 94,687,241 50,119 $ 96,464.-$ 157,023 $ 131,027 $ 384,515 Re1igeratlon Non -Res Refrigeration 2,584 19,603,512 146,037,196 77,808 $ 836,049 $ 579,096 $ 1,214,041 $ 2,629,188 HVAC - Non -Res Shell . 264 673,234 9,128,650 5,238 $ 203,063 $ 15,026 $ 123,427 $ 341,517 Process - Non Res Process 1,436 14,376,732 199,075,110 98,588 $ 1,004,955 $ 1,645 $ 890,121 $ 1,896,721 Comprehensive Non Res Comprehensh 8,472 39373,076 425,067,129 203,552 5 3,179,117 $ 972,044 $ 3,362,952 $ 7,514,113 Other Other 650 23,057,452 216,584,747 115,575 $ 1,342,784 $ 818,082 $ 2,217,674 $ 4,378,540 SubTotal 117,435 644,260,232 6,749,912,013 3,508,569 $ 55,631,778 543,122,790 547,338,540 $ 146,093,107 T&D T&D 76 335,000 9,630,000 5,573 Total 117,511 644,595,232 6,759,542,013 3,514,141 $ 55,631,778 $ 43,122,790 547,338,540 5 145,093,107 Table 9 shows the growth in program expenditures since 2006. With total expenditures now at $146 million, 2009 represents the second consecutive year that public power expenditures have topped the $100 million threshold. Since the passage of SB1037 in 2005, program expenditures have grown by 168%, with energy savings growing by more than 281% during that same time period. This result is supported by the TRC estimates that have consistently increased since public power's energy efficiency reporting collaboration began. Table 9 Program Expenditures $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 32 Understanding Public Power Energy Efficiency Expenditures Public Utilities Code, Section 9615(e)(1) requires POUs to include "the sources of funding for its investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction program investments." For the most part, the vast majority of funding for public power energy efficiency programs comes from the traditional public benefits charges collected from each utility customer on a monthly basis. It is important to recognize these charges are designated not only for energy efficiency, but also for renewable investment, electricity -related research and development, and low income assistance. When the Legislature authorized the imposition of a public benefits charge beginning in 1998, local governing boards were given full discretion regarding how these funds would be allocated. Since that time, however, certain restrictions have been imposed, limiting how future expenditures can be allocated. As an example, under the California Solar Initiative, public utilities are precluded from reducing their expenditures on energy efficiency or low income assistance to fund its solar programs. That said, local governing boards allocate the majority of their public benefits expenditures to energy efficiency programs. In some instances, local governing boards allocate dollars above and beyond public benefits expenditures, coming directly from each jurisdiction's general fund and sometimes specifically targeting what would be characterized as deferring generation purchases, referred to as procurement within the construct of AB2021. For the 2010 report, specific investments beyond the public benefits fund were reported by Alameda, Modesto Irrigation District, Palo Alto, and Truckee Donner PUD. Taking a slightly different approach, Pasadena increased its energy efficiency investments by raising the utility's public benefits charge beyond the traditional 2.85% of sales requirement. Critical to the ultimate success of public power energy efficiency programs is the ability to optimize the use of public dollars that are dedicated to energy efficiency activities. The following table illustrates just how effective public power utilities are in their ability to deliver benefits to the communities they serve. Putting aside the growing costs of measurement and verification, the majority of expenditures represent direct incentives to the customer and direct installation costs. By keeping overhead costs low, POUs are able to maximize the flow of money into their respective communities, which fosters economic development and customer investment into existing building infrastructures. In turn, these investments help to retain local jobs as well as promote local job growth. Table 10 shows POU expenditures as both a percent of retail sales, and as the total program cost per net unit of energy saved. It is clear that California's POUs have established a high benchmark for efficient and effective delivery of energy efficiency programs. 33 Table 10 Efficacy of Public Power Efficiency Programs 2009 Estimated retail sales 2009 Efficiency program expenditures Expenditures as a percent of sales Program cost per (net) MWH saved 6,489,485, 570 146,093,107 2.25%' 227 Energy Efficiency Targets: Measuring Progress to Plan As discussed in Section 11, each POU in California adopted 10 -year energy efficiency targets for the first time in 2007. Before reporting on new 10 -year targets that are in the process of being adopted in 2010, public power is now at the point where the 2007 targets can be compared to actual savings in multiple ways. Table 11 compares each utility's actual energy efficiency savings to its 2009 savings target and its three-year cumulative average. Such a comparison is important to state policymakers because the information is used by the CEC to develop statewide energy efficiency targets for energy policy development, as well as guidance to the CARB in its greenhouse gas program. Looking at the table, public power utilities are now exceeding their stated targets. Last year, POUs realized 119% of their targets in aggregate, the first time this has occurred since reporting began in 2006. Even after considering time lags associated with new administrative support for aggressive programs, public power's cumulative three-year progress to plan is a healthy 84%. Sixteen utilities have exceeded their three-year cumulative targets for 2007-2009. 34 Table 11 Progress Towards AB 2021 Targets 2007 Actua I Savings MWH otuals, 2008 2009 Actual Actual Savings Savings MWH i MWH 2009 AB 2021 Target MWH Actual s Program Cumulative Savings 2007-2009 AB 2021 Cumulative Target 2007-2009 Alameda Municipal Power Anaheim Public Utilities Azusa Light & Power Banning Electric Utility Biggs Burbank Water & Power Colton Electric Utility Corona Dept. of Water & Power Glendale Water and Power Gridley Municipal Utility Healdsburg Hercules Municipal Utility Imperial Irrigation District Industry Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power Lassen Municipal Utility District Lodi Electric Utility Lompoc :Merced ... y_ !Modesto Moreno Valley Utility ,Redding Electric Utility Riverside Public Utilities •Roseville Electri c SMUD ;Shasta Lake ISiifcon Valley Power Trinity Public Utility District !Truckee Donner TID ;Ukiah Public Utility City of Vernon Light & Power . . ... . . . . ............. .... VictoRille City of Palo Alto Utilities E.Pasadena VVater and Power Plumes Sierra Port of Oakland Rancho Cucamonga Municipa Utility 921 2,135. 2,211 : 760 5,267 2,281 8,724 16,808; 26,8051 16,233 51,337 48,247 1 041 2 352 2 145 , 2,627 5,538 7,765 253 634 , 3,030 1,041 3,917 3,124 48 133. 111 37:.,.,: 291 112 5,507 8,719 : 8,574 ! 11 542 22,900 34,273 0.1 10 247 1 583 2 109 2,625 13,939 98 23 7 467 128 1,401 7 876 8,510 13,548 1 11,803 : ... . 11,701 33,784651 651 24 ' 70 : 92 275 1:' 152 236: 361: 198: 749 595 0 8; 10 153: 16 453 8,118 30,644 ; 11,285 • 37,500 50,046 74,818 61,641 115,519 287,574 300,000 464,734 ! 7291 004 90 123., .. 478 637 , ... 691 - . ..,..1,9x. 383 3,091 1,674 ' 2,000 5,148 6,000 102 304 392 1,040 790 3,121 3,773 1,871 1,536 2,322 7,180 6,966 5,561 18,129 .•���14,681 6,942. 36,371 18,241 44: 298]. 285 822 1 72 186 817 259 2,452 4,711 4,399 4,668 3,100 I 13,777 , 8,400 4,238. 8,164 30,064 'I 13,500 € 42,466 28,500 - 10 449 158 459 464 487 422 231. 621: 1,141 1,863 53 280 - 424 333 1,250 13 448 429 1,343 2,297 ! 3,017 5,614 8,401 16,052 i 23,060'1 39,843 87,910 8 584, 7,988 22,224 1 23,194 148,028 : 145,000 358 -_-_ 322,000 286 129: 639 363 388 39 628 ! 25,762 75,026 i 77,286' 15' - .. 45 3,576 1,001 8,635 3,004 12,592 33,197 30,487 264 861 791 3,601 57 359 1,877 1,640 13,109 10,682 4,326 9,314 95,950 114,662 47 30 10,889 24,509 19 12 604 4,458 9,206 10,937 30 279 230 935 13,054 553 2,436 627 2,466 Summary Summary (Excluding LADWP) !Summa (Excluding LADWP&SMUD), 261,597 405,342 644,260. 636,621 199,955 289,822 356,686 104,006: 175,160 208,658 336,621 191,621 1,311,199 1,561,169 846,465 487,825 832,169 510,169 Figure 4 provides a visual of energy efficiency program results in aggregate that are rapidly converging with targets established by each utility in 2007. POUs are meeting the aggressive targets of AB2021 and likely to set even more aggressive targets in the next cycle. 35 Figure 4 Progress Toward AB 2021 Targets 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,E 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Actual Program Savings 2007 AB2021 Targets ----2010 Forecast —6— 2010 A B2021 Updated targets (Preliminary) Note: For illustrative purposes, it is assumed that LADWP and SMUD's targets remain at their 2007 projections. Program Target Setting for 2011-2020 In addition to the traditional data contained in past reports, this edition provides updated energy efficiency targets, providing estimates that have either been adopted by local governing boards or are at this point preliminary and based on internal utility analyses. With the proliferation of POU reporting obligations, CMUA/NCPA/SCPPA had hoped to prepare one document that would include final estimates of actual and projected sales as well as newly -adopted 10 - year energy efficiency targets. AB2021 calls for the targets to be completed by June 1, although it was hoped that each utility could seek adoption three months earlier. As noted in Table 12, only a handful of utilities were able to expedite internal review processes before the filing date of this report. As such, most of the target data included in this report is preliminary in nature and still subject to review and eventual adoption by each utility's governing boards. As noted in the table, seven utilities have adopted targets, with others on schedule to have their targets adopted by the June ft deadline. A supplemental document will be provided to the CEC during the summer once the full set of targets is finalized. 36 Table 12 Status of POU Adoption of Energy Efficiency Program Targets for 2011— 2020 Alameda March 15, 2010 Anaheim Azusa April 27, 2010 April 26, 2010 Banning Biggs Burbank NA March 15, 2010. April 27, 2010 Colton June 2010 Corona June 2010 Glendale By June 30, 2010 April 19, 2010 April 19, 2010 April 20, 2410 Gridley Healdsburg Hercules !ID May 2010 Industry NA LADWP July 2010 April 27, 2010 February 17, 2010 March 2, 2010 Lassen Lodi Lompoc Merced June 1, 2010 Modesto Moreno Valley Needles May 2010 April 27, 2010 April 13, 2010 Palo Alto Pasadena Pittsburgh Power/ Island Energy Plumas Sierra May 2010 April 26, 2010 April 5, 2010 June 2010 Port of Oakland April 6, 2010 June 2010 Rancho Cucamonga Redding Riverside June 2010 May 2010 Roseville SMUD May 5, 2010 June 2010 Shasta Lake April 6, 2010 Silicon Valley Power Trinity Truckee Donner March 9, 2410 March 11, 2010 February 17, 2010 March 9, 2010 April 7, 2010 TID Ukiah Vernon NA Victorville NA Table 13 provides the currently available annual and cumulative ten year targets, 2011 through 2020. The targets presented in the table are preliminary, with the exception of eight utilities that have already adopted final targets (see table above). 37 Table 13 Preliminary Annual Program Targets for 2011-2020 nir 'Alameda 1,574 ; 1,875: 1,771 ; 1,833 1 1,887 1,936 - 1,964 1,982 ; 1,996 2,014. 18,631 ;Anaheim 24,264;: 22,542 26,296: 32,291" 37,785 36,956 34,802. 32,568' 30,339: 28,238 306,081: 1.12% ;,Azusa 2,068 , 1,904 ! 2,071 i 2,367. 2,591 2,736 2,738 2,715 2,692' 2669. 24,551 ' 0.89% :Banning . 962 706 i 782: 894' 944 975 979 970 1 945 1 918 ; 9,073 0.59%• Biggs 44 33 . 35 38 42 45 42 39; 351 32: 385' 0.21% Burbank 6,768 7,549 8,301 ! 9,523 : 10,553 '- 11,125 10 894 10 524 10 225 - 9,928 ; 97,391 - 0.77%; .Colton 3,162 1 2 902 i 3,508 : 4 594 5064 - 5043 ', 4,827 4,574 4,317 i 4,092 _ 42,082 1.05%; Corona 156 ; 167 190: 227 _.... 256 288 312 _ 335 ; 358 381 2,678 0.34%'s Y 0 3 ; a 114 330 ; 1 00%: 11,060 : 11,520 '', 11,280 11,320 ' 11,380 11,430 : 11,4901 , 11,550 i 11,620 11,680 %' bridle liur 75 ; 75 , 75 87 ' 98 , 107 111: 1141 117 1 120 979: 0.23%; g 420 420 420 € 515 557 ' 603 614 ; 617 i 617 614 5 396 0.52%i Ftercules 75 74 86 :. 102'. 113 122 130 137. 145 153: 1137 0 52% . ' llp 19,743 R. 16,480 18,381 21,281 , 241.47 26,614 27,674 28234 28 576 28 910 240 041 056% ;Industry ..:. ` ,... _,... Lassen 375 375. 375',. 501 650.- 849 ; 1,043: 1,177 ^ 1,203 i 1,219 7,767 0.494 -Lodi 2,296' 1,667 1,905' 2,242: 2,567 2,873' 2,948 2,985' 3,019_ 3053 25,575 0.51%. Lompoc 517', 336: 395,: 459: 544.. 630.........708 ' 760 776 785 5,911 0.40% ;Merced 1,316; 1,117 1,2581 1463; 1,765: 2054' 2,143 2,191 I 2,242 2297: 17,866' 0.33% ,Modesto 16,207-;. 15,136 16,154'.. 18181 _ 20,252 ' 21,857 21,102 20,074 19,258 18,623 186,824 1 0.6714 'Moreno Valley 2741 219 234'.1 260 288: 304, 292 276 281 247 2,655 0.30 Needles 205 160 181: 211. 246 280 i 299 312 323' 334' 2,549 0.33% Palo 5,799 6,290: 6,782 7,276 7,906 7,927 7,950 7,973 7,999 8 026 73,929 , 0.75%. 'Pittsburg 17500.' 17,50000'. 17,500- 166,0001 123%'. PasadegaPower/ Island: 14542.:1 14,537 14,500 17,5D0 17,55 17564: 17,500 59 ', 529 0.29' ,. Pfumas Sierra 237 1 230 2471 279 , 346 491: 778 1,191 1,546 `. 1,688 7,033 0.36%, Pod of Oakland 406 420 424 430 437 , 486 , 523 529 533 541 ' 4,731 0.53° Rancho Cucamonga 46 1 49 551 65 , 74 i 85 1 93 . 101 110: 116: 796 012%' :Redding 2523 € 2496 3078 ` 3,7761 4,457 `, 4,855 , 4,649 4,518 ; 4402 1 4350 ' 38,903 0.38% =.Riverside 14,017; 12,526 13,705; 16,0711. 18,159 ..,,, 378: 0,75% :.. ., ,. _ .19,617 19,994 20 037 20,082 20169 i 174 092% Silicon Valley Power, 23,055 25,415 26,255 28,502 29,506 ` 28,413 25,456 23,052 , 21,328: 20,020 251,003 0.77°% Rosemlle 6 390 8 360 8 604 8,639 9 054 10 032 10 903 ,108 : 1,1 Shasta Lake 300 300 300. 713 833 934 Trinity 14 13 14 14 14 7 14 14 4 14 14' 139 001/0 Truckee Donner 1 978 1,640.: 1,706 € 1 727 1,762 , 2,017 2 257 2 317 {. 2,214 2,263 I 18880 1.13% ..�. 814 - . . .. 18829 341 ; 18 172 -, 166 603. 073°k. Ukiah 12 250 ', 0 1 12,5441 2 0 ; 13 310 ; 15 346 17 375 W. 19 413 i 9 454: 18 499 18 554499 604' 4,045 0.33 Vernon 8,020 7,863E 7,9921 8,655; 9,766 10,716 I 9,4881 8,073 1 6,9621 6,087 1 83,601 0.63% Total 186,049 178,089 191,638 218,268 239,807 249,462 245,306 238,221 231,723 226,444 2,204,905 Customer Behavior and its Impact on the Ultimate Effectiveness of Utility. Energy Efficiency Programs 0.46% Customer behavior is gaining important attention as policymakers struggle with promoting the aggressive deployment of energy efficiency programs. Sometimes, state policy objectives that provide the directive for utilities to aggressively pursue energy efficiency savings fail to align with the specific needs of individual customers. In these instances, especially in the case of smaller utilities where key customers make or break a program in any given year, such challenges may be perceived by policymakers as a failure of the utility to effectively implement energy efficiency programs in any given year. This is clearly not a reflection of a utility's lack of commitment to aggressively pursue the deployment of energy efficiency programs. Sometimes it is simply a reflection of the state of the economy. Consider the following examples that impeded certain utilities from reaching their targets in 2009: • Gridley - Two issues kept Gridley from reaching its AB2021 targets last year. The first was the delayed startup of the Keep Your Cool program, which was not completed until the end of the 38 reporting period, making it ineligible to be included in this report. The second was a delay by Gridley's largest customer (Rio-Pluma) in installing a significant lighting upgrade. The project was delayed due to a downturn in its business, brought about by the recession. • Imperial Irrigation District -The IID service area, Imperial County and the Coachella Valley in Riverside County, has been especially hard hit by the current economic recession. Historically high unemployment rates have climbed to the highest in the nation. This has resulted in significantly reduced program impacts in 2009 due to reduced customer investment in energy efficiency measures. IID is working with cities and regional associations to provide planning assistance, and to incorporate aggressive outreach to residences and businesses in their communities. • Plumas Sierra — The utility's forecasted goals are tied to its Ground Source Heat Pump program. With the downturn of the economy, building permits for new homes in the Plumas Sierra service territory declined by 85% from 2008-2009, and heat pump installations declined from 35 to nine. • Riverside —Similar to IID, Riverside Public Utilities is struggling with some of the highest unemployment rates in the country. With sales declining and cash flow a problem for many of its customers, the utility is now focusing on direct install programs and extending the small business lighting program. • Roseville — While Roseville Electric did meet its AB2021 target last year, it continues to be negatively impacted by the ongoing recession, with sales decreasing and major construction projects in Roseville being placed on hold. The utility is now relying heavily on its Wastewater Treatment Plants and Chiller projects, but at this point there are limited large savings projects available in the City. Without these projects, Roseville would not have met the AB2021 energy efficiency goals. Recent research by the University of California (California Institute for Energy and Environment) and the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) has provided, for both policymakers and utility planners, key insights on the human and social dimensions of energy use. In order for the next generation of energy efficiency programs to succeed, they will need to overcome behavior -based factors that limit the success of traditional energy efficiency programs. Policymakers can help lead the way by pursuing further market research into the types ofbehavior change strategies that will improve utility program performance, as well as re-evaluating rigid regulatory policies that hinder utility program experimentation and innovation. V. Demand Reduction Programs At present and as reported in previous energy efficiency reports, many of the large POUs have some form of demand response program, or are in the process of implementing new programs. In addition to 39 the smart grid efforts described in Section I II, this section highlights progress being made on a couple of innovative programs that are gaining attention within the public power community. Such programs benefit from the ability of public power utilities to effectively collaborate on program design and deployment. Ice Bear Project Thermal energy storage is growing increasingly popular for public power utilities located in areas that have high summer peak demand usage. SCPPA and a number of its members are investing more than $100 million in smart -grid enabled advanced energy storage, while Redding Electric has allocated more than $1 million of its own budget during the next 12-18 months to invest in an energy storage product called an Ice Bear. The product is designed reduces peak electrical demand by utilizing electric energy to produce ice at night during off- peak hours and then use the ice for cooling during the day. Approximately 1,500 units are expected to be installed by SCPPA utilities once the project is complete, allowing for up to 53 megawatts of additional load to be available during the height of the peak cooling season. Redding is looking to install 50 units in the first phase. ICE Energy will provide for the manufacturing and delivery of equipment through to installation and commissioning; including milestones, rneasurement, payment criteria, and all other required terms. Glendale plans to install 1.5 MW of Smart Grid -Enabled, Ice Bear units over the next three years. In addition to installing Ice Bear Units, Glendale will work with Ice Energy to replace approximately 400 tons of aging, inefficient City HVAC units on City Facilities at the same time they are installing the Ice Bear units thereby taking advantage of available preferred pricing and reduced installation costs. North American Power Partners SCPPA has an agreement with North American Power Partners (NAPP) to support the development of demand response programs for its members. Under this agreement, Glendale will test the feasibility of offering demand response programs to its customers over the next five years. The two programs being developed at GWP will include a Price Responsive Customer Directed Program, and a Reserves Program. The Price Responsive Customer Directed (Self -Scheduled) Program will be a voluntary and economic -based DR program that pays participating customers a utility -established or market -based rate for curtailing electric usage. The program will offset standard energy resources (supply procurement) and also capacity resources when used to reduce peak demand. The program may be activated on a day -ahead or day -of basis. The Firm Demand Reserves Program will be an available "on call" firm demand response resource program with relatively short customer notices and relatively short curtailment durations. These resources are firm, fully dispatchable resources that are controlled by the utility or the customer, but are typically automated. Customers in a Reserves program volunteer to reduce kilowatt load at their site(s) when called upon. A participating customer determines the kilowatts available to shed, hours available to shed, and may select a trigger price(s) that activates an individual call event. Once the customer commits to being available, they are considered a "firm" resource that must deliver if called or 40 be subject to a non-performance fee. Reserves programs offset standard reserves resources. Details of the Reserves Program, such as maximum cal! events per month, minimum minutes of customer notification, customer payment per kilowatt, customer non-performance to a call event, and event durations, would be determined in the design phase of specific programs. VI. Conclusions and Lessons Learned CMUA appreciates the opportunity to provide to the CEC this fourth assessment of public powerenergy efficiency programs in California. Consistent with the stated intent and mandates of 581037 and AB2021, our analysis concludes that public power energy efficiency programs are producing significant energy savings for the state in the most cost-effective manner. The following bullets provide the key findings of this analysis: • POUs continue to make major investments in energy efficiency, despite being impacted by the worst economic recession to affect California in decades. During FY08/09, POUs spent $146 million on energy efficiency programs, a 41 percent increase in spending compared with the previous year, and nearly three times the amount spent on programs just three years earlier. • Reductions in electricity consumption are equally impressive. In the most recent reporting year, peak demand dropped 117 megawatts and more than 644 million kilowatt-hours were saved, continuing a dramatic upward trend in terms of annual increases in savings. • California's POUs have invested more than $367 million on energy efficiency programs since 2006, representing direct investment in local community infrastructure, supporting economic development, and the creation of a robust green job workforce. • Public power energy efficiency programs provide nearly four dollars of societal benefits for, every dollar spent. Applying the Total Resource Cost (TRC) societal test, the weighted average cost effectiveness for all publicly owned energy efficiency programs in FY08/09 was 3.80, higher than the 3.15 estimate reported in the previous year. To put the number in the appropriate context, previous programs authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for the investor -owned utilities have ranged between 1.6 and 2.4.14 • California's POUs exceeded their collective energy efficiency targets in FY08/09. Among the entire group, the utilities realized 101% of their savings. During the first three years in which efficiency targets were being monitored, public power reached 84 percent of their cumulative targets. CMUA looks forward to continuing our constructive partnership with policyrnakers on energy efficiency issues and the aggressive promotion of the state's energy loading order. A supplemental document which includes final 10 -year energy efficiency targets for all POUs will be submitted to the CEC later this summer. The next edition of this report will be submitted on March 15, 2011. 14 A value greater than or equal to 1.0 indicates that the program is cost effective. 41 Appendix A: Description of Utility Programs ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL POWER ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL :POWER Established in 1887, the oldest municipal electric utility in the west • Established in 1887, the oldest municipal electric utility in the west • 34,200 customers, 85% are residential • Peak demand: 76 megawatts, occurs in the early evening in the winter • Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) load does not have large demand spikes like most of CA • There is no residential air-conditioning • Annual energy use is 405.4 gigawatt-hours • 95 employees Alameda Municipal Power Energy Efficiency Program Background • Since 1991 AMP has spent more than $2.lmillion on direct customer rebates. • The energy efficiency programs have resulted in a demand reduction of almost 8 MW - more than 10% of peak demand - and an energy use reduction of 24,000 MWh/yr— almost 6% of annual energy use. • AMP provides energy efficiency programs and services to all customers including free energy audits, prescriptive and customized rebates, public awareness programs, and advanced technologies. • The City of Alameda facilities the Alameda Unified School District have been retrofitted in the past with energy efficient lighting and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning equipment. All the traffic lights have been retrofitted with light emitting'diode lights. Alameda Municipal Power Energy Efficiency Highlights FY 2009 • The net energy efficiency savings for FY 2009 were 2,211 MWh. Fiscal Year Net MWh/yr savings AB2021 Target Savings MWh/yr 2007 923 760 2008 2,135 760 2009 2,211 760 43 • The total energy efficiency budget for FY 2009 is $544,900, of which 92% ($494,900) is from public benefits and 8% ($50,000) is from the power procurement budget. • The projected savings for FY 2009 were 2,982 MWh and the actual savings were 2,211 MWh; a decrease of 26%. This decrease is due to the current economic crisis that is heavily impacting California. For example, participation in the Energy Star Refrigerator Rebate and Recycle Program decreased by almost 40%. Customers have decreased remodeling their kitchens and replacing marginal appliances at this time. • The unemployment rate for Alameda County has more than doubled since 2007, from 5% to almost 12%. The vacancy rate at the major business parks has increased and many business owners are reluctant to make investments in energy efficiency. The City of Alameda building permit valuations for FY 2007 was $152 million and has decreased to $76 million for FY 2009, a 50% decrease. • An Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification of the fiscal year 2008 energy efficiency programs was completed that focused on the commercial sector. The two objectives of the study were to perform a commercial customer attitude survey and to measure the energy impacts of the commercial retrofit projects. • The key findings of the customer survey were that lack of program awareness is the biggest barrier to program participation and program satisfaction among participants is high. And from the energy impacts portion of the study, the measure realization from the program participants in the evaluation study was 82%. • The projected net savings for FY 2010 are 1,722 MWh, less than 2009 and 2008 because of the current economic crisis. To deal with the impact of the economic crisis on AMP's energy efficiency targets, AMP will do the following: o Provide a Third Party Administered program aimed at lighting retrofits in small and medium businesses. In this program the first costs of energy efficiency measures will be reduced and the third party will do the marketing and manage the customer retrofit projects. o The Energy Star Refrigerator and Rebate program marketing will be focused more on the managers of multifamily rental properties. Typically for these customers, getting a new refrigerator is not optional, they must replace a refrigerator that is broken and beyond repair. Considering 50% of AMP's residential customers live in multifamily units, this will be a more reliable source of program participation. Residential Energy Efficiency Programs 1. Energy Star Refrigerator Rebate & Recycle Program — Rebate for buying an Energy Star refrigerator and recycle the old refrigerator with our recycler. 2. 2nd Refrigerator Pick Up Program — Rebate for customers recycling their 2nd refrigerator with our recycler. 3. Great White Light Sale — Coupon worth $2 for a compact fluorescent that is redeemable at local retailers runs four months a year. 4. Incandescent Trade -Ins —Trade in events where customers bring in their incandescent lights and exchange those for compact fluorescents (CFL). 5. Meter Lending Program — Borrow a meter and measure the energy use of appliances. 44 6. Onsite energy audits — Residential audits at no cost. 7. Weatherization Cash Grant Program — Grant for up to 80% of the cost of weatherizing homes with electric heat. 8. On-line Energy Audit —On-line residential energy audit and associated tools such as an appliance calculator and energy library on AMP website. 9. Advanced Technologies — Promote advanced technologies such as LED down lights. Low Income Programs 1. Energy Assistance Program — Provides energy audits, energy efficiency measures, and a 25% bill subsidy to qualifying low-income customers. 2. Energy Assistance through Supportive Efforts - Provides short-term emergency assistance based upon matching funds from the customer. 3. Low Income CFL promotions— CFL give away for low-income customers. Commercial Energy Efficiency Programs 1. Commercial Lighting and HVAC Retrofit Program — Prescriptive rebates for retrofitting existing buildings with energy efficient equipment. 2. Commercial Customized Retrofit Program — Based upon the kWh/yr reduced, rebates for energy efficiency retrofits such as motors and server virtualization. 3. Commercial On -Site audits — Free energy audits for lighting, HVAC, refrigeration, process systems, etc. 4. New Construction Design Assistance - Grants of up to $10,000 for energy efficient design work. 5. New Construction Rebates — Whole building and systems rebates for energy efficient new construction. 6. Keep Your Cool —3`d party administered commercial refrigeration retrofit program 7. Advanced Technology Program — Increased rebates to promote advanced technologies such as LED lighting. Alameda Municipal Power Operational Efficiency AMP received a grant from the American Public Power Association under their Demonstration of Energy Efficient Developments Program to perform an evaluation of the efficiency potential of AMP'S electric system. The typical annual electric system loss for Alameda is 4%, or about 16,000 MWh. This is average for most utilities. Nearly all of AMP's distribution system is 12 kV, the only exception is a small area at the former Alameda Naval Air Station, now know as Alameda Point. In FY 2009 staff developed and started to implement a project to eliminate the no load distribution system equipment and consolidate much of the low load equipment at Alameda Point. Also at Alameda Point in FY 2009, AMP started a $1.4 million project to remove six old and inefficient 3,750 kVA transformers and replace those with two 2,500 kVA and two 1,500 kVA energy efficient 45 transformers and replace all the associated switch gear. Additionally, these transformers contain biodegradable oil. Alameda Municipal Power Investment in Renewables 63% of AMP's electricity comes from CEC approved renewable resources including geothermal, landfill gas, wind, and small hydro. With the inclusion of large hydro, over 85% of AMP's resources are carbon free. New projects and contracts for biogas, landfill gas, small hydro, and solar are being evaluated. Projects to extend the life and improve the efficiency of the Geysers Geothermal field are continuing. In addition to the injection of treated wastewater from neighboring towns into steam field injection wells, horizontal injection wells have been drilled. A 250 kW turbine in the injection well proof of concept project was successfully completed in 2009. Based on the success of this turbine, a 750 kW turbine is planned for 2010. Two 1 Megawatt photovoltaic solar arrays were constructed in 2009 to pump the treated wastewater uphill from the treatment plant to the injections wells. A 2010 project will begin changing the turbine blades to accommodate lower steam pressure. The addition of a microturbine at McKay's hydro darn and a small generator on one of the tributaries into McKays reservoir are being planned for future installation. Federal Economic Stimulus Funds Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant Program — Funds committed 1. City Facilities — Complete energy audits for all city facilities; establish benchmark for each facility to be used to evaluate measures, and prioritize all energy efficiency measures by cost, benefit, feasibility, and reliability. 2. City Hall Occupancy Sensors — install lighting occupancy sensors throughout City Hall 3. Alameda Unified School District Facilities - Complete energy audits for all city facilities; establish benchmark for each facility to be used to evaluate measures, and prioritize all energy efficiency measures by cost, benefit, feasibility, and reliability. 4. Third Party Residential Energy Audit Training Program —A non-profit consulting firm will be retained to provide a turn -key program which will train volunteers to conduct residential energy audits and perform energy efficiency upgrades. State Energy Program — projects under development 1. Keep Your Cool 2 --This is being developed via NCPA and SCPPA to create a third party administered commercial refrigeration program to install gasketing, door closures, electronically commutated motors, anti -sweat controls, evaporator, controls, and more. 2. Statewide Energy Star Appliance Program 46 3. Alameda County -Wide Green Packages Program — A county -wide program for improving the immediate and long term environmental performance of existing buildings and landscapes. Single-family homes are the first priority, followed by multifamily and small commercial buildings. This is an effort of Alameda County, cities in Alameda County, and StopWaste.org. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Emergency Contingency Fund (ECF) Utility Assistance 1. AMP is working with the Alameda County Social Services Agency to obtain funding for a grant utility assistance program for qualified families. 47 ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL POWER Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Net Lifecycle :. GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Program Sector f Net Demand Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install Efe&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings : kWh Savings: kWh savings (Tons) (9) Cost(9) Adm in Cost ($) 09 Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appliances ... _.. Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer um.,.Eectr Electronics ., c_.,_.. Consumer Eiacimnlcs ResEISCtreniC3 Lighting Res Lighting P001 Pump -._...._ Res Poo( Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration H ....... .. .. . . ............. VAC Res Shell Water Heating�T- Res Water Heating Camprehens{yo Res Comprehensite Process .. ... . . ... .. . . . . . Precess NamRes Cooking H... . . . . .. .. Non -R HVAC � oo-Res Coaling HVAC NanReg Heating is Lighting ..-�.... ...Nan -Res Lighting _... Process Non -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps Ramgeratlon Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell Process o s.-.._.--_,-._ _. ... c s.-.�.,.2mm.... Process Process .. . ., . ... . . . Non Res . . . . ... . ... . .... ... .... ..... . . ... ..:. Cam rehensise Non Res Comprehensive r . . .. . ..., . ... . .. .. . . . ...... . ..... . Other Other Su6Tatal' 1,343,131 717 5 16,889 3,811,557 1,959 $ 14,256 90.5 2,481'; 3,248 $ ._.,,48,297 1,201,3138 4,805 553 2,534 2 69 ; 2fi,957 ' 15 2d24. ...€: ,007171 i 72,213' 40 360 129: 2,210,856 i 15,833 695 73,051 8,553 5 149,243 $ 149,243 $ 386,824 26 416 82,057 1,718 140,230 108,024 ._,.. 620 $ 1,765 $ 380,824 $ 96,387 4,199 $ 188,527 175,115 $. ..,:..,.. .,,938 $ 1,785 $ 510,057 T&D T&D Total 366 129 - 2,210,896 15,833,699 8,553 $ 510,087 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&O 1.93 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Ras Cooling Appliances ....................... Res Dishwashers Appliances Res Dishwashers ConsumerEectro.._.cs ResElectroni...,...,_,...,..,. Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC . . ....,,.. Res Heating ..... . ..... . . . .. . Lighting Res 4 0 .. . ... . .. . . .. . . Lighting Pool Pump Res Poet Pump Refrigeration .. . .... . . ... . . ResRe 1_...... Rafdgem0a,1 Ras Retn'gefatian_ HVAC Res Shell _--- Water Healing Res Water Heating Gotflprehensiee Res Comprehensive Process Non -Res Cooking- - --- -. o - - 105 HVAC Non -Res Coaling HVAC . ... . ... , . -R n . ............ HV Non-Res Heating _. .�...,. _._ ._ Lighting Non -Res Lighting m Process Non -Res Motors Process Nor -Res .,. . , . . . .. ,. . .. Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell esss Process Nen Res Process _......... -� a . ' " Comprehensive Non Res Comprehensise Other Other Sv0Total Net Peak kW Savings Net Lifecycle GHG. Utility Utility , 111i1i17 Mktg, Net Annual . Net LiTecycle Reductions Incentives Cost :-.Direct install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings' kWh savings (Tons) ($) t Cost(9) - Admin Cost(9} (5) 50,055 90,256 50 179,084 1,611757-i, --- 860 374,582 .. ... . .... ., . 1 .... ...... . . . . . ... 4 4,803,371 : 2,850808 63,327 549,609 973,229 10,505944 98,514 i 394,055 ..2,598 i. 529 5,701 238 15 $ 121,209 $ 62,522 308,624.. 588 232 1,721,621 i. 10,382,250 10,049 156,900 .5 391,331 5 548,231 T80 T&D 'Total 588 232 ' 1,721,621 18,382,260 10,049 1 $ 156,000 € '$ 391,331' $ 548,231 [EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&D 1.981 48 ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES vvww.anaheim.net • Established in 1894, the only municipal electric utility in Orange County • 175,004 meters, 112,548 are electric and 62,456 are water • Consumption of energy: 74% Commercial/Industrial, 25 %residential and 1% miscellaneous • Peak demand: 549 megawatts established October 2008 • Retail annual energy used: 2,534 gigawatt-hours. • 377 full-time employees and 60 part-time employees Overview of Public Benefit Programs From January 1998 through June 2009, public benefits expenditures totaled $77,563,695 as follows: Energy Efficiency 58%; RD&D 14%; Renewable Energy Resources 21%; and Income -Qualified 7%. Energy Efficiency programs includes every residential customer, including low income. Residential customers are not required to provide income data for the Energy Efficiency programs. Therefore, the above percentage seems to over shadow the other categories. In actuality, there is a greater amount of income -qualified customers participating in the residential programs than is reflected above. Conservation of electricity and water is part of the utility's daily routine. In the long-term, conservation of energy and water, helps Anaheim Public Utilities defer the future purchase of more costly resources. In the short-term, conservation is vital in helping maintain stable rates. Anaheim offers approximately 45 value packed Advantage Services to help customers reduce electric and water use and save money. Strategic Objectives Develop programs and services to: • Achieve legislatively driven goals and objectives (AB 2021) • Meet the needs of our customers and Department • Maximize Public Benefit Investments • Promote New Energy/Water Technologies • Expand Renewable Energy • Promote Green Buildings • Develop effective communications and marketing plans Current Commercial Customer Programs Total annual program cost: $1,817,144 49 Resulting in: 2,207 kilowatt demand reduction and 10,357,878 kilowatt-hour reduction • Comprehensive Energy Audits - Customized on -site audits and recommendations designed to improve energy operating efficiency and help customers reduce costs. • Water Use Surveys - Expert analysis of a facility's water use, specific water saving recommendations, and an explanation how incentives may help fund improvements. • Industrial Process Improvement Incentives — Commercial and industrial water users adopting water saving processes are eligible for financial assistance. it • Economic Development/Business Retention Rate - Provides qualifying businesses with rate discounts with an efficiency measures installation component. • Permit Fee Waiver —Waives the required permit fees for commercial customers who install high efficiency measures. • Customized Energy Incentives - Customized financial incentives for installation of high -efficiency air conditioning, motors, and other production related equipment. • Heat Pump Incentives - Encourage installation of high -efficiency heat pumps. • Exit Sign Program - Financial incentives for up to 50 percent of the cost to retrofit incandescent bulbs or fluorescent lamps in exit signs with more efficient exit sign lighting technology. • Lighting Incentives — Provides incentives to improve energy efficiency for a variety of lighting applications. • Small Business Energy Management Assistance - Provides customers of less than 100 kilowatt demand with energy use evaluations, retrofit funding, and installation assistance; focusing on lighting upgrades, programmable thermostats, air conditioning, and refrigeration tune-ups. • New Construction - Design assistance and incentives for new construction and facility expansions that install energy -efficient equipment that exceeds Title 24. • Commercial Water Equipment Rebates -Businesses and companies are eligible for rebates by installing or retrofitting with qualifying water -saving devices. Current Residential Customer Programs Total annual Program Costs $2,558,913 Resulting in: 6,188 kilowatt demand reduction and 13,283,262 kilowatt-hour reduction. • Home Utility Check -Up - A customized in -home survey of water and energy use and existing appliances; or an option to go to www.anaheim.net and click on Public Utilities to complete a detailed survey online. Either way, customers receive money saving advice, installation of up to five CFLs, water saving aerators and showerheads, and learn about incentives designed to help them be more water and energy efficient. • Home Incentives - Rebates for purchase and installation of high efficiency ENERGY STAR® rated appliances and high efficiency conservation measures. • TreePower - Provides complimentary shade trees and incentives for residential customers. Shade trees, when properly placed, can help reduce air conditioning costs. • Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) Distribution Program — Provides free CFLs to all Anaheim residents. 50 • Rehabilitation Loan and Energy Efficiency Grants Income -qualified loans to residential customers for rehabilitation of existing single-family homes. Grants are offered in addition to installing energy efficiency measures. • Weatherization - Provides weatherization measures, ensures combustion appliance safety and install Energy Star appliances for income -qualified residential homeowners and tenants. • Neighborhood Comprehensive Revitalization — Provides comprehensive revitalization and retrofits to existing income -qualified neighborhood developments. Funding is provided to install high efficiency conservation measures and Energy Star appliances. • Lighten -Up CFI Fundraiser - Provides free CFLs to students to sell as a fund raising activity to attend outdoor environmental camp (or other specified extracurricular activity). Schools pay $1 for each bulb sold which is applied to the Sun Power for Schools Program. • Permit Fee Waiver — Waives the required permit fees for residential customers who install high efficiency measures and Energy Star appliances qualified for the Horne Incentives Program. • Toilet Rebate Programs - Rebates for ultra -low -flush and high efficiency toilets. • Income -Qualified Senior or Disabled Energy Credit - Provides a 10 percent reduction on the electric portion of bills to seniors or long-term disabled customers at or below 80 percent of the Orange County median income. • Refrigerator Recycling Program — Provides a rebate to customers who recycle an old, operational refrigerator or freezer. Current Procurement Expenses Total Annual Program Expenditures $292,358 Resulting in: 65 kilowatt demand reduction Thermal Energy Storage (TES) Program — Program provides incentives for installation of small and large scale thermal energy storage systems that permanently shift demand for electricity to provide air conditioning from peak periods to off-peak periods. Current Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V) Activities Historically, Anaheim has offered limited EM&V under the Comprehensive Energy Audit Program (CEAP). To provide a more comprehensive approach, the Lincus Group was hired to conduct a study to develop and implement a new EM&V Program. This program will be completed in FY 09/10. Public Facilities Energy efficient LED. lighting pilots and retrofits have been implemented in the City facilities; and all traffic sign lights and crosswalks have been retrofitted with LEDs. City Schools Anaheim Public Utilities rebates of $463,069 helped support the retrofit of private and public schools with energy efficient lighting and heating/cooling equipment. 51 Proposed Energy Efficiency Programs and Services 2009-10 • Continue CFL Distribution Program by mailing two CFLs to the residents of the East, West, Central and South neighborhood districts • Expand existing programs and accelerate current levels of participation by targeted marketing campaigns, potentially increasing incentive levels • Continue to evaluate the appropriateness of any new energy efficiency technologies • Prepare request for proposal (RFP) to deliver evaluation, measurement and verification services by an independent 3rd party Low Income • Expand the !ow -income programs using stimulus funds • Work closely with City Departments to ensure that all qualified customers are enrolled in the low income program Projected Integrated Resources Program • Provide incentives for large scale thermal energy storage program Review Of Progress In accordance with AB2021, Anaheim established goals for fiscal year 08/09 of 16,232,895 kWh and 3,415 kW. Anaheim has made tremendous strides in accelerating energy and demand reductions during this reporting period saving 25,804,822 kWh and reducing 8,426 kW demand, which represents 159% of our kWh .6% goal and 247% of our demand reduction .6% goal. This figure represents 100.4% of our forecasted retail sales 1% goal and 101.8% of our actual retail sales 1% goal. Anaheim will continue accelerating energy efficiency programs and will be striving to maintain a goal of 1% of forecasted 2009/2010 retail sales. Projected T&D Projects • Anaheim routinely assesses distribution system losses with the goal of assuring that system efficiency is economically optimized. The following are just a few examples of how Anaheim is working to reduce the level of line losses on its system. o Anaheim evaluates transformer losses as part of the total ownership cost when purchasing all utility transformers which are compliant with DOE efficiency standards. o All new loads are served directly from the 12.47 kilovolt system. Doing so reduces system losses substantially, compared to putting the loads on a lower distribution voltage. o Anaheim has an undergrounding program and an aggressive conductor upgrading program which uses larger wire size to improve system reliability while at the same time providing the added benefit of lower system losses. 52 o Anaheim regularly evaluates circuit performance and implements circuit configuration changes, addition of reactive sources and load balancing in order to optimize performance. These changes inherently reduce the distribution system losses. o Anaheim has implemented an A Bank de-energization program which will save an estimated 2,000,000 kilowatt-hours annually. • During the development and analysis of major capital projects, Anaheim considers loss reduction benefits as one of the factors to determine the final project site and configuration. The following are two examples: o Vermont Substation Project— besides reliability improvements, this project will reduce overall system losses due to moving the transmission source closer to the middle of the system. o Canyon Power Plant Project —This 200 MW peaker plant will complete all CEC licensing requirements in late 2009. Groundbreaking is anticipated to begin in early 2010. The addition of this new power source will improve system reliability and result in lower overall system losses. Projected AMI/MDMS Projects • Anaheim has begun the implementation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure/Meter Data Management System (AMI/MDMS) as a component of Anaheim's preparation for Smart Grid and to provide a platform to support compliance with anticipated regulatory and legislative requirements related to drought, demand -response, energy efficiency, and time -based rates including Time of Use, Critical Peak Pricing and Critical Peak Rebates. This project is intended to replace all electric and water meters with state-of-the-art smart meters with two-way communications. It will also support in -home communications with home appliances, air conditioning systems, pool pumps, and in -home displays and web access to provide customers with real-time or near real time information to facilitate improved management of electric and water consumption. The Anaheim City Council approved agreements for acquisition and installation of an advanced MDMS and initial purchases of smart meters. MDMS has been placed into production. Smart meter installations began in third quarter of 2008. Approximately 3,500 residences have been transitioned to the new electric and water meters. The AMI/MDMS system will have the following features: o Smart meters with two-way communications hardware and software o Electric meters that support remotely -controllable switches to allow for remote service disconnect and re -connect and smart thermostats for demand -response o Water meters with leak detection and tamper information o A wide area network to allow two-way communications between the utility and each meter in the APU service area 53 o Integration with APU's Outage Management System, Geospatial Information System, Work and Asset Management System, as well as the Customer information System • Deployment of an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) -Simply put, an ESB is something of a digital switchboard, providing a robust integration and data sharing framework for various business systems. In the past, it was common to develop custom software interfaces between systems which were very specific to the software programs involved. Unfortunately, these highly customized point-to- point interfaces are very rigid and prone to failure when any of the participating systems are modified in any way, for example as the result of a version upgrade. An ESB provides a more standardized and flexible integration framework, increasing the reliability of existing business processes and simplifying the development of future integrations. The following APU business systems will "plug-in" to the ESB: Meter Data Management System (MOMS), Outage Management System (OMS), Geographic Information System (GIS), and eventually the Customer Information System (CIS). • Development of a Sustainability Information Management System (SIMS) - In order to comply with state legislation, Anaheim will begin tracking and ultimately reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the city. Specifically, Assembly Bill 32 requires current emissions of Greenhouse Gases be reduced to the levels measured in 1990 by the year 2020. Although the city maintains a vast amount of data that can be used to estimate green house gas emissions, until now the information hasn't been integrated for the expressed purpose of generating such estimates. By implementing a Sustainability Information Management System, Anaheim will formalize its approach to tracking and monitoring greenhouse gases. The system will be Anaheim's primary mechanism to demonstrate compliance with applicable laws and evaluate the effectiveness of the department's community sustainability programs. 54 ANAHEIM PUBLIC UTILITIES Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Net Peak kW Savings Program Sector ! Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) A Ilances HVAC Res 5:01660 Washe3 !' Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Res Electronics. Res Heating Res Lighting - - - Res Pool Pump Refngereiicn Res Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating. Comprehensi5e_ Res Shell Res Water Heating,.,,. -Res Comprehenshe Process HVAC HVAC - - - Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Process Process Refrigerationtion Nen-Res Motors Nen-Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Nan -Res Shell Process Comprehenei+,e Other Non Res Process Res Comprehensive ., . .. _. .. ..... . .. . .. .. . . Othgf SubTotal Lighting PP kWh Savings kWh savings 534,031 8,010,468 8,592,222 67 145.551 1,302,790 - 19,541,844 1,917,514 28,762,704: 596737 8.861,052 2,098,828: 26349,348 2,090,492 31,447 380 - Net Life cycle GHG Utility Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons) (5) 5,096 S Utility : Utility Mktg, Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Cost (8) Admin Cost (5) (0) 21,724 $ 462,771 $ 15220 S � 499,715 34,004 . $ 532,746' $ -_--72,474 5 605,219 10,393 $ 46456 $ 253,971 $ 14,235 $ 308,855 18,298 $ 228„228 $ 614.606 $ 40,972 $ 503,805 5,105 $ 99,600 $ 3665 $ 13,059 $ 86,464 _ _ . . . .. 11,305 5 621,539 $ 11,374 $ :25,863 $ 858;7963 .. . . .. 16560 $ 17,720 9 157,023 $ 37,220 $ . ....... 211,983 3062 59,738 i .. ..,, 31 S 6,571,230' 103,053,456 58,361 0 _. _. _ .. .. . . . . . : .. . ... .. . ... . . . . . . . . .. .... ..... . .. . 2,000 $ 1,645: $ 71 $ 3,716 8 453,715 $ 409,721 $ 151,879 $ .....,.. .. ... .. . . .... . .... . . . . . . . . .. � ..... . .. .... . . .. .... . . 1,015{315, 8,430 25,804,825 ' 287,231,540 i 160,175 $ 1,455,175' $ 2,447,460 $ 371,013 $ 4,273,649 T50 T&D [Total 8,430 : 25,804,825: 287,231,540 160.175 1 5 1,455,175: $ 2,447,490 $ 371,013 $ 4,273,649 1 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&D 7.63) Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting.. Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehanslte_,. Process HVAC HVAC Lighting .. ... . . P rocess P rocess Refrigeration HVAC _.-- ---- Process Comprehensne Other SubTatal [: Net Demand Nei Peak kW '. Net Annual Category ; Savings (kW) Savings kWh Savings Res Clothes Washers Res Goofing . r .. .. .. Res Dishwashers Res Electronics R ... ... . . .. ........ es Heating Res Lighling, Res Poot Pump, Ros:Refigeration Res Shell Res W .. . Water Heating Res Comptehensilk Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling,.,,,,,, NOn-Res Healing NOri-Re11 Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps..,.,..,.... - Non -Res Refrigeration - - Non -Res shell Nan Res Pmcass ... Non Res Comprehensive, Other 8,430 Net Lifecycle kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Reductions Incentives Co (Tons) f$) 534,03 -•.- i 8,010,486 8,592,222 67.145,551 34,004 1,302,790 19,541644 10,393 5,096 1,917,514 26,762,704 10,288 590,737 6,661052 5,1006. 2,696,628 20,349 348 11,305 2,00.6,492 31,447,360 16,560 .__... - 5 3,982 59,736��•�.-.. .• 31 6,870,230 .. 1 . . . 103,053 458 . 55,381 Ut086y I Utility Mktg, Direct Install; EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Cost (9) - Admin Cost (1) (5) 10697 532,746. $ 82,102 $, 40,450 $ 253,970 1$ 26,828 $ 226,228 $ 514,606 $ 39,487 $_ 69800 t. $ 3605 $ 12185 5 621,53616 11,374 $ 27,937 $.... .. 1.7,720 $..., 157,023, $ .,.43,173 2,000 $ 1,645-S 52 $ 453 715 $ 409,721 $ ,141,479 $ 495,452 424,526 321,248 S 882,321 85,573 $ . ,,. 660.850 $ 217,916 $ ,•3,727 $ .....,..1,004,915, 25,804,525 287,231,540 180,175 S 1,455.176 $ 2,447,4601 $ 394,332 $ 4,296,900 T&D 180 ITolal 8,430: - 25,804,825 ; 287,231.540 - 160,175 1$ 1,455,178 $ 2,447,460 $ 394,332 $ 4,296,565 EE Program Portfolio TRC. Test 7,59 1 Excluding 780 55 AZUSA LIGHT & WATER AZUSA LIGHT R. WATER • Established in 1898, Azusa Light & Water is one of the oldest municipal utilities in Southern California and the West. • The utility serves approximately 15,250 retail customers, of which 69 percent of the sales are for the Commercial and industrial consumers that account for only 12 percent of the customer base. • Peak demand of approximately 60 megawatts usually occurs in the early evening during the late summer. • Azusa Light & Water does not.self-generate, and purchases 80 percent of the total 267,304 megawatt -hours through long-term contracts. • Un-audited sales revenues are $38,100,000, with un-audited operating costs of $37,100,000. • Electric system includes 2 substations, 20 circuits and about 100 miles of electric lines. Azusa Light & Water Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Since inception, Azusa Light & Water has expended over $5,000,000 toward providing energy conservation information to the Azusa community and rewarding businesses and residents for upgrading inefficient energy consuming equipment with more energy efficient equipment. These efforts have resulted in an annual peak demand reduction of approximately 1 percent. Savings are based upon engineering estimates and measurements that have been field verified. Current Commercial and Industrial Customer Programs: (Annual program cost: $372,300; resulting in approximately 206 kilowatts of demand reduction and over 12,986,900 kilowatt-hours of net lifecycle savings): • Business Partnership Program: Retrofit existing buildings and factories with high efficiency lighting, air conditioning and process equipment. • Free Energy Audits: Provide suggestions on the most energy efficient equipment and more cost effective methods of operations. • New Business Retrofit Program: Encourage the use of the most energy efficient equipment in the design and construction of new buildings and factories. 56 Current Residential Customer Programs: (Annual program cost: $178,500; resulting in approximately 625 kilowatts of demand reduction and over 6,506,000 kilowatt-hours of net-lifecycle savings). • EnergyStar® Refrigerator Program: Rebates are offered for the purchase of an EnergyStar® rated refrigerator. • EnergyStar® Air Conditioner Program: Rebates are offered for the purchase of an Energy Star® rated room or central air conditioning unit. • Home Weatherization Rebate Program: Rebates are offered for a variety of home weatherization measures. • Free Home -in -Home Energy Audits: Provide recommendations for the effective use of energy within the residence. • Free On -Line Home Energy Audit Program: Customers can enter various parameters that match their home and lifestyle, and receive an immediate list of conservation recommendations and measures along with an estimate of what each appliance within the home is using in the way of energy. • LED TV and Computer Monitor Program: Rebates are offered for the purchase of LED TV's and computer monitors. Public Facilities: Program guidelines are essentially the same as the current commercial and industrial programs; therefore they are included in that category for funding and savings. City Schools: (Annual program cost: $29,000; resulting in approximately 3.0 kilowatts of demand reduction and 792,000 kilowatt-hours of net lifecycle savings). • LivingWise: Provide an interactive 6th grade conservation education program to all 6th grade classes within the City of Azusa, both private and public. Proposed Azusa Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2008-2009) • Maintain existing programs at current levels • Ensure that all new electric loads are efficient • Evaluate the appropriateness of any new energy technologies • Ensure that energy efficiency is part of integrated resource planning by determining and implementing the most cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency measures • Measure and evaluate the impact of energy efficiency programs Low Income Programs: • Maintain existing programs at current levels. • Ensure that all qualified customers are enrolled in the low --income program. • Conduct an evaluation of the low-income programs. 57 Azusa Investment in Renewable Energy: Azusa Light & Water will continue to explore addition supplies of renewable energy to meet its 2017 requirement of 30 percent .renewable energy in the power portfolio. Azusa Demand Reduction Programs: • Maintain existing summer load reduction program driven by reliability considerations. Current program entails calling large customers to conserve during Stage 2 episodes. • Measure and evaluate additional price -driven demand response programs. 58 AZUSA LIGHT & WATER Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector .(Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting -,.. Pool Pomp Refrigeration' HVAC Water Heating,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Comprehensive Process '..�".."__... 4 . . ... . .. . .... .................... . HVAC HVAC Lighting Process ..... ..... ... .. ..... Process Refrigeration__._' HVAC Process . . . . . .. ... . ... . .... Coomprehensive Other SubTotal Net Demand Cate920, Savings(kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Caolln3 r........,.. Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Ras Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Commpp rehehe nsive Nan -Res Cooking..,, Non -Res Ceolln5 Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps Non -Res Re9lgeratian Non -Res Shall Nen Res Process • Nen Res Coropreheneive Other 4 Net Peak kW Savings 22 kWh Savings kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install: EM&V, and Total Utility Cost {$1 32 . _. '1,54;8673 320, 64,934 . . ... .. . ........ .e...,..... 620' 8,060: 988 4 ..._... - .. ..,... , ...,.. . 647 75 411,092 3,856,892 1,541 .. - ..m..,...... - _...... _ 3 - 3 19,741 355,334 ; 189 35 95 45,368 007,119 5?5 36- 32 120,495 123 .....C.._ .. . . . . . . ....... .. . _ .,' 1 124 772121,85 666 -_ 14 ..... .. ...14 35,434 10 10 16,023 23 50,551 3 3 . . . . .. . ...: 618,924 1,270,5E5 - 732 7,,98896 .. ......... .. ... , 628 . 4 4,427427 708680 - 373 , . 997405 575 1,863,972 1,097 $ 514 3 2 $ 516 44,904 $ 14,111 $ 59,015 .... 96... 2.4 496 853 $ 16,676. $ 17,240 $ 34,778 $ 9,111 $ 65,140, 1885 $� 10,975 ,,..,.5578 $ ..... .... 70,715 10,000 $ 20,882 $ 7,554 $ ........... 38.236 87,731 $ 36,522 $ 43,111 5 147,354 �... $ 15,188 $ 3fi88 $ 18,878 2._. 37;a1�6 ._... $ 854 $ .. . 3,170 236 $ 15028 $ 5966 $ 58.250 .....55,1031 $ 11,339 $ • 108,442 834 342: 2,145,157 , 19,493,327 10,945 $ 350,8001-$ 08,907 0 111,368 5 550,574 T50 Tam I Total 834 342' 2,145.197 18.493,327 10,945 $ 350,6001 $ 88,907 ' $ 111,366 $ 550,874 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.69 Excluding 140 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector Nat Demand )Used in CEC Report) Category '. Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Coaling Appliances Res Dishwashers _, Consumer Electronics Res Eleotronios- HVAC................................._ ResHeating........... Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration . . . . ............. . HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Res Water Heating p noise . . .. . . Cum p rehenshe Rees Comprehensive Process NemRes Cooking . . . ..... ..... .... HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res Heating .. .. .... .... . . Lighting Non -Res Lighting Process Non -Res Motors .... . . . .. . . ..... .... Process Non-- Res Pumps Refrigeration.,., Non -Res Refrigeration.. HVAC Nan -Res Shelf Process Nan Res Process C . . i. Comprehensive Non Res Comprehensive Other Other Su6Tetal Net Peak kW Savings Net Annual Net Lifecycle kWh Savings kWh savings 32 320 40 ...... ......22 64,934 ....1 546 973 .. ... . 0220 i 8060 3,686,692 I` Net Lifacycle GHG Utility Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons) (9) 955 1,941 355,334' 159 907119 525 32 120,495 1,270,555 732 124 721,986 7566626 4,427 14 35,434 708680 373 10 16,023 179,890 05 90,551 997405,...... 575 3 618,924 1,963,972 1,097 9 514 $ 44,904 $ 2,496 Utility Utility Mktg, Direct Install EM8V, and Total Utility Cost Cost (5) Admin Cast (9) (5) 2 14,111 40 $ -- 853 $ ,.,,.16,875 $ 17,240 $ 9,111 ........ $ .........1,585 65 .. .. .. ... ._......... .. . .... . .. .. . . .. . $ 65.11401 $.. .. .. ... . ..... . 5,576 , .. . .... .. . 10,000 $ 20,682 $ 7,5544 $ _ _ 67,731 i $ 36,522. $ 43,111 $ 15,158 i i $ 3,688 2,316 $, . .. . . . 554 $ 37,238'$ 15,028 $ ._, 5,966 $ 95,103: .5 $ 350,600 $ 85,507 $ 111,386 11,339 $. ....... . ... . ..... .. . . 518 $ 59,015 2,536 34,778 $ 0 i0,75,. 075 $ . . .. $ 70,715 ... .. .. .. . . .3 8 , 23 8 38,23 $ 147,364 $ 15,578 $ .. . .. . . . ......3,170 $ . . .. . . . 55,250 $ 106,442 $ 550,874 834 342 2,145,157 15,493,327. 15,945 150 T8D Total 834 : EE Program Pcrifolio TRC Test 2.69 EXcluding 78D 342 , 2,145,197 i 16,453,327 59 10,9451 $ 350,500 $ 58,907: $ 111,366 $ 550,674 (Tons) (4) Cost (9) AdminCast ($) CITY OF BANNING ELECTRIC UTILITY Proud History < Prosperous Tomorrow 1 • Established in 1922. • 33 employees. • Of the 11,848 customers, 90 % are residential. • Average demand during FY 08/09 was 17.4 MW, down 5.7% from the period prior. • Peak demand during FY 08/09 was 43.4 MW, down 5.5% from the period prior. Peak demand is primarily due to air conditioning load during the summer. • Retail energy sales in FY08/09 were 144,757,280 kWh, down 5.4% from the period prior. Retail sales are broken down as 47 percent residential and 53 percent commercial/industrial. • Projected retail energy sales for FY09/10 are 137,725,300 kWh, down 4.9% from FY 08/09. • The reductions in demand and sales are due to Banning's Energy Efficiency and Conservation efforts, foreclosures, and continued loss of large commercial load. Overview of Banning Energy Efficiency Programs During FY 08/09, Banning spent $214,379 in energy efficiency rebates, which have provided 370 kW demand and 3,030,291 kWh energy savings. Current Customer Programs: • Air Conditioner: Monetary incentives to replace an existing central air conditioning unit with a new high -efficiency unit. • EnergyStar° Appliances: Monetary incentives for purchasing products that meet the Energy Star9" criteria. • EnergyStar° Refrigerator: A monetary incentive for replacing an old inefficient refrigerator with a new energy efficient unit. °• Recycle: Rebates offered to remove and recycle operating old and inefficient refrigerators and freezers. • Energy Weatherization: Monetary incentives to replace inefficient materials with products that will improve the energy efficiency of their facility and reduce energy use. • Shade Tree: Rebates offered to plant shade trees around homes to help reduce the amount of energy used for air conditioning. 60 • Photovoltaic: Monetary incentives for the purchase and installation of photovoltaic (PV) or solar powered systems. • New Construction: Monetary incentives for new construction projects that exceed the energy efficiency above California's Title 24 standards. • Energy Audits: Provides customers with a variety of recommendations for reducing energy consumption. • Low Income Assistance: An electric utility reduced Baseline Rate for qualified customers. Proposed Banning Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (2009-10) • Banning has signed an Implementation Agreement with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) in support of the Contractual Assessment Program to Finance Distributed Generation Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Efficiency Improvements for its' customers in support of Assembly Bill 811. The program seeks funding though the Federal Stimulus program and will allow property owners within the City of Banning to obtain low interest loans for eligible renewable distributed generation projects. • Banning has applied for $165,500 through the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) for high efficiency HVAC & Lighting retrofits on its' municipal buildings. • Work with community organizations to further increase awareness of and overall participation in existing programs. • Ensure that all new electric load is efficient. • Evaluate and implement new energy efficiency technologies as applicable. • Ensure that Banning's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is maintained. • Measure and evaluate the impact of energy efficiency programs. • Complete CFL Distribution Project and Energy Conservation Survey to all residential customers. Low -Income Customer Programs: • Complete door-to-door Energy Conservation Survey, which includes providing Low Income Program eligibility guidelines to all residential customers, to ensure that all qualified customers are provided an application form and encouraged to participate in the program. • Conducted an evaluation of the low-income program, which resulted in modifying it from a flat percentage credit of the total'electric bill (which did not encourage conservation), to a reduced rate per kWh on the Baseline Rate which is equal to the full annual incentive of $400. This ensures that those customers conserving energy receive the full benefit of the monetary assistance. Banning Investment in Renewables: The City of Banning's RPS has committed the Utility to reach 33 percent renewabies by 2020. • The City has contracted for geothermal energy from two generating facilities. Together they supply approximately 20 percent of the City's energy need. 61 Banning Demand Reduction Programs: The City of Banning does not currently have any demand reduction programs in place. Banning EM&V: The City of Banning is currently negotiating the work scope with firms on contract with the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) to perform a cost effective Measurement and Verification process. 62 CITY OF BANNING ELECTRIC UTILITY Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 1,466. Program Sector Net Demand [Used in CEC Repoli Category SavingslkW) .. . .. . . . . . Appliances as Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appiancea Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics Res s Heating .. .. . ... ..... . ..... ... .... ..... .... ..... .... . . . . .. t in a . .............., Ra Lighting Res Lighting • • . .. .... ... .. ..... . .., Pool Pump Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Reingeration.., HVAC Res Shell Water Healing Res Water Heating Comprehensive Res Comprehensite . . . . .. .. . .... . . .... . .... . .. . . ,. . . . Process Non -Rea cookkinging HVAC Non -Res Ceding HVAG Non -Res Heating Lighting ............._..................... Non -Res Lighting.....,.... Process Non -Ras Motors Pruc65s.... . .... .... ..... . ...... - Non -Res Pumq-......... s R- _. _.- eklgeration Non -Res ReGgeratlpn HVAC • Non -Res 611811 Process Non Res Process Comprehensive Non Res Comprehonsrle Other Other --- -_ _ 5uhTotal 261; 722 S' 95! Net Life cycle GHG Utility 1, Utility Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW ! Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost ]Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings !,kWh Savings kWh savings € (Tons) (5) Cost ($) Admin Cost ($) (9) 1 . 1,254 12,544. 7 162 240,298' 4,413,840 ' 2,009 886 < 11,513 6 108 583,250 5066800 6 ' 38,894 - . 700,099 95 196,714 3,934.272 1,989,045 3;030,291 2,557 372 2,2865 5,867,134 p 3,435 $ 214,379 $ 183,544 5 357,923 $ 5,003 100,561 2,111 $ 72,349 27,564 9.,. 80,615 49,720 1,106 370 20,108,209 11.491 Total 1,106 370 - 3,030,291 _ 20,138,209 11,481 1 5 214,379 . $ 183,544 1$ 397,923 IEE Pragrem Portfolio TRC Test 2-02 Excluding TBD Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Net Peek kW i Net Annual Net Lifecycle Savings kWh Savings; kWh savings Program Sector '. Net Demand (Used In CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling ... ._. __...._. .__,.,.,... Applian0ces0eo Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Heating Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump Res Pool Pump, _ 6_ Refngerallan Res Rehigemtion HVAC Res Shell . .. er,.. .ea n........................ ..s. ...terHea ng...... Wafer Heating Res Water Healing Comgreheneve Res Comprehensiv0e _.- ---_ a_. o 05 Process Nan -Res Cocking VA _.....a.- . ...,,. _ o ng,..,_.. HVAC Nan -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res H .. . ....... . ..... .. eating .. .............. U3MIng Non -Res Lighting 0IOeeee NOn-Rea Mstsr1 Process Non -Res Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res Refitgeration' HVAC .. .............................. ... Non: -Res -....., ..,.., . HVAC Non.Res Shell roae5......................................Non...Res Pr...060...................: Process Non Res Process Comprehensvw Non Rea Comprehensiw Other.. Other. . . . Su0Total 295 lags okintin$677:75: 170 . 1,317 252.313 874; Net Life cycle GHG Utility Udlity , Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install; EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ($) Cost (9) Admin Cost {9) I$) 13,171 4,034,538 12,664 r..- 8 2,949 7 5,065,000 ( 2,557 770109 !. •- ' 419 4,130,9351 2,379 1,332.660 3,987,580', 2,301 $ 224,410 183,544 $ 5,275 153 168 2,352, $ 87763 31,836 59,146 .38,352 1,125' 383 : 2,395,757 . 15,628,249 10,619 $ 407.954 790 T&D ITola! 1,125. 383. 5,305,757 19,826,249 10,619 $ 224,410 183,544 1 $ 407.9541 EE Program Portfclld TRC Test 2.01 1 Excluding T&D 63 CITY OF BIGGS • Biggs has 611 residential, 37 commercial, 12 municipal and 3 industrial customers. • The City of Biggs projects a growth rate of 1% per year. • Peak demand — in August 2008 was 4.0 MW • Annual energy use: 16.3 GWH. • Power content: Geothermal 15%, small hydro 1%, large hydro 47%, Natural Gas 19%, Coal 15% and Nuclear 2%. CITY OF BIGGS ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM HISTORY: • The City of Biggs implemented residential demand -side management programs in 1997 but completely remodeled our programs in mid 2005. In FY 2006-2007, our program was expanded to include commercial audits, educational programs and commercial holiday lighting. In FY 2007/2008 we again expanded our commercial program to include commercial lighting, refrigeration and, HVAC rebate programs. In FY 2008/2009, the city implemented the "Keep Your Cool" program for food -service customers. • Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2006, the City experienced a growth in residential demand -side management program participation of 97% and a growth in residential demand - side management rebate expenditures of 96%. • As the economy began to contract in fiscal year 2007, participation in the residential demand - side management programs began to drop. Through fiscal year 2009, the City had experienced a drop in residential participation of 87%. The City's commercial demand -side management programs grew during this same period due to a lighting, HVAC and refrigeration retrofit project for all Biggs Unified School District buildings and the "Keep Your Cool Program" which was extended to the two grocery stores in town. The BUSD project, which will span three years, accounted for 96% of rebate dollars spent since the end of fiscal year 2007. This project is scheduled to finish in fiscal year 2010. Meeting demand -side management goals, after the completion of the BSUD Project, will be extremely challenging due to the limited number of commercial customers in town and the inability or unwillingness of residential customers to invest in energy efficiency upgrades for their homes. 64 Current Demand -side Management Programs and Services 1.. Keep. Your Cool Program: This third -party program is offered by City of Biggs through a partnership with The Bay Area Gasket Guy. The goal of this program is to deliver a comprehensive program of prescriptive and calculated demand -side management measures within the food service and grocery industries where commercial refrigeration equipment represents a significant portion of energy demand. The first phase of this program concentrated on the replacement of worn, ineffectual refrigerator door gaskets, strip curtains and auto - closers. 2. Commercial Energy Audits: The City of Biggs offers free, customized commercial energy audits, including lighting assessment, HVAC assessment, equipment assessment and a review of energy usage. Specific recommendations to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy use are provided. 3. Commercial Energy Rebate Program: The City of Biggs offers customized demand -side management incentive programs to commercial customers, focusing on peak load reduction and energy savings. Generous rebates and comprehensive technical support are available to commercial customers to promote the installation of energy efficient lighting, I -[VAC, refrigeration, equipment and controls. 4. Investment Grade Audit Program: The City of Biggs offers, free of charge, Investment Grade Audits for all school district buildings as a way to support the district in acquiring grant funding for energy efficiency retrofits. 5. Education Services: The City of Biggs supports the 3-12 Solar Schoolhouse Program by funding teacher participation in the "Summer Institute for Educators" and by supplying Solar Schoolhouse Educational Tools for classroom use. 6. Residential Energy Rebate Program: The City of Biggs manages a comprehensive residential demand -side management incentive program, focusing on peak load reduction and energy savings. Generous rebates are available to residential customers forweatherization measures such as attic/wall insulation, dual pane windows, shade screens, radiant barriers and cool roof products. Biggs offers rebates for measures which reduce summer cooling load such as high efficiency HVAC, whole house fans and attic fans. Biggs also offers rebates for Energy Star refrigerators and lighting controls. 65 CITY OF BIGGS Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 99 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers . .. . .. . .. .... HVAC _� Res Carling Appliances Res Dishwashers .. ....... ..... ..... Consumer Electronics Res Electroniccs .. ....,... . .. . ., .., .,..,._,.. .,...__ HVAC Rees Healing Lighting ..,.....,.. Res Lighting ... ........ .......... .. Pool Pump Res Po01 Pump -- Refrigeration Res Refrigeraticn HVAC Res Shell Water Heating _ _ . Res Water Heating Comprehensive Res Comprehensive .. .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .... . . .. . . . Process Non -Res Cooking HVAC Nan -Res Cooling HVAC � Non- ResResting Lighting Non -Res Lighting, . . . ProceS5 NomRes Motors Process Non -Res Pumps Refrigeration NomRes Refrigeration HVAC NomRes Shell Process NonRes Process Non ompe. Comprehensive Non Res Comprehensive Other _. _ _. . __. SuSTolal Other Net Peak kW Savings 44 10 110,852 1,031,831 553 $ 15,986'. $ 2,370; $ 15,932 $ 34,287 37 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle : Reductions incentives Cost Direct install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) (9) . Cost (9) Admin Cost (9) (9) 855 •. -�_- 17,904,1 . ._ .. : 29,243 328,435 60,514 685491 10 182 381 22.427 T&D T&D Total EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 3.95 Excluding T&D 10 110,652 1,031,831 553 $ 15,588 $ 2,370 ; S - 15,932 1S 34,2871 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector 1 Net Demand , Net Peak kW 1 Net Annual (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings; kWj Savings -kWh Savings Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling .... . ... . .... ... ....,....... . ... .. . .. Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Elechronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Heating . . ... .....,.. ... .:. .....,. . _. Lighting Res Lighting _ Pool Pump,.,.. Res Pool Pump _.__ _. -,':, .... .... ..... ... ....... .... . .. ..... ....... Refrigeration - . .... ..... i. .. . . .. ....... .. , ., .,. _ Refrigeration Res Refrigeration ... ........... . ..... e..... 1 HVAC Res Shall .... .... .... . .... . . , . ; . , ., _ _._._-�. _.__._._._ __-__. 324. Water Heating Res Water Heating Comprehensive Res Comprehensive . . . .. . . . .. Process Nann 0 -Res c0king HVAC Non -Res Gaoling HVAC Non -Res Heeling ! .. . . Lighting Nan -Res Lighting Process Non -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps --- - Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non-ResShell . . . . . .. ..... .. . ...... .... , . __-_._ _._ Process Naen Res Process .. . . .. . .. ... . .. . .. . .. ___ : .., .. . ... . .. dompreh9nti443 Non Res Comprehensive Other tither Sobiotal Net Lifecycle kWh savings 10,571 . ,,., . , . 118,728 16 4 40,000 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility 1 Utility Reductions Incentives Cost ;Direct Install (Tans) ($) 1 Cost (5) Utility Mktg, EM&V,and Total Utility Cost Admin Cast (5) (5) 373,001 , 200 $ 5,779 1 $ 857 $ $ 233 $ 4,054 $ 5,759 $ 12,395 • T&D 1150 Total 15 4 40,000 373,001 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 3.35 Excluding 7&D 66 200 $ 5,779 1 $ 057 $ 5,759 1 $ 12,355 BURBANK WATER & POWER (BWP) ater and Power BURBANK WATER & POWER (BWP) • Established in 1913 • Serving the 100,000 residents of and 6,000 businesses located in the City of Burbank with water and electricity • Burbank's peak electrical demand hit a system high of 309 megawatts in August 2007 • Annual energy use is approximately 1,200 gigawatt-hours • Burbank Water and Power employs about 330 employees BWP's Energy Efficiency Program Highlights During FY08/09, BWP spent over $3 million for energy efficiency programs supported through Public Benefits. These programs resulted in net peak demand savings of 3,099 kilowatts, net annual energy savings of 8.7 million kilowatt-hours, and an estimated net lifetime energy savings of 108 million kilowatt-hours. Our projections for FY09/10 show spending on energy -efficiency initiatives of $3.3 million from Public Benefits funding. Our existing programs are projected to result in net peak demand savings of 2,300 kilowatts, net annual energy savings of eight million kilowatt-hours, and an estimated net lifetime energy savings of 101 million kilowatt-hours. Please note that in late 2009, an ambitious new program providing energy, water and natural gas savings was rolled out to Burbank residents. As of this writing, insufficient data exists by which to estimate savings for this program, but by all accounts we anticipate significant results from this Green Home House Call program. Green Home House Call Program: BWP's Newest and Most Ambitious Program to Date As mentioned above, BWP began offering this newest whole house efficiency program in September 2009. Green Home House Call has several components, all provided at no charge to participants: 1. In -home energy and water education: KEMA has been retained to meet with residents to discuss their energy and water usage; 2. Efficiency Installations: Devices that save electricity, water and natural gas are installed for free in the residence, including showerheads, bathroom and kitchen faucet aerators, and compact fluorescent light bulbs. 3. Attic Insulation: Attic insulation levels are reviewed in homes with central air conditioning. When below a specified R -value, the homeowner is offered free insulation as part of the program's service. 67 4. Duct Testing and Sealing: When crews are dispatched to provide insulation services, a duct testing and sealing team is included, providing these services for free as well. 5. Irrigation System Inspection and Programming: Given the dire state of water supply in California, BWP has included irrigation system inspection and controller programming as part of this on - site program. Controllers will be programmed to comply with the City's landscape watering ordinance and the irrigation system will be turned on and inspected for any over -spray or other problems. BWP is heavily advertising this program and already the program has a waiting list. We are gearing up for Phase II of the program in partnership with the Southern California Gas Company to provide even more extensive services for low-income households in Burbank. Phase 11 will be in place during Second Quarter 2010. Current Customer Programs: BWP offers an ongoing array of both commercial and residential programs. Here is a brief description of Burban.k's commercial programs: • Energy Solutions Business Rebate Program: Rebates offered for early replacement efficiency retrofit projects such as lighting and HVAC. The program also includes rebates for thermal energy storage units to reduce air conditioning peak demand. • Business Bucks: Targeted to smaller and mid -sized businesses, this program provides free surveys of commercial facilities by a certified energy manager. A report listing recommended energy efficient retrofits is provided from which businesses can select. Customers receive up to $2,000 in cost-effective energy -efficiency retrofits paid for by BWP. • HVAC Tune -Up Program: In 2008, BWP created this new program for both residents and businesses in Burbank. The program uses Proctor Engineering's proprietary CheckMel software to diagnose and verify proper air conditioning tune-up requirements. • Made in the Shade Program: Up to 20 free shade trees are provided to interested Burbank businesses. Shade trees are nature's air conditioners, and mature trees properly sited can significantly reduce air conditioning use. • Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification Incentive Program: Incentive program to encourage the construction of environmentally preferred buildings in Burbank. Here is a brief description of Burbank's residential programs: • Horne Rewards Residential Rebate Program: Cash rebates offered to Burbank residents purchasing Energy Star® appliances and taking energy -efficiency actions, such as installing attic or wall insulation in their homes. • HVAC Tune -Up Program: The program uses Proctor Engineering's proprietary CheckMel software to diagnose and verify proper air conditioning tune-up requirements. 68 • Home Energy Analyzer: This free online service allows residents to input their household characteristics and energy use to discover no cost, low cost and investment opportunities to save energy. • Made in the Shade: Up to three free shade trees are provided to interested Burbank homeowners to reduce air conditioning use. • Refrigerator Exchange Program: Burbank's low-income customers can receive a new Energy StarTM refrigerator in exchange for their existing unit. • Refrigerator Round -Up Program: Any Burbank resident with a second operable refrigerator can turn that appliance in to BWP for environmental recycling and receive a $100 billing credit. Additionally, BWP offers ad hoc energy -saving opportunities throughout the year, including providing free compact fluorescent lights at community events and "LivingWise" kits to 6th grade students. These kits contain both energy and water saving devices for the household. All Burbank Unified School District students participate in this program. New Program for 2010: Home Energy Reports During the first half of 2010, BWP staff will roll out a new residential program, called Home Energy Reports. This new service, offered by OPower, recognizes the power of providing comparative usage information to consumers. The Home Energy Reports will show consumers how they stack up in terms of electricity usage compared to 100 "neighbors." Neighbors is here defined as not necessarily someone living next door to you, but rather those households in relative proximity who share important housing characteristics with yours, including square footage and number of household members. In a pilot study conducted by SMUD, energy reductions of about 2.5% were reported. Burbank's City Council has approved a two-year program whereby over the course of the two years, every household in Burbank will receive an average of six comparative reports. As always, BWP staff continues to explore cost-effective efficiency opportunities. BWP T&D Efforts: Our staff is currently preparing plans for a 20 -year project to upgrade our distribution system. Early projections are that as much as 17 gigawatt-hours can be saved with a full-scale system upgrade. Target Setting: On an annual basis, the Burbank City Council receives a written report and staff presentation on our efficiency targets and how effective our programs are in achieving those targets. The 2010 presentation has been scheduled for April 27. This year, the Council will be presented with the market potential targets derived by Summit Blue Consulting for the City of Burbank. BWP M&V Efforts: Along with virtually every other publicly owned utility in California, Burbank Water and Power uses the KEMA/E3 Energy Efficiency Reporting Tool to ensure accurate reporting of energy and demand 69 reductions. While measurement and verification elements are built into every program, the M&V process varies by program. Here are some examples: • In our Business Bucks program, an audit and installation program for small to mid -sized businesses, BWP uses the services of Richard Heath and Associates to verify all installed measures. • BWP administers a business rebate program, Energy Solutions, for companies installing high efficiency energy retrofits. All installations receiving financial support through Energy Solutions are toured and verified by BWP's Key Account Representatives, all of whom are trained in electrical engineering. • Home Rewards, BWP's residential appliance rebate program, receives over 3,000 applications annually. Each application requires receipts showing products purchased. Products are verified against the Energy Star website to ensure that energy requirements are met. This verification process is conducted in-house. • BWP runs two refrigerator programs utilizing the services of Appliance Recycling Centers of America (ARCA). In both the Low -Income Refrigerator Exchange and Second Refrigerator Recycling programs, ARCA is in the home verifying information related to the old refrigerators. • The HVAC Tune -Up program, offered to both residents and businesses, uses Proctor Engineering Group's "CheckMe" software. Incentives are paid to air conditioning contractors only for items verified by Proctor. Additionally, BWP has hired Lincus Energy, Inc. to conduct a third -party EM&V study of BWP efficiency programs. Lincus's measurement and evaluation work will be conducted during the first quarter of 2010 and will be reported to the CEC by March 31, 2010. Smart Grid on the Horizon: BWP was recently honored to receive a $20 million grant for a city-wide Smart Grid initiative. BWP recognizes that a number of fundamental changes are underway in the industry that will significantly increase the need for utilities to monitor and actively manage demand on their systems. BWP is already experiencing challenges with customer -owned distributed resources and plug-in electric vehicles (PEV). We expect that PEV technology will provide air quality improvements, reduction in GHG emissions, and energy conservation. Customer owned photovoltaic (PV) devices currently generate over 3 MW in our service territory, and several customers have energy storage devices installed. Some of our largest commercial customers have stated their plans to convert their fleet vehicles to PEV during 2010. The federal government through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as part of the largest energy grid modernization in U.S. history set aside $3.4 billion to help fund this initiative. BWP applied for and was awarded a $20 million grant from these ARRA funds, which will be administered by the Department of Energy. The Burbank Water and Power Smart Grid Program includes deployment of a comprehensive, secure integration of multiple, intelligent Smart Grid infrastructure systems and control processes designed to accelerate the modernization of the local grid and address these challenges. BWP with its compact 70 service territory, high customer density, and favorable climate is the perfect location to develop a full- scale Smart Grid deployment to serve as a model for other utilities to emulate. Its program includes the following primary projects, all of which will be initiated over the next few years: 9. Secure Wi-Fi Mesh Network. 10. Meter Data Management System 11. Advanced Metering Infrastructure for both electric and water 12. Mission -Critical Asset Protection Program 13. Outage Management System 14. Distribution Automation 15. Customer Smart Choice Programs 16. Energy Demand Management System Additional Stimulus Funding: Burbank Water and Power has also been awarded an Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant of $1.1 million in support of a renewable project. By Third Quarter 2010, Burbank will have constructed a 147 - kilowatt solar photovoltaic carport on our campus, bordering a heavily used thoroughfare. The purposes of this project are to demonstrate how architecturally appealing solar installations can be, while producing a significant amount of renewable energy. This project will additionally be in support of the utility's Platinum LEED application. In addition to the EECBG and Smart Grid grants, Burbank is also partnering with the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) on several ARRA applications and expects that next year's reporting will include several exciting program developments! Summary Burbank Water and Power remains committed to providing our residential and business customers with safe, reliable and affordable services and making all reasonable efforts to reduce consumption of both electricity and water by significant levels. 71 BURBANK WATER & POWER (BWP1 Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC .'..,, Res Heating Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump „ Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell Water Healing ---- - Res Water Healing pr CamprehenSiie Re59ampreht:nsiie Process Non -Res Cooking . .. HVAC Non -Res CcoUrig. . HVAC „ Nan -Res Heating Lighting Non -Res Lighting Ptocess Nan -Res Motors Process Nan -Res Pumps Refrigeration Nan -Res Refrigeration HVAC .....-...-. ._.. ...- an N -:, . .- e. _- Non -Res Shell Piocess... -,... .... . . ... , Nan Res Pro9 cess010 Comprehenefie Nan Res Comprehens[u- Other Other subrotsl Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings; kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility. Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons) ($1 1,979 1,481 : 1,302,099 - 21,350,591 13,583 2,051 277 1 515,110 r .,,.13,535,994,1 161 181 r 1,132,973, 20,393,513'. 915 915 3,067,300 218,332 6,966 10,846 2,601 44,329,562 23344 1,857,382: 883 $ tJ5lity Direct: Utility Mktg, Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost ($) Admin Cost (5) (7) i.$ „„432.170 $ 121,387 346,972 $ 348,972 $ 67,209 $ 138,468 $ 41,347 72,340 301,236: $ 50,555 _ $ 16,018 • $ 492,354 $ 582,323 $ ----142,467 $ 18,524 $ 155,370 $ 553,557 735,281 $ 278,008 457,609 1,157,174 $ 173,800 $ 3,355,738 5,117 3,089 6,573,768 106,280,063', 58,183 $ 1,257,782 ' $ 1,549,012 $ 548,955 T8❑ TED 30 39 = 100,000 2,000,000 -. 1,152 Total 5,147 3,099 -: 8,673,798 108,280 083'. 56,315 1 $ 1,257 762 ' $ 1,545,012 - $ 548,965 $ 3,355,739 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 3.95 1 Excluding T80 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector i Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category € Savings (kW) Appliances Res ClResClothes Washers ... ............. . ... ....,-,....... . .....-. HVAC Appliances..... .. Res Dishw ers -:. Res Cooling Consumer Electronics Ras Electronics . ............. . ..... .-.......,..,. , .. .,.€,. HVAC Ras Healing. Lighting R58 Lighting Pool Pump- - ResPool Pump Refn -_-- eratio .. ... .... . . . . . . . . .... . . . . .... g n Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell ---_---- Water Heating Res Water Heating Camprettenshe Res Comprehensite ,.- .. .. ....... .. Process ..-_.,...,. Non -Res Cooking_- HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res Heating Lighting Non -Res Lighting P oces5................................Non:Re Motor..,..,..,.......,... Process Non -Res Motors Process Process Non -Res Pumps . t. .. . ... Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell ............... . . . . . . ..... . ..... ....... Process Non Res Process Comprehensisa Non Res Compreheng to Other Other SubTotal $ 700,0061 5 410,000 $ 238876 :r5 20,001 - $ 152,993 Net Peak kW Savings 223: 557,5901 10,527,702 6,761 kWh Savings] kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons) 10) 132,.... .... ... ... .. . 17; 120', 120; 93,600 842.405 427 509,620 15.377,365 q. 8,711 265 626,000 7,220,0001 3,905 1,825 1 625 i 5,370,000 03,200,090 .122,080 ` 775,040 Utility Direct Install Cost ($) Utility Mktg, EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Admin Cost ($) (7) $ 267,508.A 74,259 $ . . .. ....15,000 $ .._15,006 6 ............ .2,975 50,503 $ 155,500 $ 86898 $ 450,000 $ 573,000 $ 20,336 75,000 $ 341,759 $ 32,970 $...... 277,199 $ 1,052,338 $ 5....., ., . 75,000 1,348,873 172,084 2,791 1 2,291 7,890.100: 99,043,702' 53,503 $ 1,215,000 $ 1,519,001 ; $ 587,143 $ 3,301,141 T&D T&D 30 30 100,600. 2,000,000 1 1,152 Total 2,731 2,321 1 7,959,180 i 101,043,702'. 54;655 1 $ 1,215,000: $ 1,519,001 $ 567,140 1 $ 3,301,141 EE Program Partialio TRC Test 3.32 1 Excluding T80 72 COLTON ELECTRIC UTILITY (CEU) Colton Electric Utility was established in 1895 by the City of Colton • CEU has three substations and owns a 43 megawatts gas combustion turbine generator • CEU has 18,688 electric meters, 15,694 are residential accounts, 1948 are commercial accounts, 57 are industrial (use more than 200 kW) accounts and 179 are municipal accounts. • Peak demand for 2008 was 90 megawatts on August 22 at 4:00 p.m. • in fiscal year 2008--2009 Colton Electric Utility sold 397,923 Megawatt -hours • Residential makes up 28 percent of electric sales, Commercial 27 percent, Industrial 42 percent and 3 percent Municipal of total sales • CEU has 43 employees CEU Energy Efficiency Program Highlights From FY 1999 through FY 2009, Colton spent $5,281,061 on Public Benefits Programs. Spending for the major efficiency programs was $3,707,098 and reduced peak demand by 1,828 kilowatts, overall demand by 6,831 kilowatts, annual energy use by 28,561571 kilowatt-hours and lifecycle energy use by 44,190,406 kilowatt-hours. The budget for FY08/09 was $1,318,800. The budget for FY Q9/10 is $2,141,805. Overview of Current Energy Efficiency Programs: The objectives of the program are to implement energy efficiency programs for all customers by evaluating energy use of customers and start with low and no cost measures, then do the most cost effective reliable measures beginning with lighting upgrades for all customers. Current Commercial Customer Programs: • The major commercial program has been lighting rebates that paid 200 per kilowatt reduced. From 1997 to 2005, this program cost $87,730, reducing demand by 428 kilowatts and saving approximately 1,250,000 kilowatt-hours per year. • In 2004, CEU had a consultant perform audits for 868 businesses to identify needs and opportunities for improving energy efficiency. The audits found that lighting upgrades at these customers had a potential for reducing demand by 2,026 kilowatts and saving 7,145,213 kilowatt-hours annually. • In 2005, a free direct install lighting program was implemented to facilitate lighting upgrades. This program replaced inefficient lighting with up to date systems at 250 businesses and 73 reduced demand 158 kilowatts saving 742,093 kilowatt-hours annually. The program cost $185,212. • Our 2007 -2008 free direct install lighting program expanded to cumulatively serve 578 customers. The reduced peak demand was 123.8 kW saving customers 849,185 kWh. The program's cost was $56,514. The commercial industrial lighting program has cumulatively reduced peak demand by 772.8 kW and saved 3,061,474 annually for a total cost of $552,386. Current Residential Customer Programs 2008-2009: • All 16,000 residential customers have been provided with 2 free compact fluorescent lamps. Each lamp uses 15 watts to provide the light of a 60 watt incandescent lamp. This $122,857 program reduced peak demand by 218 kilowatts and overall demand by 1,510 kilowatts saving 1,164,800 kilowatt-hours per year. The total lifecycle saving is calculated to be 10,483,200 kilowatt-hours. • • The CFL mailing program so far has sent out 112,000 lamps to 16,000 customers reducing peak demand by 784 kW and providing a combined annual savings of 604 Megawatt hours. The life cycle savings of these lamps could be as high as 5,436 Megawatt hours • Home energy audits are available to customers with high energy bills. • Online energy audits and information is available through Apogee Interactive. Low Income Customer Programs 2008-2009: • 902 Low income customers participated in our once a year one month 100% credit on electric charges. This allowed customers who received high bills especially during summer months to not be burdened with a difficult to pay bill. $149,452 was spent an average benefit of $165 per customer. • 186 Low income customers were assisted by a refrigerator replacement program that provided a new energy saving refrigerator and recycled the old refrigerator. $93,000 was spent and 7 kW peak demand reduction and a lifecycle savings of 74,400 kWh will result from the program. • Portable evaporative coolers were given to 200 customers to provide comfort and reduce air conditioning costs. The cooler program cost $43,134 and reduced demand by 380 kW, saved 175,400 kWh per year and has a projected lifecycle savings of 2,632,800 kWh. City Facilities to date: • All traffic signals were retrofitted with LED energy saving lights. The $245,000 project reduced demand by 62 kilowatts and saved 550,000 kilowatt-hours a year, saving $85,000 a year in energy costs. • Ali city facilities had high efficiency lighting installed and City Hall and the Police Department had extremely old air conditioners replaced with high efficiency units. 74 Measurement and Verification Activities: Currently and in the future E3 will be used to verify savings and benefits. Alternative calculations may be used for some measures. Proposed CEU Energy Efficiency Programs: for 2009-2010 Residential: • The CFL mailing program will be sending all residential customers a package with 2 CFL lamps and energy saving information. The program is expected to cost $320,000 and should save 153 peak kilowatts, 1050 overall kilowatts, 819,200 kilowatt-hours per year, and 7,372,000 life cycle kilowatt-hours. • Continue in -home and online energy audits. • Select incentives for effective cooling products. • Low-income residential refrigerator replacement will spend $320 per customer. Expected $32,000 annual will reduce peak demand by 24 kilowatts, save 155,680 kilowatt-hours annually, and 2,802,240 kilowatt-hours over the life of the refrigerator. • Low-income customers with high air conditioning costs are be provided evaporative coolers. The $30,000 program should reduce peak demand by 120 kilowatts, save 142,000 kilowatt- hours per year, and 713,200 kilowatt-hours over the life of the coolers. Commercial: • Rebates for large customers is expected to cost $300,000 and will reduce peak demand from 100 to 300 kilowatts, saving almost 900,000 kilowatt-hours per year and have lifecycle savings of more than 8,000,000 kilowatt-hours. • A special direct install program for food service business (restaurants and small markets) will help reduce their high demand and energy costs. Audits, lighting upgrades, refrigeration measures such as door seals and curtains as well as conditioning and cooler tune-ups will be performed at no cost to the customers. Renewable Energy Development Plans: • The Photovoltaic Rebate Program, which began in 2005, offers $4.00 per watt with a cap of $20,000 for residential and $50,000 for commercial. • The one project completed was a 100 kilowatts commercial system that received $50,000 from Colton Electric. • During 2008--2009, four residential customers installed a combined 20 kW of PV systems at a total cost of $198,725 CEU provided $80,369 in incentives toward those projects • The 2009-2009 Fiscal year is expected to have a dramatic increase of PV installations and rebates especially in the commercial sector where higher electric rate, federal tax credits and CEU's generous rebates may contribute to more PV capacity installed than in all previous years combined. 75 • Other renewable energy expenditures in 2007-2008 were $185,000 for landfill gas electric and wind energy. Colton is investigating investment and purchases from geothermal, concentrating solar, low head hydroelectric, additional wind, and bio-fuel generation from wood -waste and sludge. CEU Demand Reduction Programs: Demand reducing TOU rates are available for customers with more than 200 kilowatts demand. Many customers have shifted peak energy use to reduce charges and one 5 MW customer will be curtailing 4900 kW between noon and six PM on summer weekdays. Other demand reduction technologies are being investigated such as wireless internet controlled thermostats and energy storage systems 76 COLTON ELECTRIC UTILITY {CEU) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct' Utility Mktg, Program Sector Net Demand Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle ,,. Reductions Incentives Cost; Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) ($) _ (5) Admin Cost (8) (5) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC -- -- Res Cooling - ----- - Appliances Res Dishwashers .:e, .,. ., Electronics_ _- Consumer E[ectronics Ras HVAC Res Heeling Lighting Res Lighting .. ... ......................._ Pool Pump Res Res. Pool Pump Refrigeratloq ResRefi9eratiop .,, ..,.. , .., HVAC Res Shell Water Heating. Res Water Heating,.,_,., Comprehensive � Res Camprehensite Process Non -Res Cooking ., .. . . . .. ... i .. . ..... ..... ....... HVAC -.._, Non -Res Cooling,,, HVAC Non -Res Heating Lighting Non -Res Lighting Process Nora -Res Motors Pmcess Non -Res Pumps_- Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell P oces..................................... Non ResProcess Process Non Res Process ComprehensIse Res Camp.. Non c om p . .. ... . .... . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . ... ... mhenslte,..,. . Other Other 6obTotal 746 746 2,109,4211 10,159,487 746 $ 333,505: 7,000 $ 340,008 300 380 ' 175,400 2.632.800 1 316 216 218 1,164 020 12,483,200 7 7 .... 41,108 ._a-. 74,400 18 34,200 •, 51301 124 . . . .. . . . . .........124 . .. 693,915 ---.5,495,087 5,446 390 581 3,955 43,135 3,002 $ 122,857 $ 1,000 .. ...,_.. ...M.... .. S ..-..-93,000;T--...-..~. $ 1,000 503 $ 55,514 ` 0 1,500 $ 46,135 $ 123,857 94,000 15,550 $ 58,014 T&D T&D Total Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Net Lifecycle GI -10 Program Sector Net Demand Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions (Used In CEC Report) Category Savings(kW) Savings kWh Savings l kWh savings (Tons) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Healing Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Res Water Heating Comprehensi'e Res Comprehensi4e Process Non -Res Cooking HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res Heating Lighting Non -Res Lighting Process Non -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Ras Shell Process Non Res Process Comprehertsioe Non Res Comprehensiie Other Other SubTotal 234 215 ..,.,.234 107945 7618172 218 1,164500... 1,3„.18.3,200 8 49,469 890,400 478 i -- -- 4761 1,360,920 6,940,600 t. Utility Utility Direct: Utility Mktg, Incentives Cost Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cast (5) (S) Admin Cost ($) ($) $ 3,000 $ 30,937 961 961 2,712,134 19,942.410 10,649 $ 495,252 6,500 $ 504,752 1,000 $ 107,240 1,000 § 50,465 1,500 5 308,110 T&D 760 'Total CORONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER (CDWP) corona Department of Water and Power • Electric utility established in 2001 • Approximately 99 percent of the electric consumption originates with either municipal or private (commercial and industrial) customers. Annual Maximum Load Demand: about 28 megawatts. Total served load (about 12 megawatts of UDC Bundled Load subsumed within Corona's service territory & about 16 megawatts of Direct Access Load). Note: In prior years, CDWP also served the Los Angeles Unified School District • Annual energy use: 180 gigawatt-hours • CDWP's self -defined mission is to "protect public health" CDWP Energy Efficiency Program Highlights In FY08/09, Corona customers received $31,745 in rebate incentives to increase energy efficiency for the community through a partnership between CDWP and the Metropolitan Water District (MWD). The High Efficiency Washer Rebate program reduced load by 7,200 kilowatt-hours per year through the use of Energy Star® appliances. CDWP collaborates with the Metropolitan Water District who now administers a regional rebate program effective July 1, 2008 with a projected budget in excess of $40,000. Current Commercial Customer Programs: • Solar Rebate Program: Maximum commercial rebate amount is $54,750 (25 kW) • Energy Efficiency Technical Support Effort: CDWP offers technical support to facilitate installation and operation of air conditioning and lighting controls for commercial customers. CDWP provided three energy audits for three customers in FY 2009-2010 customers, with a total cost of $10,750. Current Residential Customer Programs: • Solar Rebate Program: Maximum residential rebate amount is $6,570 (3 kW) • Residential High Efficiency Washer Rebate Program: Rebates are provided to customers who purchase and install Energy Star® clothes washing machines. • Energy Efficiency Tune -Ups — Distribution of Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs Current Education Programs: • Energy Usage and Demand Analysis Effort: Analyze commercial customer energy usage and demand in order to facilitate customer efficiency measures and demand -side management. 78 Proposed Corona Energy Efficiency Projects and Services: (2010-2011) • At a minimum, the City of Corona plans to maintain existing efforts and programs at current levels with continued funding. • City of Corona's energy efficiency programs are currently under development and improvement efforts are underway to augment and elaborate upon existing and new efforts and programs, which are expected to continue for the foreseeable future. CDWP Demand Reduction Programs: The City of Corona does not currently have a rate -based demand reduction program in place. However, CDWP operates multiple municipal facilities that can be interrupted for several hours per day, when needed. 79 CORONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER (CDWP) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC . . . ............ .....,. ._ Apppliannceoes Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pob1 Pump Refngeration,,,,. Water Heating . . .. . . . .., Oomprenprehe ensite Process HVAC HVAC Lighting..._.. Process- ---- --- --- Process Refrigeration . ...................Refrigeration HVAC ........................�..,..� Process Comprshershe Other Sub-fotal Net Demand Category Sayings (kW) Rea Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers I, Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refigeration w ...__, Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Ras Heating Non -Ras Lighting . .. . .. ....... ghting___ Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non R05 Process Nan Res Comprehensive Other Net Peak kW Savings Net Life cycle GHG Utility Utility Direct: Utility Mktg, Net Annuals Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cast, EM811, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings- kWh savings 3 : 3 - 7,000 70,084 40 $ 31,745 8,000 $ 59,745 (Tons) ($) (9) Admin Cost ($) (9) $ 30,745 T8D TAD Total 3 EE Program Portfolio IRO Test 0.131 Excluding TBD 3 7,006 70,084 401$ 31,745 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 $ 8,000 $ 39,745 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances ConsumerElectron Electronics Consumer Electmnics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump ....:......... .. . Refrigeration HVAC . . .. . .,. . Water Heating Comprehensive Process c es................................... Ps HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comorehensise_ Other SubTotal Category Savings(kW) - Savings '., kWh Savings" kWh savings Res Clothes Washers Res Coaling Res Dishwashers ... es...Eectronc....................... Res Electronics Res Heating Lighting i.-. ....... ................... Res L ighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res water Healing Res Comprehensiv9 Non -Re ....cooking c s ki ng...... Nan -Res Cooking - ._. Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting - -. . . , . . . ... Non -Res Moutons Non -Res Pumps r8ti.. Non -Res Rafrigeralian Non RsShell Non Res Process....... .........• Non Res Corgrehensae P,..,._ ........ Other Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct' Utility Mktg, Net Demand Net Peak kW I Net Annuals Net Lifecycle i Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cos EM&V, and Total Utility Cost ($) ' Admin Cot ($) ($) 3 8,038 89,383 - 40 $ 31,428 $ 8,000 $ 38,470 85,363 (Tons) (E) 40 T80 Tao Total EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 0.13 1 Excluding 1841 80 9,838: 09,383 40 $ 31,428 8,000 $ 30,428 GLENDALE WATER AND POWER (GWP) City of Water 8 Power -y —, GLENDALE WATER & POWER UTILITY SUMMARY GWP manages a service territory with 84,500 customer meters and an all time peak load of 336 MW in July 2007. GWP owns 249 MW of onsite, natural gas and landfill gas fired generation. GWP also has a 40 MW share of Magnolia Power Plant, a 20 MW share of Hoover Dam generation, 39 MW of Intermountain Power Project, 10 MW of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, 20 MW of San Juan Unit 3, and approximately 80 MW of other power through power purchase agreements. Approximately 16 percent of GWP retail sales come from renewable resources, including wind, geothermal, and local landfill. Our goal is 20 percent to 23 percent renewable resources by 2017. GWP partially owns or has long term contracts on various transmission lines in the LADWP transmission grid, and has made significant investments in energy efficiency through its public benefit programs. Glendale City AMI-SMART GRID Initiative GWP has been selected by the U.S. Department of Energy for a $20 million smart grid grant. GWP was 1 of 33 public power utilities to be selected. The total value of the Glendale City AMI-Smart Grid Initiative is over $51 million for electric and $17 million for water. GWP began the project in August 2009. It will be completed over the next three years. The project will install a new AMI-MDMS system for all electric and water customers, increase the efficiency of GWP's distribution grid, and provide all customers with access to interval data, and new energy efficiency, load management, demand response, critical peak pricing, time of use, and dynamic rate programs. Any successful move to the Smart Grid requires the right implementation, the right technologies and the support of regulators. This project has all three. The Glendale City Council has approved a contract with Itron, Inc. to provide its industry leading OpenWay® AMI electric system, SaveSource AMI Water system, data collection engines, and Itron Enterprise Edition Meter Data Management System to support this initiative. Itron Inc. is a leader in developing AMI standards and security measures in cooperation with DOE and the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). Additionally, GWP has assembled a team of AMI industry experts in providing energy efficiency, load management, demand response, new rate programs. Project management and technical support will be provided by KEMA, Inc., a recognized leader in Smart Grid Development. KEMA, Inc. has been supporting GWP's Smart Grid efforts since February 2008. Customer participation and proper measurement and verification will be key to maximizing projected benefits for this initiative. GWP has engaged independent third parties to measure and report on the 81 effectiveness of its marketing and outreach efforts, and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Glendale City AMI-Smart Grid initiative. GWP is confident that the Glendale City AMI-Smart Grid Initiative will serve as a model for others to follow in California and across the nation. GWP is committed to sharing data and lessons learned with third parties, utilities, the CEC, and the DOE so that others benefit from DOE's investment. PROGRESS TOWARD AB 2021 TARGETS GWP has set a minimum energy efficiency target equal to approximately 1.0 percent of annual retail sales, and reported such to the CEC along with other public owned utilities in the June 2007 CMUA AB 2021 report. In 2007, our energy savings target was 11,362 MWH. As reported in the December 2006 CMUA SB 1037 report to the CEC, GWP achieved 8,510 MWH about 25% below our target. In 2008, our energy savings target was 11,586 MWH. We achieved 13,547 MWH approximately 17 percent above our goal. This year our target was 11,702 MWH. We achieved 11,803 MWH approximately 1 percent above our goal. Over the last three years, our total target was 34,650 MWH. We reached 33,860 MWH, missing our three year target by only 0.02%. We are in the process of updating our AB2021 goals. Our tentative target for 2010 is 11,819 MWH. We are on track to meet this goal. DEMAND SIDE MANAGEMENT (DSM) HIGHLIGHTS TOTAL DSM INVESTMENTS • $3,474,555 invested in FY 2008-2009. • Over $28 million invested since January 2000. TOTAL DEMAND AND ENERGY SAVINGS — FY 2008-2009 • Incremental demand reductions of 6,255 KW. • Incremental coincident peak demand reductions of 2,586 KW. • Incremental net energy savings of 11,803 MWH. • Incremental energy savings as a percent of GWP annual load reached 1.02%. • Estimated cumulative demand reductions since January 2000 of over 26,000 KW. • Estimated cumulative energy savings since January 2000 of over 82,000 MWH. SUMMARY OF ACTIVE DSM PROGRAMS -- FY 2008-2009 • Low -Income Customer DSM Programs o Cool Care provides long-term electric bill discounts for low-income customers encouraging the replacement and recycling of old, energy inefficient refrigerators. Program replaced and recycled 3,718 refrigerators with new ENERGY STAR models since July 2003. o Smart Home Peak Hogs is our CMUA award winning program that reduces peak demand while providing bill relief for primarily low-income customers by encouraging the replacement of energy inefficient HVAC units in apartments. Since July 2003, this 82 program has replaced 2,089 tons of energy inefficient Peak Hogs in Glendale apartments. General Residential DSM Programs o Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) Giveaway Program provides free CFLs to GWP customers to promote energy efficient lighting through direct mail, at community events, and over the counter. This year we sent out one CFL to each GWP household. Total CFLs distributed this year were 72,752. o Smart Home Refrigerator Recycling targets secondary refrigerators for early retirement by offering free CFLs and a onetime discount off the electric bill. The retired refrigerators are recycled in an environmentally sensitive manner. Since 2006, 126 refrigerators have been recycled and 756 energy efficient light bulbs were distributed. o Smart Home Energy and Water Saving Surveys reduces customer energy consumption through comprehensive in -home energy and water saving surveys,education, and direct measures installations. Installed energy saving measures include compact'fluorescent lights, hot water heater wraps, and blower door tests. Since July 2001, this program has provided over 10,572 in home audits and energy education sessions, installed over 41,300 CFLs, 3,900 water heater blankets, and conducted 3,769 blower door tests. o Smart Home Energy and Water Savings Rebates provides rebates to promote the early retirement of eligible energy and water saving appliances and devices. Over 31,180 rebates have been processed since July 2001. o Smart Home AC Tune -Ups and Duct Sealing Services, provided by Proctor Engineering, helps residential customers save energy by ensuring that their air conditioning and duct systems are functioning at their optimal level. Over 9,000 tons of HVAC have been tuned since February 2000. o Livingwise® provides energy and water conservation education materials for Glendale public and private school students. These materials support 10 hours of intensive energy education as well as installation of energy saving devices including compact florescent light bulbs. Over 11,660 students have participated in this program since July 2001. o Tree Power provides up to three free shade trees and arborist services to ensure that the trees are planted correctly. When properly sited and cared for, a healthy, mature shade tree helps provide shade that cools the home and helps reduce air conditioning use. This program has planted over 2,000 trees since July 2004. • Small Business DSM Programs o Small Business Peak Hogs is modeled after the GWP's CMUA award winning residential program. It reduces peak demand and customer energy consumption, and provides bill relief for small business customers by providing incentives for small businesses and small business landlords to -replace old, inefficient HVAC units. o Smart Business Energy Saving Upgrades is our CMUA award winning program that provides small business customers with comprehensive no -cost energy surveys, 83 customized written reports, energy education, and directly installs as much as $2,000 worth of cost-effective energy conservation measures. This program has conducted 3,100 energy audits and retrofits since July 2001. o Smart Business AC Tune -Ups and Duct Sealing Services, provided by Proctor Engineering, helps small business customers save energy by ensuring that their air conditioning and duct systems are functioning at their optimal level. Over 6,340 tons of HVAC have been tuned since February 2000. • Large Business DSM Programs o Business Energy Solutions (BES) provides incentives to complete pre -approved energy audits and retrofit projects. incentives are limited to the lesser of 25% total project costs for retrofit projects, 100 percent of the above Title 24 remodeling and/or new construction investments, or $0.06 per kWh saved over the life of the installed measures. Audit incentives are limited to $0.065 per square foot. This program has supported 188 retrofit projects since January 1999. • City Building Retrofits o Working with Glendale Public Works Department and GWP, this program would implement the energy and water savings retrofits outlined in the recently completed energy audits of 23 city buildings including the Community Services Building, Perkins, MSB, City Hall, GSA, the Libraries, the Fire Stations, and the Police Building. The retrofits will include the newest high efficiency T-8 lamps and ballasts, occupancy sensors, HVAC upgrades, retro-commissioning and other energy savings measures. This $1.8 million program would provide $1.5 million for direct installations, and up to $300,000 or 20% of installed value to support Public Works salaries directly related to the installations, with $1.2 million corning from EECBG and $600,000 coming from PBC. o Energy savings are estimated at 2.3 million kWh per year with estimated electric bill savings of just over $360,000 per year for 10 years or more. GWP and Public Works will work to finalize the scope of work to maximize cost-effectiveness based on energy savings. TIME PERIOD FOR PROGRAM PERFORMANCE DATA • Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2009 LOAD MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR FY 2009-2010 • Enter into an agreement with SCPPA and Ice Energy to develop the specific designs for the SCPPA utilities, and other agreements for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of smart grid enabled Ice Energy thermal storage systems, and the replacement of HVAC units on City Facilities. Ice Energy provides a unique small scale, packaged Thermal Energy Storage product called an Ice Bear. The Ice Bear reduces peak electrical demand by utilizing electric energy to produce ice at night during off-peak 84 hours and then use the ice for cooling during the day, The City has previously installed two Ice Bear units and has found them to work satisfactorily. Initially, the project will install 32 Ice Bear units on City Facilities. Once the initial City portion of the project is complete, GWP will expand the ice Bear project to include the installation of 254 units on local small and medium sized business in Glendale. As an added benefit, GWP would use PBC funds and to the extent possible, U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds to have Ice Energy replace 401 tons of aging, inefficient City HVAC and 29 furnace units at the same time they are installing the Ice Bear units thereby taking advantage of available preferred pricing and reduced installation costs. Replacing the HVAC units will save the City an estimated $82,000 in annual energy costs and $30,000 in annual maintenance fees for 15 years or more. • implement two demand response pilot programs through SCPPA and North American Power Partners (NAPP) to test the effectiveness of demand response in emergency and other situations as part of GWP's U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) supported Smart Grid initiative. SCPPA has a contract with NAPP to deliver such services for its members, and GWP included these programs in its application for DOE Smart Grid funding. NAPP was selected by SCPPA through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to provide demand response services for its members. The two NAPP demand response programs would be offered over the next five years. The first program would be a price responsive customer directed program that would be a non -firm resource and economic -based demand response program that pays participating customers a market -based rate for demand response. The second program would be a reserves program where reserves would be available "on call" firm demand response resource program with relatively short customer notices and relatively short curtailment durations. These resources would be firm, fully dispatchable resources that are controlled by the utility or the customer but are typically automated. MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION Over the next few months, Lincus plans on performing the Evaluation, Monitoring and Verification (EM&V) studies of GWP's selected energy efficiency programs. This independent evaluation entails randomly selecting a sample size of applications within those programs that meet 90%+/- 10% confidence level, verifying the installation of particular units, and measuring/monitoring those units to verify the demand and energy savings calculated by Glendale Water and Power. Measuring/monitoring the units can vary between an hour and a week depending on the measure. A report will be composed that presents the data obtained and gives recommendations to GWP on improving their energy efficiency programs and calculations. + The existing EM&V Plan evaluating GWP's selected energy efficiency programs based on the kWh savings. This Plan describes the programs, not only in what they do, but how much energy and demand is saved, and costs expanded during the 2008/2009 fiscal year. The purpose of this EM&V study as required by AB2021 is to ensure that measures are installed as claimed by GWP 85 and to lend credibility to GWP's savings reports. In addition to meeting regulatory compliance requirements, EM&V studies are essential for a number of other reasons, namely: 1) to measure the effectiveness (e.g. Gross & Net Energy and Demand Savings, Benefit/Cost ratio, savings realization rate, market penetration etc.) of the existing program and 2) to educate the program implementer on ways to improve existing and future programs. In the months to come, with GWP's authorization to proceed, Lincus will develop this EM&V study and review it with the GWP's representatives prior to GWP filing the study with the California Energy Commission. GLENDALE WATER AND POWER (GWP) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 34.4 Program Sector Nat Demand Used in CEC Re art Catego ' Sevin ga(kW Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling .. . . . ... . ... . . ..... .... . . . ... . . . . . . ... . . .. . .... Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electron .... ......... ................................... ............................. ICS..............., HVAC Res Heating Lighting --- Res Lighling POM Pump Res POol Pump Refrigeratioq Res Refugeration HVAC Res . . .. . Shall _-_g _...__ Water Heating Res Water Healing Comprehensive . .. . . . ... . . chenu.... . ........... Comprehensi5e _ Res Comprehenske Process - Ncn.Res Cccking HVAC Nan -Res Coaling HVAC Non -Ras Healing Lighlmg Non -Res Lighting Process on -Res Motors , . . ......, N :. . . . : . , Process Non -Res Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res ReMgeration . .. . ... ... . ........ _..... .. . .... . . . .. .. HVAC Non -Res Shell Process Non Res Process . . .. .hens. Comprehensive re Non Res Comp hensive Other Other SubTotal 6 { Net Lifecycle GHG Utility I. Utility Direct Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW Net Annual - Net Lifecycle i Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cost : E21&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings 'kWh Savings- kWh savings ( (Tons) ($) i Admin Cost (5' --- 564,160 325 5 19,083 . $ 1,109 $ 20,193 17,389,482 11,081 $ 385,060 $ 184,540 ',. $ 54,169 5 623,769 ... . .... . . . . . . .. .... . . .. . . . . . ... .... . .... . . . ..... . . . ... . ... . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . ... .. .. 260,085 142 9 28,840 ? $ 468 $ 29,328 24 56,416 3 ... . . . ... . .. . . . . 359 850,1899 5, . ......20,005. 3809;-- -485 2,701,124 24,310,120' 12,311- -- `$ 346,930; $ - -- 30,731 5 395661 17:... 4 25,350 ; ... . 253,500 } _,. 149 $ .....7,084 ; 1 $ .. . 527 S_.. . 7,611 1,652 16 049 7365 , , , ,8 538 $ 423,122 , $ --- 30,128 $ 453241 122 151 68 .. , . . , .. ...... .40 .,, .,. 832: 563 477,887 8,636,624! 3,820 $ 255,396 ` $ 40,837; $ 13,708 5 309,943 8• a 29,108: 436,6205 251 $ 5,703', $ 888 5 8,592 314 314 1,397,075 24784,040 14;281 $ 178,441 5 56,932 $ 55385 $ 291,738 670 670 3.848,524: 40,443,139: 22,476 5 126,087 s 743.25214 78,920 $ 950.179 11,388 - 113,880 OB $ 1,955: • 1,49494 ,458 , 4,483,388:: 2,270 2,179 $ 383,727 $ 7,398 $ 351,123 8,255 2,586 - 11,803,156 135,724,712 1 75,709 8 1,425,049 $ 1,765,982 15 253,545 $ 3,474,555 T&D T&4 Total 6,255 tEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.41 1 Excluding T&D 2,566 11,503,156 135,724,712: 75,709 $ 1,425,049 ; $ 1,765,962 $ . 253,545..0 3,474,555 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC APplianca5 -. •,• '- Consumer Electronics . . .: . . .. . . HVAC Lighting Pool Pump ftetngereliari,. .. , . HVAC Water Heating. Compreheneise Process HVAC HVAC Lighting ...,. Process Process ....�.� Refrigerationnn. HVAC Process Comprehensive._ Other 6u6TOtal Net Demand Category : Savings{kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers,, Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting ., .... .. .. ..... . ....... Res Pocl Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Wafer Heating Res Rees NomRes Cocking Nan -Res Coaling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting__ -. Non -Res Molars Non -Res Pumps : Non -Res Refn`geralion Non -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Compfehensv3 ; Other Net Peek kW Savings kWh Savings` kWh savings 24 24 55,416 810 359 850,169 - ,..20,095, 314 0701 8255 i 2.566 ' 11,803,156 135,724,712 75,709 584,160 17,359,452 280,085 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility utility Direct; Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives cost' Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) (9) (91 Admin Cost (9) )$} 325 11,081 2,701,124 .. 24,310,120 l 12,311 25,350 253,500 148 891,652 16,849,738 =. 8,538 .. 477,867 6,636,624 l 3,620 20,108. 436,820 1 251 1,397075 .,,24764040 14,281 3,845,524 ' 40,443,138 22,470 11,388 113800:.,.,.. 66 1,494,456 ' 4,483,38B 2,270 5 10,083.' $ 5 385,060 9 104,540 $ $ 28,846 1,455 MV - Ii 5 348,630 $ 62,690 $ . ....._7,054 . ......... : $ 054 4 $ 4 ,._-....... .,.. -..._-.-.__-.-..-._..-.-...,. 1 .. 23,122 i .. , . .,; . , , , 4 $ 41,38,388 $ 255,398.: $ 40,837 ; $ 17,114 ii $ 5;703 i $ 1,129 5 170.441 $ 58;532 $ 63.912 $ 120,067.1.3 743,252 $ _-- 104,283 $ 1,955 . . ..,, . . . , ,... .. ' $ 383,727' $ 11,581 $ 1,425,049 • 5 1,765,962 1 $ 350.000 $ _ 20,538 $ 814,442 29,519 $ 411,620 7,737 $ 484,510 $ 31.3,349 $ 8,829 $ 299.285 $ 975,052 $ 2,249 $ 395,289 $ 3,541,010 T&D 7&D 1To1a1 6,255 ' 2,568 11,803,156 135,724,712 75,7091 $ 1,425,048, $ 1,755,982 $ 350,000 1 $ 3,541,010 IEE Progrem Portfolio TRC Test 7.37 1 Excluding 7&D 87 GRIDLEY MUNICIPAL UTILITY (GMU) +` City of NY'lr Gridley History and Load Data The City of Gridley's electric utility was established in 1910. Currently in Gridley, the electric utility serves 2,760 customers, 2,299 which are residential (83 percent). The City of Gridley projects a growth rate of 5 percent for the next 5-10 years. Peak demand is 10.6 megawatts is usually experienced on a July or August afternoon. Annual energy use for GMU is 39.2 megawatt -hours Overview of Gridley Energy Efficiency Programs Gridley Municipal Utilities (GMU) manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential & commercial customers focusing on peak load reduction and energy conservation. For residential customers, rebates are offered for the installation of various energy efficiency measures. For commercial customers, rebates are available for upgraded lighting, HVAC equipment, and in cases where an analysis is performed rebates can be offered for additional equipment that reduces energy use and/or demand. Residential Energy Efficiency Programs: • Energy Efficiency Hotline: A toll free line with GMU personnel is available for our customers to answer questions and provide information on energy efficiency related matters. • Energy Audits: On -site energy audits by GMU energy specialists are available to residential customers. Energy efficiency measures are recommended based on each audit and the GMU personnel follow up with additional visits to answer questions and make additional recommendations, if requested. • Appliance Rebates: GMU provides rebates for the purchase of several EnergyStar® appliances • Residential Heat Pump and Efficient Air Conditioning Rebates: GMU offers rebates for residential and small business customers who install high performance heat pumps or air - conditioners that exceed current state requirement_ • Residential Lighting and Ceiling Fan Rebates: GMU offers rebates to homeowners who install compact florescent lamps (CFLs) and/or ceiling fans to replace more energy intensive cooling options (AC). • Weatherization Incentives: GMU provides financial incentives for homeowners who invest in weatherization measures. 88 Commercial/Industrial Energy Efficiency Programs: • Energy Audits: On -site energy audits by GMU energy specialists are available to commercial customers. Energy efficiency measures are recommended based on each audit and the GMU personnel follow up with additional visits to answer questions and make additional recommendations. • Custom Energy Efficiency Incentive Program: GMU financial incentives for commercial customers are based on individual audits and audit recommendations and are tailored to the individual customer needs based on the audit and the potential energy savings. • Lighting retrofit: A commercial lighting retrofit program is offered to businesses in Gridley. There is a prevalence of T-12 lighting throughout the City and most high bay lighting uses high intensity discharge fixtures instead of more efficient florescent fixtures. Performance Results for 2008-2009 Gridley's AB2021 Energy Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 91,700 kWh annually. In FY09, they achieved 77% of their annual goal, with a total net energy reduction of 70,385 kWh. Gridley's AB2021 Demand Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 11.2 kW annually. In FY09, they surpassed their annual goal, with a total demand reduction of 18.8 kW. One large commercial project contributed the bulk of kWh savings and demand savings in FY09, Sav-Mor Market in Gridley completed their refrigeration upgrade, which replaced a water-cooled cooling tower and associated refrigeration equipment with a new air-cooled unit. Savings were based on two components: no longer pumping 12,267,600 gallons per year for cooling the towers; and upgrading the refrigeration system (excluding condenser) - also referred to as refrigeration compressor upgrades. This project resulted in net annual kWh savings of 62,115 (88% of the program results) and net demand reduction of 10 kW (53% of the program results). Two issues kept GMU from reaching its 2008-2009 AB2021 targets. The first was the Keep Your Cool program (see below) which was not completed until early July of 2009, making it ineligible to be reported in this report. The second was a delay by Gridley's largest customer (Rio-Pluma) in installing a significant lighting upgrade. The project was delayed due to a downturn in their business. 2009-2010 Forecast Gridley participated in the Keep Your Cool (KYC) program implemented through ESG and Humitech in 2009 as a pilot for utilities in Northern California.. The program offered commercial customers, typically small to mid -sized businesses, with free upgrades to their refrigeration equipment, including door gaskets, strip curtains, and auto door closers. The KYC program contributed highly cost-effective results for the utilities who participated. The pilot (Phase I) was implemented over several months; Gridley's customers were serviced in July 2009 so the results of KYC in their service territory will be reported in FY10. Even with a single commercial project contributing 88% of the FY09 kWh savings, Gridley is forecasted to exceed their AB2021 Energy Reduction Target by 14% in FY10 due to the KYC projects. The KYC program will contribute net savings of 92,449 kWh and 11.30 kW in FY10. 89 GMU Evaluation, Measurement and Verification for 2008/2009 Because its performance in 2007/2008 produced substantially less energy savings than its AB2021 target, Gridley did not conduct, a study of its programs for that period and instead focused on working towards implementing programs that achieved the energy savings goals that it adopted in 2007. The process to hire a firm to perform an EM&V study for the.2008-2009 performance period is currently underway and is expected to be complete by early Spring of 2010. Update to Annual Energy Savings Targets for 2011-2020 A recent assessment of energy savings potential in Gridley conducted by Summit Blue indicated that an appropriate 10 year goal (2011-2020) for their energy -efficiency programs would be 979 MWH. Taking into account current economic conditions and the demographics of the City, staff has decided to target 75 MWH per year over the next three years as a start towards that target. 90 GRIDLEY MUNICIPAL UTILITY (GMU) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances . , . .. .. . .... Consumer Electronics HVAC . . . : . . . . ...... . ... ... . - .... . .... ..., Lighting Pool Pump RBfilgeratlon HVAC Water Heating _.�. Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Refrigeration HVAC PrO0606 -- .......................................... Comprehensive Other SubTotal Nat Demand Category ; Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Ras... ...................... av cooling Rea Dishwashers Read Electronics Res Heating . , . . . . . .. . .t __............. ....... Res Lighting Res Pool Pump,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Res Rehlgerat164 Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non.Res Cooking Non.Res ....0 . . . ... . . .... . .. �R Cooling,,,,,,,,,,,,, NomRes Heating Nan -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Noo-Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non Res 7000669 Nan Res Comprehensive Other 3 19 17 70,365 1,067,585 '. 589 $ 45,559: $ 2,179 $ 49,175 $ 96,910 Vka 11 Net Life cycle GHG Utility Utility : Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install. EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings .kWh Savings kWh savings 242 2,424 .. ..... .... .. 215...:: 1.179 21,215 66 858 15,458 62.e4i 847. 62,115 831,728 (Tons) (1) Cost ($) Adman Cost ($) ($) 14 8 35 18 491 75 $ 1,163' $ 25 $ 482 6,461 174 $ 400 ` $ 3,076 .. . . ..... . 9 1,803- $ .._ _.. 14,383 S 42,000 i 922 23,866 6 557 5 7,824 5 .. ..... . .... ....198 3,476 16,286 T&D T&D Total 19 - 17 S 70,385. 1,067,585 589 1 45,556 _ $ 2,179: $ 45,175 1 $ 96,910 1 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 0.61 Excluding MD Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector Net Demand /Used in CEC Report} Category Savings (kW) Appliances . . . ............. HVAC Appliances_ Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating C O rn pfe h en e ive............... comprehensive Process HVAC . _. .... HVAC Lighting g ht n .......... ...................... ng........................... . . . Process Process Refrigeration . . . ... ..... ........ HVAC e .. ..:. . ... .... . . . . ....: . .:.. Prooess Comprehensive Ot.... ........... ........................... Otheer 880Total Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res dishwashers- Res Electronics Res Heeling Res Llghting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration ... .._ ................... We Shell Res Water Heating Res COmprehe05ive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Coaling. Non -Res Heating ., .,.. .. i . . Non -Res lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Nan -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Nan Res Process Non Res Comprehensive t . ... . ....................................:............_.. Outer Net Peak kW Savings Net Life cycle G1 -IC Utility Utility Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Directlnstal kWh Savings`. kWh savings (Tons) (s) Cost ($) 250: 2,497 l 1 1,179 1 :. ............. . . 21,215,..,.. 14 ............. . ..:..... ...... ...... ,.... BB i 86484 26 24 ; 104,481 1,567,027 833 $ 06,571 5 4,359 1 $ 58,010 S 129,939 Utility Mktg, EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Admin Cost (8) ($) 171 1,961 59 $ 1.012 $ 4,260 $ 8,847 T&D T&D Total 28[ 24 i 104,481 1,597,027 833 1$ 66,571 ', 5 4.359 $ 59,010 1 S 129,939 SEE Program Portfolie IRO Test 0,82 1 Excluding 7&D 91 CITY OF HEALDSBURG History and Load Data The City of Healdsburg serves 5,539 customers, of which 4,371 are residential. The City' projects a growth rate of less than 1 percent per year. It's all-time peak demand was 2L2 megawatts on July 2006. The 2008-2009 annual energy use was 77,045 megawatt -hours. The City's power content is as follows: Geothermal 43 percent, small hydro 1 percent, large hydro 22 percent, and nonrenewable 34 percent City of Healdsburg Energy Efficiency Program Overview Healdsburg manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential & commercial customers focusing on peak load reduction and energy conservation. For residential customers, rebates are offered for the installation of various energy efficiency measures. For commercial customers, rebates are available for upgraded lighting, HVAC equipment, and in cases where an analysis is performed rebates can be offered for additional equipment that reduces energy use and/or demand. Residential Programs: • Energy Efficiency Hotline: A toll free line is available for our customers to answer questions and provide information on energy efficiency related matters. • Energy Audits: On -site energy audits by energy specialists are available to residential customers. Energy efficiency measures are recommended based on each audit and upon request, the customer is provided a written report summarizing findings and recommendations and/or additional visits to answer questions. • Appliance Rebates: Healdsburg provides rebates for the purchase of several EnergyStar® appliances. • Residential Heat Pump and Efficient Air Conditioning Rebates: Healdsburg offers rebates for residential and small business customers who install high performance heat pumps or air - conditioners that exceed current state requirements. • Residential Lighting Rebates: Healdsburg offers rebates to homeowners who install compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). • Weatherization/Window Incentives: Healdsburg provides financial incentives for homeowners who invest in weatherization and window measures. 92 Commercial and Industrial Programs: • Energy Audits and Rebates: This program offers complementary, on -site energy audits for both commercial and industrial customers. Energy efficiency recommendations and follow up visits support implementation of recommended energy efficiency measures. Rebates are available for energy efficiency upgrades identified in these audits. • Commercial Lighting: This program engages local lighting and electrical contractors to promote and install energy efficient lighting upgrades using technical assistance and financial incentives available from Healdsburg. • Keep Your Cool: This limited time offer provides a free, no obligation check of commercial coolers and refrigerators. The Bay Area Gasket Guy (BAGG) looks at the condition of door gaskets, strip curtains and door closers. if BAGG finds that the current door gaskets are in need of replacement, new gaskets will be manufactured and installed for each cooler/freezer with air leaks at no charge to the customer. This offer is supported and being paid for by the City of Healdsburg Electric Utility Energy Efficiency Program. Public Facilities and Schools: Energy Audits: Complementary on -site energy audits, as requested, for all public facilities. Energy efficiency recommendations and audit follow up visits support implementation of recommended energy efficiency measures. Rebates are available for energy efficiency upgrades identified in these audits. Additional Programs: "Time -of -Use Rates" Program: The City of Healdsburg has implemented a "time -of -use -rate" program for both residential and commercial customers, enabling them to reduce their energy costs through the time management of their energy usage. Residential "Energy Efficiency Outreach": The City of Healdsburg has implemented an energy outreach program for our Hispanic residential customers, offering comprehensive energy efficiency information to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy use. Performance Results for 2008-2009 Healdsburg's AB2021 Energy Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 198,400 kWh annually. In FY09, they exceeded their annual goal by 82%, with a total net energy reduction of 360,518 kWh. Healdsburg's AB2021 Demand Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 22 kW annually. In FY09, they surpassed their annual goal, with a total demand reduction of 104.77 kW. Healdsburg participated in the Keep Your Cool (KYC) program implemented in 2009 as a pilot for utilities in Northern California. The program offered commercial customers, typically small to mid -sized businesses, with free upgrades to their refrigeration equipment, including door gaskets, strip curtains, and auto door closers. The KYC program contributed highly cost-effective results for the utilities who participated. The pilot (Phase I) was implemented over several months; Healdsburg customers were 93 serviced in June and July 2009, the June projects contributed net savings of 84,394 kWh and 9.65 kW in FY09. They would have exceeded their energy reduction goal by 39% without the KYC projects that were completed in FY09. 2009-2010 Forecast Healdsburg is forecasted to once again exceed their AB2021 Energy and Demand Reduction Targets due to the KYC projects. In fact, their net annual kWh forecast for FY10 is almost double their current annual goal. Between the completions of Phase I projects in July 2009, and their participation in Phase ll (which occurred in Q4 2009), the KYC program will contribute net savings of 184,328 kWh and 21 kW in FY10. The positive impact of the KYC program on program cost effectiveness can also be seen in both the FY09 results (TRC 1.76) and the FY10 forecast (TRC 2.07). Efforts are also coordinated with the City of Healdsburg Green City Committee in order to bring a community focus onto energy -efficiency. The Green City Committee's goal is to: "Provide leadership to implement community actions that promote environmentally -sound practices and expand public outreach to promote conservation and sustainability." Healdsburg Evaluation. Measurement and Verification For 2007-2008, Healdsburg did not undertake an EM&V study. The process to hire a firm to perform an EM&V study for the 2008 -- 2009 performance period is currently underway and is expected to be completed by Spring of 2010. This report will assess program operations for the Keep your Cool program which provided the most significant savings. Revision to Annual Energy Savings Targets for 2011-2020 A recent assessment of energy savings potential in Healdsburg conducted by Summit Blue indicated that an appropriate 10 year goal (2011-2020) for their energy -efficiency programs would be 5,396 MWH. Taking into account current economic conditions and the demographics of the City, staff has decided to target 420 MWH per year over the next three years as a start towards that target. 94 CITY OF HEALDSBURG Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal year ending 6/30/2009 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Program Sector - Net Demand Net Peak kW • Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install. EM&V, and Total (Utility Cost JUsed in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) ($) Cost (5) Admin Cast ($) ($) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electrof ico HVAC L ighting Pool Pump • Refrigeration HVAC water Heating Campretiensine_ Process HVAC . . ,.., . . . . . - . . . . .. . .. . ... . . ... . . . . . . .. HVAC L ighting .............. Process Process Refigeration. • • HVAC Process Comprehensive Other S usTotal Res Clothes Washers 2 2 5818 58176 Res Cocking 9,1,. . 8 �2 439 41,283 Res D€shwashera 792 10,296 ..w_ -.-... ...._' __.,:.. .. . Res EIeCtmnios Res Heating ling Res L,ghtin9 Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration ... .. .. .. . ..... ..... . .... Res Shell Res Water Healing_-- Res Ccmpreherstve NonResCooking -- R ...... . ... Non-ResCooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting. 51 49 106,298 2523 509 Nan -Res Moioia Non -Res Pumps N Non-Res Refrigeration 18 18 160,285 641,139 Non-Res Shell .. .. . . . . ... ......... .... Non Res Process Non ResCompfehensi,.e Other 105 ' 80 360,518 ; 3,608,453 32 26 $ 2,400 3,213 800 11 600 1 104,400 5e $ --- 1,103 - - -- 7,759 --- 139 781 79 $ 3,375 ... .. ...... ..... . 9......._.. .......... . ...... .... ..... ... 4 ........ ...... ..... 5,524: 69,889: 51 $ 4,151 1,399 $ 08,460 $ 2,355 2,490 425 3,750 5,695 4,015 15,752 2,587 $ 4,755 $ 5,692 $ 1,025 $ 4,856 1,984 $ 63,845 ! 5 - 1,777 $ 37,437 $ 128,056 T&D T&D (Total 105 86 - 300,518 3,608,453 1,584 1 $ 83.845 - 5 7,777 $ 37,437 $ 129.058 1 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&D 1.76 l Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pont Pump Refrigeration 'r1VAC Water Heating Comprehenslne Process HVAC ... ,........_...._.. .. ...............: HVAC Lighting -- Process Process -- RefOgeration HVAC .., . . . ................................ Process Comprehensive Olhef Su6Total ( Net Demand Category Savings(kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Ras Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting.._,_ Res Pool Pump Res Refigeration Ras Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking -, Non -Res Cooling onResHeat _.., _... .... Non -Res Heating Non.Ras Lighting .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . . Non -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration NQmRes Shell ...enRes Poces.:... Nan Ras Process Nan Res Comprehensive Other 3 Net Peak kW Savings 3 kWh Savings: kWh savings 6,108 2,511 ... 792 51,085 42,501 10296; '174',91-11 2,640,684 Net Lifecycle GH5 Net Annual r Net Lifecycle Reductions (Tons) 34 27 8 42 80 52 1,459 737,210 389 28 1 .. ,,,., ... . . . . 5761 Utility : Utility ; Utility Mktg, Incentives Cost '� Direct Instal( EM&V, and (el Cost ($) i Admin Cost (5) 107 921 390,923 3,015,107 2,099 $ 98,716 $ 8,943 , $ 39,308 Total Utility Cost ($) $ 5 3,148 3,746 706 1,835 5_.-......-_5.846 $ 16,532 1,286 $ 136,968 T&D T&D Total EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T0D 07 0 92 350,923 1 3,619,167 2.07 1 95 2.0591$ 88.716 $ 8,943 , $ 39,309 1 $ 130,968 CITY OF HERCULES MUNICIPAL UTILITY (HMU) The Hercules Municipal Utility ("HMU") was created in 2002 to provide safe, reliable and cost-effective electric service to retail consumers in Hercules that are located in and around new development areas. Hercules Municipal Utility serves in a territory where all buildings are less than 10 years old. The utility has added more rebates in response to customer inquiries. Most customers inquire and request appliance rebates, lighting rebates and solar rebates. There has been no demand for other programs to date. Hercules Municipal Utility encourages residential customers to increase the efficiency of their homes by offering incentives for the following energy efficiency measures: • High Performance Windows • Increased Insulation • Sunscreens • EnergyStar Refrigerators, Clothes Washers and Dishwashers Hercules Municipal also offers residential customers free compact fluorescent lights. For business customers HMU offers rebates for: INTERIOR FIXTURES REPLACEMENTS • Linear to T8 or T5 or High Output (HO) T5 fixtures • T8 or T5 To electronic ballast • Compact fluorescent fixtures • Interior pulse start metal halide fixtures • Occupancy sensors • De -tamping EXTERIOR FIXTURES • Pulse -start metal halide fixtures 96 OTHER CONSERVATION • The goal of the HMU is to encourage energy conservation. In order to further energy conservation, the HMU will provide a rebate of 12 cents per kWh for energy savings in the first year up to a maximum of 30 percent of installed cost for retrofits of existing facilities with energy saving devices not covered under specific programs. Hercules Municipal Utility also provides solar rebates to both residential and business customers. 97 CITY OF HERCULES MUNICIPAL UTILITY {HMU) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances- Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting— _....... Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC .. . .. ...... . .... ........ ..... H Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting .. : . Process .. . .. . , . i .... . . . . . .. ._ ., Refrigeration HVAC _ . . _. . . ...... ......... .......... ............... . ..... . .. Process Comprehennsre , Other SubTatal Category Ras Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Healing Res. Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Ccoling Nnn-Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors -. : Non -Res Pumps . . . . . . . t . Non -Res Refrigeration Nan -Res Shell - - - --- .. . ........ . ........ . .. . ..... ......... ..... ...... Non Res Process Novi Res Conprehensie Other Net Demand Savings(kW) Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings. kWh savings 131 2 0,683 06,742 47 $ 1,250 1,250 Net Lifecycta GHG Utility :Utility Direct!. Utility Mktg, Net Annual Nat Lifecycta Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cog '. EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Irons) (5) _(5) !. Admin Cost (3) (5) $ 450 §.__... _......_,..606 200 7&O T&O Natal 13; LEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.42 Excluding MO 2 : 9,653 95,742 47 $ 1,250 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 I5 1,250 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances, HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics Consumer Electronics HVAC _._._..., Lighting _._. . Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating._._ Comprehensive Pr00405 1-VAC . . .... . . ...... . .... ........... ......._ c HVAC Lighting . ... . . ,- -_._. .. Process Process Refitgerellorl HVAIl`-- Prooeaa Compmhennrw Other SubTotal Category Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics roniic................ Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting • Res Pool Pump - - s Res Refrigeration_ Res Shell .,_ ,....., Res N7eter Heating Res C Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking -- Non -Res Cooling_ Non -Res Heating Nan -Res Lighting Mon -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration, Non -Res Shell Non Res Process. Non Res Camprehahslve Other • (Tons) ($) (3) Admin Cast ($) ($) 13; 2- 9,653 99,742 47 $ 1,250 1,250 58 Net Lifecycle • GHG Utility °.Utility Direct] Utility Mktg, Net Demand Net Peak kW 'r Net Annual ; Net Lifacycle . Reductions Incentives Cot ± install Cost i EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings(kW) '. Savings '. kWh Savings; kWh savings 154; 0,360':' mm 84,240'' 45 139' 2,506': T&D T&O `Total 13 0,653 88,742 47 1 1,250 1,2501 EE Program Portfolio ZRC Test Excluding T&D 2.42 98 CITY OF INDUSTRY • The City of Industry established a municipal utility, Industry Public Utility Commission (IPUC), in 2001. IPUC began delivering electricity to retail customers in May 2002 and currently serves commercial and industrial customers through its electric distribution system; • IPUC developed and installed a 2 MW combined heat and power project in 2002 that supplies a large hotel with electricity and hot water; • Peak 2009 Customer Demand: 7.5 megawatt • Annual 2009 Energy Use: 35 gigawatt-hours • IPUC has supplied electric power to its retail distribution customers at rates that on average have been 25% lower than Southern California Edison's (SCE) • Mission: IPUC strives to provide reliable and cost effective electric power to help the competitiveness of local businesses. • City of Industry Program Highlights • Pacific Palms Combined Heat and Power Project: The Project currently provides IPUC with 2 MW of local area capacity resources and supplies heat and power to the Pacific Palms resort. The Project uses both landfill and pipeline gas and continues to explore maximizing landfill gas from the nearby landfill to reduce methane emissions. • Amonix Concentrated Solar: IPUC is engineering structural design to raise the elevation of tracking concentrated solar photovoltaic (CPV) systems and enable power generation in parking areas (dual land use). Installation of 35 kW Amonix CPV system comprised of 5 MegaModulesTM, along with the required drive, hydraulic, tracking control and AC/DC control subsystems is planned in 2009 at a location within the City. Proposed Renewable Projects and Services: • Ground Mount Solar: IPUC is developing a ground mounted 3-5 MW photovoltaic power generating facility which would be the largest installation in the LA Basin. • Rooftop Solar: IPUC is developing a 5 MW rooftop photovoltaic power (PV) generating facility on buildings served by the utility. • Pumped Storage: IPUC has initiated preliminary development efforts for a 50 MW pumped storage electric project located in the LA basin. Demand Reduction Programs: IPUC does not currently have any demand reduction management programs in place. 99 ISLAND ENERGY PITTSBURG POWER COMPANY/ISLAND ENERGY YEAR 2009 ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM REPORT • Doing business as Island Energy, the Pittsburg Power Company owns, operates and manages the electrical and gas system facilities located at Mare Island in the City of Vallejo, California. • Island Energy supplies all retail electric and gas services to residential, commercial and industrial customers within its service territory. • Island Energy serves 85 commercial and 261 residential customers with 439 electric and 322 gas meters. • Customers on Mare Island are served through our looped 12 -kilovolt underground facilities with a peak demand of 4.5 megawatts. • Commercial and industrial electric loads consist of approximately 92 percent of the total electrical load and approximately 70 percent of the gas load. • Hydroelectricity accounts for more than 40 percent of Island Energy's retail electric sales. • Island Energy's Public Benefits Program funds all Energy Efficiency Programs, Low Income Assistance Program, Medical Support Baseline Program and Solar Incentive Program. Island Energy Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Electrical Substation Upgrade: Island Energy has committed $3,000,000 to upgrade its main electrical substation and backbone distribution system to improve system efficiency and to accommodate future developments. The project consists of three phases. The first phase involved replacing a 60 -year -old transformer with a previously idle transformer which is newer, more efficient, and reliable. A new SF6 circuit breaker was installed to replace an old oil circuit breaker. Island Energy is beginning the second phase of installing the second 120 kV SF6 Circuit breaker at the main substation. This multiple -phased project will be completed in the next 1-2 years, subject to the progress of development on Mare Island. Mare Island Lighting: Island Energy has worked closely with the City of Vallejo to promote the installation of energy efficient lighting throughout Mare Island. The plan has been implemented in all new residential projects. Island Energy is also working with the master developer on Mare Island, Lennar Mare Island, to retrofit street lights with LED light bulbs on the Mare Island causeway bridge. Commercial Energy Efficiency Programs: Island Energy's Commercial Energy Efficiency Programs are designed to provide rebates for designated energy conservation measures to commercial customers. Based on studies of existing businesses and load profile on the island, commercial energy efficiency programs are developed to improve the energy efficiency of existing customer equipment and to maximize energy savings on the island. 100 • Energy Efficiency Advisory Services: Island Energy teams up with energy solution companies to provide free feasibility analysis of energy conservation measures upon a commercial customer's request. Customers who wish to pursue recommended measures will commission an energy solution company to produce an investment grade energy audit at the customer's expense. Island Energy offers rebates to cover up to 30% of the cost of producing the audit. • Commercial Lighting Fixture: Island Energy offers rebates up to $10,000 for installation of energy efficient lighting fixtures and lamps. Qualified fixtures include interior linear fluorescent fixtures, compact fluorescent fixtures, interior & exterior pulse -start metal halide fixtures and interior induction fixtures. Island Energy also offers rebate for installation of linear fluorescent lamps with electronic ballasts and de -laming of un-efficient lamps/ballast and removal of unused lamp holders from existing fixtures. • Motors & Process Improvement: Island Energy offers rebates up to $15,000 for installation of new, NEMA premium efficiency motors ranging in size of 5 to 200 hp. Commercial customers can either replace their old motors with a new motor or add a new motor to their facilities. The rebate for this program is $0.07/kWh of the first year's energy savings based on the investment grade energy audit. • Compressed Air System: Island Energy offers commercial customers rebates up to $35,000 for improving compressed air systems by installing a new system or by redesigning and retrofitting an existing system. So far, this program is the most successful and effective energy conservation program implemented on Mare Island. it has demonstrated significant energy savings in the industrial/commercial sector. The rebate for this program is $0.07/kWh of the first year's energy savings based on the investment grade energy audit. Residential Energy Efficiency Programs:_ Residential energy efficiency programs have been a continuous effort by Island Energy. The programs are funded by the Public Benefits Fund which is incorporated into monthly bills based on energy usage. Energy Education: Island Energy educates its customers on energy saving tips, sources of energy and new technologies for renewable energy through its website and newsletters. Energy -related magazines are available at Island Energy's office. • Home Energy Audit Service: On -site free Energy Advisory service is available upon resident's request. Trained electrical and gas technicians can provide help by pointing out what areas are not energy efficient in residential homes and offer specific strategies to help residents to reduce their energy bills. • Residential Retail Lighting: 2009 was the third year in which Island Energy provided free energy efficient light bulbs to its residential customers. Island Energy is committed to providing up to five CFL light bulbs per year to each home on the island. Coupons for the CFL light bulbs can be redeemed in a local lumber yard store (this program also has the benefit of attracting additional foot traffic to a local business). Coupons for two extra light bulbs will be given to residential customers if they register themselves with Island Energy's website to learn more about Island Energy's energy efficiency program. 101 • Appliance Efficiency Program: Island Energy offers residential customers rebates for installation of Energy Star -rated appliances, including dishwashers, clothes washers, refrigerators and air conditioners. This has been the most popular program in the residential sector its inception in 2008. • Solar Incentive Program: Island Energy provides rebates of $2.80 per installed watt towards the purchase and installation of new solar energy systems by residential customers as an encouragement to use renewable energy. Proposed Energy Efficiency Programs and Services (2010-2011): • Customer -Directed Program: Provide funding to allow commercial and industrial electric customers to plan and develop their own energy efficiency programs in any of the public interest categories. Island Energy Demand Reduction Programs: Island Energy does not have demand reduction programs at this point. As load grows and matures, the utility anticipates evaluating such programs. The customer databases described above will be used to forecast load as well as explore energy management programs. 102 ISLAND ENERGY Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances . . . .. ... ...... . ... ..... ..... ..... ........ .. HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics 66 . E ctronics HVAC .............. 6666. .. Lighting Poet Pump . . . ... .... . . .. . . . Refngeraticn HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Pro0005 ................................... P cess HVAC _- - - . . ..... ........ . ....... . . ... . . .... ......... .... HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensive Other Su55TotaI Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Lifecycle GHG U81ity )If 11fy Vtility Mktg, Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) (7) Cost ($1 ' Admin cost (0) ($) Res Clothes Washers Res C.6. i .. ...... ..... . ..... .... ...... .. Caafing Res Dishwashers Re...6 . 44 90 . . . . ... . . ......... Res Elect1ron5ics • Res Heating ...... . ...... .... ...... .. Res Lighting Res Pool Pump 6 6 6 6 .. .. . .:.. � . . Res Refrigeration_ Res Shell - - - -- _-- Res Water Healing "— Res Comprehensive on-Res ...... .......... . Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating. .. .n ... . . .. . .... . . . ting , Non -Res Lighting Non- .. ..........�.....�.. Non -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps -- Non -Res Refrigeration_ Non -Res Shelf- --- Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive Other 2 784 8.523 94 1,631] 350 1,748 967 6 666. . 13,541 .. 5 111 446,0, 759 8,935,12209 4.762 ......75522 $ 35,957. 3.987 1,139 208 $ 539 $ 883 $ 37,175 114 i 114 448,980 ' 8,880,9821 49766 $ 39,944 T&D T0D 10101 114 EIE 753519m Portfolio TRC Test 7-42 1 Excluding T&D 114 448,960 • 8,960,962 r 4,766 $ 35,957 Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 3,907 $ 39,944 Program 3echor (Used in CEC Report) Appliances ................................................... HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration 6 666... HVAC . .. . . ti . . .......... . .. .. Water Heat ... .... .... ehen...... .... ....... .. Comprrehensive ..,. , 66 66 . Pmcess HVAC HVAC Lighting Process - - - - Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Compprehens.... rehens.................... C ive Other SuSTolal Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers .......................... ....................... Res Cooling Res Dishwashers ._ .. .._._....,-._„ Res Eiectranics Res Healing Res Lighting Res Pad Pump o...., 66 66.. Res Refrigeration lie .. .. Res Shell 66 6 6 Water Heating Res Water Heating s Co... ..reh ns Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking 7 -Res ...............:.�..,.......�: NPn-RBS Cooling Non -Rea Heating 66 6 6 . . . ..... . . .. Nan -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors- - -_-' Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refhgeration Non -Res She[I Non Res Process on Res Co... . hens. .. Non Res Comprehensive Other Net Lifecycle GHG Net Peak kW Net Annual i Net Lifecycle Reductions Savings ',kWh Savings' kWh savings € (Tons) 5 Utility ? Utility UtilityMktg, Incentives Cost ; Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (91 Cost (9) j Admin Cost ($) ($) 114 1141 418,980 ' 8,960,962 4,765 $ 35,957 • 9,512 $ 45,408 610 T&D T&D `Total 114 114 44.8,900: 8.960.962 4,769 19 35.957 5,512 1$ 45,489 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&D 103 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT IID) • Established in 1936 • 110 serves 145,916 customers • Peak demand: 993 megawatts, July 21, 2006 • Annual energy sales are 3,316 gigawatt-hours in 2009 IID's Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Total program expenditures of 51,918,650 in calendar year 2009 will result in savings of more than 11,284,982 kilowatt-hours annually. These investments in efficiency will also reduce peak purchases by 3,025 kilowatts. The IID service area, Imperial County and the Coachella Valley in Riverside County, has been especially hard hit by the current economic recession. Historically high unemployment rates have climbed to, at times in some of our cities, the highest in the nation. This economic recession has resulted in significantly reduced program impacts in 2009 due to reduced customer investment in energy efficiency measures. IID's Energy Efficiency Program Objectives: • Provide a positive impact on utility cost by stabilizing energy consumption and reducing purchases of expensive peak power. • Insure the program portfolio is cost effective thereby relieving some of the upward pressure on rates. • Assist customers by providing an opportunity to take charge of their energy utilization and by doing so, reduce their electricity cost. • Provide customers the opportunity to improve the environment by conserving energy and/or acquiring renewable energy. • Provide income qualified residential customers with rate assistance and positively impact their families by providing energy efficiency measures that reduce their dependency on subsidies. • Provide all customers with the opportunity to participate in renewable energy (specifically photovoltaic) generation by providing attractive, cost-effective options. • Increase the awareness of energy efficiency and utilization through effective promotion of programs and energy issues, and provide a forum for customer adoption of energy effective habits through energy education. 104 Current Commercial Customer Programs: • !ID's Energy Conservation Services: No cost energy audits, educational workshops, and a number of other services including rebate program administration. • Commercial AC Maintenance Program: The Quality AC Maintenance Program has been expanded to include an early retirement component. The program delivers comprehensive HVAC maintenance and optimum operational efficiency to commercial customer's equipment. • Energy Rewards Rebate Program: Rebates offered to commercial customers that purchase qualifying energy efficient products including lighting products, motors, HVAC equipment, and Energy Star qualified thermostats. • Commercial Demand -Side Management Program: Offers energy analysis of large customer facilities to identify cost-effective measures which reduce peak load and energy use. This program includes performance based incentives for lighting retrofits, high efficiency HVAC, chillers, motors, VFDs, air compressors, and ice storage. • Pumping Efficiency Program: The IID Pumping Efficiency Program offers financial incentives for pump testing and recommended repairs. The target markets for this program are irrigation pumping, golf courses, and municipal systems. Government Energy Manager (GEM): This program provides municipal governments an energy manager from IID's staff. This energy manager reports to the city manager and augments the city's staff with energy_professional. The energy manager coordinates energy matters for the city, identifies energy efficiency opportunities, facilitates project implementation, and insures new construction occurring within the city addresses energy efficiency. o Schools/Education Program: In 2008, IID expanded the GEM program to include school districts. Partnering with one of the largest school districts in the LID service area, IID has conducted energy audits of all district schools in the area and initiated the Power Pledge program with the students and individual schools. In 2009, this school district completed construction of a new middle school and high school, both qualifying for IID new construction energy efficient design incentives. o Power Pledge Program: IID has implemented the Power Pledge program, which allows city residents and/or school students to pledge to reduce their energy consumption by 10% and then provides them with access to web based energy consumption tracking software to help them validate their efforts. The Power Pledge Program provides a more interactive environment for customers and provides an opportunity for young people to engage in energy efficiency infotainment. Current Residential Customer Programs: • IID`s Inspector Energy Inspector Energy provides no cost audits of residential homes and provides homeowners with incentive proposals and information concerning IID programs. In addition, Inspector Energy provides educational workshops and a number of other services including rebate program administration. 105 • Energy Star® Appliance Rebate Program: Rebates offered to residential customers that purchase energy efficient appliances such as pool pumps with VFD and Energy Star® labeled refrigerators and room air conditioners, • California Green Builder: IID has partnered with the Building Industry Association to deliver the California Green Builder (CGB) throughout IID's service territory. CGB provides incentives to builders to provide environmentally friendly construction. IID provides builder incentives far exceeding Title 24 by more than 15%, coordination with municipal entities through the GEM program, and promotional assistance for builders. To date, one builder has signed on to the program and five governmental entities have passed resolutions supporting CGB. This initiative has been hampered by the turn down in the building industry. • Residential HVAC Maintenance Program: The Quality AC Maintenance Program delivers comprehensive HVAC maintenance and optimum operational efficiency, air flow and refrigerant charge, to residential customer's equipment. • • Residential HVAC Duct Testing and Sealing: The Quality AC Maintenance Program also delivers comprehensive duct testing and sealing services. • Residential High Efficient HVAC Rebate Programs: Rebates are offered to customers installing energy efficient air conditioners and heat pumps. Program is being promoted in conjunction with Energy Star®, and is available for residential customers, replacement, new construction, and early retirement. • Emergency Energy Assistance Program: Qualified low-income customers can receive financial assistance to avoid disconnection of their electric service due to non-payment. • Residential Energy Assistance Program (REAP): Qualified low-income residents receive up to a 30 percent discount on their electric rate. • Low -Income Weatherization Program: Qualifying low-income customers receive weatherization services to help minimize the effects of weather on household energy consumption. IID has partnered with SoCalGas Company to deliver weatherization services to income qualified customers. Photovoltaic Program • Photovoltaic Rebate Program: 110 offers rebates to residential and commercial customers that install qualifying photovoltaic generation systems. In 2009, IID provided incentives for 99 PV systems that installed 1,550.51 KW. 110 incentives totaled $ 3,969,856 in 2009. Proposed IID Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (2010) Existing Programs: • IID's Board of Directors adopted energy efficiency and demandreduction targets through 2017. The target for 2010 is 45,067 MWh. • 110 Energy will continue to use Inspector Energy for education and promotion within schools as well as promote the Power Pledge. This effort will incorporate CFL campaigns and use energy wisely promotion. 106 • IID Energy has expanded the residential and small commercial Quality AC Maintenance Program to include multiple verification service providers. New initiatives include increased service options far participant contractors and customers. Expected benefits include streamlined administrative processes, an instant rebate for customers via the contractors invoice, and identification and early replacement of old, inefficient air conditioning systems. Photovoltaic Program • Through February 1, 2010; a total of 42 applications have been received fora capacity of 2,476 KW and over S6 million in incentives. New Programs: • IID Energy is proceeding with implementation of a small business combined Thermal Energy Storage/Time of Use rate program. • IID will develop and implement a large commercial lighting retrofit program in 2010 that targets large retail and office segments andwill be contractor driven. • IID has included energy efficient pool pumps to our residential appliance rebate program offering to address the 8-10k pools in the IID service area. • IID will expand the Government Energy Manager program to include working with cities and regional government associations, such as the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, to provide demand -side management planning assistance and to incorporate aggressive outreach to residences and businesses in their communities. Outreach efforts include neighborhood energy efficiency workshops, joint facility project improvements, and more focused school events. • IID and Southern California Gas Company are engaged in a joint effort to expand our low-income weatherization services. This arrangement is a model for other POU/IOU weatherization partnerships. Imperial Irrigation District's 50 NegaWatt (NW) Plant Imperial Irrigation District's (IID) DSM and Supply and Trading (S&T) groups are working together on a plan to "construct' a 50 NW plant over the next five years. These groups are pooling their resources to provide more vibrant and aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy programs for IID's customers. This includes pooling S&T resource procurement funds together with DSM funds to increase and expand customer incentives. In this way, S&T will buy reduced load instead of acquiring energy through purchases or construction. This is a sample of actions being considered for the initiative: • Replacement of 6,000 old, inefficient residential central air conditioning systems. • Retrofitting commercial lighting systems to save over 8 MW. • Introducing and expanding an aggressive pumping program for irrigation systems and the over 8,000 residential swimming pools within the District to save over 5 MW. 107 • Enhancing the existing AC diagnostic and repair program to keep thousands of residential and business air conditioning systems in their most energy efficient operating condition. • Adding Thermal Energy Storage (TES) systems to thousands of small businesses to shift load off- peak. • Implementing a residential and business demand response program to provide over 50 MW of controlled load over the next three years. IID is in the process of contracting with Navigant Consulting to conduct Measurement and Verification of IID energy efficiency programs. 108 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT (IID) Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Net Life cycle GHG Utility Utility Direct' Utility Mktg, Program Sector (Used in CEC- Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electroncs . . .... ...... . ... HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrig018ticq,.,. HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration .. ....................... . ...,, HVAC .., ........ ........... . ..... .... ... . Process comprehensive Other SubTotal [ Net Demand Category 1 Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling _.. . ,. . ,,. Res Dishwashers ResElectronics Res_ Heeling Res . ......Lighting ............. . ''i Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating . . Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling .... ..... .. .. ... . .. Nor -Res Heating_ Nan -Res LISIShng Non -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps__ Non -Res Religeratlon Non -Res Shell NonResP. occs................... Non Res Process • Nan Res Comprehensive Other $ 251,072 Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost', Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ($) )$) Admin Cost )$) ($) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 1,301 .... 1,356 4,897,107 57416006:-,._ 36,808 1 : 6,772 78 948 ._.. . . . .. .. 45 19 136,043 954,389 485 33 547,630 6,476,304 . 3,225 31 94 1,033,883 878 5 ; .035 80,704 , 48 1,122 .,....., 23 -. 2 48 83 '. 1,128 3,890276 37161370: 21,452 21 79,486 853,117 474 2 11.802 177 024 . ..... . 93 48 374,777 - 3,747,766 2,209 383 , 1,465,114 20,816,352 11,915 77,431 $ .... . ... 564,965 ;.$. . 387,400 $ ... . . ... 17,340,,. ... . .. . $ 345 $ 852 $ 7,323 $ 3.453 $ 51,536 ' $ 25.712 $ 129,854 _ . $ 7,084 $ 358' $. 394 $ .��...�202,965 ..$...........� 387.51.1 $ 15,120 $ 3,755 350 $ __..._350 $--.-- 784 $ 37,554 .,.. $ ._.. __.. 18.867 $ 145,511 $ $ 1,177,438 5 7,323: $ 733,859 104,561 5 13.52,365 $,. 17,685 11,628 $- - 87,251 136,936 $ 782 $ 384.476 . .:.18,878 3,054 55,521 3,124, 3,025 11,284,942 128.218,762 $ 1,918,550 T&D 7512 'Total 3,124 3,025 11,284,942 128,216,762' 77,431 $ 1,777.438 7,323' $ 733,888 1 $ 1,818,650' 55 Program Portfolio TRC Test 5.60 1 Excluding T&D Net Demand i Net Peak kW SavingsIkW) I Savings Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC' Appliances Consumer Eleclmnlcs HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Rehlgeration HVAC Water Heating;. Comprehensive Process HVAC .. ... HVAC Lighting . ... .. Process Process Refrigem407 HVAC Process • comprohansiee .. .. . . ........... . . . . Other SubTotal Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 Category Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics_-- Res Heating ResLighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating_ Non -Res Lighting_ Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res 96145ur8tian NorrRes shell Non Res Pmcesa Non Res Comprehensive Other 8,276'i,.,. 2 262 .. 63 551 81 Net Annual kWh Savings € Net Lifecycle GHG Net Lifecycle ' Reductions kW5 savings i (Tons) 2.,373 6,567,466 100450844 64,048 ...,_.2 15,347 1381191,. 86 33 185.523 1 669 763 848 58 958,079 9580791 = 5,641 55 174.775 2858472, 1,536 8 .,.7 ,686. 141,192 .......,811 1,862 1,969 5,456,136 85048785 'r 4 3 29,647 492 727 829 39 37 139 061 1 309,703 183 84 i 84 855,872 8,556,718 ; 3,854 670 37,531 874 2,563,215 36,068 298 j 20,846 Utility :Utility Direct' Utility Mktg, Incentives COM '. Install Cost EM&V, and ($) (5) Admin Cost($) $ 588,406 677,756 i$ 603 $ 1,491 $ 12,612 $ 0,041- $ 197,6521 $ 44,863 $ 227,179 • $ 12,394 $ 679 $ 889 $ 355,087: 5 317,554 $ 26,452, $ 6,575 $ 612 5 1,231 $ 55,701 5 33,163 258,321. ; $ 152.030 Total Utility Cost I$) $ 1665,152 $ ..,....... 30,939 20.344 $ 152,6413 $ 239,573 $ 1,366 5 672641 33 627 1,843 . '98;864 $ 435,251 S 3.356.877 5,485 5,292 19,743,000 224,315,150 135,488 3 - 2,059,927, $ 12,612. $ 1,283,938 T&D T&O 'Total 5,465 IEE Program Portfolio 7RC Test 5.05' ExCluding T&1 5,292 ` 19,743,000 109 224,316,1501 135,456 $ 2,059,927 $ 12,912 $ 1,283,938 3,356,677 1 LASSEN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 1LMUDZ History and Load Data Lassen Municipal Utility District (LMUD) was established in 1988. It serves 12,500 customers. Fifty percent of energy sales are residential, with the remaining 50 percent primarily commercial with a few agricultural and industrial customers. The median residential income in Lassen is at or below the poverty level. There is little or no difference load demands for LMUD between winter and summer. It's annual energy use is 132 gigawatt-hours. It's annual power content is as follows: 2 percent geothermal, 30 percent hydro, <1 percent biomass/waste, 2 percent wind, <1 percent solar, 66 percent nonrenewable. LMUD's mission is to provide reliable, quality power to our community at the best possible price. LMUD works closely with all of the other local agencies to promote planned economic growth in our service area. Overview of LMUD Efficiency Programs LMUD manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential & commercial customers focusing on peak load reduction and energy conservation. For residential customers, rebates are offered for the installation of various energy efficiency measures. For commercial customers, rebates are available for upgraded lighting, HVAC equipment, and in cases where an analysis is performed rebates can be offered for additional equipment that reduces energy use and/or demand. Current Programs/Services: • Residential Rebate Program": provides rebate credits to customers who purchase and install EnergyStar® appliances and Marathon electric water heaters. LMUD also provides a residential lighting program. Rebates are offered for replacing incandescent bulbs with CFL's along with a variety of other lighting incentives. • Custom Energy Projects:. LMUD offers customized rebate programs to larger customers who have special projects that do not fit into existing rebate categories. • "SmartBuilt" "SmartBuilt Retro": SmartBuilt targets new construction, as well as, remodeled homes to encourage homeowners and contractors to install energy saving measures such as low -e windows, upgraded insulation, energy efficient appliances and high SEER heating and cooling units. • Energy Audits: Commercial customers may request an onsite energy audit, provided free of charge by LMUD. • "SmartLiqht": SmartLightwas introduced in 2008 and is LMUD's commercial lighting retrofit program. The program offers commercial customers rebates for replacing inefficient lighting 110 with new technology, such as removing existing T-12 fluorescent bulbs and replacing them with T -8s. • "Community Projects" Program: Local non-profit entities submit projects based on the four guidelines of AB 1890. Qualifying projects are eligible for financial incentives equal to 50 percent of the project expenses (with a limit of $25,000). * Energy Conservation Assistance Program "ECAP": ECAP is LMUD's low-income rate assistance program. The program is income based and allows between a 50% and 20% discount on customers first 1,000 kWh. The program also works with local service agencies to provide energy conservation classes to participating customers. • Consumer Education: LMUD strives to reach each of our customers to educate them and help them reduce their energy consumption. The LMUD web site and "Ruralite" magazine offer current energy conservation tips and advice on how to implement energy conservation measures. Through the website and the Ruralite magazine, customers are encouraged to call our efficiency experts for help to determine their energy usage and identify appropriate conservation measures. Performance Results for 2008-2009 LMUDs energy reduction target for 2008-2009 was 250,000 kWh. They exceeded their annual goal by 91%, with a total net energy reduction of 478,138 kWh. Lassen participated in the Keep Your Cool (KYC) program implemented in 2009 as a pilot for utilities in Northern California. The program offered commercial customers, typically small to mid -sized businesses, with free upgrades to their refrigeration equipment, including door gaskets, strip curtains, and auto door closers. The KYC program contributed highly cost-effective results for the utilities who participated. The pilot (Phase I) was implemented over several months; Lassen's customers were serviced in June and July 2009, the June projects contributed net savings of 241,108 kWh in FY09. 2009-2010 Forecast Lassen is forecasted to once again exceed their Energy Reduction Target at 312,708 kWh. LMUD Evaluation, Measurement and Verification For 2007-2008, LMUD did not undertake an EM&V study. The process to hire a firm to perform an EM&V study for the 2008 — 2009 performance period is currently underway and is expected to be completed by Spring of 2010. This report will assess program operations for the Keep your Cool program which provided the most significant savings. Revision to Annual Energy Savings Targets for 2011- 2020 A recent assessment of energy savings potential for LMUD conducted by Summit Blue indicated that an appropriate 10 year goal (2011-2020) for their energy -efficiency programs would be 7,767 MWH. Taking into account current economic conditions and the demographics of the City, staff has decided to target 375 MWH per year over the next three years as a start towards that target 111 LASSEN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (LMUD) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector {Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Eectronloo HVAC Lighting Pool Pump ReIgeratlon,.,,. HVAC Water Heating Comprehensite Proc85...,..., P cess HVAC HVAC Lighting .. . ..... ..... . .. Process PI11Ce59 Refrigeration HVAC Process Camprehenslus Other Su7Total Net Demand Net Peak kW Net Annual !. Net Lifecycle Category Savings (kW)', Savings :kWh Savings. Res Cl01h65 Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating _. ... .... ....... Res Lighting . ....... . . . .. Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensitie Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting,. ..,. Non -Res Motors Npn-Res Pumps . ... . . ... .. . . . Non -Res Radlgerellon Non -Res Shelf Non Res.Process • Non Res Comprehensive Other 102 60 'l, 478,138 4,940,848 2,692 $ 135,411 I $ 15,507: $ 50,166 4 23 kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility • Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives CostDirect install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ($) Cost (0) Admln Cost (5) ($) 9,905 99,384 ._, .,, . ,,. .55 4,193 75.489 : 48 1,716 22,308 12 31,451 __--- 624,330 --- 314 ......674 . ...... ,_ 5,082 ", ...3 7,720 138,857 1 75 35,047 700,948 ' 395 1,211 19,18a ' 10 1,632 __.. 18,574', . . l. . ... . .......... .048 ...,..,.,-2289,128 28 241,107 12 1,258 510 9 1,435 5 ....3.375 ..... ..... . 5 _ ......._910 ,. ...... $ 65,936' $ .. 100. . ... 5 2,300 5 27,503 800 5 - ..'4,300 :. $ 211 $ 29,050. 5. .... .,. ,-,. 18,068 $ 3 `$ 1,442 1,854 330 7,904 77 2,023 11,408 245 ;.$ . �.. 15,507 ; $ -_ 0,804 $ 2,677 5,029 1,240 $ 73,742 $ 177 5 4,323 $ 39,911 $ _.._. 845 $ . . . . . . . . . ....4,511 $ .,. .. . . 47.119 22,310 $ 201,084 T&D T&D Total 102 90 478,138. 4,940,948' 2,992 1 $ 135,411 $ 15,507: $ 50,486 1 $ 201,084 1 06 Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding 7817 Net Demand Category { Savings {kW) Net Peak kW Net Annual Nat Lifecycle Savings :`kWh savings; kWh savings Program Sector iUsed in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC , . , . ... . Appliances Consumer omer. . ..Eleotroni ., . ... o.. . as HVAC Lighting . - , . . �. .. ,- Pool Pump_.,,.,__,_ ... Refrigeration HVAC .,..,_ Water Heating Comprehen5ite HVAC HVAC Lighting .___._.. Process P ................ . . ...... . Process Refrigeration HVAC _, .,.,.. .. . Pr6C855 Camprehensiw, Other SuSTotal 1.83 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers - Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration .... .......... Res Shell Rea Water Hea}ing Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking,._ ._ Non -Res Cccling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors N lion -Res s Pumps on Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shall Non Res Process Nun Res CCmprehensite .� Other 4 23 4 '': Net Lifecy GHG Utility Vdlity I Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install" EM&V, and Total Utility Cost {Tons) (6) Cost {5) Admin Cost (6) (9) 10,237 , ..,.. 102,386 . 17 . 4.193 75 40 ' .. .. ........... 9 . ..1. 1,767 - 22977 31,451 624,330 l 314 1,347 12,125: 8 7,952 __-- 143136' 78 . , . . . 38,099 721,975: 407 2,422- �-- 36336 �m- 19 16 64 71 312,706 : • 1,032 19,574 12 151,250 2382584` 1.316, 64,929 , .... . .�.. .� .. 260,545 - ...� ��. ..��. � . ... . 137 57 48 13 26 576 $ 1,478 P $ ..... 3,375 $ . . . ..........._937..; $ .. 65,838'.. _ $ 7.472 $ -._.200 $ __. 145 $ 2,366 $ 29,328',, $..�-. .. _. 1,206 1,225 903 275 1,713 8641 435 $ 4,300 ... $.. ., ... .. , �,-222 30,503 - $ 28,517 4,176 $ 3,116 7 $ 2,703 $ 4,278 $ 1,212 $_ 73310 345 5,.,_, 4,082 39,969 $ 1,635 $ $ 59,020 4,522 4,460,993 2,411 $ 139,728 5 4,176 , $ 52,875 $ 196,578 T&D T&D r Total 84: 71 312,708 ; 4,400,993 1 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 1.89 Excluding T&D 112 2,411 1 139,725 5 4,176 ' $ 52,975 1 $ 196.578 1 LODI ELECTRIC UTILITY (LEU) • Established in 1910 • 28,920 customers (23,920 residential; 5,000 commercial/industrial; FY 08-09) • Peak demand: 141 megawatts; occurs in: summer daytime (FY 08-09) • Annual Energy Use: 452,075,554 kilowatt hours (FY 08-09) LEU Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Since 1998, LEU has spent more than $7.3 million on demand -side management rebates and programs designed to increase energy efficiency for the community, resulting in a 14 percent peak demand reduction and an 11 percent energy reduction. Current (FY 08-09) Commercial/Industrial Customer Programs: • Lodi Commercial (G-1 & G-2) Rebate Program: Provides rebates for small and medium-sized commercial customers who install designated energy efficiency measures, such as: attic insulation, window tinting/shade screens, programmable thermostats, ceiling fans, appliances, high efficiency lighting retrofits, and maintenance of refrigeration/HVAC equipment. • Lodi Commercial/Industrial (G-3 to 1-1) Rebate Program: Provides rebates of up to $20,000 to large commercial and industrial customers; the rebate is for pumps/motors, process equipment improvements, building envelope improvements, I-IVAC/chiller replacements, and high efficiency lighting retrofits. Current (FY 08-09) Residential Customer Programs: • Lodi Appliance Rebate Program: Provides rebates to all customers who purchase an EnergyStar ® refrigerator, dishwasher and or front -loading clothes washer. • Lodi Energy Efficient Home Improvement Rebate Program: Provides rebates to customers for installing attic/wall insulation, attic fans, whole house fans, shade screens/window tinting, radiant barriers, as well as for repairing/replacing HVAC duct systems, and for installing high efficiency (14+ SEER) air conditioning units. • HVAC System Performance Test: Provides a rebate for customers who utilize a select list of HVAC contractors capable of performing a high -end duct system performance test (the test measures airflow, air return and system balance). 113 Current (FY 08-09) Commercial and Residential Programs: • Lodi Energy Audit Program: LEU offers on-line and on -site residential energy audits as well as on - site small commercial customer energy audits. Current (FY 08-09) School (In -Classroom) Programs: • Lodi LivingWise Program: Provides energy efficiency "kits" and manuals to 445 6th grade students in Lodi schools; the program is designed to teach the students the basics of energy and water conservation. • Lodi Solar Schoolhouse Program: Provides teacher mini -grants and teacher training regarding solar/renewable energy resources; also via this program, we sponsor various solar fairs and events at individual school (students and teachers build solar -powered fountains, model race cars, houses, ovens, etc.). • Youth Energy Summit: Provides scholarship opportunities for juniors and seniors in high school; the eligible students must participate in a two-day workshop (known as the Youth Energy Summit), then complete a community service learning project, based upon the information they garner from the Summit/training. After completing their "project," the student teams then present their findings and projects to a panel of judges, who in turn award the scholarship funds. Current (FY 08-09) Low-income Residential Programs: • Lodi C.A.R.E. Package Program: Provides grants to very low-income customers in need of assistance paying their electric utility account; the program coordination/customer screening is performed by the Lodi Salvation Army. In order to secure a grant payment, customers must consent to in an in -home energy audit. • Lodi SHARE Discount Rate: LEU provides a rate discount of 30% for qualifying residential customers on their electric utility monthly billing statement; $400,000 annually is budgeted for this rate discount from the Lodi Public Benefits Program fund. Measurement Methodology: Lodi utilizes KEMA Consulting 'Measure Quantification Methodology' report for various residential and small commercial rebate programs; for large commercial and industrial customer rebates/programs, the customer is required to provide to the utility an engineered energy analysis/audit detailing their projected savings. In addition, LEU has implemented an Evaluation, Measurement & Verification (EM & V) Plan, and has completed its first and second year assessments of randomly selected programs and large rebates as part of the designed EM & V Plan. For the FY 08-09, projected energy savings were verified for five (5) large customer rebates and one (1) residential program (Lodi Energy Efficient Home Improvement Rebate Program) was assessed for the FY 08-09. Note: LEU retained the services of Summit Blue Consulting to assist in the creation of the aforementioned Lodi EM & V Plan, 114 as well as the on -site, first and second year kWh savings verification processes. LEU intends to utilize Summit Blue for similar kWh and kW verification savings in 2010. Proposed LEU Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2010-2011) Maintain existing programs, while possibly expending additional Public Benefit Program funds on demand -side management rebates/incentives. LEU Demand Reduction Programs: LEU does not currently have any demand reduction programs in place. Economic Impacts on LEU Energy Efficiency Programs: Based upon conversations with numerous large energy users in Lodi, it became apparent that during this reporting period, the state of the global economy (as well as the United States and California economies) had an impact on the implementation of large energy efficiency projects in Lodi. Although some projects were pursued during this time -frame, many large customers opted to wait on installing energy conservation measures; instead, choosing to maintain the status quo and to "ride out the current economic storm" until better times were achieved. Projects involving the proverbial "low -hanging fruit," such as a lighting retrofit, were still relatively popular; however, projects involving building envelope improvements or process equipment upgrades were held back until further notice. 115 LODI ELECTRIC UTILITY (LEU) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics. HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC _. . i . . . ,... Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC _...._ WAG Lighting . ......... Process Prgoes5 Refrigeration HVAC process Comprehensive Other SubTotal Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling ... . r ....... ....... Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Healing Res tight ng Res Pool PumP,__,_.-,._. Res Refrigeration Res Shell . .. . _.......; Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res cooking Non -Res Cooling • Nan -Res Healing Non -Res Lighting NoeRes Motors Nan -Res Pumps NomRes Ileftigeratior _ Non -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensise Other Net Peak kW Savings Net Lifecycle 585 Utility Utility UGIity Mktg, Net Annual ' Net Life cycle Reductions Incentives Cosy :Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings` kWh savings (Tans) 191 Cast ($) Admin Cast ($1 $) 3' ._, 3a,-,.. 7,782, 6,210 3,858 4,680 1,120 't 0,600 14,439 77,816 ..........43 70,194 42 00,648'...- ...-...28 42,1201 22 11,200..'1- _ _.._B., 194,400 I 105 241.832 138 _ . 3,, _ .999 84 42f 38 .. . . .. .. .. ., . . .. 202.320 . 2,225,520 1,233 274 - 2,738 1 303,872 .. , .1215468 ...,,988 3,,020900- = 48,486 20 224,006 3350,000 1,787 887,519 7 . ...._ ,770,388 ---- 4,133 $ .. .......5,600 . .. $ 528 $ 7,937 ....,.,... $ 083 3,125 $ 351 100 7,100 13,514 252 78 1,327 1:823 6,239 5 458 $ 28,160 $ '15,454 1,620 $ 11,224 $ _ 8,000 0 52,8041 5 146,505 8,823 349 21,397 $ 48,560 $ $ 8,129 $ 8,521 $.... 3,478 $ 252 $ 176 • - ..6,427 $ 15,337 $ 6,694 43,614. 20,047 $ 1,435 $ 27,397 .$. ...101.384 $ 246,505 96', 64< 1,874,2101 15,376,249 0,287 100,000 T&U T&D (Total 66 64 : 1,674,210 ' 15,378,249 8,287' $ 146,505 $ 100,0001 $ 246,505 1 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&D 2.00 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Ccolmg . ....... . . . . .. ., Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics ReResRes Electronics . ... ............... ..... ...... ..,. . .. ., . ,..,..,... HVAC Res Heating Lighting ...._ Res Lighting, . . . .... Poor Pump Res Pool Pump.., . .. Refrigeration Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Ras . ..__ ... Healing Water Healing Compr54600 te Res Camprehen5ile. . .. Process Non --Res Cooking HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC � � � Nan -Res Heating Lighting, --- Non -Res Lighting.- .0.,6-._.........-,.,.. .. e. Precess Non -Rea Motors r --- Pmcess Nan -Rea Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration -_ HVAC Non -Res Shell . .r. . .. .. .. . Process Non Res Princess Coin rehensiae Non Res Comprehensive j P ... ...... . . . .. Other Dth91er Sue-falai 3 3 7r 11 18 2 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW ' Net Annual E Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cast Direct install 1 EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (fans) {$) Cost (0) '. Admin Cost (9) (4) Savings 'kWh Savings kWh savings 7,782 r 77,818 31 6,210 70,194 ' -.. ,2 3,898 50648 i` 4,600; 42,120' _._ .. :.. 1,120 11,200 2 10,800 194,400 .... 16 14,439. 241,832 ; . .-33 3 i..,. ) . .. 3,999 64,421 202,320 2225 5Z0 >. 43 42 28 22 s 105 136 35 ....274 2736;...... ., ... 1 297,795 1,191,178 --- 672 3,299 49,486 .....,- . 28 212,600 : 3,192,000 1,697 887,519 ----7,770.388 ---- 4,133 $ $ 5,600 7,937 3125_ $ 7,100 $ 13,514 e 2351 28.160 1,020 $ 11,000 $ 1,066 $ 5,700 $ 52,8041 $ 145,981; .5 1,683 1,618 1,095 911 242 4204 5.230 1 393 48,120 09 25,750 1,070 ....59,020 $ 188,038 7,283 9,465_ 4 i2o ?.... ...... .. . � . � 911 $ .. .., 342 5 11,304 16,743 9,628 5. 7e,288 $ 1,679 $_ 36,780 $ 2,166 $ 74,728 $ 229,942 $ 474,341 86 64 1,656,932 15,183,939 8,184 ,$ 328,360 T&0 T&D Total 1 84 1,659,932 • 15,183,939 0,184 i $ 145,801 $ 328,3601 $ 474,341 1 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 1,03 Exc84105 T&LS 116 CITY OF LOMPOC Lompoc initially implemented energy audit programs in 1981. In 1991, the programs were expanded to include energy efficiency education programs. In 2001, energy efficiency rebates and a low-income refrigerator subsidy program were added. Since then, additional programs have been added and existing programs modified to accommodate the community's needs. Current Commercial Customer Programs: • Commercial Lighting Rebate: the rebate for changing T12 to T8 fluorescent lighting was changed to offer a rebate that would provide for a 1.75 year payback. • Exit Sign Rebate: A rebate of $15 to replace existing incandescent or fluorescent -lit exit signs with LED, or.$30 the replace same signs with electro-luminescence signs. This rebate was first offered in 2002. (Net Annual Savings: 28,126 kilowatt-hours). Current Commercial and Residential Customer Programs: • . Refrigerator Rebate: A $144 rebate is paid to electric customers, or landlords who rent to City Customers, to replace working refrigerators or freezers manufactured before 1992 with a new energy -efficient model. The old appliance must be recycled at the City's landfill. (Net Annual Savings [all refrigerator programs]: 85,263 kilowatt-hours.) • Refrigerator BuyBack Program: $35 is paid to customers who recycle, at the City's landfill, any second working refrigerator or freezer. This program was first offered in May 2001. Clothes Washer Rebate: A $120 rebate is paid to customers who replace a working (non Energy Star®) clothes washer with a new Energy Star® model. The old clothes washer must be recycled at the City's landfill. This program was first offered in March 2003. Dishwasher Rebate: A $50 rebate is paid to electric customers who replace working dishwashers, which were manufactured before 1994, with an Energy Star® model. The old dishwasher must be recycled at the City's landfill. This program was first offered in March of 2003. Gas Conversion Payment: $100 is paid to electric customers who replace and recycle an electric water heater or clothes dryer with a gas appliance. The electric appliance must be recycled at the City's landfill. (Net Annual Savings: 12,717 kilowatt-hours). LED Holiday Lighting: A rebate of $4 for up to 35 light strands and $8 for larger strands is paid to utility customers who purchase LED holiday lighting. This program was first offered in October 2005. 117 Renewable Resource Rebate: Any electric customer who installs a grid -tied self -generating electric system that is considered to be renewable energy will receive a rebate of $3.00 per watt. (Non profit customers will receive a rebate of $3.50 per watt.) This program was first offered in February 2004. Customized Rebate: a rebate of $.15 per watt saved is offered for any energy efficiency measure completed for any electric customer. • Energy Audits: Lompoc provides free energy audits for all customers and an online audit for residential customers. Current Low Income Customer Programs: • Income Qualifying Refrigerator Purchase Program: For low-income customers, a payment of up to $600 is made toward the purchase of a new refrigerator.. The old refrigerator must be in working order; must have been manufactured before 1992; and will be recycled at the City's landfill. The customer is required to repay the City $240 over a one-year time period. • Rate and Energy Assistance Programs: Lompoc offers a rate discount for low-income customers and a special medical needs rate. Current subsidy is $8.00 per month not to exceed electric charges. Current Community Programs: • Education Programs: Lompoc encourages energy conservation through school and community education programs. Proposed City of Lompoc Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2009-2010) • Evaluate existing programs to determine if incentives are attractive to customers and increase incentive levels if necessary to assure continued participation in all programs. • Ensure that energy efficiency is part of integrated resource planning by determining and implementing the most cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency measures. Measure and evaluate the impact of energy efficiency programs. System upgrades: Lompoc will continue the upgrade of all 4 kilovolts lines to 12 kilovolts distribution lines and is purchasing only low -loss transformers. Lompoc Demand Reduction Programs: Lompoc offers a Firm Curtailable Load Purchase Program, but no customer has utilized it since it was created. Customers who have an average peak -period demand of at least 500 kilovolt -A during each of the last six summer months may apply for this program. The customer must sign a contract for electric service fora five-year period, and will be required to reduce demand when the City requests such curtailment. The customer receives a demand payment of $6.00 per kilowatt of curtailed demand per season and $0.10 per kilowatt-hour. 118 ARRA Stimulus Funding: Lompoc has applied for ARRA large city ARRA funding of $165,600. One hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) will be used to retrofit existing street lighting from HPS to LED lighting. As a test, the City has installed four LED street lights and two Induction street lights in an areas on side streets off of state highways. The two lighting types will be evaluated as the project moves forward. Commercial Lighting Retrofit: thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) of Public Benefit funding will be added to the$65,600 for rebates for commercial business to retrofit existing T12 lighting to more energy efficient lighting. Installation of occupancy sensors will be included in this program. Economic impact: As business slows, the downturn in the economy has affected customer willingness to spend money on energy efficient appliances unless the old appliance 'breaks down' and it seems they will not purchase the most energy efficient appliance or the type of first choice but the least expensive model that will meet minimum needs. For example, last year for the three months of April, May and June fifty-four rebates in all categories were issued. This year for the same three months, twenty-three rebates were issued. This is also evident when approaching commercial customers to discuss the retrofit of their lighting. The rebate for retrofit of lighting will pay for 85 to 95% of the cost to change the light to more energy efficiency lamps. Even though this will make the payback within 6 months or less, the business owner is reluctant to participate in the program. It is extremely more and more difficult to convince a customer that they will save money by making the suggested changes. To them the facts are that the money must be spent before a rebate is issued and they do not want to make that initial expenditure. The other problems that is caused by the economic downturn is the amount of available businesses that exist in our service territory. Property owners are reluctant to make energy efficient improvements to a vacant building. The City continues to work with property and business owners to reduce usage while meeting the business needs. 119 CITY OF LOMPOC Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 .500 Program Sector : Net Demand Nat Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle )Used in GEC Report) Category ; Savings (kW) '. Savings -kWh Savings kWh savings ..... . ........ Clothes W . .. Washers . .. . '... ..... ...... . . . ..... . . . .... . ......._ .. .,. ,_.... .. . ,. ... .. -... 8,944 Appliances Res HVAC Res Cooling s. Appliance ._ _.._ -. . . . . . ., . Res ers ��...5?9 -...., 7134 Consumer Electronics Res Electronics 9 Lighting Pool Pump Res Pool Pump . . . . . . . . . .. . .... . . . .. i.. ....... .:.. .... . . .... ..... .., . Refrigeration Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Res Water Heating Comprehensive Res Comprehansl1e Process Non -Res Cooking }iVAC Nvn-Res Coding - ---- '. HVAC Non -Res Heating lighting Non -Res Lighting.,- Process Non -Res Motors . . . . . _.__ m Process ...,._. Nan -Res Pumps a on -Res fg rats .... . ... . ...... ........ Nan -Res Refrigeration 3, Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell . .,.,_,-.....,. N R P ......... .......... ..... . ... Process Non es Process I. . , _.___ _.... Comprehensive Non Res Compmhenslve Other Other 3, 26 0 Net Lifecycle GHG Reduction (ions: Reductions 1111011214111111 USIEty Utility Utility Mktg, Incentives cost :Direct Install; EIVI&V, and Total Utility Cast )8) Cost($) Admin Cost 1$) ($) 0 4,580 $ 380. $ 133 $ 5,073 4 ...... ........ . ..700 $...............140 5 .. . . .. . .51 $ 891 13 123,038 1,265,513 9 690 6 3,968 • 5 _:.:.... -_ 4. ��-- 6 703 $ 0,fi94 _._ 18312 1 $ 2412 5........- .. . 3 18,960 341,260 195 S 15,900 . ,. .._.., . ...... . ... . . . 27030 718,198 1,300182 721 $ 7,440 _,.._. 69760E 39 $ 25,070 111,440 334,320 „. 185 9267 $...,.... ,... 38297 539 $ 25,609 _ $, ,... ...2.500, $...,., .. 2,8 2,599 SubTotal 113 40 392,120 3,337,134 ; 1,634 $ 113,248 $ 520 $ 23,604 $ 137;372 T&D T&D T 174410 113 40 ' 392,120 3,337,1341 1,634 $ 113,246 $ 520 9 23,624 1 $ 137,372' 1 1EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding 7&O Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in GEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Elecconics_ HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration' HVAC Water Heating ..................... ting Comprehensive Process; - .............. . .... HVAC HVAC Lighting P mcess Process Refrigeration .. ........ _...................... ...... . HVAC Process comptohensii.e Other SubTotal Net Demand Category savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling RasDishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating - - - Res Lighting.-...,-,..,--,.-.-� Res Pao! Pump Ras Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking N....... Cooling . ... .. ...... ..... .... ...... .... Non -Res Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Nor -Res Molars Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Nor -Res Shell..,,.-.... . Nor Res Process . NonRes Comprehensive Clher Net Peak kW Savings Net Annual I Net Lifecycle kWh Savingsi kWh savings 18,944 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives Cast Direct Instal( EM&V, and Total Utility Coat (Toner 19) 10 116 40 395,829 3,375,099 1,655 $ 114,445 $ 520 $ 23,004 $ 138,572 $ 4,560' $ $ ' 700$ $ 411 ;, ..,., $ ...15,90011..,... cost 15) ' Admin Cost ($) (0) 360 $ 132 50 9,118 2,367 $ 36,128 $ 25,559 $ 27,030 _ ._ $ 9,003 $ 25.070 �� -- $ 468 $ 2,336 5,972 890 $ 2,336 T&D TRO .l 'Total 118 40 395,026 3;375,099': 1,655 1 $ 114,448E $ 520 $ 23,6041; 138,572 'EE Program Portfolio TRC Test - 1.82 Excluding 780 120 LOS ANGELES DEPT OF WATER & POWER (LADWP) GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF UTILITY • Established in 1902 to deliver water to the City of Los Angeles. Electricity distribution began in 1916. • Serves 4 million people via 1.4 million electric and 680,000 water connections. Nearly 70% of electricity usage is by the commercial/industrial sectors and over 30% by residential customers. • A peak demand of 6,165 MW was registered in the summer of 2006. • Annual energy use is 24.6 million megawatt -hours. • 8,611 employees. • Largest municipal utility in the nation. LADWP Energy Efficiency Program Highlights • LADWP Energy Efficiency Program expenditures during the period beginning FY 2000-2001 through FY 2008-2009 totaled $204.3 million. • Programs achieved peak demand reduction of 262.5 MW and 823.0 GWh of energy savings during this period. • Average life cycle cost of these savings was $0.024/kWh. • Savings based upon estimation methodologies approved for use by both IOU and POU for energy efficiency program reporting purposes. Savings have been adjusted annually since FY 2003-04 based on measurement and verification performed by an independent•third party. Overview of LADWP's FY 2008-2009 Energy Efficiency Programs Commercial Customer Programs: Total Non -Residential Program expenditures: $50.0 million resulting in 25.3 MW of peak demand reduction and 151.7 GWh of annual energy savings. The rebates and rebate levels assist LADWP customers in lowering energy consumption and energy expenses while benefiting the environment. Program enhancements were made to encourage maximum achievable program participation. • Commercial Lighting Efficiency Offer: Provides rebates for a wide variety of high efficiency lighting measures to retrofit existing buildings. Rebates levels were increased and the list of qualifying measures expanded for FY 2008-2009. Program is largely vendor -driven. 121 • Chiller Efficiency Program: Provides rebates to retrofit existing buildings with high -efficiency electric chillers. Expanded the list of qualifying types of chillers, and new rebate levels designed to pay the full incremental cost of new high -efficiency units. • Refrigeration Program: Provides incentives for a variety of energy efficient refrigeration measures. Rebate measures include ice machines, solid and glass refrigerator doors, door gaskets, night covers, strip curtains, vending machine controllers, etc. To be eligible for rebates, participating customers must reserve funds and receive approval to proceed prior to purchasing and installing the qualifying refrigeration equipment. • Custom Performance Program: Provides incentives for cost-effective energy -saving opportunities not served by existing prescriptive offerings. Program includes equipment controls, CO sensors, high efficiency technologies, and other innovative strategies. LADWP engineers evaluate the energy -saving benefits (quantity, reliability, persistence) of each submitted measure and calculate savings -based financial incentives for participating customers. Energy saving measures, equipment or systems must exceed Title 24 or minimum industry standards • Small Business Direct Install: Program pays 100% of the installed cost, up to a maximum of $2,500, for lighting retrofits in small business customers' facilities. Program operates using SCPPA Direct Install Program contractors made available to LADWP through a participation agreement with SCPPA. Program services deliver energy savings from typically hard -to -reach small business sector. • New Construction Incentive Program: Provides incentives and technical assistance for new construction and major remodel projects; uses prescriptive incentives for standard new construction and more aggressive, energy points -based incentives for projects receiving LEED certification. • Financing Program: Provides low -interest loans for the installation of energy efficient equipment in existing buildings (including city facilities). • Energy Audits: On -site energy audits for existing non-residential buildings, available free -of - charge. • Technical Assistance: Provides technical assistance and design review for retrofit projects in existing, building and new construction projects. Residential Customer Programs: Total Residential Program expenditures: $17.6 million resulting in 25.6 MW of peak demand reduction and 135.9 GWh of annual energy savings. • Consumer Rebate Program: Provides rebates for the purchase and installation of Energy Star rated appliances and other high -efficiency equipment, including refrigerators, air -conditioners, windows, pool pumps, etc. • Refrigerator Recycling Program: LADWP provides free pick-up and recycling of old, inefficient refrigerators, along with free CFLs and a rebate of $35 for each recycled refrigerator. • Compact Fluorescent Lamp Distribution: Significantly expand distribution of free CFLs to residential customers through community and City events, via community groups, and in conjunction with other energy efficiency programs. 122 • Horne Energy Saver On -Line Audit: Computerized energy audit analyzes energy use and makes recommendations for efficiency opportunities. • Low -Income Refrigerator Exchange Program: Provides new energy -efficient refrigerators to low- income customers in exchange for their existing inefficient older models. Three-year program goal of 50,000 refrigerators. LADWP Energy Efficiency Measurement & Verification (M&V) Activities LADWP has retained the services of an independent third party contractor to evaluate its energy efficiency programs. The firm has completed assessing energy efficiency projects completed in fiscal year 2006-2007 (July 1 —June 30). Projects reviewed represent a random sampling from the full spectrum of LADWP's energy efficiency program portfolio. The independent third party's M&V analysis conclude the "...energy savings for most LADWP incentive programs showed that the baseline energy savings were achieved as projected by LADWP." A redacted version of this report has been submitted to the CEC and is available. A preliminary report has been submitted by the contractor for M&V activities for the fiscal year 2007- 2008, which covered mostly non-residential programs. Additional work is planned to include measures implemented under the Residential Efficiency and other programs. The findings will be made available for review as soon as the revisions and additional M&V activities are completed. Proposed FY 2009-2010 LADWP Energy Efficiency Programs and Services Commercial Customer Programs: Total Non -Residential Program budget: $46.7 million resulting in a projected 35.2 MW of peak demand reduction and 199.0 GWH of annual energy savings. • Commercial Lighting Efficiency Offer (CLEO): LADWP anticipates continued increase in program participation from customers seeking the higher rebates offered for "Super T8" High Performance (HP) and Reduced Wattage (RW) systems ($30/fixture), and qualifying T8 and T5 high bay fixtures ($100/fixture). Eligible measures and rebate amounts (increased by as much as 25 percent in prior years) under review for possible refinement. • Chiller Efficiency Program {CEP): Rebates are available for all types of chillers (air-cooled and water-cooled). In addition, water-cooled centrifugal chillers now can be tested at either standard ARI or non-standard ARI conditions provided the cooling tower meets specified performance criteria. Higher rebate levels are based on the percentage that the chiller's Integrated Part -Load Value (1PLV) performance exceeds California's Current Title 24 requirements for chillers. • Refrigeration Program: This program continues to offer generous rebates for the purchase and installation of high efficiency refrigeration equipment and measures. Program planning includes improved outreach to equipment vendors. • Custom Performance Program (CPP): This program continues offering savings -based incentives for the installation of energy saving measures, equipment or systems that exceed Title 24 or minimum industry standards. Program planning includes offering higher incentives for large - 123 scale energy efficiency projects (annual savings of 1 GWH or more) under the Custom Plus program. • Small Business Direct Install (SBDI) Program: Continuation of the three-year program launched in February 2008, assisting small businesses (Al rate customers) in the City of Los Angeles to become more energy efficient. Small businesses that reduce their energy load can save money and apply that savings to grow their business and create new jobs. Qualifying customers receive a FREE lighting assessment and FREE lighting upgrade and installation (up to $2,500 in cost) from one of three authorized contractors. • New Construction Incentive Program: Continuation of a program offering two tiers of incentives to owners who build to levels that exceed required standards of energy efficiency. These incentives are being offered to encourage property owners to build to higher levels of energy efficiency and environment responsibility. Anticipated increase in program participation due to the implementation of a new Green Building Ordinance in the City of Los Angeles. • Air-conditioning Tune -Up & Replacement: This program under development will provide customers with HVAC tune-up services, duct test and seal, and early replacement of inefficient HVAC equipment. • Financing Program: Ongoing low -interest loan program for the installation of energy efficient equipment in City facilities. • Energy Audits: Continued offering of free on -site energy audits for existing non-residential buildings. • Technical Assistance: Continued offering of technical assistance and design review for retrofit projects in existing building and new construction projects. Residential Customer Programs: Total Residential Program budget: $40.5 million resulting in a projected 18.5 MW of peak demand reduction and 102.7 GWH of annual energy savings. • Consumer Rebate Program: Continued offering of rebates for the purchase and installation of Energy Star appliances and other high -efficiency equipment (refrigerators, air -conditioners, windows, etc.). Program planning includes offering "Point of Sale" rebates that result in maximum influence over consumer purchase decision. • Refrigerator Recycling: Ongoing program provides free pick-up and recycling of old, inefficient refrigerators, along with free CFLs and a new cash incentive of $35 for each recycled refrigerator. • Low -Income Refrigerator Exchange: Ongoing program provides new energy -efficient refrigerators to low-income customers in exchange for existing inefficient older models. Program planning includes improved outreach and expansion to apartment owners. • Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) Distribution: The CFL Distribution Program which provided two free CFLs to 1.2 million residential customers through direct -to -door distribution to residences in the City of Los Angeles was completed in early 2009. This program however continues by providing free CFLs to customers through community events, via community groups, and in conjunction with other energy efficiency programs. • CFL Manufacturer Buydown Program: Offers financial incentives upstream, to CFL manufacturers and distributors, to reduce the production costs of each CFL. CFLs are then sold 124 to retailers in the City of Los Angeles at reduced costs, resulting in a significantly lower -price for CFLs sold to consumers. • Point of Sale Consumer Rebate Program: Program would provide LADWP's residential customers, instant, at -the -register rebates for the purchase of qualifying energy efficient appliances and products at participating retail establishments. • Home Energy Saver Online Audit: Ongoing availability of web -based energy audit; analyzes energy use and makes recommendations for efficiency opportunities. Demand Reduction and Other Programs: Total Other Program budget: $ 6.8 million resulting in a projected 171 kilowatts (KW) peak demand reduction for the fiscal year. • Thermal Energy Storage: Incentive program for FY 2009-2010 provides incentives and technical assistance for TES systems that shift load and include energy efficient designs. Note: FY08/09 figures have not been audited and reporting includes previous year expenditures for projects concluded during FY08/09 LADWP Demand Side Management Programs Update Assembly Bill 2021 became law in 2007 requiring the Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) and Publicly Owned Utilities (POUs) to identify energy efficiency potential and establish annual efficiency targets that would result in the state meeting its goal of reducing total forecasted electricity consumption by 10 percent over the next 10 years. Pursuant to the requirements of AB 2021, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) developed and submitted the following Board -approved energy efficiency savings goals to the state (California Energy Commission): FY 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 GWH 58 275 315 300 280 255 252 252 252 252 MW 12 50 58 57 55 53 53 53 53 53 2006 Potential Study An energy efficiency potential study conducted by Quantum Consulting (Now Itron) was initiated in early 2005 and completed in February 2006, the results of which eventually became the basis for implementation of efficiency programs required to meet the goals shown in the LADWP AB2021 submittal. Among the more significant recommendations of the potential study included expansion of program offerings in the following areas: • Residential Compact Fluorescent Lamp Distribution Program • Residential and Non -Residential HVAC Performance Program (Pilot) • Refrigerator Early Retirement Program • Non -Residential Custom Incentives Program 125 GWH Savings 350.0 - 300.0 250.0 - 200.0 - 150.0 - 100.0 - 50.0 - 0.0 • Non -Residential New Construction Program • Small Commercial Turnkey Program (Small Business Direct Install) • Non -Residential Refrigeration Program • Non -Residential Retro-Commissioning Program These program recommendations (except for the Retro-Commissioning and HVAC Pilot Programs) were developed, launched and implemented during 2007 and 2008, in addition to continuing to offer the core programs under the Commercial Lighting Efficiency Offer (CLEO), the Chiller Efficiency Program (CEP), the Consumer Rebate Program (CRP) and expansion of the Residential Refrigerator Recycling Program to include a Low income Refrigerator Exchange program component. Achievements and Results —A Historical Trend and Perspective Tracking of the energy efficiency program results starting with Fiscal Year 2000-2001 is shown by the following gross savings achievement impacts in GWH savings as well as the corresponding expenditures (in millions of dollars): FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Annual Gwh Savings 65.0 164.2 52.3 34.5 37.0 16.6 67.9 138.8 318.0 LADWP Energy Efficiency Achievements & Projections (Annual GWH) 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 Fiscal Year 126 Energy Efficiency Programs FY 00-01 FY 01-02 FY 02-03 FY 03-04 FY 04-05 FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Expenditures ($M) $12 $19 $13 $11 $10 $8 $13 $36 $67 Based on the charts, the LADWP has achieved significant increases in annual energy savings over the last several years. Savings achieved in FY 06-07 was about four times more than the previous fiscal year. The FY 07-08 more than doubled the results reported for 06-07 at 140 GWH. Adding to the upward trend, based on the more recent performance for the fiscal year, LADWP achieved energy savings amounting to 19 times FY 05-06 levels. This energy savings amount of 318 GWH represents an all-time high energy efficiency savings achievement while keeping the program expenditures well below the cost-effectiveness benchmark of 3 cents per kWH on a levelized cost basis. The current 2009-2010 fiscal year budgets a total of $92 M with a 300 GWH energy savings projection. Potential Study 2010 As required by AB2021 load serving utilities need to identify achievable, cost-effective efficiency potential every 3 years and establish annual targets based on the results. The LADWP is in the process of implementing a new Efficiency Potential Study for June of 2010 that will evaluate the current program plans and identify new programs for implementation in order to achieve LADWP's energy efficiency goals forAB2021. A Potential Study RFP was issued in December 2009 and the LADWP received proposals from 4 bidders. Evaluations of the potential study proposals have been completed and a contract award to the most responsive bidder is expected to be sent for approval to the Board of Water and Power Commissioners on April 6, 2010. Preliminary AB2021 targets are expected to be submitted to the CEC by June followed by Board -approved potential targets by the end of July 2010. Current and Future Program Plans The LADWP continues its plans for development of the remaining efficiency programs identified in the potential study notably, the Retro-Commissioning program as well as an HVAC tune -Up and Early Equipment Replacement Program. Program plans are underway for a Consumer Electronics Program which will achieve energy savings in consumer electronics and appliances, specifically providing incentives to influence the manufacture and purchase of high efficiency LCD monitors, televisions and computers, both for residential and commercial applications. The LADWP is considering participating in a statewide collaborative effort with other utilities with regards to this program. Energy Efficiency staff also assesses ongoing programs to identify opportunities to make improvements that will prompt higher levels of customer participation with increased energy savings. 127 LADWP ARRA Grant Activities LADWP will be receiving $ 3.5 million from the City's $ 37 million Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, to be used for the following energy efficiency measures and activities: • Rebates for residential whole house fans • Rebates for residential cool roofs • Rebates for residential window shading • Incentives for commercial building retro-commissioning Rebates and incentives for these measures will be available in the third quarter of 2010. LADWP has also submitted an ARRA EECBG application, requesting a total of $ 43 million for the following energy efficiency measures and activities: • Energy Efficiency audit Program • Direct Install Lighting Efficiency Program (targeting small and medium businesses in enterprise zones, and non-profit businesses citywide) • Direct Install Pool Pump Replacement Program Funding availability for this grant application is pending. 128 LOS ANGELES DEPT OF WATER & POWER (LADWP) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Cnn3omer 51006onles HVA........ _.. . ........ ..... ..... ..... ... HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration„_ HVAC • Water Heating Comprehers5e Process . . . .... . ... .. ... . . ... ... .. . . . HVAC HVAC • Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Prooess Comprehensive Other SubTotal Net Demand Category Savings(kW( Res Mathes Washers Res Cooling 363 .. . . Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res ... .... ..... . ... . . ...... . .............. ..... ..... ..: Res H6affng Res Lighting,. ., Res Pool Pump Res Refigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling 724: 724 : 2,503,203 Non•Ros Heating ...03 g5t......... ............. ..... .... .. .....18.. -. 110.835 0.,. ..,: Nan -Res Lighting 23,183: 16 259 - 170,895 057 1,064 386 499 : 589,634 On -- -- .. . . . 2 ... .. . ,885 Nan -Res MOtrn's 253;31763 - 5,379 17,419,903 268,796,552 - 154,885_ Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration 1,124 745 - 7,118,779 28,982,498 16,580 Non -Res Shell' " 213 213; 457,066 6,858,284 - 3,951 Non Res Process Nan Res Comprehensne - ... ... Other � 1,0%• 33, 12,80606 3221 146,228,382 � 77,0135 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct; Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW ( Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cost i EM&V, and Total Utility Cast (Tans) ($) (5) ' Admin Cost 14) (5) Savings 16Wh Savings kWh savings 7,182,029 -. 4,589 22.263 118,282989 1,046,364 204; 529,901 137 403,760 4037800 2,377 2.954E 16,766,299 251,149,760 133,573 ........ 7 42 24028 460550: 277 45,983,549 25,496 $.,.. . . 448,000 182,400 179,091 2,020,387 21,901 $ 5,787,674 $ 91,320 ! $ $ 804,384 $ 7,505,677 1 $ $ 68,260 $ $ 1,365,619 451,844 $ 1.288,000 $ 2,786,935 $ 28,322,179 $ 11849,586 5 2,519,157 -_, 5 1,340,500 $ 256,830 5 155,685 $ 760,877' $ 15,115,641 : 0 33,827,859 $ 18,819,803 415,000 110,644, 899,450 9 900,844 $; 5,960.074 $ 270,411 $ 10 331,049 $ 90,191 $ 2,654,619 $ 41,058,800 $ 3,859,557 $- 711,630 260,325 1,450,427 171,345 ; 50,920: 287,574,239 2,870,428,815 1,539,248 $ 87,564,300 T&0 T(50 'Total 171,345: 50,920: 287,574,239. 2,870,428,915 1,539,249 1 5 15,116,641: 5 33,827,853: 0 15,618,843 1 $ 67,564.300 1 1EE Program PonfalioTRC Test 3.77 Excluding 780 Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Repoli) Appliances_ HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refdgeration_, HVAC Water Heating Camprehensise Process HVAC HVAC - Lighting Process Process Refrigeration_. HVAC Process comprehensive Other SubTotal Category Res clothes Washers Res Cooling . ..... ... .. . .... Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res,Ughtinp Res Pool Pump______ Res Refrigeration Res Res Water Heating - Res Camprehenshe Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Coaling • Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non-Res Metals .. .. . . . . .....,.. , Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration . . . . .. . Non -Res Shell Non. Res Pmcess. Non Res Comprehensive Other 1 Net Lifecycle • 1 GHG Utility ',Utility Direct Utility Mktg, Net Demand : Net Peak kW ' Net Annual Nat Lifecycle 1 Reductions Incentives Cost 11 Insist] Cost ' EM&V, and Total Utility Cos Savings (kW) savings kWh savings', kWh savings i (Tons) ($$1 '.. (5) Admin Cast (8) (0) 3,198,207 • 54316936mii-.. �_. ��1,747 . .. .... ... ..... ... ... 60,213 7'66- 43,375,823 l 390,382,449 E 213 1 124' 310,257 1 3,102,568 ' 0,709 55,643,469 , 6,708 '., . 5._ . 922,697,371 e B 6: 3,5871 71,738 i s p_ 1,613 8,373,626 7 122 472 512 29,022 24,059 144,949,880 , 1,464 853,405 i 1,815 770'. 84 1,427 6,507 589 5004,015 58909279 770 1,650,352 24,755277 ; 84 3,212 250 48,183,872 1,427 1 6,43E1,721 ; 96,550,820 6,682 29,344,316 1 399,749,045 $ 1,387,254 • -.. 767,936 $ 2,712,660 $ 263,158 $ 573,106 $ 83,1051 i 5' 73,789 5 3,204,562. 529,838,390 ; $ 1,491,439 $ 10,190 $ .5 ,149 S 2,547,500 5 2,200,000.5 172,500 $ 10,190,000 915,285,000 $ 2,199,000 $ 509,500 $ $95,800 $ - 711,54tla- -' i $ 39,331 $ 1,933,787 ; S 00,121 $ 3,057,900 ' $ 80,300 $ 5,426,223 - ' $ 1,698,885 $ 31,833,320 547,586,578 $ 7,757,138 $ 2,175,193, $ 3,548,954 166.853 $ 34 624,391 $ 15,339 $ 4,920,000 5..._ $ 27,874,000 $ 1,105,100 $..... 750871 $ 2,013,408 § 3,137,300 $ 7,125,088 $ 87,247,036 112.0113 53,763 341,704,532 3,646,272,231 T&0 T&D TTotal 112,418', 53,763 301,704,532 1 3,508,272,231 i 1;$ 31,863,320; $47,586,5781 $ 7,797,1381 $ 87.247.0361 MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT • For more than 75 years, the Merced Irrigation District (MID) has been in the business of generating wholesale electrical power. • Fourteen years ago, MID determined the best way to leverage its investment in low-cost generating facilities, and to benefit Eastern Merced County communities was to develop its own electric delivery system. • In 1996, MID created the Electric Services Department, and Foster Farms in Livingston, CA became the District's first electric customer. • MID's electric distribution system has continued to grow with the addition of a 34 -mile transmission loop and a sophisticated distribution system supporting customers in Eastern Merced County. • MID sells electricity generated at its New Exchequer hydro power plant to PG&E under a long- term contract that expires in 2014. MID Energy Efficiency Program Highlights In 2000, MID -Electric Services created and implemented the Public Benefit Programs. These programs promote, assist and educate all electric customers to participate and install energy efficiency measures. Current Commercial Customer Programs: • Commercial Energy Retrofit Programs: Any commercial, industrial, or agricultural customer of the District is eligible to receive up to $150,000 in rebates annually. Merced Irrigation District will consider payment for conservation based on total kWh saved over one year at a rate of $0.07 or 50% of the project cost, whichever is lowest. • Commercial New Construction Program: Incentives for the Commercial New Construction Program are also available for projects estimated to exceed Title 24 or standard practice baseline by at least 10 percent on a whole building performance basis. • Customized Commercial Retrofit Program Effective: January 2009 • Commercial/Industrial Mechanical Equipment Retrofit Program - Effective January 1, 2009. • Commercial/Industrial Lighting Program January 1, 2009 Current Residential Customer Programs: • Residential Rebate Program: Implemented in 2004, this program encourages residential customers to purchase EnergySta0 labeled products, home appliances and energy -efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs. 130 • Appliance Recycle Program: Implemented in 2009, this program allows residential customers to receive a $35.00 rebate for recycling qualified refrigerators or freezers. • Spruce Up Your Horne Shade Tree Program: The Merced Irrigation District did not implement its tree program for 2009. However, there are plans to move forward with this program in 2011. • Residential Energy Assistance Program (CARE): Since 2000, MID has been providing a 20 percent discount on monthly energy bills for Low -Income Families, and the Medical Baseline and Life - Support Program for those who depend on electrically powered medical equipment were implemented Proposed MID Energy Efficiency Projects and Services: • MID will be offering the same programs for the calendar year of 2010. MID Investment in Renewables: The MID Board of Directors approved a resolution to acquire 15 percent renewable resources by 2012: • Since 2003, MID has purchased 5 megawatts of Wind -Power annually towards that goal. • In 2008, the Merced Irrigation District launched its Solar PV Buydown Program. The amount of the rebate is based on the Estimated Performance (kilowatt-hour production) of the system, and converted to the effective annual AC generating capacity of the PV system measured inn AC watts. The rebate amount for 2008 is $2.80 per AC watt for systems up to a maximum size of 3 kilowatts (residential) and 25 kilowatts (commercial). Currently, the total amount available for rebates the first year is approximately $450,000 for all installations. Rebates are available on a first come, first served basis and are limited to $8,400/ residence and $70,000/commercial installation. Customers may apply for one incentive over the 9 -year lifetime of the program. MID Demand Reduction Programs: MID does not currently have any demand reduction programs in place. 131 MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances„ HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refigeraticn HVAC Water Heating C o ro pre h 0n S ire .... . ..... ..... . Process HVAC HVAC • Lighting Process . .. Process c e s .................. .... ...... ..... . s RefOgeratios,..-- HVAC Process Comprehensive Other 6ubTatal Net Lifecycle 060 Utility Utility Net Demand Net Peak kW Net Annual ` Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost !'Direct Instalr Category i Savings(kW) ' Savings :kWh Savings' kWh savings (ions) ($) Cost ($) Res Clothes Washers Res'Cooling .. .. . . ... Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Re... ...... ..:... ............ sHea4ng Res Lighting Res P001 Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Ras Water Heating R......Com5rak en she Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Nan -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating,_,.,. Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors ... .0 ...... .. .......... Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell NonRes Process Non Res Comprehensive Cthe 5 6 - 14.643.' 148,432 884 _ .11,232 81 15 6 24,785 418,128 -. 242 $ 4,800 1,080'. 1-,125 '.. ,..,.154 8,626 $, 1.098 $ Utility Mktg, EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Admin Cost ($) ($) $ 3 2 1.816 . ........_,. 27158-! ...... ...........15' - .....7,920 28 ...- , .. 22 240,330 2,564,462 . .. 36740 : 1,423 $ 36,740 '110: 164 -19,348 77.392 r 43 $ ,,.2,380' 1,227,449: 18,411,720 9,707 $ 170,192 4,117 840 319 ,1,516 761 73,338 2,294- 95,097 $ 6,917 $ 1,900 $ • 1,444 8,701 $ 110,078 $ 4 654 170,192 148: 1,536,030 21,751,355 11,354 $ 232,981 i 9 1,098 - 6 $ 329,176 T&❑ T&D (Total L 164 148 1,536.035 21,751,355 11,554 $ :232,981 $ 1,098 i-8 95,097 19 329,1761 159 Program Portfolio MC Test 3.16 1 Excluding T&D Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 Program Sector {Used in CEG Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pomp Refigeral[on_; HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process _ _ HVAC HVAC Lighting .... ...... .... . .. Process Process Refri5eration HVAC-- -- Process Comprehensive Other SubTotal Net Demand Net Peak kW i Net Annual Net Lifecycle Category , Savings(kW) Savings ,.kWh Savings) kWh savings Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling • Reess Dishwashers c_,,,,,,,,,,,,, Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting- Res Poo] Pump Res Re5lgeration Res Shell eS Water Heating Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Nan -Res Cooking_ Nan -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating,„ Nan -Res Lighting Nan -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps e.... .. gar Nan -Res Refrigeration h . . . . .... .... . Non -Res Shell Nan Res Process ...preh . ..�. .... Nqn Res Comprenenslva other -..,..... 110,_ • ,_,.....,..,_,. 6: 14,643 2,292: 884 4,510! 24,785' 146,432 26,246 11,232 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utlity Utility Mktg, Reductions 10001100es cod ',Direct install, EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ! Cost ($) AdminCost (6) (4) doSea1'. 446125: .242 81 15 6 1 1,810 27,156 _ 15 249,330 2,564,462 , 1,423 19,348 77,392 43 10' 1227,448 18411,720, 9,707 5 232,981 ; $ .1,008: 572,631 8,655 1,751 1,421 $._.. .....1 232 $ 21,463 S..�.. . ......6,635 104,253 4,387 $ 854,903 $ 806,713 164 146: 1,536,030 { 21,751,355 11,554 T&D T&D r Total 164 148 1,536,030. 21,701,555 EE Program Portfolio 1RC Test 2-16 Excluding TSD 132 115541$ 232,981 , $ 1,096 $ 572,631 1$ 506,710 1 Weser ain0 newer MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT Modesto rrigation District • Established in 1887, the Modesto Irrigation District (MID), located in California's Central Valley, provides electric, irrigation, and drinking water service. • With more than 110,000 customers, 60 percent of energy sales are commercial/industrial; the remaining 40 percent are primarily residential. • System Peak Demand: 698 MW in July 2006. • MID's mission is to deliver superior value to irrigation, electric and domestic water customers through teamwork, technology, and innovation. MID Energy Efficiency Program Highlights: 2009 Residential Customer Programs: • MPower Home: Paid over $570,000 in rebates for the installation of energy efficiency measures in existing homes. Eligible measures included air conditioners, duct sealing, whole house fans, CFLs, washers, radiant barriers, insulation, and window film/screen. The peak load reduction was 524 kW and the annual energy savings was 1,710 MWH. • LIEE / Weatherization: Paid over $200,000 in direct installation costs for energy efficiency and weatherization measures in 250 qualifying dwellings. The program also provides education, information and community outreach for low-income customers. The peak load reduction was 36 kW and annual energy savings was 213 MWH. 2009 Non -Residential Customer Programs: • MPower Business: Paid over $508,000 in rebates for the installation of energy efficiency measures in existing commercial and industrial businesses. Eligible measures included air conditioners, lighting, refrigeration, window film/screen, motors and computing. The peak load reduction was 1,373 kW and the annual energy savings was 8,840 MWH. • MPower Custom: Paid over $195,000 in rebates for the installation of customized energy efficiency measures in existing commercial and industrial facilities. Qualifying measures included air compressors, chiller, cooling towers, VFDs, insulation and EMS. The peak load reduction was 334 kW and the annual energy savings was 1,422 MWH. • MPower Commercial New Construction: Paid over $227,000 in rebates for the installation of energy efficiency measures in new or renovated commercial and industrial businesses. Eligible measures included air conditioning, lighting, insulation, cooking, skylights and process cooling. The peak load reduction was 103 kW and the annual energy savings was 2,390 MWH. 133 2010+ Planned MID Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: • Evaluate the appropriateness for rebate of new, energy efficiency technologies • Ensure that energy efficiency is part of integrated resource planning by determining and implementing the most cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency MID Demand Reduction Program Highlights: Since the early 1980's, MID has continuously operated demand reduction programs. Their purpose is to reduce electricity demand during peak use periods, May through September, when necessitated by operational constraints or supply shortages. Bill discounts are given for both direct load control and curtailable load reduction mechanisms. Following are program highlights for 2009: • STEP: Bill discounts of over $330,000 for residential and commercial customers participating in the "Shave the Energy Peak" (STEP) program. STEP allows MID operators to reduce electricity demand by cycling over 14,000 air conditioners. The available peak load reduction was 13 MW. • Interruptible Rate: Bill discounts of over $345,000 for commercial and industrial customer participants. This program allows MID operators, upon customer notification, to reduce electricity demand by requiring cessation of the curtailable portion of customer load. The available peak load reduction was 19 MW. MID Renewable Energy Program Highlights: On December 16, 2003 MID adopted a Renewable Portfolio Standard Policy, pursuant to Section 387 of the California Public Utilities Code. Per that policy, MID continues to generate or purchase energy from multiple, qualifying sources: small hydro, wind power and digester gas. • Stone Drop: New investment operation and maintenance costs to continue operating an existing small hydroelectric power plant. The plant capacity is .26 MW and 2009 energy production was 129 MWH. • High Winds 2004 Purchase Power Contract: New eligible renewable energy resources from the High Winds Project in Solano County, California. Purchased 25 MW of project capacity for a 10 -year period, which began in 2004. The 2009 energy delivery was 61,659 MWH. • Shiloh 2006 Purchase Power Contract: New eligible renewable energy resources from the Shiloh Project in Solana County, California. Purchased 50 MW of project capacity for a 10 -year period, which began in 2006. The 2009 energy delivery was 131,986 MWH. • Big Horn 2006 Purchase Power Contract: New eligible renewable energy resources from the Big Horn Project in Klickitat County, Washington. Purchased 25 MW of project capacity for a 20 -year period, which began in 2006. The 2009 energy delivery was 64,231 MWH. • Fiscalini: New eligible renewable energy resource located in Modesto, California. MID purchases the output from the 750 kW generating facility on an annual basis. Commercial operation commenced in June 2009. The 2009 energy delivery was 1,951 MWH. 134 Energy Efficiency (EE) Funding Sources MID presently exceeds the required annual funding level for public benefit programs (2.85% of revenue - AB1890/AB995) and has for several years. Overtime, low income and renewable energy programs have grown significantly and now comprise`the majority of public benefit expenditures, which has led MID to fund EE from both public benefit and procurement sources. MID's 2009 EE funding from public benefits and procurement was approximately $1,901,000 and $1,505,000, respectively. Essentially, MID uses public benefit dollars for the non -incentive components of EE program costs and procurement dollars for the customer incentive component of EE program costs. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification (EM&V) Activities In 2009, MID made continued efforts to obtain independent, third -party review of its EE programs. MID hired Summit Blue (now Navigant) to develop the overall EM&V plan, which was posted on the website hosted by NCPA. In addition, M1D's internal plan for EM&V of its EE programs is to have independent review of 1) all large rebate projects, 2) a sample of small rebate projects and 3) a sample of prescriptive programs. Due to budget constraints in 2009, MID did not perform many of the activities outlined in the EM&V plan for its 2008 programs. However, MID did hire a CVMP qualified firm, Power Services, Inc. to perform M&V on selected 2009 projects, the scope of which encompassed process cooling, insulation, lighting, duct sealing and compressed air. In 2010, MID budgeted $55,000 and has a contract in place with Navigant to perform the work outlined in the EM&V plan for its 2009 programs. AB2021 Goals — First Triennial Update MID participated in the joint, POU EE potential study, which was performed by Summit Blue (now Navigant). One of the deliverables from that project was an Excel -based model tailored to its service territory. Once the model was in hand, MID staff did some preliminary testing of its sensitivity via changing values of various user -controlled inputs. Overall, MID found that its model 1) is relatively insensitive and 2) identified market potential above the level of its previously adopted goals. Due to time constraints from compiling data for the annual SB1037 report (MID is a calendar year utility), staff did not seek Board approval of revised AB2021 targets prior to the issuance of that report. So, MID is submitting preliminary targets at this time, which are the default values prepared by Navigant. When Board approval is sought for updated targets, staff anticipates 1) presenting several scenarios and 2) the adopted numbers will differ from the preliminary ones. MID will obtain Board approval no later than May and will submit final targets via a joint POU, supplemental report. 135 MODESTO IRRIGATION DISTRICT Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Lifecyele GHG Utility Utility Direct. Utility Mktg, Program Sector Net Demand Net Peak kW ; Net Annual Net Lifecyele ', Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cost ENI&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings '.kWh Savings: kWh savings (Tons). ($) ($) Admin Cost (0) (8) Appliances $ 23,462 HVAC . .. . ... . . .... _. $ 792,712 Appliances __. Consumer Electronics HVAC 10,258 _ . ... . . . . ... . ... . . ..... . ..... . 5. . ... .. .,. 77,349 Pool Refiigarstlon $ _.-483,895 Water Heating.. . .. . ;,.,.,., ___ .... . ..... _._ $ 2,974 7 HVAC 258 $ 477,36 Comp henshe Process - .. ., . . .. 1W.. ..... . . _._. _ $.. $ 58,637 Lighting Process Process _. . _... .. Re51gerahan HVAC ....,... Process .. .. _... .. .. Comprehensive Other SubTotal Res Clothes Washers ; Res CC . ... . . ocling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res P001 Pump Res Reflgeration Res shell Res Water Healing Res Cnmprehens4e Non -Res Conking . Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Healing Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Campreherisns Other. B 159 367: 162 259 6 14,364 143840 79 102 147,320 2,88Z277 1,545 3,750 58250 1, 31 53 295,955 1 2,663 694 1,422 1,146,882 20,840483 11,197 185,026 3.0.49 322 1,721 5,325 43,834 23 78 147,252 ,,.2,208773 1,209 1.019•` 8,085,279 53,438,891 35,123 _. _. 21,249 . . . .... .... .. . 318736 `.. - ... .. .170 ., . . $1 81 7864,4449 2466734 1,312 571 200: 2,543,2271 21,003,502' 11,247 2.__._. 2 i. 18,822 1 168224 .., ., 105 321.= 321 '. 2,589,340: 35,540,097 1 20,393 109 ; 109 ' 1,389,742 ' 6,290,234 t 3,335 $ 21,700 $ 1.762 S. 116,500 5 16,954 $ 59,258 8,983 $ 1,275 $ 8,940 $ 55,817 $ 12,592 24255.5 183,357 $ 276,082 $ 401,204 $ 31,980 $ 44,183 $ 50 $ 2,041 $ 883 40,050 5 _ _ 17,887 $ 359824 $ 514.157 $ 2,450 5 3,006 $ 37 555. $ . . . 22,010 $ 136,952 $ 180,386 8 1,938 $ 1,508 $..- 301,599 , $ 391,132 $ 60,757: $ 44,145 ; $ 52,141 $ 884,981 $ 5,456 $ 59,565 $ 327,348 $ ... . 2,548 $ 852,737 $ 157,043 $ 3,406,322 3,332 - 2,389 ; 14,680,522 1 163, 934, 670 39,211 1,504,803; $ 343,277 $ 1,558,241 162 T&D Total I 3,302 2,389: 14,680,822 163,934,870 ; 89,211 1$ 1,594,603: $ 343,277 $ 1,558,241 1$ 3.406.322 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 3.01) Exufufing Tan Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 Program Sector 1 Net Demand (Used in CRC Report} Category Savings (kW) Appliances HVAC Appliances• Consumer Electronics HVAC Lf9htmg Pool Pump Refrigeration. HVAC Water Heating_._ Comprehe nsl'e Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC .., . ,... .. Process Comprehenske, Other su67otal Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res NSa006 _ ResLightulg Rea Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating, ResCamprohensive Non -Res C .. . . . .. ..... ... coking Non -Res Cooling. Non -Res Heating Mon -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell,,.,, Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive Other 1 Net Lifecyele GHG Utility Utility Direct°, Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW i Net Annual Net Lifecyele: € Reductions Incentives Cost Install Cast EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings ;kWh Savings! kWh savings (Tons) (9) (8) AdmincostlS] (9) 3 3 7,483 74633 . ., 4 82 - . - - 52 76,438 1,495,495 057 1.948 _.._ .29 186 l .-,..,. 16 41 201 28 _.-1663,565,.,..., 1,382.001 738 54 594,971 10,709,4E14 5,809 134 -' X734 87,162 1 1,582167 ..,,.893 __,. . . ,........ 2,763 1 22,640 12 40 1 .. , _ 76,403 1,146,041 627 532 3165,751 1 33,147,837 18,350 11,025 i 165,378 ; 88 :......... 42 .. . 85,320 i 1,279886 681 208 1 104 1 1,318,575 1 10697 653 i 5,838 1 1 1 9,766 B7,B82 54 ....... 1 , 7 _, ..... 96865 . 13,58.. 166 68 1393,124 19,9 1 _.,_.,.. .. , 57 i 57 710,702 . ............3,263,743 - 1,730 $ 11,259 5 913 50,447 $ 8,797 l$ 30,708 $ 4,861 5 651 $ 4,639 $ 29,961,5 T6,508 $ 12595. $ 95137 1 $ 143,332 206159 $ 113593; $ 22,889 26.5 1,059 1 5 457 5 21,247: . $ 9,253 $ 193388 ' $ 267,829 5 1,271 $ 1,557 $ 19485 ; $ 11,396 $ 71,074 $ 88,547 $ 539 9 790 $ 156,487; ; $ 187,000 $ 31,524- $ 22,905 5 26.979 $ 782,139-$ 170,112-5 $ 12,172 5 98,950 5 5,322 $ ._. �. 40,108 $ 250,753 $ 247.650 $ __...,1,542 $ 30,500 5 457,275 5 2,626 $ __- 33682 169,521 $............... 1313. $ 343,487 $ 81,409 $ 1,788,759 1,716 1,243 7,636.000 85,290,747 1 46,415 808,507 T&D T&D 1T0ta1 I 1,716: 1,243' 7,828,000 85,290,747; , 46,415 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test I 2.01 Excluding T&D 136 782,139 - 5 178,112 $ 808,507 $ 1,769,758 1 MORENO VALLEY UTILITY • The City of Moreno Valley, one of the fastest growing cities in the country and incorporated in 1984, established a municipal utility in 2001. Moreno Valley Utility (MVU) began serving its first customers in February 2004. MVU serves residential, commercial, and industrial customers. • Moreno Valley Utility currently serves approximately 5,400 customers. Residential customers have historically comprised the majority of the energy sales for MVU, however energy sales to MVU's commercial and industrial customers are growing. • All customers' facilities are six years old or less, occupying buildings that meet Title 24 requirements. This results in a lower Energy Efficiency Potential. • Peak Demand: 20.1 megawatt • Annual Energy Use: 81 gigawatt-hours • Mission: Moreno Valley Utility strives to provide reliable, economical, and safe electric distribution service to benefit the community and the City. Moreno Valley Utility Energy Efficiency Program Highlights In FY 08/09, Moreno Valley spent approximately $4,300 in incentives to increase energy efficiency for the community. MVU's Energy Efficiency Program has resulted in an energy savings of approximately 298,000 kilowatt-hours per year. Approximately $40,000 was spent in energy audits of city facilities and development of customer programs in energy efficiency and renewable distributed generation. The recommended HVAC, lighting and building envelope upgrades from the audit reports for the municipal facilities will be funded by Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) the city received in late 2009. Current Customer Programs and Projects: • Energy Efficiency Program: Moreno Valley Electric Utility offers incentives to developers for buildings that exceed California Title 24 requirements by more than 10 percent. • Energy Audits: Provided customers with a variety of recommendations for reducing energy consumption, when requested. Some of these audits were provided by community organizations that increase awareness of existing energy efficiency programs. • Val Verde Unified School District Energy Incentive Agreement: In return for an energy efficiency incentive, Val Verde's Indian Middle School design far exceeded Title 24 requirements which resulted in an Energy Incentive Agreement with MVU. The project's energy savings are approximately 298,000 kWh, which resulted in incentives of $4300 for FY 08/09. Proposed Energy Efficiency Projects and Services: (2009-2010) • Residential Energy Efficiency Programs: All homes within the service territory are six years old or less, which make it difficult to offer building envelope upgrades. MVU is developing 137 innovative programs to encourage energy efficiency. These include direct -to -customer CFL Giveaways and Energy Star® rated electric appliance rebates. • Assembly Bill 811: The City of Moreno Valley has signed an Implementation Agreement with the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) in support of the Contractual Assessment Program to Finance Distributed Generation Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Efficiency Improvements for its' customers support of Assembly Bill 811. This program will allow property owners within MVU territory to obtain low interest loans for eligible renewable distributed generation projects and energy efficiency upgrade projects. • Stater Bros. Energy Efficiency Protect: Multiple energy efficiency measures (EEMs) were simulated for the new Stater Bros market (using DOE -2) which calculated an energy savings of 627,271 kWh as well as a demand reduction of 162 kW. Under MVU'S Energy Efficiency Program, this resulted in an incentive of approximately $31,000. This project will be included in next year's report. • Ross Distribution Center Energy Efficiency Projects: MVU's largest customer is exploring projects to reduce annual energy consumption and reduce their peak demand significantly. • Highland Fairview Corporate Park Project: Highland Fairview is proceeding with the development of a corporate park which will be served by MVU. There will be five buildings which includes a 1.8 million square feet building anchored by a Fortune 500 company. The design team for this project has expressed interest in obtaining LEED certification, and MVU is working with Highland Fairview in maximizing energy efficiency on this project. The Project is expected to be completed and energized in fourth quarter 2010. Demand Reduction Programs: Staff is evaluating potential technologies for future demand reduction programs, such as smart metering and thermal energy storage. M&V: Engineering analysis programs, such as DOE -2, are the basis for calculated energy savings and incentive calculations. 138 MORENO VALLEY UTILITY Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 • Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct` Utility Mktg, Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances . ........ ..... ..... .... . ..... . ......... ..... ..... . HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration-- HVAC Water Healing Comprehensive Process .._ HVAC HVAC .... . ..... . ... .... . ......... . . ..... ........ . ..... .. HVAC Lighting - - - Process Process Refrigeration ge, ..t.io........................... tion,,,, ,, HVAC Process CompComprehhenscns.................. . . .. ive Other SusTotal Category : Savings (kW) ! Savings €kWh Savings kWh sayings Res Clothes Washers Res . ... Cooling . . .... . .... ..... ..... ........ Res Coaling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics . , . .. ..... ..... ... ....t Res Heating Res Lighting Res Poo! Pump Res Refigeration-- ResShell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling- -- Non -Res in .... . ..... .... ..... Non -Res Healing Non -Res Lighting Non-Reest Motors - - . .., .. r ... . . .. ... . ... . . N Non-Res Pumps Non-Res e i..er t10rt Non -Res Refr igeration Non -Res Shell Non Res Process NonRe...Compehensue.... i Non Res Comprehensivz Other Net Demand Net Peak kW : Net Annual Net Lifecycle I Reductions incentives Cost Install Cost,' . EM&V, end Total Utility Cost (Tans) ($) - ($) =Admin Cost ($) (3) 285,000 2.650.3001 1,584 $ 4,250 4,000 $ 0,250 255,000 2,850 000 1,584 'Total 285,000 2,850,000 1,584 1 $ 4,250 4,000 1 $ 8,250 IEE Program Purl5lia TRC Test 5.03 I. Excluding T&D Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances I-IVAG ...Isnoes...... ............. A,ppl _— Consumer Eiectronics HVAC L1QhLng . . . .. .. Pool Pump .......... ...._ .... .. Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating .................. ... ling Comprehensive . . .... . ................... . .. Process I-IVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refigeration HVAC Process Comprehensi,e other SubTotel Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Res Clothes washers Res Cooling --_- - -- . .................... Res Dishwashers _ Res Electronics -- ... ea i. . . .... . . .... ... . . ..... . . Ras Heating Res Li Li . . . ............ . ... . .... ..... .. ghting. ... ..... . ... . ......... .. Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Wa erHeat........................ Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking .. . ., n .. . . . .. ... . . ..... . .. N ing Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Llghhng.,.., ..,..-. Non -Res Molars Non -Res Pumps -_-- . .., , Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Reg Shell Non Res Process Nan R . . .. R . ... es Comprehensive Other Net Peak kW Savings Net Annual Net Lifecycle kWh Savingeii. kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Reductions (Tons) 310,000 i 3,100,000. 1,723 #mss,... .. . . Utility -Utility Direct: Utility Mittg, Incentives Cost y install Cost '. EM&V, and Admin Cost (6) ($) ($) Total Utility Cost (a) 310,000 i 3,100,000 1,723 $ 31,000. $ 4,351 5 36,351 T&D T&D lTotal 310,000 3,120,000 1,723 1 $ 31,000 $ 4,351 5 35,351 1 1EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 5.83 1 Excluding TBD 139 CITY OF NEEDLES CITY OF NEEDLES The City of Needles Public Utilities Department was established in 1982. Needles is located in Western Area Power Authority Administration control area and is not part of the CAISO grid. • Needles has 2,969 meters, serving 2,504 residential customers, 461 commercial customers, 35 commercial demand customers and 4 master metered and municipal customers. • Total energy sales are 57,241,260 kilowatt-hours (FY 2008-09); 46 percent is residential sales, 54 percent is commercial and the remainder is master metered and municipal sales. • Peak demand is 19.1 megawatts • Needles is an extreme summer peaking utility. Summer temperatures (late June through early September) can reach 130 degrees, and daytime temperatures range frorn minimum temperatures in the mid -90s with afternoon temperatures between 100 and 120 degrees. City of Needles Energy Efficiency Program Highlights On an annual basis, Needles' load factor is less than 37 percent. The Needles City Council approved Resolution No. 7-24-07 1 on July 24, 2007 adopting the provisions of California Assembly Bill 2021 — Public Utilities Energy Efficiency. The budget amount of $150,000.00 adopted for the program was based upon the Rocky Mountain Institute's analysis "to identify al! potentially cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction for the next 10 - year period" The City of Needles' energy efficiency programs are designed to reduce the summer air conditioning loads and increase the annual load factor. In FY 2008-09, the City of Needles' energy efficiency programs reduced peak demand by 186 kilowatts and 185,959 kilowatt-hours (per Western Area Power Authority approved Integrated Resource Plan Annual Progress Report for 2009). Note: The kilowatt savings are derived from the number of hours that air conditioners are used in Needles (essentially all hours when temperature is greater than 90 degrees —April through October). Note: At FYE 6/30/2008 the total combined residential and commercial usage was 57,553,850 kilowatts hours. At FYE 6/30/09, the combined residential and commercial usage was 57,241,260 kilowatt hours, a reduction of 312,690 kilowatt hours or .05%. 140 The City of Needles will continue to budget $150,000 annually for the existing energy efficiency programs and will allocate additional funding if customer demand is greater than the program allocation. The $150,000.00 is funded by ratepayers via a line item on their electric bill (Mandated Conservation at $0.00338/kWh). The prerequisite for eligibility for the energy efficiency program (City pays for 14 or higher SEER rated air conditioners, evaporative coolers and refrigerators) is that the rate payer's apply for weatherization through the San Bernardino Community Action Coalition ("HEAP"). Needles budgeted $50,000 for solar programs beginning in FY 2009/10. Current Residential Customer Programs: • Air conditioner, evaporative cooler, refrigerator replacement with SEER 14 or higher with proof of home weatherization completed. • . Air Conditioning Rebate Program: Provides installation support and financial rebates to facilitate upgrades to more efficient lighting and air conditioning systems. • Sun Shade Program: Provides rates for the installation of residential sun shades, designed to lower house temperatures during the summers. Proposed City of Needles Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (FY 2010 - 11) Maintain Existing Programs at current levels and monitor effectiveness for potential expansion (finances allowing). City of Needles Demand Reduction Programs: The City of Needles demand reduction program reduction target calls for O.2mW for 2010. 141 CITY OF NEEDLES Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers -- Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Healing Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump Res Pool Pump -- - -„ e _.. Reiteration Res Refrigeration . . . . . .. . . .. . .. .... . ... . . . . .... . . . . . . .. , - ., HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Res Water Heating omp... ._.s.i_......,:.,:..... .605 Co . .:.. ..: .. . ...sir :.,-,- Comprehensive Res Comprehensive .. . Process Non -Res Cooking . ,. . ,. , . HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res Heating Lighting . . .... ...... . .-, , Non -Res Aiding Process Non -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps . .. , .. . . ,_.. Refrigeration Non -Res Reklgera[ion HVAC Non -Res Shell . . .. . ... ..... . . .... .. ... . ...... . . Process Non Res Process Comprehensive Non Res Comprehensive Other Other SubTatal Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 6 185,959 3,347,252 2,129 $ 150,000 15,000 $ 165,000 Net Lifecycle 5HG Utility U51ity Direct Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions Incerdtves Cost: Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ($) ($) Admin Cost ($) ($) 150,000 0 15,000 TED 100 (Total s 6 185,959 3,347,262: 2,129 $ 150,000 $ 15,000 $ 165,000 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.73 1 Excluding T&D Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances on oarEectronr]os Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting,-.— Pool Pump .. . ... rat) . . . . . . ......... ...... . .... ReNigeration- HVAC a erH.. Heating ..... . ......... ..... Water Heating Comprehensive P . . ... .... . . . ...... . . . ..... ...... Proccesess HVAC HVAC Lighting . . .. . . ... . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . . ..... . .. . . Process Process r c ..,. - Ref6geralion HVAC Process Comprehensive Other .. .. . . . . SubTotal Net Demand Category : Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling rs Res Dishwashers . .. .. . . t. Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res P001 Pump m - .. . . . . . . Res Refdgeratian, Res Shell Res s Water Heating a Res Comprehensive Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking, Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res ,.. . ,- , . No Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non Res Process .. .. . . 5 rocess Non Res Comprehensive Other Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Savings ',kWh Savings kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct Reductions Incentives Cast Install Cast (Tons) ($) (5) 176,881 3179899 2,023 142,500 6 6 176,661 I 3,179,890 2,023 $ 142,500 15,000 5 157,500 Utility Mktg, EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Admin Cost {$) (6) 15,000 $ 157,500 T&D T&D iTotal 6 : 8 178,661: 3,179,599 2,023 $ 142,003 $ 15,000 5 167,500 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test t 2.72 Excluding T&D 142 CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES CITY Oi^ PALO ALTO \\ UTILITIES Inspired by a brighter tomorrow. • Established in 1900. • The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) is the only municipal utility in California that operates city owned utility services that provide electric, natural gas and water services to its customers. • CPAU has 29,024 electric meters. • CPAU's annual electric load is 20 percent residential, 48 percent commercial and 32 percent industrial with a customer base of 90 percent residential, 9.3 percent commercial, and 0.7 percent industrial. • CPAU's eligible renewable energy resources comprised 19 percent of annual energy supply in 2009. The Long-term Energy Acquisition Plan sets a target of 33 percent by 2015. • CPAU's award winning PaloAltoGreen Program offers a voluntary 100 percent renewable energy alternative for retail customers, which added 5 percent in 2008 to the energy mix with over 20 percent of customers participating in 2008. The program received the 2008 U.S. Department of Energy award for Best Green Power program for a small utility. CPAU Energy Efficiency Program Highlights CPAU implemented energy efficiency programs in the 1970s. In 1996, CPAU approved a policy to fund electric, gas and water efficiency programs at one percent of revenues per year. In 1998, CPAU increased the electric public benefits program budget to approximately 3 percent of revenues, with a one-year increase of an additional 8 percent from the electric commodity purchase budget during the 2001 energy crisis. In April 2007, Palo Alto City Council approved CPAU's first Ten-year Energy Efficiency Portfolio Plan, setting aggressive energy efficiency targets and adding funding from supply funds, increasing efficiency budgets by 50 percent for electric and 100 percent for natural gas. During FY 2008 and 2009, the actual electric efficiency savings achieved exceeded the goals set in 2007. Current Commercial Customer Programs and Services: Commercial and Industrial Energy Efficiency Program (CIEEP): This program, which began in mid -2009, is delivered by Enovity, Inc. It provides technical services and cash incentives to identify, quantify and implement electric and natural gas efficiency projects for commercial and industrial customers. The program provides valuable professional services at no -cost audits and review for CPAU commercial and industrial customers with buildings larger than 30,000 square feet and/or greater than 50 MW maximum electric demand. Customers are then assisted through implementation and rebate application process. Specific areas of focus for CIEEP activities include: HVAC systems, process (including compressed air and steam systems), controls, domestic hot water, lighting controls and energy efficient 143 lighting retrofits. Typically these are implemented through control setting changes, hardware repair and installation of new equipment. Commercial Advantage Program: Incentives offered to commercial customers for investments in efficient lighting, motors, HVAC and Custom Projects that target peak demand and energy reductions. The program was expanded in 2008 to include food service and refrigeration measures. Consultant Assistance for Resource Efficiency: Comprehensive technical assistance for commercial customers to identify efficiency measures to facilitate peak demand reduction and energy savings. Commercial Lighting Retrofit Program (Right Lights+): With the non-profit company Ecology Action, CPAU has provided since 2006 this program of assistance to small businesses in Palo Alto. These businesses receive fast, free, unbiased, expert assessment and recommendations tailored to their needs in the areas of lighting, refrigeration, and vending equipment. In 2008, this turnkey program was enhanced through a contract with National Resources Management to include refrigeration measures (primarily refrigeration gaskets) at low cost to commercial customers. MeterLinks: Online utility data accessible for large industrial customers to enable the customers in efficient implementation of load management programs and energy usage management. Current Residential Customer Programs and Services: Smart Energy Programs: A comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential customers. Rebates and technical assistance promote home shell improvements, and the installation of attic/roof insulation, high efficiency cooling and refrigeration equipment, appliances and lighting. In 2008 incentives were added for residential clothes washers which previously only received a rebate from the Santa Clara Valley Water District for water savings. On-line energy audits: Working with Aclara since 2004, this on-line analysis tool allows residents to identify the ways they can reduce energy and water use. Low -Income Assistance Programs: CPAU provides weatherization and equipment (refrigerators and furnaces) replacement to low-income residents. Community Education Programs: Community Energy Education: CPAU offers free residential online audits and other energy conservation and efficiency education programs to target groups in the community. Activities include hosting commercial Facility Manager Network meetings, residential energy workshops, participation in Chamber of Commerce meetings, neighborhood association events, and local fairs and special events. Green@Home Audits: Beginning in late 2008, CPAU contracted with a local non-profit company to provide free in -home residential energy audits. The auditor will install a variety of low cost energy and water saving measures including three compact -fluorescent lamps and an electric usage monitoring device. 144 Building Operator Training: Training commercial facility managers and staff on retro-commissioning commercial facilities. CPAU hosted 8 well -attended classes in 2008. Public Schools Program: Palo Alto Unified School District has 17 schools with 10,000 students. CPAU provides annual education grants to the local schools to support teacher training programs and the development of curriculums and education projects that promote energy and water efficiency. CPAU also participates in monthly school sustainability committee meetings and makes educational presentations to classes on energy efficiency and renewable energy. Third -Party Program Evaluation, Measurement and Verification To meet the requirements of state law, a third party consultant (Navigant Consulting) was also contracted with to provide evaluation, measurement and verification services (EM&V) of the energy efficiency savings and demand reduction achieved during FY 2008-2009. The consultant report was completed in March 2010. The EM&V effort consisted of two areas: process evaluation and impact evaluation. The process evaluation focused on the Residential Smart Energy program and the Commercial RightLights Plus program. The impact evaluation covered the Commercial Advantage program and the RightLights Plus program. The energy savings from these two programs combined account for over 70% of the EE program savings. Based on the sampled customer projects, the realization rates for the Commercial Advantage Program and the RightLights Plus program were found to be 89.2% and 84.3% respectively. On a project basis, some sites have higher than 100% realization rate due to the actual operation hours being longer than estimated. Other sites have less than 100% realization rate, with various reasons attributing to the lower than projected savings: • One Commercial Advantage customer ordered more CFL lamps than the number of fixtures, with the extra lamps being stored as spares. • Another project site only installed three of four Variable Frequency Drives (VFD), with the installation of the fourth VFD being delayed until the building is fully occupied. • The realization rate of 84% for the RightLights Plus program is primarily attributed to the difference in the energy savings calculation methodology. Ecology Action, the program implementer, calculated energy savings based on the energy usage of existing equipment. This calculation approach is also used by Ecology Action for a similar program in PG&E's service territory. The EM&V consultant, on the other hand, used Title 24 standards as the minimum efficiency baseline from which energy savings are calculated. This approach results in lower energy savings than the reported savings from Ecology Action. 145 Utility staff have reviewed the recommendations from the consultant report and either have already made or are in the process of making modifications to improve the programs and future realization rates. Federal Government Stimulus Funds under the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant The Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG) program was created by Congress in 2007 and was funded for the first time by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 with an appropriation of $3.2 billion. The EECBG Program is administered by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). On March 26, 2009, DOE announced the EECBG formula grant allocations, and the City of Palo Alto was eligible to receive up to $663,000. Funds were received on October 27, 2009. The two demonstration projects developed for the EECBG application are the early replacement of High Pressure Sodium (HPS) street lights on selected streets with Light Emitting Diode (LED) streetlights and the implementation of a Home Energy Report (HER) for residential customers. The EECBG funds allocated to the LED Streetlight Project and the Home Energy Report project are $450,000 and $213,000 respectively. Ten -Year Electric Energy Efficiency Goals Update AB 2021 requires municipal electric utilities to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electric efficiency savings and to establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction over 10 years. CPAU developed its first Ten -Year Energy Efficiency Plan in 2007 and the plan was approved by City Council in April 2007. In April 2010, CPAU staff will recommend an updated Ten -Year EE Plan to City Council for adoption. The new recommended EE savings goals are based on updated technology and market parameters, and incorporate lessons learned in implementing programs in the past three years. The recommended EE goals are to achieve 0.6% and 0.65% annual incremental efficiency savings in FY 2011 and FY 2012 respectively, and to achieve a 10 -year cumulative EE savings of 7.3% by FY 20202. These new EE goals double the previous EE goals set in the 2007 Ten -Year Plan. As part of the updated Ten -Year EE plan, staff also recommends that in addition to the $1.8 million of Public Benefit funds used annually for EE programs, CPAU will utilize up to $1.2 million per year of electric supply funds to implement electric EE programs for three years starting in FY 2011. Future Energy Efficiency Programs: (beyond FY2008-09). In addition to the LED streetlight and the Home Energy Report projects that are funded through the DOE's Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, CPAU is currently developing two financing programs: the Electric Efficiency Financing Program (EEFP) for businesses and the CaliforniaFIRST property tax based financing for residential efficiency and renewable energy installations. The EEFP will provide zero interest, non -secured loans to businesses who install efficient equipment, and it is targeted at businesses that rent their office space. The CaliforniaFIRST program is a joint action program with 14 146 counties and about 100 other cities. It will allow residents to finance efficient equipment installations and make payments through their property tax assessments. CPAU Demand Reduction Programs: CPAU is in the process of exploring the expansion of its volunteer demand reduction pilot program for large customers. This opportunity may be enhanced by installing advanced meters, and it is being investigated as part of the preparation of the smart grid strategic plan. 147 CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report} Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Net Peak kW Savings Net Annual kWh Savings Net Life cycle kWh savings Appliances,,,,,,,, HVAC Appliances • Consumer Electronics I- VAC Lighting Pool Pump Refngemlicn_ HVAC WaterrHaating Comprehens[se -- - Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process RehigerMion HVAC Process Comprehensiee Other SubTotal Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling .. Res Dishwashers . . . . ... Res Eleclrentmn[cs Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res ___.. Res Refrigeration . .......... Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Camprehensi4e Non -Res Cooking._,. Non -Res Coaling Niin-Res Heating . . . . ........... Non -Res Lighting Ndn-Res.Malars Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration 4 Non -Res Shell Non Res Praxess Nen Res Camprehensise Other 653' 2 : 38,409 6,640 .. ,. .,__ 12,0744 i , . 394,045 ' 123,120 156,857 Net Life cycle GHG Utility Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons} (0) 212 79 87 678,637 _--9.222,882 4,927 7,849 78.400 _,.. 43 447,809 8,062,186 4,373 15,344 305,881: 173 .. .1 21,715 : 9989,412 5,255 16,376,044 10,732 12 55 629,758 3 770 540 1,988 717 9318, 5 863 . . ........2131 -__.-.- 21,312i 11 $ 20,390 $ '5,800 $ 17.150 i 5 19.5,903 $ 1,750 $ 48,185 20.718 Utility Utility Mktg, Direct Install; EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Cost {$) Admin Cost i5) (5) 5 6,797 3,204 2,829 155,406 388 143,845 6,123 350 $ 362 158,032 $ 70,192 $ 140 ...,..,. $ 4266 $ 750 $ 617,601 167,979 540,124 138.612 152 341 $ 5 27,187 9,004 19,979 $ 354,309 $ 3,138 S _ 192.030 5, 25,841 $ 732 $.... 244,020 696.155 $ 206,834 .$ ... .. . 292 3- 4,541 750 $ 1,785,783 1,825 1,452 4,687,711 I 51,425,595 27,908 $ 1,168,182 T&D T&D Total 1,825 1EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.46 Excluding 700 1,452' 4,887,711 51,425,595 27.508 $ 817,601 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 5 1,168,182 1$ 1,795.783 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting , Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehensi+e Process HVAC HVAC .. ... . . . . .. . . . -. Lighting ..,... Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensive Other SuSTotal Res ClclheS Washers Res Cooing -_ Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Healing Res Lighting _..... Res Pool Putrid Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating .. ...s....e..., Res Comprehensive Nan -Res Cooking Non -Res cooing__ Non -Res Heating - _- Non -Res Lighting_ ,,,, Nan -Ras Motors .:.: ..W..... Non -Res Pumps Nan -Res Refrigeration Non-ResShel[ Nan Res Process Npn Res Compreherisite Other Net Lifecycle ( 1 GHG U6hty Utility Utility Mktg, Net Demand i Net Peak kW I Net Annual sii,. Net Life cycle 1 Reductions Inaentives Cost;. Direct l nstatl ' EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Category I Savings{kW} ', Savings kWh Savings kWh savings ' (Tons) (5) Cost (5} ? Admin Cast {$) (5) 40.325 5 403,250 7,182 128 278.8 12,677 _ . _ 184,805 75 927 1.917 • 223 91 859,566 0,663,795 5,173 3 _,.8,232 82 320 - ..... 45 75; 470,2941 -_---8,485,295 4,592 6 16,111 I r 322225 i. 182 _., 0._, ._ 1,906-` 22,801 12 972,835 10,383,803, 5,526 337 1,847. 7, , ,935 - 20347996 11,209 861,246 3,959 667 2,067 703 5,754 827 � 2,238. 22,378 ;. 1,524 4,501,025. 5 12 53,996,8751 29,303 $ 21,4I 9,239 $ 2 982 $ 16,206 6 3776 205.095 $ , 221 860 S - ,. -.1,838 �'- $ 1,686 § X50,594 $ 193,943 $ 21,754 ... . . 5 _ __ 7,352 $ 648,481 $ 1,237,091 30,848 9,052 21.783 427,557 $ 3,723 $ 244,538 29,136 $ _ 890 $- 317,743 5 630,014 $ 164,406 :.:... .. $ 371 5 4.923 5 785 $ 1,885,572 T&D 7&D Total 1,917:. 1,524 4,801,096 53,996,875 I 29,303 5 848,481 1 $ 1 237,091 $ 1,885,572 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 2.44 1 Excluding T4D 148 PASADENA WATER AND POWER (PWP) P A 5. A 1) E N A Water&.Powe r Background and Goals • Established in 1906, Pasadena Water and Power (PWP) today provides electric service to more than 63,590 metered accounts over a 23 square -mile service area. Peak demand: highest recorded was 316 megawatts (MW) in 2006; 287 MW in 2009. • Annual energy use is 1,336,412 megawatt -hours • The mission of PWP's energy efficiency programs is to promote the use of socially and environmentally responsible energy efficient measures and customer assistance programs for the benefit of all Pasadena residents and business customers. • On September 18, 2006, the City of Pasadena adopted the United Nations Urban Environmental Accords (http://www.wed2005.org/pdfs/Accords 11x17.pdf), calling for a 10% system demand reduction by 2012 as one of 21 environmental goals for the city. • On December 19, 2005, the City of Pasadena adopted the Green Building Practices Ordinance requiring new standards for new construction and tenant improvements. These standards incorporate energy and water efficiency measures into the design, construction and maintenance of public and private buildings. • On September 17, 2007, the City of Pasadena adopted the following goals: energy efficiency savings of 13.3% by 2016, and the installation of 14MW of customer -owned photovoltaic systems by 2017. Energy Efficiency Program Goals: • Identify cost-effective energy -saving opportunities, and provide solutions to help customers achieve reductions in their electric bills. • Provide direct assistance to qualified customers who are unable to implement cost -saving energy efficiencies on their own. • Introduce sustainable concepts and operational practices to customers to reduce the energy consumption and environmental impacts of buildings. • Demonstrate and evaluate new and emerging technologies which encourage market transformation of energy efficiency and peak load reduction. Actual (FY08/09) Energy Efficiency Program Highlights • Increased the Public Benefit Charge (PBC) collection rate to provide additional funding in order to meet aggressive energy efficiency goals (twice that of historical levels of revenue) on 7-1- 2008. 149 • Efficiency programs, after ramping up new programs which began in the previous year, achieved 223% of PWP's FY08/09 efficiency goal • Total FY08/09 Public Benefit Fund program expenditures of $5,432,638 resulted in total lifetime savings of more than 366,729 megawatt -hours (MWh), or 25,915 MWh annually, with an average cost-effectiveness test of 2.73 TRC and 7.2 PAC, as follows: o Residential efficiency programs provided 1,467 equipment rebates and distributed CFL's to 15,999 households, saving 11,627 MWh per year and reducing peak load by 1.5 MW. o Commercial efficiency programs provided 70 rebates saving 14,288 MWh per year and reducing peak load by 3.9 MW. • Additional PWP activities not funded by the Public Benefit Fund resulted in energy savings as follows: • Transmission and Distribution (T&D) system upgrades saved 177 MWh per year and reduced load by 0.02 MW ■ Water efficiency program (residential and nonresidential) rebates funded by PWP and MWD saved 513 million gallons, resulting in 4,149 MWh energy savings per year and 0.006 MW load reduction.(shown on the E3 as "Non -Res Pumps") • Combined first year energy savings for FY08/09 activities from Public Benefit Programs, Water Conservation Programs and T&D upgrades total over 30,241 MWh. M&V • Contract labor performed site verification of 10% of residential efficiency purchases and installations (verifier also left behind 3 CFL's with each customer) • Utility staff and contracted labor performed pre -and post -installation verification of all non- residential customer projects • Used early replacement deemed savings per the E3 Reporting Tool for prescriptive rebates • Used data loggers and third party engineering estimates for quantifying actual energy saved on selected custom efficiency projects • Contracted third party engineers used e -Quest, DOE 2 and engineering analysis program software, calibrated with customers actual 12-24 month billing history, to evaluate current year central plant projects • Contracted third party engineers used DOE II -type software for evaluating completed large customer projects, including chillers, lighting and motors • Contracted third -party engineer evaluated participant phone survey results and provided NTG and energy savings for the residential Power of 10 CFL Challenge Program. Actual (FY08/09) Commercial Customer Programs: • Energy Efficiency Partnering {EEP) Program: This program allowed any building technology that saves energy to qualify for a rebate. Provided an electronic processing loop to speed up rebate processing and custom rebate estimate immediately. Rewarded projects that achieved the 150 greater cost effective energy and peak load reductions. Offered customers an additional incentive bonus for projects that were completed and verified by December 30th 2008. • Direct Install Emerging Technologies {DIET) Program: Provided no cost site evaluations and no cost installation of seven innovative efficient products , up to $25,000 per site. Technologies included daylight harvesting, HVAC Ultraviolet, hotel room keycard, CO2 sensors, Delta "P" pressure control valve, HVAC cycle management and diesel emergency generator heat pump. • High Performance Building Program: Provided incentives for new or remodeled buildings which exceed Title 24 energy standards by at least 12 percent. The program matched one month's electricity savings (in dollars) for each percentage greater than Title 24 code. Pasadena is built out and redevelopment activity has been decreased with the slow economy. • LEED Certification Program: Provided incentives for buildings certified by the U.S. Green Building Council's LEEDTM Rating System as follows: — LEEDTM Certified $15,000 - LEEDTM Silver $20,000 — LEEDTM Gold $25,000 - LEEDTM Platinum $30,000 • Technical Assistance: The Technical Assistance program provided walk-through assessments of facilities, third party reviews of DSM projects and information on appropriate efficiency technologies to business customers. • Business Energy Efficiency Outreach & Education: Promoted PWP's commercial energy conservation and efficiency programs via events, brochures and advertising. Actual (FY08/09) Residential Customer Programs: • Energy Star® Incentive Program: Encouraged residential customers to buy high efficiency items including refrigerators, hard -wired lighting fixtures and ceiling fans with attached light kits. • Power of 10 Challenge Free Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL's): Community campaign challenged residential customers to replace ten of their existing incandescent light bulbs with CFL's. Phase I (conducted in FY 07/08) distributed two free cfl's to all residential customers. Phase II offered $75 worth of 15 common and specialty bulbs. Customer selected the number, style and wattage of lamps needed for their home and fulfillment center shipped products directly to customer. Very successful "opt -in" program shipped over 224,000 bulbs to almost 16,000 households (participation rate over 30% of all households). • Refrigerator Recycling: Provided free pick up and recycling of old, inefficient refrigerators and/or retired second units. Customers were mailed a coupon for three CFL's (redeemable at local community centers) and a check for $25 and $35 incentive for their old refrigerators and freezers, respectively. • Efficient Horne Cooling: Rebates provided to residential customers who installed new central air conditioners (14 SEER minimum), Energy Star® doors and windows, room air conditioners, solar attic fans, and sun shade window screens. • Energy Use Assessments: Provided customers with the Home Energy Suite, an online self -serve energy analysis tool. If the customer needed more direct assistance, this program sent energy 151 conservation experts to identify energy conservation opportunities and provide customers with analyses of usage and high billing histories. • Cool Residential Trees Rebates: Incentives for planting up to 10 energy -saving shade trees (maximum $500 per household). Provided detailed guidebook and workshops on how to locate, plant and maintain shade trees. • Residential Programs Outreach & Education: Promoted PWP's residential conservation tips and efficiency programs at events, in brochures, direct mail pieces, workshops, and advertising in local papers. • Pool Pump Program: Provided up to $250 for a two, four or variable speed pool pump. Budgeted (FY09/10) Energy Efficiency Program Objectives: • Continue implementation of cost-effective programs for all customers. • Expected FY 09/10 program expenditures up to $7,309,000 may result in annual energy savings of 19,928 MWh and reduce peak demand by 4.7 MW. (minimum cost-effectiveness target of 2.0 TRC). The largest customers are planning aggressive efficiency projects as a result of PWP incentive programs. • PWP expects to exceed its FY09/10 goal to reduce system -wide annual energy use by 1.3% . Cumulative FY07/08-FY09/10 savings through this current year are expected to exceed the cumulative annual goals for the three year period. • Ensure that energy efficiency is part of integrated resource planning by determining and implementing the most cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency measures. • Measure and evaluate the impact and potential for energy efficiency measures and programs. Budgeted (FY09/10) Residential Customer Programs: • Energy Star® Incentive Program: Continue existing product menu (refrigerators, lighting fixtures). • Residential Efficient Cooling: Continue existing product menu (central and window air conditioners, windows and skylights, solar attic fans) • Income Qualified Refrigerator Exchange: Free pick up and recycling of old refrigerator and delivery of new high -efficient refrigerator to qualified residential customers. • Residential Pool Pump Program: Provide rebates for efficient pool pumps and encourage timers be set to off-peak hours. Substantially saves energy and reduces peak load. • CFL Recycling: No -cost CFL recycling at local retailers and community centers. No cost recycling bags provided at community events and community centers. • Home Energy Reports: PWP is working with OPOWER to deliver customized energy use reports ,to 25,000 residential electric customers. These reports will compare the electric usage of each recipient with similar PWP households. The program is currently under development. 152 Budgeted (FY09/10) Commercial Customer Programs: • Energy Efficiency Partnering Program: Features an online rebate calculator and allows any technology that saves energy to qualify for a rebate. Rewards projects that achieve the most cost effective energy and demand reductions. Participation is at a high level with the institutional sector. All public schools, the community college, municipal facilities and several large institutions are participating in this program. • LED Street Signal Retrofit Project: Provide funds for LED replacements for 100% of municipal traffic signals, managed by Public Works Department and installed by contractors. • Direct Install Efficiency Program (DIET): Provide free evaluations and installation of innovative efficient technologies, up to $25,000 per metered account at no cost to customer. Technologies include daylight harvesting, HVAC Ultraviolet, hotel room keycard, CO2 sensors, Delta "P" pressure control valve, HVAC cycle management and diesel emergency generator heat pump. Budgeted (FY09/10) Renewable Energy Programs: • Pasadena Solar Initiative began 1-1-2008 and provides performance -based incentives of $3.15/Watt for residential, $2.00/watt for business customers, and $2.60/Watt for non-profit customers through December 31, 2009. • Studied municipal properties for photovoltaic potential. List of facilities created with highest potential. Further study will be needed to prioritize facilities and coordinate with upcoming scheduled roof replacements and efficiency measures. PWP Demand Reduction Programs: • Demand Response Pilot Program: Evaluate technologies and program options which provide energy savings to the customer while giving the utility the ability to reduce peak demand. • Staff is evaluating potential technologies for future demand reduction programs, such as smart metering and thermal energy storage. • Work in conjunction with customers, other POUs and SCPPA on joint RD&D projects. M&V • PWP uses the KEMA/E3 Energy Efficiency Reporting Tool to calculate deemed energy savings on residential program activity, • Contract labor performs site verification of 10% of all rebated residential efficiency purchases and installations (and leaves behind 3 CFL's) • Refrigerator recycling and refrigerator replacement program equipment verifications are provided by ARCA, the vendor who delivers and recycles these units. • Utility staff and contracted labor performs pre -and post -installation verification of all non- residential customer projects • Contracted third party engineers use e -Quest, DOE 2 and engineering analysis program software calibrated to customers 12-24 months actual bill history to evaluate current year central plant projects 153 154 • DOE II -type software used for completed large customer projects, including chillers, lighting and motors • Designing "Continuous Commissioning" demonstration projects with large institutional customers to perform facility diagnostics and measurements; submitted grant request for ARRA stimulus funds for this purpose • Use natural replacement deemed savings per the E3 Reporting Tool for prescriptive rebates • Use data loggers and third party engineering estimates, for quantifying actual energy saved on selected custom efficiency projects • Program Evaluation Plan has been developed by Summit Blue Consulting. PWP is in the process of selecting a qualified vendor to provide ongoing services. • Process Evaluation of non-residential Energy Efficiency Partnering Program has been conducted by Summit Blue Consulting • Considering an Impact Evaluation of non-residential programs, particularly the EEP and DIET programs. Efficiency Targets PWP is using the "EERAM" tool provided to California's public utilities by Summit Blue Consulting to revise its next ten-year efficiency goals. Staff recommendations for FY10/11 to FY19/20 energy savings and demand reduction targets are going through the process of being adopted. City Council discussion and approval is expected in April 2010. The proposed ten-year energy efficiency and demand reduction goals represent a 1.2% reduction of PWP's forecast electric load. This is slightly higher than the market potential determined by the model results. The goals are broken down into two implementation timeframes that align with changes in model results as well the statutory interval for adopting new ten-year goals. The proposed annual goals will provide consistency and simplicity while assisting PWP to meet the City's environmental objectives. AB 2021 3 Year Summary Annual Energy Efficiency Goals (MWhlyear) 11,782 5,379 30,064,452 365,771(,740 I 199,546 Program Sector ) Nat Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category 4 Savings(kW) Appliances ResClothee Washers HVAC •• Res 0001319 Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics -- -_ es Electronics HVAC Res Heating Lighting Res Lighting .. . . €. . ..:... .. Pool Pump„ Pool Reg P Pump ., .,.. F.-.--. RefrigerationRefrigeration ResRes Reffigerahon HVAC Res Shall E Water Heating Res Water Heating Comprehensive Res Comprehenshe ,. Process Non -Res Cooking_. HVAC Non -Ras Cooling HVAC Non -Res Healing Non t -_. Res Lighting Process . .... Non - Res Lighting Non -Res Motors ....,. on Pumps . .. . __.._ __. . Process Non -Res Pumps Refrdgeation Non -Res Refrigeration 7 HVAC Non -065 Shell 5 Pmcess Nan Res Process Comprehensive r Non Res Comprehensive Other Other SobTotal 881 3,421 8 4,514 PASADENA WATER AND POWER (PWP) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09 atositAiNktidvAVAiiiimiat Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC _Appliances 0030umer Electronics I-IVAC ... ..... . .... ... . .. .... .... . Lighting . .,... . Pool Pump, Refrigeration HVAC Water Healing Comprehensne Process HVAC• HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensive Other SubTotal Category Savings(kW) i Savings Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers cs Res Eleclroni _ ._ _ Res Heating Res Lighting Res P051 Pump , Res Refrigeration- Res Shell Res Water Heating Ras COmprehenshe Non -Res Cooking Noon -RR s . . . . .. . ,. , as Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting_„ NOn-Res Motors . . .. ... . . . .. . . . ... . NOn-Res Pumps 1100-R69 Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Compre5000rre • Other Net Lifecycle GHC Net Demand '= Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Reductions kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) 213 ` 140 .�-� 148,892 2,921,225 1,857 230 2,995 2 2 926{ 2,948 10,385,859 93,682.891 3• •- 47,433 29,122 291,200' 171 973;610 '.«.. '17,524,980 _ 9,321 91,235 1,162,970 589. ....528 6,522,185 2 949 7,430,750 . . . ,.. 4,144 9,234 9 . 77,727 119,195,348 88684 74,333,490 41.311 56,429,578' 29,716 777,270 t 405 157605 472,824: 272 Utility Utility Direct- Uslity Mktg, Incentives Cost Install Cost . EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (5) ($) Admin Cost ($) $ 81,502. 270 . 4 ,665 S .�....... 3 $ ,..,..,.... 13,889. $ 1,139,642 $ 78,491 $ 5,825 $ 311 $ 158,779 5 68684 - $ -- 16858 $ 33,730 $ 1,218 $ 5 5 $ 68,189 273 1,231,922 5,925 234,301 34,956 $ 551,343 - $ 89,295 5 138,258 $ 759,594 5 3,288,287 ! $ 7,371 $ 74.089 3 3,309,242 $ 5 : $ 50,172 $ ....5{1.177 $ ..........21,375 : $ 879 $ 22,054 23,250. $ . 480 $ 23,730 $ 4,129,216 $ 1,306,422 5 399,222 $ 5,798,859 7&D [T&D 20 : 20 177600 5,318,000 3,129 11,802 5,368 ; 30,241,452 372,088,740 202,970 1$ 4,126.216 $ 1,396,422 $ 366,222 1 $ 5,798,859 EE Program P046110 1RC Test 2.68 1 Excluding T8D Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 21 Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings-. kWh savings 145,$92 2,021,225:. 230 ` 2,995 74j 11 , 103,059 -- - 938,629 20 : 11 .. . . 29,120 291,220 154 154 - 973,810 - 17,524,960 82. ., .. ... 91,235: 1,162,970 851 Net Lifecycle 6H6 Utility Net Annual Net Lifecycle ; Reductions Incentives cost (Tons) ($) 1,80.7 2 474 171 5,321 869 8,158 833 110,855,394 : 53,676 .. ,. 3,421 6619 670 88,226814 814 - 47,920 3,734,310 50786,826: 28,745 70,732 707,316 372 157606 472,624 4,670 22,385.899 271,858,9613 • 151,581 Utility Direct'.. Utility Mktg, Install Cost EM&V, and Total U51ity Cost (5) Admin Cost (8) (6) 611505 270 $ -- 138 • $ 11,398,$ $ 5625 S $ 150,779 5 06,664 $ $ 33,738 -. . .-.. . ;`$ $ 512,470 $ 3614413, 5 5 9 . ......1. ..451 $ 4,598,391 ; $ 174,307 5 368,222 $ 5,138;920 3,835 4 1,282 392 23,805 1,565 84444 $.... ., 149,317 0,550 5 118,143 r .. ... .... . . $ 88,497 $ ......953. 637 55,439 274 $ 12,758 5 6,017 $ 241,045 $ 35 305 $ 728,231 3,539,1037 $ 88,412 5 20,404 23,887 T&D T&D 20 -_ 20 177,000 5,310.0201 3,129 1 1Tata1 4,035. 4.890 20,262,899 ; 277,198,858 154,811 1 $ 4,598,391. $ 174,307 ;. 6 388,222 $ 5,139,920 1 1 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test ' • 2.651 Excluding T&D - 155 PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOP (PSREC) PLUMAS-SIERRA RfwC Electricity Telecnrnmunlcatlon5 Our mission: To provide electric service with a high level of reliability for a fair and reasonable cost. PSREC is dedicated to improving the quality of life of our member -owners and our rural communities. • Plumas-Sierra RECwas established in 1937 • 7884 member -owners served (Revenue by rate class: 48% residential, 46% commercial/industrial, 6% irrigation • Annual energy use: 160 GWh (51% com/ind, 42% res, 7% irr) • Peak demand: 31 MW (winter hours of 5-10 AM) • PSREC facilities include: two 69kV interconnect substations, 150 miles of transmission line, 11 distribution subs and 1200 miles of 12.47/7.2kV distribution line • 70 employees, including our telecommunications subsidiaries Plumas —Sierra Energy Efficiency Program Background PSREC implemented energy efficiency programs beginning in the early 1980s. Our programs are designed to encourage members to be more energy efficient, decrease their energy demand and costs and conserve resources. PSREC uses KEMA's data for energy efficiency measure quantification. Current Energy Efficiency Programs and Services (Calendar year 2009) PSREC manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program, helping members retrofit their homes to be more energy efficient. Generous rebates and solid technical support are available to members who purchase and install high -efficiency air and water heating systems, appliances, and lighting. The PSREC Ground Source Heat Pump Program is one of the most successful in the nation. • Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) Program: Rebates and 0% interest loop leases offered for installation of ground -source heat pumps in residences and businesses. • ENERGY STAR® Appliance Rebates: Rebates offered for the purchase of an ENERGY STAR° refrigerator, dishwasher, clothes washer or other small electronics. • Non -essential Freezer/Fridge Retirement: Rebates offered for recycling a non -essential freezer or refrigerator. • Marathon Water Heater Program: Discounted sales of high -efficiency electric water heaters. • Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb Program: Discounted sales of CFLs and several events to distribute free CFLs. Additionally, rebates offered for the purchase of ENERGY STAR° CFLs from local retail locations. 156 • LED Holiday Light Exchange: Provide LED holiday lights for exchange with one working incandescent strand turned in. • Custom Commercial Lighting Retrofit Rebates: Custom rebates offered to commercial businesses that retrofit existing lighting with more efficient lighting. • Energy Efficient Equipment Discounts: Discounted sales of water heater blankets, low -flow showerheads, and ConvectAir heaters. • Energy Audits: Free energy audits to assist members with energy conservation or troubleshooting high energy consumption in their home or business. • Meter Lending Program: Members can borrow our WattsUp meter to plug in 120 -volt appliances and help them identify energy usage of appliances. • Green Building Program: Semi-annual presentations to introduce contractors to new technologies for building more energy efficient homes. • Education/Outreach: Provide energy efficiency and conservation information to interested members to help them reduce their bill, understand their energy consumption and make their home more efficient. • Lending Library and Resource Center: Provide energy efficiency and renewable energy resources to members through a book lending library and resource center. • Low Income Winter Rate Assistance Program: Income -qualified members can apply for a discounted rate during the heating season. In conjunction, a home energy audit is conducted to assist members with energy conservation. • Weatherization Workshops: Provide basic information about the benefits of weatherizing, including costs/returns, and hands-on demonstrations on installing weatherization materials. Members who attend the events received their own caulking gun, a tube of caulk, spray foam sealant, a package of weather-stripping, outlet and switch gaskets, two CFLs and a tape measure. 2009 Program Summary: Total Program Costs: $201,411 Total kW'demand reduction: 140kW Total Lifecycle kWh reduction: 2,547,357 kWh T&D System Upgrades (Calendar year 2009) Due to the remote nature of the PSREC system and the substantial distribution system necessary to reach all our rural members, PSREC is subject to significant system operational losses ('17,520 MWh/year). Investment in construction upgrades yields efficiency savings from reduction in system peak losses. In 2009, PSREC's system upgrades provided a load reduction of>26kW. Analysis in Variation of Goals and Results (Calendar year 2009) Historically, approximately 70% of our GSHP installations are in newly constructed homes. This is due to the fact that we have robust outreach and education to encourage custom home contractors to incorporate GSHPs in their construction plans. Additionally, installing a GSHP in new construction is 157 significantly more cost-effective due to the fact that retrofitting interior ducting can be very expensive. Unfortunately, building permits for new homes in our area declined by approximately 85% from 2008 to 2009. Due to the economic downturn and slow down of new construction, our forecasted goals have been significantly impacted for our GSHP Program, and thus for our overall energy efficiency goals. In our peak year 2007 we had 24 GSHPs installed in newly constructed homes and 11 retrofits, and in 2009 we only had 3 installed in new homes with only 6 total installations. The construction decline has been devastating to our community, as well as to our energy efficiency potential objectives. We hope to see the market recover next year and would anticipate our dedicated contractor network to again assist us in encouraging the installation of GSHPs. Additionally, our GSHP program energy savings estimates have been reviewed through EM&V efforts and the results have significantly impacted our savings. The E3 model has limitations in how we report coincident peak demand savings since we had to use PG& E's load profile as a default. It is important to note that PSREC is unique in that our peak demand occurs during the winter hours of 5-10 AM. Therefore, it is most cost-effective for PSREC to concentrate on programs that reduce demand in the winter. In 2009 we conducted an in-house lighting retrofit for a total estimated annual energy savings of 19,770 kWh. A Custom Rebate for an energy efficient lighting retrofit was provided to one local church with an estimated annual energy savings of 5,000 kWh. Proposed PSREC Energy Efficiency Programs and Services (for 2010) • Maintain or accelerate existing programs. • Continue to target businesses with large lighting loads to provide incentives for lighting retrofits. • Begin developing a test case program for Cold Climate Heat Pumps. • Expand Holiday LED light program to allow members to receive rebates for Holiday LED lights purchased at any retail store. • Evaluate and implement new energy efficiency programs and technologies, as applicable. American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 The ARRA anticipated jump-starting a recessionary economy; unfortunately, this hasn't been the case for Rural Electric Cooperatives who are not eligible for any of the formula based energy efficiency and conservation block grants. Planned EM&V Efforts (for 2010) PSREC's GSHP Program constitutes the largest component of our residential energy -efficiency programs, and is the top priority for Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification (EM&V) activities. PSREC initiated an engineering review to verify the energy savings attributable to GSHP systems in 2009. In 2010, we initiated a comprehensive EM&V review of the GSHP program through Efficiency Services Group and anticipate delivery of the report in late February. 158 PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOP (PSREC) Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Net Lifecycle GHC L8ility Utility Utility Mktg. Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances. HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration . . ... . ..... . .. ..... ... . ... . . . HVAC Water Heating Camprehen5ne Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process P cessProcess roce........... ... .. .......... ... Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensna Other SubTotal Net Demand Net Peak kW ; Nat Annual Net Life cycle . Reductions Incentives Cost Cited Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Category � Savings (kW) ' Savings kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) (5} Cost (5) Admin Cost (8) (5) Res Clothes Washers Res Coaling Res Dishwashers Ras Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res -_ Res Pcoi Pump Res Refigeration Res Shell . . _ . . . ... Res Water Heating . . . Res Comprahensite Non -Res cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Mon -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Comprettenshe Other 4: 4 10,181; 1,394 172 46,348 75,015 101,808 i 58 18127 10 1,548. 1 1,450,440 730 551,477 353. 18.819 _. . 302746. ...... . . .. 164 103,872:._.. 237,987 132 21,835 50,844: 152,832111- . . .,..,-._84. 4 6,545 2,030 25,393 3213 231,434 3,030,837 1,587 5 64,673 $ 138,730 201,411 $ $ 5 .. 19,309 9,445 2,130 56,333 5 8,228 $ 28,941 $...,... 13,059 $ 52.351 140 35; T&❑ T&D 26 : 26 58,000 2,320,000 1,291 'Total 186 61 . 284,434' 5,350,537 2,878 $ 84,673 $ 136,7381 $ 201,411 I IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding 750 0189 I Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAG Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting .,.. ...,.., Pool Pump Refrigeration.., HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration,,, HVAC Process Comprehenshe„ Other SubTalal Net Demand Category Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Caaling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pant Pump Res_ Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Healing Res Gomprehensire Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Coaling Nan -Res Heating Nan -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors 540-000 Pumps Nan . , . , 00 -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Nan Res Process . . . Non Ras Comprehensive -. Other - Net Peak kW Savings Net Lifecycte GHG Utility Utility - I151ity Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle s Reductions Incentives Cod Direct Install';;. EM&V, and Total Utility Cast kWh Savings; kWh savings `'. (Tons) ($) Cost (5) ' Admin Cost (5) ($) 14,5441 ......,....145,440', 2,640 ........ 34,320 '. ...344 - 3,096 80 19 2 49,860 433,804 232 38,516 657,2169 357 5 3,000; $ 2,000" $ zoo $ 92,020 ; $ 3,058 .., .. $ 10,750 . ... $ 13,,214214..;.: $ 250'. 31 168,140; 1,813,180 875 $ 125,892 114,193 5 17,542 $ 20,542 8,637 $ 10,637 2,038 $. ..... .... 2,236. $ 92,820 3,502 $ 7,160 24,272 $ T... 36,02✓2 4,424 $ 17,639 ,411 52,518 5 52,616 115 240,085 T&D T&D 518 1 518 I 38,500 ' 1,460, 000 812 'Total 6331 548 204,040 3,073,1601 1,687 1$ 125,892 $ 114,1531 $ 240,085 I IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 0.33 Excluding 7-80 159 PORT OF OAKLAND • 150-200 customers, 100 percent are commercial • Peak demand —13 megawatts • Annual energy use: 83 gigawatt-hours Port of Oakland Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Current Commercial Programs: • Energy Audits: The Port is currently conducting an Energy Audit program that will result in recommendations of five major energy saving retrofit/improvement projects that could be undertaken to effectively support load reduction and the more efficient use of energy in the area. The proposed energy efficiency projects will be prioritized by highest to lowest energy savings. Rebates will be provided for the energy efficiency projects completed based on the energy audit recommendations, and up to 100 percent of the total energy audit cost. • Energy Saving Measures Exceeding Title 24 Standards: Port will provide a rebate for any new facility constructed within the Port by its electricity customers that exceed the title 24 standards in energy saving measures. Eligible facility must reduce energy usage by a minimum of 10% compared to the standard title 24 facility. This rebate will pay fora % of the cost difference between a standard and an upgraded title 24 equipment (such as HVAC units) and material. • Energy Saving Equipment Retrofits/improvements Rebates: The Port has implemented a program that provides generous rebates and solid technical support for the installation of new energy efficient equipment/improvements by our commercial customers. Under our program, the eligible projects must reduce energy usage by a minimum of 20 percent, to be eligible for a rebate of the equipment cost differential (up to a 90 percent rebate for energy saving of 90 percent or more). • Lighting Retrofit: A program providing rebates for the installation of energy efficient lighting that reduces annual energy usage by at least 35 percent in commercial facilities. This rebate is based on a single flat incentive rate of $0.05 per annual kilowatt-hours saved. • Energy Saving / Efficiency Research, Development, and Demonstration Programs: Port electricity customers that do research, development and demonstrate new energy saving/efficiency programs are entitled to a rebate up to 20% of the cost of a project based on availability of funds. To qualify for a rebate under this program all Energy Savings/Efficiency Research, Development and Demonstration Programs must be based on environmental friendly natural resources (or waste products). • Photovoltaic (PV) Power Generating Systems In Accordance with Senate Bill 1 {SB1): Beginning January 1, 2008, this rebate will reimburse new solar energy generating facilities a one-time flat 160 rate of $ 3.50 per watt (Alternating Current) of installed capacity. In the event the new solar facility generates more than the electric customer's monthly electric consumption, then the Port will purchase the excess solar electric power from said facility at the same rate the Port sells power to said facility. In addition, the new solar energy generating facilities must obtain Port approval and must comply with all regulatory requirements prior to the construction of the facility. This rebate is subjected to 7% annual reduction per SB1. • Other Renewable (or Green) Energy Programs: Beginning January 1, 2008, this rebate will reimburse new clean wind energy generating facilities that generates over 7.5 kilowatts a onetime flat rate of $ 1.50 per watt (alternating current) of installed capacity and if the facility generates less than 7.5 kilowatts then the rebate will be a onetime flat rate of $ 2.50 per watt (alternating current) of installed capacity. In the event the new wind power facility generates more than the electric customer's monthly electric consumption, then the Port will purchase the excess electric power from said facility at the same rate the Port sells electric power to said facility. In addition, the new wind power energy generating facilities must obtain Port approval and must comply with all regulatory requirements prior to the construction of the facility. All other renewable generation that qualifies under this program are given a maximum rebate of 20% of the construction cost of the generating facility, based on the availability of funds. Proposed Port of Oakland Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2009-2010) • Maintain existing programs at current levels. Port of Oakland Demand Reduction Programs: The Port of Oakland does not currently have any demand reduction programs in place. 161 PORT OF OAKLAND Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09. No energy efficiency rebates provided in FY 2008-2009. RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITY • The City of Rancho Cucamonga established the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) in 2001 to provide safe, reliable and cost-effective service to retail customers that were building new facilities located in the designated service territory. • RCMU began serving commercial and industrial customers in 2003. • RCMU receives wholesale power through its 66/12kV substation. • RCMU serves approximately 460 non-residential meters. • Peak demand for the utility is 14.5 megawatts and annual energy sales are 62,600 megawatt - hours. Rancho Cucamonga Energy Efficiency Program Highlights In fiscal year 2008/2009, the utility spent approximately $27,000 in rebate incentives to increase energy efficiency. The annual energy efficiency savings were 13,000 kilowatt-hours. Those savings were three percent of the projected savings. This appears to reflect market saturation and customers' reluctance to invest in energy efficiency programs during this economic uncertainty. Energy Efficiency Program Goals: • Design and install distribution facilities that reduce system losses. • Provide information and analysis to RCMU customers that allow them to make informed decisions about reducing energy consumption. • Prioritize energy efficiency technologies and opportunities. • Provide direct assistance to qualified customers who are unable to otherwise implement cost- effective and approved savings energy efficiencies. System Design • Customers are served through a looped 12,000 volts underground facilities with larger gauge ASCR conductors to improve system reliability and reduce system losses. • RCMU evaluates circuit load performance to optimize performance and reduce system losses. • RCMU purchases and installs efficient transformers to reduce system losses. • All street lights are high pressure sodium lamps. • All signal lights and crosswalks use LED energy saving bulbs. 163 Commercial Customer Programs: • Energy Audits: City offers free, customized energy audits including lighting assessment, HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning) assessment, equipment assessment and a review of energy usage. Specific cost-effective recommendations to improve energy efficiency and reduce energy use are provided. Through June 30, 2009, energy audits were completed for 60% of the utility's customers. • Commercial Lighting Rebate: A rebate of $0.05 per kWh is offered for energy efficiency lighting and upgrades. • HVAC Tune-up Rebate: Customers are offered a rebate up to $300.00 for HVAC tune-up. Through June 30, 2009, the City has diagnosed and verified the proper HVAC tune-up requirements for 32% of its customers. • Time -of Use Rates Program: All customers loads exceeding 200 kilowatts demand receive time - of -use pricing bills; enabling them to reduce their energy costs through the time management of their energy usage. • Customized Energy Programs: Measures include sunscreens, window film, and cool roofs. Commercial Customer Education Programs: • Energy Usage and Demand Analysis: The Utility will review energy usage and demand data at customer facilities to identify opportunities for the customer to lower costs. Renewable Energy Programs: • Solar Incentive Program: Solar Rebate Program provides performance -based incentives of $2.60 per installed watt rebate up to a total of $25,000 towards the purchase and installation of a solar energy system. Rancho Cucamonga Demand Reduction Programs: • City -Load Reduction Program — involves City facilities that have installed or modified emergency back-up generation systems. 164 RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITY Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector {Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC Appliances C .._....... . . . . . . ConsuumeerrElectronics HVAC Lighting _..,.. .. Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating . e . . .. . . .... . . . Comprehensise Process HVAC HVAC.. Lighting Possess Possess Refrigeration HVAC Possess ,.-. i . .. .: .:.. Compreehenhen sive Other SubTotal Net Demand I Net Peak kW Net Annual Category Sayings (kW) Savings 'kWh Savings Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating. Res Lighting - - Res u01 Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Ras Water Heating Res Comprehensi}e Non -Res Cooking_ Non -Res Ccoing - Non -Res Heating Non -Res •Cighting... . .. ......... Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps -- __- . , . . o ,. Nun -Res Refrigeatioptn Non -Res Shell Non Res Proc._. es5 Non Res Coniprehensine Other 4 5; 12,719 Nat Lifecycle kWh savings 64,340 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Reductions. Incentives Cost (Tons) (9) 50 5 24,764', Utility Direct- Utility Mktg, Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (5) 1 Admin Cost (8) (8) 2,500 $ 27,284 T&D T&D Total 1EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding Y&O 12,719 84,340 50 24,784',. Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 $ 2,500 $ 27,284 6454, Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances HVAC Apptiances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump RefrigeiattCf_..� HVAC Water Heating Camprehensile Process HVAC HVAC Lighting ...,,,.. Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Pioees0 Comprehenoise Other Su6Total Res Clothes Washers Res Goofing - -- ... ...... 50r........,... Rees Dlshweshem __ __..._..., Res Electronics . .. . .. ..... .... ..... . .. Res Heating Res Lighting Res Poo! Pump Res Refrigeration ......... ..... Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Nan -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling _.: Non-- Heating Healing Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Nonon -Res Refrigeration . .11........ Non -Res Shell Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive t Othe . . .. Other ( Net Lifecycle GHG Utility ,Utility Direct; Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle ; Reductions Incentives Cost ` Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) (0) r (8) Admin Cost (6) (9) Savings -kWh Savings' kWh sainings 08,743 ........ ... ...............54 170,677 101 79,554 $..,..._. - 14,994- 2,075 1,752 10 17 46,000 305,026 185 $ 69,634 $ 9,142 96,676 T&0 T&❑ Total 16 17 46,000', 305,028 185 $ 59,634 - 5 9,042 $ 95,679 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 1.18 Excluding T&i7 165 REDDING ELECTRIC UTILITY (REU) Redding Electric Utility Energy Efficiency Program Performance and Forecast Redding Electric Utility (REU) spent $2.4 million on its Public Benefits Program (PBP) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. Of this amount, more than two-thirds or $1.6 million was spent on REU's energy efficiency improvement programs. $1.4 million of the energy efficiency -related expenditures was used directly for utility -sponsored rebates and incentives for REU's customers' purchases and installations of energy efficient equipment and the improvement of our community. In summary, during FY2009 REU achieved a net annual energy savings of 2.3 Gigawatt-hours (GWh) and reduced our system's net coincident peak demand by 13 megawatts (MW) at a combined cost of $1.6 million. Based on the results of the state -approved E3 computer model to evaluate energy efficiency program cost effectiveness, this translates into an overall energy efficiency program Total Resource Cost for REU of 2.10. According to the E3 model, this would suggest that for every $1 spent on our energy efficiency programs, REU, our customers, and society as a whole, received slightly more than $2 in value or benefit. The FY 2009 program resulted in slightly less energy savings than forecast in 2007 largely due to economic conditions including four large commercial account closures during FY 2008 and FY 2009, and one of the state's highest unemployment rates existing in Redding and Shasta County. These conditions continued to slow the use of REU's lighting rebate program that was originally forecast to provide nearly 1 GWh of annual energy savings. To offset this program shortfall, REU participated in the Keep Your Cool Program as part of a regional effort to improve energy efficiency in the small commercial and food service refrigeration markets. REU has employed Efficiency Services Group from Portland, Oregon, to provide third -party evaluation, measurement, and verification (EM&V) services on REU's newest (and largest) energy saving program during FY 2009 in the commercial refrigeration sector. The EM&V findings showed a statistically significant sampling to confirm 100 percent of the installations were completed as documented by REU and the installer, Humitech, in the Keep Your Cool Program. This Program's deemed savings of 734 MWh accounted for approximately 30 percent of REU's total net annual energy savings in the 2009 period. Since 1998, REU has spent more than $12 million in numerous rebate and incentive programs to increase the energy efficiency in the Redding community. These programs have raised customer awareness of energy efficiency with the installation of high efficiency measures and through increased education. REU continues to offer rebates for many energy efficient products and measures that meet utility -defined criteria and specifications including: air-conditioning equipment, household appliances, lighting, and pumps/motors. 166 To date, the most successful incentive program for REU has been the high efficiency air-conditioning equipment. The program has been used by roughly 400 to 500 customers per year in each of the last six years, and has served to reduce customers' energy use by a combined 15 GWh. More important, the installations of high efficiency units have reduced REU's peak demand by more than 6 MW. REU's other programs, such as the ENERGY STAR' -approved Appliance rebate programs, have been highly utilized by customers to reduce utility bills and save energy. However, their impact has been less dramatic and far less valuable for the utility. Specifically, such programs serve to reduce overall energy usage more than peak demand. By definition, any program that reduces energy use by a greater percentage than it reduces peak demand serves to reduce the system load factor. Such a reduction in utility system load factor is, ironically, a reduction in utility system efficiency. Therefore, while many energy efficiency programs are largely successful in reducing utility customer energy use, unless there are sufficient incentives and programs available to reduce peak demand by a like amount or more, these efficiency programs will serve to reduce utility systems' operating efficiency and increase utilities' operating costs and rates. Serving the peak demand is essentially the most costly load — both economically and environmentally — for summer peaking electric utilities to serve. Therefore, reducing this peak should be the most critical aspect of electric utility operations. Unfortunately, there continues to be a perception in some quarters that any and all kilowatt-hours saved are of equal value. Any utility operator can tell you that is not the case. For example, reducing the energy consumption of Redding's streetlight service by 5,000 kWh (0.5 MW) from 8PM to 6AM is far less valuable to our utility's operation than shaving 5,000 kWh and 1.0 MW from 1PM to 6PM. The fact that on -peak energy has a greater amount of embedded source energy has been recognized over the last decade by state legislators and regulators -- as most clearly demonstrated by the California Energy Commission's adoption and application of the Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) to the state's Title -24 building code. REU would submit that similar treatment be afforded to the consideration or valuation of energy efficiency programs such that not every kWh saved is of equal value. The legislatively mandated loading order for cost-effective resource procurement addresses this with peak load reduction being placed at the top of the list. Electric utilities typically incur large fixed costs to pay for the capital investments necessary to build the generation, transmission, and distribution infrastructure required to provide reliable electric service to all of their customers. If electric utilities continue to reduce customers' energy consumption at a cost that is greater than the variable operating cost avoided, they will be serving fewer kilowatt-hours of energy to their customers at a higher per unit cost, and ultimately will be required to raise rates to pay for the utilities' fixed costs. While REU's energy efficiency programs have been very successful in reducing energy consumption for customers over the past 10 or more years, our programs have not been as successful in reducing peak demand. Since 1998, REU's annual load factor has decreased from 167 44 percent to as low as 38 percent this past year. This has occurred as our current efficiency programs have served to shave more energy from the shoulder and off-peak hours than they have from the on - peak period. This causes "peakier" peaks and deeper valleys in the utility's load profile, and requires fixed costs to be spread over a smaller base. Beyond the costly on -peak service requirements, the deep valleys can also make it difficult to accept wind energy, which is often produced in large quantities during off-peak periods. To improve REU's operating efficiency and to continue to provide cost-effective efficiency improvements in our system, the utility has begun the implementation of a thermal energy storage (TES) program that is primarily focused on the five ton, direct expansion air-conditioning (DX -AC) market. This relatively small-scale application of TES technology is provided with the addition of the ice Bear TES unit to qualified AC units. REU anticipates expenditures of approximately $1 million in the next 12 to 18 months in the purchase and deployment of the first 50 units under this TES program. The Ice Bears serve to reduce the applicable AC systems' peak demand on REU's electric system by diverting the vapor/gas refrigerant in the DX unit away from the compressor, and into a coil that runs through the system's ice block during the peak period. By relying on the temperature differential in the ice to condense liquid, rather than the mechanically -driven compressor, the compressor does not run during the utility -defined on -peak period, and the AC load is reduced by 95 percent for as much as six hours per day. Further, because the TES compressor is used during off-peak hours to re -freeze the storage system's water and make the ice that will later be used to provide cooling, the utility "shifts" the load from on - peak to off-peak hours —thereby allowing the utility to sell energy to our customers at a time of the day that is less expensive to generate or purchase for their use. With this nighttime operation, the compressor will typically run more efficiently than the same compressor running during the hottest hours of the day. Therefore, the customer will see a reduced amount of energy consumption (efficiency improvement) to provide a higher level of cooling comfort, and the utility will see reduced operating costs as our load profile is flattened (operating efficiency/load factor improvement) — a true win -win solution for all parties. This continued focus on peak load reduction will be increasingly important for REU because more than half of its demand is driven by air -conditioner. load. With the required use of the new refrigerant R -410A in DX/AC units, the new AC units being installed in California will be at least 15 to 20 percent less efficient than older units that use R-22 when the temperatures exceed 105 to 115°F. Therefore, even though appliance standards require high SEER unit installation, these new units using R -410A will perform less efficiently at peak load times than older units with lower SEER ratings because the new refrigerant's performance degrades substantially when ambient temperatures reach levels that regularly occur in Redding. While REU's high -efficiency air -conditioner incentive program has been one of, if not its most successful program to -date, we will be less likely to see significant long-term peak load reduction benefits because 168 of the reduced efficacy and performance of the new refrigerant at high ambient temperatures. Therefore, REU is turning to the TES load -shifting technology that will allow the utility to cost-effectively sell energy to provide air-conditioning comfort to our customers, and reduce operating costs for both the individual customer and to the community as a whole in the City of Redding. In a related energy efficiency program development, the City of Redding received an allocation of $892,700 from the Department of Energy's Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant Program. REU has developed and is implementing a whole house -based, deep energy retrofit/weatherization program for income qualified customers. Part of this Program has been the creation of a training program for local contractors in association with the Shasta Builders Exchange to create a green workforce that is capable of providing high quality Home Performance Contracting services in our Community. With the training phase complete for more than 40 contractors, REU has begun to implement the retrofit program and deploy these contractors to specific, income qualified homes for auditing and remediation services that improve the energy efficiency, safety and indoor air quality for the occupants. Lastly, REU has used the California Publicly -Owned Utility Energy Efficiency Resource Assessment Model (CalEERAM) as developed by Navigant Consulting (formerly Summit Blue) to develop a 10 -year forecast of the market potential for energy efficiency savings in Redding, as required by State law. REU revised the original model prepared by Navigant to adjust for removal of a few measures (e.g. residential CFLs and torchieres) that are not included in the utility's current or proposed rebate offerings. The net effect of these changes was to reduce the 2011 forecast by approximately 20 percent from the original Navigant model and be more in -line with REU's recent experience and rebate program performance. REU is finding that a combination of reduced disposable income for both residential and commercial customers, and the increasing saturation(s) of high efficiency appliances and other measures in our service territory has slowed the participation and use of REU's programs. As part of this 10 -year forecast tool, Redding also developed and included a forecast of the continued implementation of TES in its service territory that provides a greaterreduction in peak demand. REU firmly believes this overall electric system efficiency improvement program will produce benefits for its community, the state as a whole, and our global environment. This forecast shows that energy savings will grow over time, but REU's focus on peak load reduction through load shifting technology will cause our system's peak demand to grow more slowly than the rate at which our energy requirements are reduced -- to provide the associated long-term system efficiency improvements, cost reductions, and environmental benefits for its customers. 169 REDDING ELECTRIC UTILITY (REU) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances Res Clothes Washers . ........ ....... _.__. ____. HVAC Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers .. .i. . Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Healing L[g 14 Res Lighting -_ Pool Pump Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration HVAC Res Shell . . . . .. . . .. . __. Water Heating Res Water Heating Camprehensise Res Comprehensive Process Non -Res Cooking HVAC Non -Res Gaoling __ .. HVAC Non -Ras Hesting Lighting . . .. Non -Res Lighting Process Non -Res Motors Process Nan -Res Pumps Refrigeration' Nan -Res Refdgeralion H Non-Res Shell .........,... s_.. _.. Process Nan Res Process ..__...... 11 R. ...C , . e .........._ Comprehensive Nan Res Comprehensive Other Other SubTotal 41 299= 7., 00 Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 972 '...... 22 . 83 304 0 1,823 Net Lifecycie GHG Utility (Utility Direct 1 Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Lifecycle l Reductions Incentives Cost ', Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost [$y Admin Cost .1-9) [$1 (Tons) ($I 41 • 86,364 983849 544 254 285,235 4,773,107 _...7 21,052 274981. 43 _ 78,796 702,894: 378 5 `. ...., 31,490 568,827 307 972: 687,044. 13,769,174 I 7,769 3,331 i 49,512' 27 47 13.342 230,136,:_, 50 299.125 . ,._, Z180,945 02 734,008 , 2,959,172 67.091 � 878913,�, 1,481 2,297,409 27,145,691 310 1,213 1,634 37T 15,757 $ 4,913 508,761 $ 12,657 1 6,249 52535 1,589 $ 7,160 $ .3,175 $ 21,475. $ 2790 $ 696,292; $ 160 900 S 1,929 9 ,....... 244 $ 54.467 $ 33,919 $ 13,310 $ 39,954 ._,. 5 11,150 € 5 48,650 $ . . . 18639 3.306 .. . . $ .......3,103 $ 1,380,904 ; $ 79,960 $ 274,935 11,153 $ 561,315 $...�..,--• 14,247 ..�...,. . ,- $ 19,335 $ 24274 $ 857259 $ .. ...... 2,173 $ 131,707 $ . ._... 51,113, 84,889 0,489 $ 1,734,940 T&D T&D Total EE Program Portfolio 7RC Test 1,823 1,481 I 2,297,409 27,143,001 2.12 1 Excluding MO 15,757 1 $ 1.390,954 $ 79,960: $ 274,035 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 $ 1,734 949 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report), Category • Savings (kW) Appliances VAC Res Cooling Appliances Res Dishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Heating Lighting . . ., _.. Res. P.91009. _. . Pool Pump -- Res Pall Pump Refrigeration....._ Re5 Refigerahon_... 5_ HVAC Res Shell 972 Water Heating Res WaterHeating ,., 1 Comprehensive Rea Comprehensive • Process Non -Res Cooking HVAC - - Mon -Res Cooling ii . . . . .. ..... HVAC Nan -Res Heating Lighting 1000 -Res Lighting Process Nan -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps ; Refrigeration San Res Refrigeration i HVAC Nap -Res Shell ... . . . . Process Nan Res Process ' Comprehensive Nan Res Comprehensive . .. .. _......... ...., Other Other • 7SubTotal Res Clothes Washers 1,823 Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle Savings I5W5 Savings kWh savings 49 95,384 : 254 265,235 ..,.. .. .. ..,.. 7 27;002 131 76,7061 51; 31,493 672 1 867,044: 1 3,301 13,342 50 209,125 82 1 .734,009 1,481 67,091 1 2,297,409 Nat Lifecycle GHG Utility 175lity Direct Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives Cast Install Cost ' EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) I$) (9) ' Admin Cost ($) (41 _..903,840 4,773,107 274,051 702,094 - 375 666,827 ; _., 307 13,768,174' 7,789 48,512: 27 544 3,951 151 200,136 ' 313 2,188,045 1.213 2959,172 , . . ... 1,634 -__ 676.913 --, „ 377 27,143 661 15,757 $ 4,913 1 508,781 .. . c ... . . $ 12,657 =. $ 7,1E9 21,475 $ 698,292', $ 1,929 1, 6,240 52,335 1,580 3,175 2,795 160,966 244 5 04,467 $ 33,810 5 13,310 5 39,954 $ ,.....,11.158 $ 46,050 $ 18,838 '$ 0,308 $ 3,183 $ 1,390,954 I $ 79,960 $ 274,035 $ 11,153 $ 561,315 $,.., 14,247 $ 10,335 $ 24,270 $ 857,2599 $ 2,173 $ 131,707 $ -..,..64,589 6,489 1,734,948 T&D T&0 otal 1,825_ 1,481 1 2,287,400 1 27,143,681 IEE Program portfolio 71R0 Test 2.12 Ex4Judirx7 780 170 15,757 1 $ 1,300,954 S 79,960.. $ 274,035 1 5 1,734,949 RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES Yl A Y ER ENERGY l I f E ct1, ,r • Riverside Public Utilities (RPU) was established in 1895 • Over 106,000 electric and 64,000 water customers • Population over 300,000 • Peak demand hit system high of 609 megawatts in August 2007 • Annual energy use is approximately 2,700 gigawatt-hours • RPU employs just under 600 full-time employees Introduction Riverside Public Utilities is committed to the highest quality water and electric services at the lowest possible rates to benefit the community. RPU is also dedicated to its energy and water efficiency efforts, demand reduction, and resource conservation. In addition to the previously mentioned responsibilities, Riverside Public Utilities plays an important role in the execution of the Green Action Plan (GAP). The first plan, .a 38 point initiative, used these guidelines to highlight seven vital areas: Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Waste Reduction, Urban Design, Urban Nature, Transportation, and Water. After completing the first action plan, the State's Department of Conservation selected Riverside as the first "Emerald City." The designation is part of a pilot project that is designed to serve as a template for other communities. The City's new Green Action Plan includes the original seven focus areas and an eighth dedicated to creating a "Healthy Community." From the focus areas 18 new goals were created and form a working document. Both action plans can be found at www.greenriverside.com. Background Riverside is committed to meeting the annual energy efficiency (EE) and conservation goals it has established through Assembly Bill 2021 (AB2021) for energy and demand reduction by 2016. The reduction goal of 240,038 megawatt -hours (MWh) across 10 years was established in 2006. Across the last few years, Riverside has been able to review past E3 submissions and locate areas of energy savings which had not previously been reported. Some of these areas include large scale new construction projects, refrigerator recycling efforts, direct install of lighting for small businesses, and other efficiency programs. These omissions account for over ten million additional kilowatt hour (kWh) savings not previously captured or reported. Specifically, the revised annual energy savings officially reported for FY'06-07 is now 13,109,259 kWh and for FY'07-08 the total is 10,682,305 kWh. 171 RPU has seen a significant reduction in program participation due to the national recession. Riverside County has the second highest unemployment rate in the country, next to Detroit. According to a recent American Public Power Association (APPA) report dated Dec. 8, 2009, "The current economic downturn has underscored the need for communities to engage in strong economic development activities, both with current and potential customers. Businesses both large and small served by public power are feeling the effects of tighter credit, reduced consumer spending, higher unemployment, and the potential of increased energy and environmental costs." • The City is experiencing record unemployment currently at 15% (per EDD, January 2010 data.) This figure is 2.0% over the statewide unemployment figure and California has the 5th highest unemployment in the nation. • The real estate market has been severely impacted with property values decreasing nearly 40% from the 2007 peak. In addition, the region's foreclosure rates are some of the highest in the nation. This real estate crisis has resulted in the homeowner's inability to participate in energy - efficiency home improvement measures. • RPU has seen a drop in revenues as well as overall energy use. Energy sales and forecasts have seen a decrease of approximately 8 percent over the last two years. • RPU's low-income program (SHARE) participation levels have nearly doubled over the last two years requiring additional unprecedented funding levels. In response RPU is focusing new programs on direct installation, which interests cash -strapped businesses and residents. These new programs will include direct installation of programmable thermostats for small businesses, installation of VendingMisers for any business with cold drink vending machines, and the extension of the small business lighting program. RPU is also adding a Whole House Rebate Program for residential customers. The utility will continue to research and develop new cost- effective programs that yield energy savings to achieve the goals set forth by AB2021. RPU Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Total program expenditures of over $6,000,000 in FY 2008-2009 resulted in savings of more than 16,000,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) annually or 205,155,182 kWh lifetime. Since FY 2001-2002, total program cost for all energy efficiency programsis more than $54,000,000 resulting in greater than 160 GWh reductions. RPU Energy Efficiency Program Objectives • Work collaboratively with city departments to support common economic and business development goals and promote public outreach. • Explore new opportunities to increase Energy Efficiency Program awareness. • lmplement energy efficiency measures at various city facilities to demonstrate new technologies in a responsible and cost-effective manner. • Introduce and encourage latest energy technologies to advance market transformation. • Evaluate program effectiveness, the needs of the customer and revise guidelines to increase participation. 172 • Increase current School Education Program efforts with additional funding. • Expand awareness of "green power" by educating customers on the benefits of reducing the use of traditional electric generation and how it can reduce harmful effects on the environment. • Support energy efficiency research and development efforts of Large commercial and industrial customers. • Economic development focused on business attraction, expansion, and retention including a focus on 'green jobs.' Current Commercial Customer Programs • Air Conditioning Rebate for Replacement and/or New Units: Offers incentives for replacement or installation of heating, ventilating and air conditioning units with high - efficiency equipment. The incentive is intended to close the gap in cost between new standard HVAC equipment and high -efficiency equipment. Incentive amounts are based on. the unit's Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio rating as defined by California Title 24 codes. • New Construction: Offers non-residential customers technical assistance during the design and planning stages of new additions to maximize energy efficiency and energy savings by exceeding California's Title 24 state standards. • Custom Energy Efficiency Technology Grant Program: Supports businesses, non-profit organizations, educational institutions or groups of customers working in collaboration for research, development, and effective use of innovative energy technologies. Grant funding supports projects related to the efficient and innovative use of energy that are not covered under our existing non-residential programs. • Energy Innovations Grant for Post -Secondary Educational Institutions: This program is for the funding of research, development and demonstration programs for the public interest to advance science or technology in electric -related projects in the institutions of higher education within the city of Riverside. • Energy Efficiency Incentives for Lighting: Offers incentives for replacing older inefficient lighting with high -efficiency units. The incentive is offered to close the gap between standard lighting equipment and high -efficiency equipment. • Technical Assistance Program: Offers all non-residential customers a comprehensive energy audit using a software program designed specifically for businesses. Demand rate and time - of -use customers can receive the services of a technical assistance consultant in addition to the audit. • Energy Management Systems Assistance Program: Provides incentives for energy management system upgrades for non-residential customers. RPU offers cost sharing incentives to assist the customer in technology purchases that provide energy savings. The incentive is the cost sharing of half of the project based on overall customer load. 173 • Shade Tree Planting for Cooling Efficiency: Provides incentives to non-residential customers to plant shade trees around their business or organization to help save on summer cooling costs. Program is based on the American Public Power Associations "Tree Power" program. Customers receive a rebate check from RPU for up to $25 per tree toward their cost to purchase up to five trees annually. • Energy Education Campaign - Residential, Business: Energy information is provided to all residential and business classes; small and large commercials customers on energy conservation and demand reduction. Onsite energy audits are also available. • Thermal Energy Storage and Feasibility Study Incentives: Incentives are provided to close the gap in cost between standard heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment and new cooling technologies such as thermal energy storage. The incentive amount of $200 per kilowatt is based on the on -peak kilowatt demand savings. Funding for 50 percent or up to $5,000 is also available for a study to analyze the feasibility of installing a system. A feasibility study is required before a customer entering into the agreement development phase of the program. • Customer Directed Funding: Customers who enter into multi -year, energy service agreements with RPU can direct a portion of their Public Benefit Funds directly to their specific needs. Customer directed funds can be used for a variety of energy conservation and assistance programs that promote renewable resources, and research and development. • Auto Meter Reading: This program provides a tool to non-residential customers that monitor the electric load on 15 -minute intervals. The program allows non-residential customers the ability to view usage patterns via the Internet. • Efficient Motors: Incentives for the replacement or purchase of new premium motors for non-residential customers. • Performance Based Incentives: Provide rebates to those customers who can demonstrate a kWh savings based on an energy -efficiency measures implemented in their business that is not already provided through a standard rebate program. Commercial Photovoltaic Incentive: This rebate is to encourage the installation of photovoltaic panels. Rebates are provided to customers who install PV on their business to reduce peak load. Rebates are $3 per watt up to 50 percent of the project cost, not to exceed the appropriate cap starting at $50,000 and going up to $500,000 depending on the customer size. Current Residential Customer Programs • Air Conditioning Rebates for New or Replacement Units: Offers incentives for replacement or installation of central heating, ventilating and air conditioning units and/or room units 174 with high -efficiency equipment. The incentive is intended to close the gap in cost between standard HVAC equipment and high -efficiency equipment. Incentive amounts are based on the unit's Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio rating as defined by. California Title 24 codes. • Energy Star® Appliance Rebates: In conjunction with the Department of Energy, this program offers rebates to customers who purchase appliances or equipment carrying the "Energy Star®" label. • Refrigerator Purchase Rebate: Provides incentives for the purchase of new high -efficiency Energy Star® -rated refrigerators that use 20 percent to 50 percent less electricity than standard units of comparable size. • Online Home Energy Analysis: Generates an analysis of home energy that identifies energy efficiency measures and savings. Customers complete the survey online and can view the results instantly. The Web also provides conservation information. • Refrigerator/Freezer Recycling: This program provides for recycling of old operating inefficient refrigerators and/or stand-alone freezers that are taken to a recycling facility for processing. • Shade Tree Planting for Cooling Efficiency: Incentives for residential customers to plant shade trees around their home to help save on summer cooling costs. Customers receive rebates of up to $25 per tree for the purchase of up to five trees annually. In addition, a free shade tree coupon comes on the back of the March bill. The coupon can be redeemed for one tree worth up to $25. • Pool Saver Swimming Pool Pump Incentive: This program offers swimming pool owners a $5 credit on their monthly electric bill for setting their pool pump timers to operate off-peak hours. • Low -Income Assistance: Credits up to $150 toward electric deposit or bill payment assistance for qualified low-income applicants annually. • We Care Program: Provides disabled, seniors, and/or low-income residents free home energy efficient/weatherization product installation. • Weatherization Incentive Rebate: This program provides a whole house approach to improving home energy efficiency with rebates on attic insulation, duct insulation, duct testing/sealing, window replacement, window shading, whole house fans, programmable thermostats and evaporative coolers. • Residential Photovoltaic Incentive: This rebate is to encourage the installation of photovoltaic panels. Rebates are provided to customers who install PV on their home to reduce peak load. Rebates are $3 per watt up to 50 percent of the project cost, not to exceed $25,000, whichever is less. 175 • Low Income Refrigerator Giveaway: Provides qualifying residents with a new Energy Star refrigerator while recycling the old efficient machine. Photovoltaic Efforts (Solar) RPU has been actively promoting residential and commercial participation in its renewable energy programs. In support of Senate Bill 1 (SB1) RPU has allocated a budget of $2.5 million annually for the next ten years to expand customer installed systems. During the last year there were more than 30 residential installations totaling more than 180kW and three non-residential systems also generating more than 180kW of renewable solar energy. • Photovoltaic (PV) Projects: RPU has a goal of installing 20 megawatts of local photovoltaic by 2020. The following are some of the completed projects through the end of 2009. Including residential and commercial PV installations, more than 1.3 megawatts of local PV power has been installed by the end of 2009. ■ Utilities Operations Center Carport ■ La Sierra Metrolink Station Carport ■ Autumn Ridge Apartments — Phases 1 and 2 ■ Oak Tree Apartments ■ Three local City Pool Changing Facilities ■ Janet Goeske Senior Center Carport ■ City Hall 7th Floor Patio Structure ■ Orange Terrace Community Park Schools School Education Program: RPU supports public and private schools with a variety of energy and water - related curriculum that includes field trips and classroom presentations. To date, more than 35,000 students have been reached. (The water portion of this program is provided by water operation funds, which are not included in this budget). Proposed RPU Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2009-2010) RPU plans to maintain the current level of programs and services to its customers. A few additions will be made to some existing programs including: • Double Rebates for HID Replacement • LED Security Wall -packs • Small Business Direct Install — Lighting • VendingMisers Direct Install • Commercial Thermostat Direct Install • Residential Triple Rebates for Weatherization • Residential `Whole House' Rebate 176 Evaluation, Measurement, and Verification (EM&V) Like many other SCPPA members, Riverside Public Utilities recently selected Summit Blue (now Navigant Consulting) to provide an evaluation, measurement and verification study of its energy -efficiency programs. This study is expected to evaluate RPU's residential and commercial rebate processes, program portfolio, the cost-effectiveness of the programs and the methods of reporting energy savings in compliance with the law. The EM&V report will also include a review of RPU's marketing materials, an assessment of the database tracking systems and a recommendation to complete an impact evaluation. The impact evaluation will consist of customer telephone surveys, onsite inspections, verifications that might include metering efforts and a thorough analysis of program effectiveness. In addition to the efforts provided by Summit Blue, RPU consistently performs the following in support of EM&V activities: • An onsite inspection rate of no less than 10 percent for all residential program participants, performed by RPU staff and contractors. • A pre- and post -inspection of most commercial rebate participants, including a review of historical energy usage and energy -saving calculations. • Audits and installations performed by third -party contractors for RPU direct install programs have high inspection rates that are performed by consultant. • Refrigerator/Freezer Recycling program administered by Appliance Recycling Centers of America (ARCA) assures proper inspection when the contractor is picking up old refrigeration equipment. RPU will continue current EM&V efforts for its energy -efficiency programs while working with Summit Blue to streamline the inspection processes, improve reporting and tracking efforts, and enhance overall program effectiveness. Stimulus Opportunities According to the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG) guidelines of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the City of Riverside was allocated $2,850,600 under the formula set by federal law. Using the city's Green Action Plan (GAP), adopted by Riverside City Council in 2007 as its guiding document, Riverside's stimulus strategy focuses on six key areas: Goals and Objectives, Implementation, Agency Partnerships/Impacts, Sharing and Coordination of Information, Program Sustainability, and Transparency and Accountability. The following projects were submitted under the grant for the EECBG funding through ARRA: • Energy Efficiency Retrofits — retrofits included boiler and water pump replacement; heating, ventilating and air conditioning unit upgrades; and building automation for Riverside City Hall. • Foreclosed Home — Green Rehab Program will offer a "whole house" approach to energy efficiency on foreclosed, vacant and blighted homes purchased by the city for low-income homebuyers. 177 • Personal Computer Management Software Rebate —a pilot program for all city PCs which then makes funds available for businesses and non-profit organizations. RPU will continue this program after the stimulus funding has been expended. • Update Marketplace and University Avenue Specific Plans —stimulus money will be used to further goals including job creation, improving local air quality, lowering greenhouse gas emissions and foster long-term sustainability. • Greenhouse Gas Community inventory— URS Corporation will complete a community GHG emissions baseline to compliment a previously funded government facilities study. • Solar Trash/Recycling Compactors —a program to install over 30 units to reduce energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled. • PV Electric Vehicle Charging Station — project will use a photovoltaic charging system to charge 12 golf carts, off -setting expensive peak power and providing green renewable energy. • Street Lighting Retrofit LED -- a program to expand existing program and provide funding for approximately 200 additional energy -efficient light -emitting diode (LED) streetlights. • Lighted Street Retrofit — design to install approximately 1,000 "Diamond Grade 3 (DG3)" street name signs to reduce maintenance costs and energy use, as well as serve as a model for future non -illuminated street name sign standards. RPU and the City of Riverside will continue to look for ARRA stimulus, competitive bid, and grant opportunities to further enhance its energy -efficiency and demand side management programs. 178 RIVERSIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC ApphanaeS_ Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting .. . .. -. Pool Pump Refrigeration' }}VAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC [.goring _.._.._..,. Process Ptocass Refigeniti0n HVAC Process Comprehensive Other SubTotal Net Demand Category 1 Savings7cW.) Res Clothes Washers Res Coaling- Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating- Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refilgeratlon ., Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Cooling o ..... ..... Non -Res ing . , . , . . . . .. . i Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lghting,_ Non -Res Motors Pumps u.... ............... Non -Res Pumpps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell . . , _.-.. Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive Other 8 $50 5 716' 9,271 Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings kWh sayings • Net Lifecycle GHG Uglily Utility Utility Mktg, Net Annual j Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cast Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) ($) cost ($) Admin cost i$I (3) 8 ; 18,305 _ 183,048 676 2,050.769 61,261,893t .. .. . - 4 14,582' 189,898 € 894 ji 4,884,800 43,983,200 I 22,284 3 20,289 202,500 119 105 716,578 12,934,411 i 6,879 210 r 251,349 3,908,656 i= 2,020 212 105 39,011 106 429,304 8,343.566 4,808 770 3,850,409; 38,504,000 21390 716 3,577,768 225,987 3,600 10,052,142 205,155,182 35,777,080 i 255,220 18,841 167 210,447 115,722 $ 59,175 : $ 478,908 $ 38,000 1,245 745,100 $ 0,310 $ 540,080 $ 246,383 4,041 $ 1,469 295,400 $.... 82,930 $ 84,702 $ 74,800 $ 84,439 $ 25,107 101,550 ! $ 68,281 $ 240,650 $ 223r611 '; $ 308.642 $ 280,488 2,148 $ 1,596,735 I $ 985,691 4 $ 1,845,848 $ 00,420 $ 1,224,00B $ 39,319 786,463 6110 482,932 $ 184,345 $ ,..249.611 $ 001,11S $ 434,057 $ $ 4,239,373 310,790 T&0 T&0 Total ,271 3,000. 16,052,142 205,155,182 I 115,722 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 4-20 Excluding 790 $ 1,596.735 $ 995,991 $ 1,648,648 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/10 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility i Utility Mktg, Program Sector • Net Demand c Nat Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle ' Reductions Incentives Cost; Direetlnstall) EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category : Savings (kW) Savings Cost $) I Admin Cast ($) ($) Appliances - Res Clothes Washers 6' 6 kWh 513920 kWh sa139200- [fans} 80 $ ($}45,000 ( E_$ 1,070. $ 46,070 HVAC Res Coaling 466' 495 1,291,755 1 .38557387:,,.. 24,562 $ 354,336 $ ---530,337 $_ 884,673 Appliances Reg Dishwashers 3. 3 9,800 124800 72 $ 25,000. $ 981 $ - 25,501 Consumer Electronics Res Electmnics HVAC Res Heating Lighting Res Lighting Pool Pump Res Picot Pump Refrigeration Res Remgeratlon HVAC Res Shell Water Heating Res Water Heating ' Camprehansi�.e _ ,. Res Coniprehenslpe.., , Pmcess - Non -Res Cooking HVAC Non -Res Cooling. HVAC Non -Res Healing_ Lighting Non -Reg Lighting Process Non -Res M01018 Process Non -Res Pumps Refrigeration Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Nan -Res Shell Process Non Res Process - • 0.. -. 0..... Comprehensive Nan Res Comprehensne 1 520 1,529 0,809000 72,000,000 37,916 $ 350,444 $ 350 000 $ � 480 967 $ 1,180,087 .... ,..... Other Other '�. 114: l 114 , ; $ ......178 $ .. . 1 $ 177 SuOTotal $ 4,239,373 14 62` 39-' 3 ..,...20,800; 62 425842 ; 38 50,720 200 000 7661,520 1,214,560 i $... .. �. ,1,704 $ 0,464 4,075 0 $ 22 ,090 $ 49,500 $ 5fi,719 $ 326,219 .. .... . 690 $ 61,500 $ 10.257 $ 71,787 3295€ 111 3,530916 40773732 22,750 $ 96,000 $ 300000{$ .840 3,20R0,013 32,200,000 - 17,784 $ 200,000 8,046 2,879 17,353,473 192,679,293 108,051 $ 1,358,586 320,782 $ 716,782 244,720 $,.,.. 444,720 0 $ 609.575 ' $ 1,646,648 $ 3,702,922 T&0 T60 (Total 5,046 2,8794 17,353,473 t 192,679,293 106,081 $ 1,358,596 $ 599,676 i $ 1,646,6481 $ 3,722,920 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 4,45 1 Excluding MD 179 ROSEVILLE ELECTRIC (RE) VG. SE C. A Ir t P O NIA Ros vifte Elect • Established in 1912 • 51,828 customers (45,478 residential and 6,349 businesses). Roseville Electric projects an average 1,009 new meters annually for the next 10 years. • Peak demand — 325.15 megawatts; summer afternoon peak. • Annual energy use: 1,233 gigawatt-hours (FY09). • 127 employees ROSEVILLE ELECTRIC ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: • RE began offering energy efficiency programs in the early 1980's. • From 2001 to 2009 these programs have resulted in peak demand reductions of 15.6 MW and cumulative energy savings of over 104,000 MWh. • Total expenditures for energy efficiency programs during fiscal year ending June 30, 2009: $2,641,412. TIME PERIOD FOR PROGRAM PERFORMANCE DATA —Fiscal year ending June 30, 2009 CURRENT RE ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS AND SERVICES (FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009) Residential Retrofit Programs • Energy Efficiency Incentives and Support Programs: RE offers comprehensive technical support and incentives to facilitate installation of incrementally higher -efficiency cooling and heating equipment, envelope measures, appliances, and lighting for residential customers. Incentives are also offered for refrigerator recycling. • Energy Audits: A free comprehensive online audit is available for residential customers. Non -Residential Retrofit Programs • The Two -Five -O Small Commercial Lighting Program: Over 100 customers participated in the "Two Five -O" lighting retrofit program. The installed measures have resulted in an annual peak demand and energy reduction of over450KW and 2,000,000 kWh. • Municipal Facilities: Continued a 10 -Year Plan to upgrade the efficiency of municipal facilities beyond code requirements during renovations and capital improvement projects. • School Facilities: Assisted local schools with T12 to T8, T12 to T5, and HID to HIF lighting retrofits. Additionally, incentives for upgrades to more efficient HVAC units were provided. 180 • Mid -size and Large Non -Residential Program: Offered incentives to implement energy efficient measures that reduced peak loads and energy consumption; these include lighting, HVAC, and chiller programs. • Custom Incentives: The Customized Program is designed to provide rebates to mid -size and large business customers who install peak load reducing energy efficiency measures where the work is outside the regular program requirements. o Waste Water Treatment Plants: The City Waste Water Treatment Plants are converting from chlorine disinfecting systems to Ultra Violet Light (UV) disinfecting systems. RE has worked with the City to install high efficiency UV lighting systems and has provided incentives for the high efficiency units. The 1S` system was completed this report year; the 2"d system will be complete in spring 2010. The demand reduction for each system is approximately 500kW. o Chillers: Despite the limited opportunities for high efficiency chiller replacement projects in Roseville, RE assisted a large industrial customer with incentives to replace an older less efficient chiller with a new high efficiency chiller. This project resulted in relatively constant 150 kW demand reduction, with significant kWh reductions, with a .92 load factor customer. New Construction Programs • Residential New Construction Program: RE provides incentives to residential builders to exceed Title 24. The Preferred Homes energy efficiency and the BEST Homes energy efficiency and roof -top solar electric programs are popular among local builders. In fiscal year 2008-2009, over 30% of all new single family participated in the residential new construction programs. • Business New Construction Program: The business new construction program provides assistance in bringing energy efficiency into the design and construction of the facility. The goal is to control peak load and reduce overall energy use. The program includes lighting, mechanical,'envelope and whole -building measures. Educational Programs and Community Outreach • Utility Exploration Center: RE and other City departments participate in educational programs at the new "Utility Exploration Center", which opened in December 2007. This facility is an educational resource for the community that emphasizes energy and water efficiency and conservation as well as recycling solid waste. • LivingWise: The utilities serving the City of Roseville support the LivingWise program, which is an educational program that goes into schools to teach the students the importance of energy efficiency and water conservation. • Community Events: RE participates in numerous community events to promote energy efficiency and increase program participation. These events include Downtown Tuesday Nights, Holiday Tree Lighting, Earth Day, and several educational workshops at the Utility Exploration Center. 181 Rates and Low Income Assistance Programs: • Low Income Rate Assistance: A rate discount is provided to qualifying low-income seniors, low- income customers with special medical needs and very low-income customers. • Low Income Energy Efficiency: Residents in the low income rate assistance program are eligible for a free Energy Star refrigerator. As a requirement of the program, the participant's current refrigerator must be older than 10 years. All of the vintage refrigerators are recycled, which helps RE remove less efficient refrigerators from our service territory. • Large General Service rates are time -of -use to encourage energy conservation during peak periods. PROPOSED. ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS (FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010) • Reduce the number of residential programs that do not have a TRC greater than 1.0. This includes dishwashers, windows, insulation, sunscreens, and CFLs. • Focus on increasing participation in the residential and small business air conditioner replacement programs. • Continue to evaluate and modify the Small Business Lighting program to increase customer participation. • Ensure participation in the Preferred and BEST Homes programs reaches the 30% projection. Residential new construction is expected to continue at a significantly reduced level. However, the builders that are active in Roseville, continue to participate in these programs. • Promote the new construction program for businesses so that all new buildings will surpass Title 24 by a minimum of 10 percent. • Investigate new energy efficient strategies. • Create a refrigerator recycling incentive program that employs a state certified refrigerator recycling company. • Continue to promote our Customized Program to our large customers. • Assist Placer County with the implementation of the AB811 program. AB811 authorized cities to finance energy efficiency and solar installations on developed residential and business properties via liens against property. ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM EXPENDITURES Fiscal Year 2009 • RE spent $5,435,381 or 3.44% of total revenues on Public Benefits programs (Low -Income Assistance, Energy Efficiency and Demand -Side Management, Research, Development and Demonstration, and Renewable Energy Technology and Resource Programs). • As part of the dollars spent on Public Benefits programs, $2,641,412 or 1.67% of total revenue was spent on Energy Efficiency programs. This amount includes $928,109 that was used to procure energy savings through energy efficiency programs, which reduced electrical supply costs. 182 Proposed 2010 • RE plans to spend $4,347,676 or 3.16% of total revenues on Public Benefits programs. As part of the dollars spent on Public Benefits programs, $2,447,538 or 1.78% of total revenue will be spent on Energy Efficiency programs. This amount includes $431,892 that will be used to procure energy savings through energy efficiency programs, which reduced electrical supply costs. EVALUATION, MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION Fiscal Year 2009 • Completed EM&V plan December 2008. • Submitted EM&V report for the residential retrofit HVAC, residential new construction HVAC and Commercial Custom programs. • Reviewed the EM&V procedures for all RE commercial and residential energy efficiency programs. Proposed 2010 • RE is has completed an evaluation of the Small Commercial Lighting Retrofit, Commercial and Industrial HiBay Lighting Retrofit and LivingWise Efficiency. Education Programs. ECONOMIC DOWNTURN • Roseville Electric continues to be negatively impacted by the ongoing recession. Energy sales for fiscal year 2009 have decreased more than 1.0% over fiscal year 2008, and are projected to decrease an additional 2.5% in fiscal year 2010 over fiscal year 2009, as a result of residential and commercial vacancies, and reduced per meter energy consumption. Major construction projects in Roseville have been placed on hold during the recession, eliminating previously projected growth. • Major and Key account business customers are actively inquiring about energy conservation strategies as well as energy efficiency improvements. CIP and deferred maintenance budgets are being reduced, requiring RE staff to provide additional customer assistance during the project evaluation and analysis. Many locations have retained their leased spaces but staff has been reduced, thereby reducing energy loads. Commercial occupancy rates are at all time lows. • RE has worked hard to find projects like the Waste Water Treatment Plants and Chiller projects, but there are a limited number of large savings projects in the City. Without these projects, Roseville would not have met the AB2021 energy efficiency goals. Once the second Waste Water Treatment Plant is completed, RE does not anticipate any other large projects in the near future. 183 AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT (ARRA) OF 2009 • The City of Roseville was awarded $1,073,700 from the Department of Energy. The City Manager has approved disbursement of these funds in the following manner: o $923,700 — Small Business Energy Efficiency o $100,000 — City owned facility onsite audit o $50,000 — LED streetlight pilot project In January 2010, the City Council will authorize City staff to accept the funds and commence with the launch of the above mentioned programs. • On December 21, 2009 the City of Roseville submitted responses to three RFP's, requesting more than $8 million in ARRA funding. The proposals were submitted to the CEC, which received ARRA funds for the California State Energy Program from the U.S. Department of Energy, The RFPs included Comprehensive Residential Building Retrofits, Commercial Energy Efficiency Building Retrofits and Municipal Energy Efficiency Building Retrofits. Funding was not provided to the City, however. 184 Appliances,,,,,,,. HVAC AAGlianees� Consumer Electronics #VAC Lighting -. Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC • Water Healing Comprehensive - --- Process HVAC • HVAC Lighting ProCese Process ' Refrigeration HVAC Pintoes Comprehensive Other SubTotal ROSEVILLE ELECTRIC (RE) Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09 Program Sector Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Demand f Net Peak kW Net Ann ai Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost -Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Categoror '. Savings (kW) Savings 'kWh Savings; kWh savings € (Tons) (9) 1 Cost (9) Admin Cost (9) (5) 125,648 15516885' , 137779 • 37,442. _._,.. , 376889 . 198 324,710 i 5644,775 3.171 38,545: 404,578 - 228 ReS Clothes Washers Res Goofing .. .. .. Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Heating • Res Lighting . ............. ResPool Pump Res Remgsmlien . .... .... . Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Reg Cooking . Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Ras Pumps _�.. Non -Res Refrigeration Non-Res Shall Non Res Process ! Non Res ComprehensiveClher 5 535 5- 490 12,505 745,552 10,588 517 562 2,748,259.. 1,200 : 1.124 4,$59.911 26,585 - 2.357 2,223 8,584,107: 722,851.981 69 9920 70 41197,688 22,923 59,846,578 ',...... 32.742 116 69,443 $ 13,475 577,474 1,925 3,727 266 758 3,121 $ . .. 3,385. $ 17,559 $ 39,250 l $ 53,252 $ 37,315 $ 23,156 ,• _ .. . .. . 5 3,682 $ 384,465 $ 881,250 $ $ 1,936,758 $ 83,252 _ $ 641,403 2,363 115,632 574 $ 17,202 $..:. 846224 $ 5,646 $ ...... 21,554, $ 139,817 $ 28,752 .. . . . .. . . . . ... . .. 501,091 $ 1,081 264. 5 2,807 $ 2,641,412 T&D T&D Total 2,357 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 3.89 ExelWing 700 2,223 8,584.107 122,501,981 89,443 $ 1,838,758: $ 83,252 i $ Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/10 641,403 1 $ 2,641,412 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CDC Report) Category Savings (kW) Apprla050S HVAC Appliances Consumer Rlecfmnics HVAC ,.. Lighting ... .... . .... Pool Pump Refrigeration • HVAC Water Heating _. Cpmpi2henshe PfCCeeS HVAC HVAC Lighting • Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensive . . . ...._.... _.__..._�. Other 3ubTolal Res Clothes Washers . ................. .. _..i Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell .. .. Res Water Heating_ Res Comprehensive -, -, ..... Non -Res Cooking .. .. . ,.__. Non -Res Cooling Nan -Res Heating • Non -Res Lighting Non -Rea Motors -... Nonn-Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Mon -Res Shell . ... 06_. ..............._ Non Fries PmceSS onR __._._.e Non Res Comprehensive Qahef T&D 482; 2 Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 441 , 675807 2 5,209 Net Lifecycle GHG 1Hi1i15 Utillty Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Life cycle Reductions Incentives Cost ;Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) (9) Cost (9) AdrninCost ($) (5) 13,965195• .,,,..,., 8,928 88896. 38 • 6,087 472 1, 2,563.363 • 38,725,263 .,- .., 21,545 877 3,530,051 t 46,056 331 ..,.__, 25,538 2,022 1,814 • 7,613,153 : 110,037,651 622,140 $ 1,852,821' $ 121,444 $ 519,727' $ .983'.. $ 206,487 85.472 422 $ 75,360 5 121,444 $ ---68,683 $ 361,397 .,_., $ 237,014 $ 090,175 -�-- $ ---287,863 673,474 88411 $ 977,057 $ 2,447.505 TAD Total 2,022 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 4.36 Excluding 7&D 1,914 7,513,153 • 110,637,651 185 62,140 1 $ 1652.621 $ 121,444 $ 673,474 $ 2,447,538 i SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD) SMUD SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT The Power To Do More. SMUD Profile (2008)15 • Total Customers (year-end): 592,490 • Annual Energy Sales to Customers: 10,916,750 kWh (thousands) • Record Net System Peak Demand —1 hour: 3,280,000 kW (July 24, 2006) SMUD Energy -Efficiency Program Highlights • SMUD has been continuously operating energy -conservation, load management, and energy - efficiency programs since 1976. • In 2007, the SMUD Board of Directors approved a significant expansion in annual savings goals for its energy -efficiency resources, from approximately 0.6% of annual sales to an annual average of approximately 1.5% over the following decade. The expanded goals were part of the Board's vision to "empower our customers with solutions and options that increase energy efficiency, protect the environment, reduce global warming, and lower the cost to serve our region." SMUD is presently in the midst of redesigning its energy -efficiency portfolio to expand existing programs, plan and implement new programs, and develop and implement a broader marketing and engagement plan that will meet these expanded goals and the Board's vision. • For 2009, SMUD spent $32.8 million for residential and commercial energy -efficiency programs, compared to an adjusted budget of $33.2 million.16 All expenditures are public -goods funded. These programs are delivered 25.8 megawatts (MW) of peak -load reduction and 148.0 million kilowatt-hours (GWh) of annual energy savings, compared to annual goals of 26.0 MW and 127.0 GWh. • For 2010 residential and commercial energy -efficiency programs, SMUD has budgeted $34.8 million in PG funds.2 These programs are projected to deliver 24.5 MW of peak -load reduction and 143 GWh of annual energy savings. 15 SMUD 2008 Annual Report, front inside cover and p. 21. 16 includes market research, planning, M&V, and emerging technologies R&D. 186 SMUD 2010 Energy -Efficiency Programs Commercial/Industrial Retrofit Programs Commercial/industrial energy efficiency retrofit programs for existing buildings and facilities are budgeted for $9.2 million, with goals of 9.1 of peak -load reduction and 48.7 GWh in annual energy savings. • Customized Energy Efficiency Incentives: Promotes the installation of energy -efficient equipment controls and processes at all commercial and industrial customer facilities. Provides incentives to contractors and/or customers to promote efficient practices for the following measures: lighting and controls, HVAC and refrigeration equipment and controls, and process improvements. • Express Efficiency Incentives: Provides prescriptive incentives to participating qualified contractors for high -efficiency equipment across a variety of end -uses: lighting, HVAC, refrigeration, food -service equipment, and office -network PC power -management software. Incentives are targeted to the contractor/supplier in an effort to stimulate the market for energy -efficient equipment and services, and are designed to cover a significant portion of the incremental cost of the high -efficiency equipment. • Retrocommissioning {RCx): Designed to garner cost-effective energy savings and reductions in peak demand by fine-tuning energy control systems and ensuring that major energy -using equipment is operating at design efficiency levels. The RCx program is intended to reduce overall building energy consumption through low-cost/no-cost operational improvements and on -site training of building operators. A secondary goal is to guide the customer toward more far-reaching improvements that may become evident in the course of the commissioning process. • Prescriptive Lighting: Promotes the installation of energy -efficient lighting equipment and controls in commercial and industrial customer facilities by providing financial incentives to contractors who install efficient lighting and controls. • Distributor Incentives: Promotes the installation of energy -efficient packaged-HVAC equipment and premium motors. Provides incentives to manufacturers and distributors to encourage warehouse stocking and marketing of premium -efficiency motors and high -efficiency packaged- HVAC units. These incentives are paid per sale of energy -efficient packaged-HVAC unit and per sale of premium -efficiency motor. • Large Public Buildings Energy Service Agreements: In this pilot program, SMUD will execute energy -service agreements with owners of large public buildings to provide and fully finance energy -efficiency upgrades. Work will be performed by implementation contractors under contract to SMUD. Financing and the scope of work will be structured to guarantee the customer a cash -neutral or cash -positive position for the duration of the payback period. SMUD will recoup all program costs from the customer. The program may be extended to other large commercial customers in the future. 187 Residential Programs Residential energy -efficiency programs for existing homes are budgeted for $13.3 million, with goals of 12.7 MW of peak -load reduction and 75.8 GWh in annual energy savings. • Shade Trees: Provides free shade trees to SMUD customers. Implemented through the community -based non-profit Sacramento Tree Foundation (STF). STF foresters review tree selection and site locations with customers, who plant the trees. • Equipment Efficiency: Provides rebates and/or SMUD financing for qualifying (Energy Star, Consortium for Energy Efficiency, and/or other high -efficiency) efficiency improvements to homes' building shells and equipment. Improvements include central air conditioners and heat pumps, duct sealing, windows, attic and wall insulation, insulated siding, solar domestic water heaters, and cool roofs. Two new program components will likely be added in 2010: Quality installation for new or replacement HVAC, involving at a minimum tightly sealed ducts and correct sizing; and Quality Maintenance for existing HVAC, involving duct sealing and replacement, corrections to refrigerant charge and airflow, and other HVAC-performance improvements. • Whole -House Performance: Participating contractors use building -science principles and diagnostic equipment to evaluate the current performance of the whole house, and then recommend comprehensive improvements that will yield an optimal combination of savings and comfort for homeowners. Once the homeowner selects the improvements that fit their needs and budget, participating contractors will do the work or enlist other professionals to have the job done. In 2009, the focus has been to develop and educate the contractor base from which to launch a more comprehensive program in 2010. • Appliance Efficiency: Provides rebates for qualifying (Energy Star or Consortium for Energy Efficiency -listed) appliances: clothes washers, dishwashers, and room air -conditioners. Included in this program are two previously separate programs. Refrigerator/Freezer Recycling provides rebates for the free pick-up and environmental recycling of old refrigerators and freezers. Pool Efficiency provides educational information to customers on the benefits of installing high - efficiency, variable -speed pumps and motors, and encourages customers to operate pool equipment during off-peak hours. Pool Efficiency also focuses on educating the pool -contractor community on practices for retrofit and new -pool installations that maximize pumping efficiency and minimize energy use and peak demand. • Home Electronics: This program has multiple implementation components: Education — Educate consumers on ways to reduce usage by the increasing proliferation of electronic devices in homes that consume energy even when turned off. Collaboration—SMUD, collaborating with other utilities, regional and national advocacy organizations, and the U.S. EPA, will influence electronics standards -setting, and will design and deploy program and best -practices guidelines to coordinate impacts of other developing home -electronics programs. Incentives—SMUD has implemented an upstream OEM- and retail -incentive program that can be replicated by utilities across the nation. • Retail Lighting: Brings a variety of Energy Star lighting products, at reduced prices, to local hardware, grocery, drug, discount, big -box, and home -improvement retailers. Implemented 188 through agreements with manufacturers and retailers that involve cost buy -downs, marketing, and/or advertising by SMUD and/or manufacturer and retailer partners. • Multi -Family (Apartment and Condominium) Retrofit: This program is designed to capture some of the significant energy -savings potential in existing apartments and condominiums and their common areas not addressed by current SMUD programs. The foundation of the program is developing business relationships among the key players affecting the multi -family (MF) market segment, for the sole purpose of maximizing the efficiency of MF energy use, and offering rebates and financing to help buy down the higher cost of efficiency improvements. The program targets, builds, and fosters relationships with property managers and owners of MF rental property, owners of condominiums, property -management associations, condo - homeowners associations, vendors, and service providers. • Residential Advisory Service: Provides on -site energy audits of homes, on-line energy audits, and telephone assistance for customers, with recommendations to reduce their homes' energy use (and bills). Recommendations include practices and home -improvement projects that will increase the energy efficiency of their dwellings. • PowerCost Monitor (Home Energy -Use Display): Will provide residential customers an idea of how their energy use actions influence their electric bills in real time by providing an in -home, real-time, energy use display unit that customers can purchase for a discounted price and install themselves to assist them in making smart energy use choices. This program is considered a bridge program until full deployment of Automated Metering is completed over the next several years. • Home Electricity Reports: A scientifically designed program to measure the impact of sending electricity -usage reports to residential customers. The reports compare the customer's monthly usage to that of the previous year and to 100 neighbors in similar -size homes. The reports are customized to each house and provide energy tips to assist the customer in making behavior changes that reduce their energy use. New -Construction Programs New construction programs are budgeted for $3.4 million, with goals of 2.2 MW of peak -load reduction and 6.8 GWh in annual energy savings. • Residential New Construction: Provides incentives to builders to build homes that exceed the Title 24 energy -efficiency standards by 20 percent or more. A separate but integrated Solar Smart Energy Homes component provides incentives and marketing support to builders to build homes that include PV and have net electricity consumption that is 60 percent lower than typical new homes. • Savings by Design: Provides incentives to builders and their design teams to design new commercial and industrial buildings 10-30 percent more energy efficient than required by Title 24 (or typical new construction in the case of Title 24 -exempt buildings and processes). 189 Demand -Reduction Programs • Peak Corp (Residential Air Conditioner Load Management): Customers volunteer to allow SMUD to install a radio -controlled cycling device on their central air conditioners, and to send a radio signal that switches or cycles off their air conditioners during an electric -system emergency. • Voluntary Emergency Load Curtailment: Calls on commercial and industrial participants to reduce their electrical use by a pre -determined amount. There is no obligation and no penalty if the business is unable to respond to SMUD's request to reduce usage. • .Curtailment Agreements: Agreements in place with largest industrial customers to reduce usage on an on -call basis to help manage system peak loads. Measurement and Verification Plans In concert with its commitment to significantly ramp up energy -efficiency activities over the next decade, SMUD has established a framework to develop yearly measurement and verification (M&V) action plans. SMUD is planning M&V activities for all of its major programs, scheduled at fixed intervals (two to four years apart), with the intention of evaluating all programs on a continued cyclical basis through 2017. For methodological approaches needed to perform specific types of evaluations, SMUD will be guided by the CPUC's "California Evaluation Framework" (June 2004) and "California Energy Efficiency Evaluation Protocols" (April 2006). SMUD is planning to allocate approximately 2% of its total energy -efficiency budget towards impact- and persistence -focused M&V studies. These studies will be conducted primarily through the use of third - party contractors, with management and oversight by SMUD's Business Planning Department. SMUD has awarded or is in the process of awarding contracts for consultants to perform evaluations of the following programs in 2010: Residential— • Multi -Family Retrofit • Appliance Efficiency • Retail Lighting • Solar Smart Homes Commercial— • Savings By Design • Prescriptive Lighting 190 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD) Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar year ending 12/31/09 Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Direct Utility Mktg, Program Sector Net Demand p. Net Peak kW Net Annual I Net Ufecycle Reductions Incentives Cos; Install Cost EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) : Savings kWh Savings! kWh savings (Tans) (8) (8) Admin Cog ($) )8) Appliances Res Clothes Washers 123,; 113: 282,690 4245350. 1,717 ....._........ 2. _. - -. 0 4,598,254 8B,523811 ..•. _,27,752 PP IanaeS._,.,.., Res Dishwashers 3014 , -... 9.,014 35,380 530,700 215 g Consumer Electronics Reg E19CtfONCS 630. 636 6,378,500 83,755,000 25 833 Pool Res Pool Pump 361 381 7,110. .362 627 8,827 Refdgeratian Res Refrigeration 563; 583 4,424,550 21128649 244536 Lighting Res Lighting 5551. 5,557 43,027,700 • 35710fi650 43 HVAC Ras Heating 909,046 16 0 9 .185 549 . . .. 9,556 HVAC Res She0 66 66 212,450 4,229,000 1,713 Water Healing, Res Water Heating 18 18 112,870 2,257,400 914 Res Comprehensive 2,100' 2,100 79,050,000 135,680,040 54,954 P cess ..._. . Non -Res Cooking_... .<, ..,. .... ..... .. . ......... .. . .... . .. HVAC Non -Res Cooling 2,345 _ 2,345 8,870,547 133,058,211 53,089 HVAC Non -Res Heating _ .. . , _ .... . ......... . . . .: . . . .... . . . . -_ Non -Res Ugh -tine -_- - Process Non-ReS MOtms 7 -_ -.-.- ..:. ...:. Process NOo-Res Pumps _ Non -Res Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Shell Process Nan Res Process - Nan Res Comprehsnsiia Other Pump Comprehensive HVAC ro Lighting Refrigeration Comprehensive Other SUSTotal 5,033 , 120,062,079 48625 410; 410 33,333 11,000,000. 4,455 98' 96 881,515 6,815,149 . . . . .. .. . .. . .. 2,780 638'. __. 838 ..5,509,005 ..........55,098846 `. ... . .. . ... 22,312 4,590 :.,_ 4;500 23210,000 209,330443 1 34,779 $ 134,700 -• g 511,367 6 848,067 0 1967,300 $ 2,304,780 $ 4,272,080 $.,. . 12,515 $ 205,502 $ 218,617 1,017,623 -... $ 875,745 $ 1,693,31313 $ 356,600 $ 118,390 $ 472,990 $ 2,168.368 --- 5 1,627,264 $ 4,025,632 $.... 3,500 $ 223 $ 3,723 $ 250,180 5 405,778 $ 751,955 $ 25321... $ 6,842 $ ........... 31,963 $... 08,609 ..._........ 1 $ ........8,194 $ 88,194 $ 4,399,032 $ .2,090,387 $ -8469,419 8 745806 --' . $ 1,225,355 $ 1,974,241 $...,,,3829,535 $ 2,055,401 5 6484,937 2 124,521 --- $ 118,515 5 _-- 243,036 $ 15078 ___.. - $ 44,208 $ ___...-59,284 82,89'1 ;. $ 1,870,559 287,844 S 330,535 2790,128 $ 4.487,097 821,000 $ 821,004 25,724 ; 25.724 148,027,550 1,209,397,924 489,806 $ 16,681,120; $ 16,171,020 $ 33,052,140 T&D T&D 150181 25,724 ; 25,724 ' 148,027,550 1,209,397,924 . 485,806 1EE Program Pat70117 TRC Test Excluding 7140 Program Sector )Used in CEC Report) Appliances RVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting_ . ....., Pool Pump,,.,..,..,. Refrigarerlon HVAC ......,. Water Heating Comprehensive,_ Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprehensive,._ Other sphTotal 2.511 $ 18,061,120 Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar year ending 12/31/10 Net Oemand Category Savings(kW) Res Shell . . Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive_ Non -Rea Cooking:, Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heatino......,. - Non -Res Llghling,..,..,.. 4,900; . , . 4989. 28266,306 , 113,065199 45,797 Non -Res Moto ,__--- • _._-- 150 153 800,000 • 12.020 000 _-- 4,860 Non -Res Pumps 23- _. Nan -Res Refrigeration -, geratfon 123 223 - 504,29411- 5,042 939 2,042 Non -Res Shell --- ...., Non Res Process 478 ! _ Non Res Comprehensive 3279 1 3278' 17420,962. 157 119 63633 Other_ €, . .... .....� . .... ..... .. .. . . ....... • Net Lifecycle OHO Utility ;Utility Direct Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW , Net Annual i Net Lifecycle € Reduction Incentives Cast Install Cast EM&V, and Total Utility cost Savings =kWh savings; kWh savings (Tons) (5) (8) 1 Admin Cost (5) ($) 5 18,171,0201 $ 33,052,140 Res Clothes 31 .., 1. .664 2,754959: 1,116 Res Cooling Washers - -- 2,740- 2,740 3,027,091 45,406358 19398 Res-0isn hers 151 15 33,857 507 656 206 Res Electronics - 1,00g j 1,600 12 200,000 122,000 000 • 49,410 , Res Heating 547,r12 15,248 013 fi 175 Res Lighhng 5 900 i• 5,900 48,000000 • , 396,408 080 161 352 ..... Res Pool Pump .. .... .. 589 r . . . 589_• 10 I Res Refrigeration _ 756 710 56 4,559,855 05,000 ' 14,100 009 8,037 661 9 , 9 110,000 7,200 000 • 891 1 700 1,700 17 288,508 85,901,500 34,790 2 27d 2,220 • 4 017 9021 60,268 536 i 24,400 479 4,190,542 41,905,415 • 18,972 $ 60,653 1 '1, 0 42,845 $.,- 2,260,735 '1 $ 2,102,,997 $ 8492 '1 $ 22,594 $ 1,800,000 € I $ 1 043,180 $ 414094 $ 132,102 $ 2400 000 1 !. $ 2,406,828 • $ 1,4.00,452 $ 20,703 $ 8,366 $....... 70.369 ... .. . ', $ 8,908 $ 2,767,500 -,$ 3,361,275 • $ 621,¢36 = $ 1,239,854 $....... 2,965,406 $ 3,237,309 $ 35,000 $ 53,590 $ 25,09Y; , ...�$.. . .63,501 107,266 $ 1,312295 440,145 5 2,739,040 1$ 983,303 $ 103,445 $ 4,353,736 $ 31,076 $ 2,843,180 $ 546,196 $ 4,808,828 $ 1,400,452 $ 29,069 $ 79,278 $ 6,128,775 5 2,050,470 $ 6,232715 $ 88,590 $ T_ 708,598 $ 547,411 $ 4,051 335 $ 983,393 $ 34,376,478 24,549 ' 24,649 ; 141,968,078: 1,095,763,445 i 439,7341 $ 15,469,000 $ 79,307,478 T&D 7&D Total 24,549: 24,549: 141.966078 1 1,005,703,445 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test y 1,52 Excluding 7817 - 191 439,734 $ 15669,090 $ 19,307,478 1 $ 34,378,478 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE History and Load Data The City incorporated in 1993 which included an electric enterprise formally known as the Shasta Dam Area Public Utility District which was established in 1945. The City is a load serving entity and distribution provider. The City owns and operates two small solar installations, the largest is 10 kilowatts and both are located on City facilities. The City provides retail electric service to customers located within the City's corporate limits, as well as certain adjacent areas and serves approximately 4,453 retail customers (meters), of which 4,100 are residential. Residential users account for approximately twenty-two percent of annual retail sales. Shasta Lake has thirteen industrial customers with retail sales representing 71 percent of total retail sales. The City's power and energy requirements are greatly influenced by residential customers, with year-to-year variations in peak demand and energy sales representative, in part, of the effect of local weather conditions on the residential class usage patterns. Peak demand was 33.7 megawatts on July 28, 2009, at 6 pm. Annual energy use is 190.1 gigawatt-hours Overview of Shasta Lake Energy Efficiency Programs The City of Shasta Lake manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential & commercial customers focusing on peak load reduction and energy conservation. For residential customers, rebates are offered for the installation of various energy efficiency measures. For commercial customers, rebates are available for upgraded lighting, HVAC equipment, and in cases where an analysis is performed rebates can be offered for additional equipment that reduces energy use and/or demand. Residential Customer Programs: • Energy Efficiency Hotline: A toll free line is available for customers to answer questions and provide information on energy efficiency and energy savings -related matters. • Free Energy Audits:. On -site energy audits by Shasta Lake energy specialists are available to residential customers. Energy efficiency measures are recommended based on each audit and the city personnel follow up with additional visits to answer questions and make additional recommendations, if requested 192 • Rebate Program: Comprehensive technical support and incentives to facilitate installation of higher efficiency cooling and refrigeration equipment, envelope measures, appliances, and lighting for residential customers. • Weatherization Incentives: Shasta Lake provides financial incentives for homeowners who invest in weatherization measures. Commercial/Industrial Customer, Schools and Public Facilities Programs: • Free Energy Audits: Shasta Lake offers free, on -site energy audits for both commercial and industrial customers. Energy efficiency recommendations and follow-up visits support implementation of recommended energy efficiency measures. Rebates are available for energy efficiency upgrades identified in these audits. Verification services, to ensure appropriate installation of recommended measures is also provided. Shasta Lake Demand Reduction Programs: For the past several months, Tantalus remote -read meters have been rolled out to nearly all customers. It is anticipated that this remote meter reading system would allow the City to implement an interruptible load program, time of use metering and other such programs. Performance Results for 2008-2009 Shasta Lake's AB2021 Energy Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 157,000 kWh annually. In FY09, they exceeded their annual goal by 121%, with a total net energy reduction of 285,755 kWh. Shasta Lake's AB2021 Demand Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 14 kW annually. In FY09, they surpassed their annual goal, with a total demand reduction of 71 kW. Shasta Lake participated in the Keep Your Cool (KYC) program implemented through ESG and Humitech in 2009 as a pilot for utilities in Northern California. The program offered commercial customers, typically small to mid -sized businesses, with free upgrades to their refrigeration equipment, including door gaskets, strip curtains, and auto door closers. The KYC program contributed highly cost-effective results for the utilities who participated. The pilot (Phase I) was implemented over several months; Shasta Lake customers were serviced in May 2009 and the 8 projects contributed net savings of 175,491 kWh and 20.06 kW in FY09. 2009-2010 Forecast In 2009-2010, Shasta Lake is forecasted to exceed their AB2021 Energy and Demand Reduction Targets. They will offer residential and commercial rebates and participate in another round of KYC projects. Their net annual kWh reduction forecast for FY10 is 38% greater than their annual energy reduction goal. Their expected participation in Phase II (which occurred in Q4 2009) will contribute net savings of 49,433 kWh and 6.02 kW in FY10. The positive impact of the KYC program on program cost effectiveness can be seen in both the FY09 results (TRC 1.83) and the FY10 forecast (TRC 1.76). 193 Shasta Lake Evaluation, Measurement and Verification for 2008/2009 Because of its performance in 2007/2008 which produced substantially less energy savings than its AB2021 target, Shasta Lake did not conduct a study of its programs for that period and instead focused on working towards implementing programs that achieved the energy savings goals that it adopted in 2007. The process to hire a firm to perform an EM&V study for the 2008-2009 performance period is currently underway and is expected to be complete by early Spring of 2010. Update to Annual Energy Savings Targets for 2011-2020 A recent assessment of energy savings potential in Shasta Lake conducted by Summit Blue indicated that an appropriate 10 year goal (2011-2020) for their energy -efficiency programs would be 7,719 MWH. Taking into account current economic conditions and the demographics of the City, staff has decided to target 300 MWH per year over the next three years as a start towards that target. 194 Appliances HVAC Appliances �... Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC . . . . . . .. . .... .. . . .... . Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting ..._...,_ Prnne95��_ �. Process Refnger-attan HVAC Process C .,...., Comprehensive Other _-- SobTotal CITY OF SHASTA LAKE Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, I Net Demand i Net Peak kW Net Annual . Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct !fisted EM&V, and Total ttiiity Cost li_Jsed in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) i Savings ',kWh Savings: kWh savings (Tons) ($) Cost ($) i Admin Cost ($) (8) . . . . .. .... .. i3 ........ ... . .... ..... . 13 $ $ ' S $ -._-- Res clothes Washers Res Coohng- Res olahwashers Res Electronies Res Heating ResLr9hting Res Pool Pump Res Rehigeralion Res Shall Res Water Heating Res Com p hnaive . .. . . .. .. . . ... . ... . : rehe Non -Res Cooking --- .. _ Non -Reg CDOIing- Non -Res Heeling Nan - Res Lighting. Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Re5igerah0n Non -Res Shell Non Res PrOCea5 Non Res Comprehensive Other 1 1. 2,424 10,252 728 24,240 179 539 9,430 2,101 ' 18,907 3,840 i . . .... .......... . . 69.120 12,935 ..- 227,335 77,985 s 1.247,757 175,492 --- 702,74$ 370 37 128„ T8D T&D 71 62 l 285,755 2,475,001 1,368 $ 26,792: $ 10,490 $ 40,350 $ 77,636 Total 71 82 285,755 2,479,081 1,300 1$ 28,792 $ 10,496 5 40,350 1 $ 77,638 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test 1.83 Excluding 7812 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Net Lifecycle - GHG Utility 1 Utility it Utility Mktg, Program Sector 1 Net Demand ' Net Peak168 Net Annual I Net Life cycle Reductions Incentives Cost l Direct Install= EM&V, and Total Ufrlity Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category ; Savings(kW) ° Savings ,kWh Savings kWh Savings (Tons) (8) Cost($) )Admin Cost (5) Al 14 115. Appliances VAC H ...PPIIanCBs. 6 HVAC Consumer Eleclrenics HVAC.....-... �...... Lighting -- -- PoolPump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating_. .... .. Comprehenslte P .. . . . . , recess HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration,_.,..,._, HVAC Process comprehensive Other 8u0T0tal Res 01011160 Washers 1100 Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electmnics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Re8l$oration Res Shell Res Water Healing, Res Comprehens ei Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting„ , Non -Res Motors Non -Rea Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Nan Res Process as Comprehensu Non R e .. .. .. .. ..... Other 1 14 2,467 10,559 746 1 24967 184,925 - 9,721 . .. .... 1,576 , 94,160 1 S 8 3,955 71,194 39 13,324 - 234,155 132 27 22: 03,582. 1,497,305 030 210,824 ....... ........ 111. :8 $ 773 7,787 283 62 . 52 178.888 2,247,274 I 1,253 $ 28,419: $ 3,149 $ 45,192 15,625 502 3,719 195 285 1,432 4,709 5 5,092 _..,.... $ 35,110 3,149 ` $ 4,240 1,275 $ 11,508 $,..,.., .470 595 8.,..,. 3163 $ 15,233 $ 7,386 $ 75,760 T&D T&O Total 62 - 52 1 178,888 2.247,274 1,253 55 Program Portfolio TRC Test 1.76 Excluding T8O 195 $ 28.419'. $ 3,140: 46,192 1 9 76.760 SILICON VALLEY POWER 11 .n Valley er SILICON VALLEY POWER, CITY OF SANTA CLARA (SVP) • Established in 1896 • 51,240 customers; 84.8% are residential customers but only 8.6% of power sales are residential. 87.6% of sales are to the 1,925 industrial customers. SVP projects an average increase of 0.68% annually in sales. • Peak demand: 489.9 megawatts in 2008; 75.9% load factor. • Annual energy use: 2,858 gigawatt-hours in 2008. • SVP owns power generation facilities. Has invested in _joint ventures that produce electric power and trades on the open market. 30.1% of its power comes from geothermal, wind, and other eligible renewable sources. • The City of Santa Clara employs 144 in the Electric Department (SVP). • SVP mission: To ensure the citizens, organizations and businesses of Santa Clara a low-cost, reliable and stable source of electric power. SVP Energy Efficiency Program Highlights: SVP's Public Benefit Programs are separated into residential and business programs, with the majority of funding toward the business sector since that is the customer class that represents 90.6% of the sales. Total program expenditures are about $6 million per year. Savings of more than 165 million kilowatt hours were achieved in the first year of the program in 1998. Total program cost for energy efficiency programs in fiscal year 2008-2009 was $6,601,078 ($7,631,240 on all public benefit programs), resulting in 2,854 kW net demand reduction and 39,627,773 MWh net reductions. Since 1998, total program costs for all public benefit programs were $56,548,094, resulting in over 241.6 million kWh in cumulative first year savings. SVP's goals and objectives for implementation of energy efficiency programs include: • cost-effective programs to lower energy use • programs that create value to for the community and meet all applicable legal requirements. • programs that assist Divisions and City Departments in achieving optimal energy efficiency at City facilities and assist in implementing new energy related technologies for the benefit of the City and community 196 • programs to support renewable power generation that increase resource diversity and minimize adverse environmental impacts from electric generation and operation of the electric system. • programs that support emerging technologies • programs that assist low-income residents in paying their electric bills and installing energy efficient appliances and other measures. • determination of the best energy programs to offer Santa Clara customers by collecting input from community organizations, businesses and other City departments. Current Commercial Customer Programs: • Business Audits: Free energy efficiency audits to business customers. • Rebates: A comprehensive portfolio of energy efficiency rebates (for purchase and installation of energy efficient lighting, motors, air conditioners, motion sensors, programmable thermostats, new construction, and customized energy -efficiency installations). • Compressed Air Management Program (CAMP): Provides assistance to large commercial and industrial facilities to assist them in upgrading poorly functioning and inefficient compressed air systems. • Retrocommissioning (RCx): Provides commissioning and retro commissioning services to data centers, commercial buildings, educational facilities, and hotels. • "Keep Your Cool" Program: Provides service through a third party to repair or replace broken refrigeration door gaskets and to install new strip curtains for businesses in Santa Clara. • Express Refrigeration Program: This program will deliver energy efficiency measures such as refrigeration controls, motors, and LED lights at no cost to customers with commercial refrigeration equipment. The target market will be small businesses such as mini markets and restau rants. • Data Center Optimization Program (DCOP): This program will target small data centers under 10,000 square feet within existing office or other buildings. The program will deliver an assessment of all electric end uses such as facility site infrastructure loads (cooling, fans, pumps, lighting, and uninterruptible power supplies), network equipment, storage, and servers. The program scope includes comprehensive facility assessments, reports, project management service during implementation, financial incentives for energy reductions, and savings verification services. • Business Energy Information: Management information on energy usage through 15 -minute interval meters, Itron's `EEM Suite' software, training, and other sources. • Energy Innovation Program: This program encourages businesses to demonstrate new products and product applications not yet commercially viable in today's marketplace, install energy efficient technologies not generally known or widely accepted, yet show potential for successful market growth, successfully apply energy efficiency solutions in new ways, or introduce energy efficiency into industries or businesses that are resistant to adopting new technologies or practices. 197 • LEED Rebate for Energy Efficient Building Design: If your building meets LEED criteria and exceeds Title 24 energy requirements by at least 10 percent, you can get a rebate of up to $47,500. • Business Solar Photovoltaic Rebate: Provides financial incentives for the installation of solar systems at business sites. Businesses can receive rebates starting at $3.00 per output watt up to a total of $300,000 per customer for systems up to 100 kW. The former rebate was $2.50 per watt for a maximum of $125,000 or a 50kW system. Businesses installing systems between 100kW and 1 MW are eligible fora Performance Based Incentive of $0.40 per kWh. Businesses are required to complete an energy audit in order to receive a rebate, as is the case with the statewide California Solar Initiative. Current Residential Customer Programs: • Residential In -Home Energy Audits and Education: Through this technical support program SVP staff provides on -site audit analysis, energy efficiency recommendations and distributes energy saving items (four compact fluorescent lights, "lime lites," and programmable thermostats). The Solar Explorer and the SVP information booth participate in major city events, providing education on energy efficiency and solar electric generation systems. In collaboration with the Santa Clara Police Department, compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL's) and educational materials are distributed to residents participating in the National "Night Out" Program in August. • Residential Appliance Rebates: Rebates encourage residents to purchase and install ENERGY STAR® labeled refrigerators or window AC units and recycle their old units. • Energy Star Ceiling Fan Rebates: Provides a rebate of $35 per fan (up to three fans per residence) for the installation of Energy Star ceiling fans. • Energy Efficient Pool Pump Rebates: Provides a rebate to replace an existing pool pump and motor with a new high efficiency two -speed or a new high efficiency variable speed motor. • Solar Attic Fan Rebates: This program encourages customers to cool the attic space with a solar attic fan. By reducing the attic temperature, the insulation is more effective at stopping heat from entering the home, thereby reducing the need to cool the living space. • Residential Attic Insulation Rebates: These rebates encourage the installation of attic insulation by providing incentives for both single-family and multi -family units. All homes are inspected to ensure installation has been completed. • Neighborhood Solar Program: SVP customers have the option to pay into a special fund to support the installation of solar electric systems at non-profit community buildings. The third installation will be located at the Bill Wilson Center and is scheduled for completion in April 2009. Industrial customers provided $10,000 of the funding for this installation. • SVP Plug -ins Catalog: Energy -efficient product catalogs are delivered four times per year to residents. Monthly promotions are available to customers who order on the web. The printing of catalogs and fulfillment of customer orders is done by Energy Federation, Inc. • Rate Assistance Program: Qualified low-income customers receive a discount on their electric bill (low-income program). 198 • Refrigerator & Room Air Conditioner Recycling: Rebate for recycling old refrigerators and room air conditioners. • Residential Solar Photovoltaic Rebate: Provides significant financial incentive to residential customers for installation of solar systems. Customers receiving the rebate are required to also complete an energy audit, as is the case with the statewide California Solar Initiative. The rebate is currently at $4.50 per watt, up to a maximum system size of 10 kW. Current Community Programs: • Public Facilities' Energy Efficiency Program: SVP provides technical assistance and financial incentives for the expansion, remodel, and new construction of City of Santa Clara buildings. Included in this program are higher levels of rebates for qualifying equipment, energy management assistance, and a small budget for retro commissioning. Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09. Proposed Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2009-2010) (Continuation of Existing Programs): Commercial Customer Program: • Small Business Efficiency Services Program • Business Audits • Business Energy Information • Business Rebates • Compressed Air Management Program (CAMP) • Data Center Optimization Program (DCOP) • Energy Innovation Program • LEED Rebate for Energy Efficient Building Design • Business Solar Photovoltaic Rebate Residential Customer Programs: • Residential In -Home Energy Audits, Education, and Hot Line • Residential Appliance Rebates • Residential Insulation Rebates • Neighborhood Solar Program • SVP Plug -ins Catalog • Rate Assistance Program • Low -Income Refrigerator Replacements • Refrigerator & Room Air Conditioner Recycling Community Programs 199 • Public Facilities' Energy Efficiency Program (Modifications to Existing Energy Efficiency Programs and New Programs) Business Customer Programs: • EnergySmart Program: This program will incorporate the measures that were previously funded under the "Keep Your Cool" and "Express Refrigeration" programs when those programs expire in late 2009. The new program will be managed by a single contractor to provide a more seamless interaction with the customer rather than dealing with separate programs managed by two contractors. • Laboratory Energy Management Program: This program focuses on the unique needs of energy - intensive laboratory space. The program provides recommendations for energy savings, technical analysis and rebates for energy efficiency retrofit projects. • Enhanced Automation Initiative: This program is focused on hardware and software upgrades to building controls systems to bring buildings up to optimum performance. • Vending Miser Installation Program: This is a direct install program to install Vending Miser occupancy sensors on cold drink machines to reduce energy consumption by 36-56% when the area is not occupied for periods of time. • Retrocommissioning (RCx): This program has been modified to include a cost -sharing component for the detailed retro commissioning study. The initial scoping study will remain free to the customer. Residential Customer Programs: • Low -Income Refrigerator Replacements: Replaces old, energy -wasting refrigerators for eligible low-income residents with new, energy -saving appliances. SVP has offered this popular program in the past and will bring it back in FY 2009-2010. • Expanded Appliance Rebates: SVP will add rebates for Energy Star electric water heaters once they become available in the marketplace. Availability is projected at Fall 2009. Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Programs: The City of Santa Clara was awarded $1,180,900 in stimulus funds under the EECBG funding opportunity. These programs will be administered under the municipal electric utility, Silicon Valley Power, and will be spent on the following programs: • Retrocommissioning of City Facilities • LED Pedestrian Signal Retrofits • A Photovoltaic System on a park facility at Henry Schmidt Park • LED Lighting retrofits at various locations around the City of Santa Clara • A Low Income Weatherization Program 200 Demand Reduction: SVP has a load factor of 75.9%, primarily due to a large percentage of sales to large high tech firms that operate three daily shifts daily, 365 days per year. Because of the relatively mild climate, residential customers often do not have air conditioning, and do not have the peak in energy usage that occurs in other parts of the state. Due to this very high load factor, SVP's demand response program is a voluntary load -shedding program called the "Power Reduction Pool". Through a voluntary arrangement, participating customers reduce their load by at least 200 kW during system emergencies. The communication network of customers and SVP staff for these shutdowns is tested at least once per year. In addition, one industrial customer is on an interruptible rate. This customer is interrupted for both economic and system emergency conditions. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification (EM&V): Silicon Valley Power contracted with Summit Blue Consulting, LLC to create an EM&V plan, which was delivered in Fall 2008. Resulting from that plan, SVP contracted with Summit Blue to perform the evaluation of its FY 2007-2008 energy efficiency programs, which was completed in January 2009. Summit Blue is currently evaluating SVP's FY 2008-2009 energy efficiency programs. Results of this evaluation should be available in February 2010. While performing the evaluation, Summit Blue Consulting identified a data entry error where a demand savings was entered for a single air side economizer project. SVP corrected this error in its database and the corrected information is reflected in the tables below. 201 SILICON VALLEY POWER Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/09 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings(kW) Soving0 .kWh Savings Appliances HVAC Appliapces Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump Refrigeration„ HVAC Water Heating Comprn nls se Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Praaeg5 Camprehene-he Other SubTotal Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics.., Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling - -- Non -Res Heating _ Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motars, o Non -Res Pumps Neil -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell NonRes Process ... .... . . ... . . .... Non Res Comprehensise Other Net Demand Net Peak kW - Net Annual 7 2- 122: 122 _ Net Lifecycle kWh savings Net Life cycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install EM&V, and Tatar Utility Cost (Tans) (0) Cost (9) AdminCost (9) (5) 15,015 - 100,160 89 12,660 134,875 i • 175 _,...._......_�. 701 119,133 1,250,885 • 008 ....5620 66,000-.. _31 000,868 14,542908 7,879 8,703 136294 70 1,971 _. ..... � .23.854 � ... . . . . � .. . � 12 . . . : . ...... ....... . .. ,. 3.2 Si4- 42 21 21,380 7,879 422,619,049 25 11 ..,., . . . . . ............ . �.... .., 5777 : 641 2,875402 38793,202 20,388385 1 ; ' ... ,, 1 3,785741 50486114, 30,039 873 _ 960, 3,033,576 59,881,859.T �. 31,498 289'. 266 6,025,835 101,359,518 53,698 86 88 i 1,113,830 20,769,456 I 11,151 -,.,.,_ .. . _ .. . ... ., . 12 12i 412,491 . 1.918,397 ' 7,048 2,854 2,104 35,627,773 718,171,743 391,704 $ 7,090 $ -__--9,110 5 -- $. . , ....,, . .. 100 .... _ _ _. $- 581 $ 10,100 1213,431 $ 1,000 $ 1,892 $ $0600 $ 103,488 $ 13,225 -., . ..�� $ ......._ 9,181 303 $ 66 $ 1.758475 $ 1,119,456 $ 233908 $ 895 • S _ 351,770 $ 488549 5 151,138 • $ -01.52f $ 374532, $ 743985 $ 830,337 i $ 236,529 $ 335,018 $ 55,485 $ 55,690 $ 30,793 • $ 208,888 $ 3,825,475 9 425,379 $ 2,550,224 $ 7,220 5.. 8.. 38,583 $ 139,112 $ 2,892 9 134,128 $- 22,406 . $ 388 $ 2,877631 $ 566,373 $ 649,867 $. 580,045, $,., 866,905 $ 390,503 $ 304,371 $ 0,601,078 T&D T&U Total 2,854 2,194. 39,927,773 716,171.743 391,794 $ 3,825,475 $ 425,379 9 2,550.224 $ 6,601,076 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding T&❑ 5.60 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/10 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC .............. .. . Appliances Consumer Electronics Consumer Electmnics HVAC Lighting Refdgerato00 HVAC Water Heating., Comprehensise Process HVAC HVAC-........ .. Lighting. Process Process RaMgemlion - - HVAC Process --- Comprehenslsa Other I SI :Total 1 Net Demand Category ` Savings (kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling . . . . hes., Res Dishwa5her5 Res Electronics Res Healing Res Lighting 1 .._...., 34 E 8 27,627 ........... 250,177' �, . 134 Pum p 4 - - 2 5500 - 56 690 31 3 Res Refilgeratranl , 122 ; 422 $60,66C -----{4:54'2,50$'r- 7.679 Res Shell .. . . . ... . 9__ _.__.. , 9, ...,5,763; 135,284_,.,... 36 Ress . .. . Water Healing .. .. ........... . __._ ..-.., Res ComprehensNe . - .......... ........ ....' . '. Non -Res Cooking 1,971 23,654 12 Non -Res Cool ng 309 25 12,820,571 253,591,429 - 141,073 He .. .. .m..m .-... ___._.._ _.. -.._..- Non -Res Heating -. ..... . _......�..,_..-.....-.. Nan -Res Lighting,,., 677 '1 , 541 2,875,402 .38793,202;, ., . .. 20,388 _..,. .,. 5 --_- Non-Res Molars 1 1 3,785,747 € 58,488,714 39,039 Non -Res Pumps - ,....,. .,.,. _ ..... ... Non -Res Refrigeration ; 827 815 2,678,641 50,712,674 28,773 Non -Res Shell ., ....,. .-, . .. .. . . ..._ v. ._.._.., ,,. :.. . ,...., _ ._ Non Res Process i 135: 3,012,918 135', '. 50,879,759 - 26,8499 Non Res Com retiensne - 77 .......77 l.024471 19,092.513- 10 044 Other _... 12 •. ...472.491 ...1,978,397 , 1,046 Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings' kWh savings Net Li£ecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Life cycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install' EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Tons) (9) Cot ($) Admit Cost ($) (91 10,410 104,104 12,550 __--- 134,875` 50 78 2,219 1,854 27,384.301 484,260,659 204,460 $ _ 110 $ 2,42$ $ - 1,217 $ 1 000 $ 295 $ 30,660 $ ---78, 562 13,225. $ ......... 712 $ 549 709 300 .......,... 5.....,...._,_ 125 1,955,005 $ 1,335 940 233,008 $ .,._,895 $ 183,753 $ 488.549 $ 297,455 $ 52,293 $ 316352 $ 281053 $ 315,168 $ 266,890 $ 301,517 $ -_- 98435 $ 55,690 5 39,793 $ 10,410 9 2,581,172 5 361,119 $ 2,559,224 5,098 19,078 9 3,454 1295 9---- 107,242 $ 13,507 $ 425 $ 2,351,020 $ 428,357 9 708,005 837,998 582,048 399,951 105,901 $ 5,472,515 T&D T&D Total 2,219 • 1,854 1 27,384,301 484,280,059. 264,460 LEE Program Perifolio TRC Test - 4.39 Excluding T&D 202 $ 2,551,172 $ 361,115 $ 2,550,224 $ 5,472,515 TRINITY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT "Serving Trinity County Since /982' l . U. D• • Created in 1982 as a result of the Trinity River Division Act of 1955, in which Congress provided mitigation for the economic devastation to the local economy resulting from the Act. • The Congressional mitigation provides the TPUD enough low cost and clean hydroelectric power to meet its entire load for the next several decades, but forbids the TPUD from selling any of the energy it does not need to meet load. • Serves small economically depressed area in northern California consisting of nearly 7,000 meters in mountainous terrain covering an area the size of Vermont. • TPUD is comprised of nine small substations serving 560 miles of distribution line. • TPUD has a peak coincident demand of less than 20 megawatts, which may occur in winter or summer. • More than 60 percent of TPUD's load is residential and only two customers have a peak demand of more than 150 kilowatts. TPUD Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Since FY 2000 through FY 2009 TPUD public benefits expenditures on energy efficiency total approximately $321,000 and have resulted in kilowatt-hours savings of more than 157,000 kilowatt - h ou rs. Current TPUD Energy Efficiency Programs: • Weatherization Program: Provides incentives for installation of cost-effective weatherization measures including insulation and energy efficient windows in electrically heated homes for all new buildings and major remodels, about 30 per year. Proposed TPUD Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for 2009-10) • Maintain existing programs at current levels. TPUD Demand Reduction Programs: TPUD does not have much of an air conditioning load and measures the demand of only one of its customers, none of the TPUD's power costs is dependent on demand and therefore the TPUD has no plans to implement a demand reduction program. 203 TRINITY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal year ending 6/30/2009 ,.. . E Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Program Sector Nat Demand . Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle - Reductions Incentives Cost 'Direct Install'. EM&V, and Total Utility Cost (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 1 (Tons) (5) ' Cost (5) Admin Cost (4) (5) Appliances .......... . . .... . . ._ i HVAC Appliances.._ __._ � _.__._ �_. __ - .. ... . ..... . ... .. .. . . . ... . . .... .. ... . ....... ... .. . .. . . . . . ... ... ConsumerElectronics _._.. . .... . .. .... . .. . .. . ... : . ...... ��. . . . .,....... ...... ..... . . . . �.... .� .. ... ... . .,. ....-. .,. � .-. �.-... HVAC ....... .._i.... .. .. . . ... .... . >� . ..., __.._. _..__ __. _ ., -, ., - , . . .. Lighting, Pool Pump . ....,. . . , .. .. . .... ,... o -. .-.-.-..,. Refrigeration._ _ _._._ _._.._ __..,..,. . .,w..,-,. __...-.. - .. �.� ... . . . . ....... .... ... . ,... ......... HVAC .. ._ 9.4'� . . . . ., Water Heating Comprehensive . -..,. ,. d_.,.. .,.,.. ..,.....,. . . .. , ._. ..,. Process �. - � ............ ...... ....... ...::....... HVAC _.. ...... . .. . .. .. . .. . . ..... . . ___. __ - HVAC ............. . ;..,., Lighting Process. Process Refrigeration HVAC Non -Res Sh II Process -_...., ... .,.-.__.. Comprehensive e Other __ _ - . . .... .... . .. �, . . . ., . ,_. . ' Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling .. .er5..... Res Dishwashers Res Electronics Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration, Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensile Non -Res Cooking Non -Res Cooling . ........ Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration e Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive ; Other SubTotal 14,029 192,764 117 $ 32,133 $ 32,133 T&D T&D L 'Total 14,828. 192,764 11715 32 113 5 32,1331 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 0.02 Excluding T80 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector : Net Demand jUsed in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Consumer Electronics HVAc._.__....__ _.. .. . Lighting Pool Pump Rehigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting Process ProcessM,M.� Refrigeration HVAC Process ..,.., nnpretl e ns...................... Comprehensive Other Sub-rolal Res Clothes Washers C .. . .... ... ..... . .. Res Cooling Res Dishwashers e rs.,..... Res DlahWa5hers Res Electronics . ._ _ .__._.-. Rees Heating ResLighting. ....:...: 395 Pool Pump: Ras Rehigeraticn Res S hell R Heating Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive - - Non -Res o. .. .... ... . ....._. I, N . . .. . on --Res Cooking Nart-Res Cooling ___ _. Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps .. o. Non -Res Refrigeration Noon -Res S n-ResShell . . ... ......... _.. hell . .. .. .... ...... . Non Res Process Non Res Comprehensive Other Net Peak kW Savings kWh Savings kWh savings Net Lifecycle GHG Utility utility j Utility Mktg, Net Annual Net Life cycle Reductions Incentives Cost 'Direct tnstalli EM&V, and Total Utitity Cost (Tons) (5) I Cost (0) I Admin Cost ($) (5) 14,125 193,625 112 35.800 5 35,500 T&D T&D 'Total 14,125: 183,625 112 1 38,500 Is 35.500 IEE Program Portfolio ERG Test Excluding T&0. 0.02 204 TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT TRUCKEE DONNER Public Utility District • Established in 1927 • 13,154 customers, 88 percent are residential • TDPUD projects an average growth rate of 1 percent per year, for the next 10 years • 2009 Peak demand — 35.9 megawatts (winter peaking) • 2009 Energy Use -- 146.9 gigawatt-hours TDPUD Energy Efficiency Program Highlights • In 2009, the Truckee Donner Public Utility District (TDPUD) continued to make significant investments in our Public Benefits and energy efficiency programs. This includes increasing Public Benefit and energy efficiency spending to —4.5% of gross electric sales in calendar year 2009 with a calendar year 2010 budget of "'4.5% of gross electric sales. In 2009, the TDPUD's energy efficiency results included a first year energy savings of almost 2.5% of gross electric sales with a TRC of over 5. • In 2009, the TDPUD developed 7 new energy efficiency programs (for a total of 16) that expanded our offerings to businesses and income qualified customers and continued to serve our residential base. The TDPUD targeted the most cost-effective programs and partnered with local agencies, businesses, and community groups to effectively implement programs. The TDPUD is seeing increasing acceptance of the economic and community benefits of energy efficiency investments. • The economic crisis during 2009 had a major impact on our energy efficiency programs as customers struggled to make ends meet. On the positive side, the TDPUD's'save energy, save money' message had much more traction with our customers. However, the customer's ability to make the investments necessary to implement cost effective energy efficiency projects was diminished. This was particularly true with ourcommercial and small business customers. To address this, the TDPUD focused on direct -install and give -a -way programs. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) was one opportunity to address the economic crisis but, due to the design and implementation of the stimulus money, the TDPUD was precluded from participating in a meaningful way. This was due to the fact that the majority of the money was distributed to cities and counties (of which the TDPUD is neither) and the competitive opportunities through the California Energy Commission's State Energy Program and the Department of Energy were not designed for smaller utilities grant applications. • The TDPUD updated our 10 -year energy efficiency targets in early 2010 as part of the SB1037/AB 2021 requirement. For the period from 2011 through 2020, the new energy savings target is: 19,880 MWh (^'1.1% per year). This is a significant increase from the first energy 205 savings targets, established in 2007, of 10,1014MWh (^'.67% per year). The new aggressive targets take into account the TDPUD's strong past energy efficiency results. However, the new targets also recognize that past results were heavily influenced by lighting programs which the TDPUD is beginning to saturate and which, unfortunately, are being unfairly discounted by the regulatory bodies. 2009 Highlights Include:. • Implemented programs with the potential to reduce electric usage by almost 2.5% in the first year. The District was able to achieve this performance through a combination of cost-effective measures (mostly lighting), effective program management, and leveraging the District's position within the community. • Created an Evaluation, Measurement, & Verification (EM&V) Plan for calendar year 2009 programs and completed the final EM&V report within 2 -months of calendar year 2009 end. The EM&V report concluded: Net Annual kWh Savings of 3,575,636 kWh, Net Lifecycle kWh Savings of 34,528,706 kWh, Net Peak kW Savings of 898 kW, and a TRC of 5.06. • Effectively delivered programs for a cost of less than one quarter of the District's power purchase costs and a fraction of the customer's rate. • Developed a new income qualified program, Energy Saving Program (ESP), targeting residential energy efficiency and weatherization measures. This innovative new program provided a one- time bill credit for the customers largest bill in the last 12 -months (up to $200) but also required that the customer participate in a free energy survey of their home and that they agree to install energy conservation measures provided for free at the time of the survey (CFL's, piping/water heater insulation, door sweeps, etc.). To implement the program, the TDPUD partnered with a local non-profit (Family Resource Center) to do the outreach and qualification for the program and worked with the Sierra Green Building Association (SIGBA) to conduct the residential energy surveys. ESP was very successful in providing immediate assistance during the economic crisis, enabled the customer to reduce energy usage overtime, and strengthened the TDPUD's relationship with our low-income customers and the overall community. • Significant investments in community outreach, communications, and marketing are tapping increasing interest in energy efficiency programs. As an example, the TDPUD's recent LED (Light Emitting Diode) Holiday Light Program achieved "6 percent customer participation over a 4 - week period and all of the customers came to the TDPUD office where they were educated, provided with free CFL's, and given information on other energy efficiency opportunities. 2009 Commercial Customer Programs • 'Keep Your Cool' Commercial Refrigeration Program: This direct -install program was developed by the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) for their member utilities and targets cost- effective commercial refrigeration measures (door gaskets and closers). This program was oversubscribed in the first -round and the TDPUD added additional budget to this program in 2009 to meet robust customer demand. 206 • Commercial LED Exit Sign Retrofit Program: This direct -install program was developed by the TDPUD to retrofit existing incandescent and fluorescent exit signs using high -efficiency LED exit sign retrofit kits. The combination of low retrofit cost and ease of installation created a very cost effective program. • Commercial Energy Audits: TDPUD offers free on -site energy audits conducted by a TDPUD Energy Specialist for commercial customers that provide specific recommendations on cost- effective energy improvements to manage and reduce energy use and load. • Commercial Energy Conservation Rebate Program: TDPUD provides a comprehensive commercial energy efficiency incentive program; focusing on peak load reduction and energy savings. Generous rebates and technical support are available to commercial customers to promote the installation of energy efficiency measures. This includes an appliance efficiency program for clothes washers, dishwashers and refrigerators; a building efficiency program that includes building envelope and forced -air distribution system leak testing and mitigation; a lighting efficiency program that includes any and all high efficiency lighting measures; space heating system efficiency program including ground source heat pumps and a water heating efficiency program including the purchase of energy efficient electric water heaters and solar water heater tanks. • Solar PV Program: TDPUD offers financial incentives to commercial customers who incorporate solar PV technologies into their businesses (SB-1). This program is fully subscribed into 2011. 2009 Business Partnership Programs (Green Partners) • Retail: TDPUD encourage restaurants to install energy -efficient lighting and other energy efficiency measures. The District also works with and encourages local hardware and grocery stores to market, sell and install energy -efficient products and services. • Restaurant: Encourage restaurants to install energy -efficient lighting, cooking, dishwashing, and heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. • Hospitality: Encourage hotels, motels, and resorts to implement LEED design principles and energy -efficient lighting, controls, HVAC, water heating, pool/spa, restaurant, renewable energy and green building technologies. 2009 Residential Customer Programs • Developed a new income qualified program, Energy Saving Program (ESP), targeting residential energy efficiency and weatherization measures (see 2009 Highlights above). • Residential Green Partners: This new 2009 program was focused primarily on screw -in lighting with a goal to determine which types of lighting (beyond standard spiral 60 -watt equivalent CFL's) are used most in our community and to provide free samples of this lighting for our customers. Based on data from over 300 customers and over 3000 screw -in lights (over 20 types ranging from can lights to globes to flame tips to outdoor lights to dimmables). Based on the data collected, the TDPUD is now handing out, in addition to 12 -packs of 60 -watt equivalent CFL's, the following lights: 40 -watt equivalent globes (625's), 50 -watt equivalent R20's, 65 -watt equivalent floods (R30's), 65 -watt equivalent dimmable floods (DR30's), 90 -watt equivalent 207 outdoor floods (PAR30's), and 100 -watt equivalent CFL's. This program is in addition to the rebate program that the TDPUD has for high -efficiency lighting. • Portable/Take Home Energy Meters: Using the `Kill -A -Watt' portable energy meters, this new 2009 program allows customers to sign out a watt meter for a 2 -week period to measure the energy use of their residential plug loads (from refrigerators to electronics). The TDPUD then helps the customer understand the data and identify cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities. • Residential Energy Audits: TDPUD offers free on -site energy audits, conducted by a TDPUD Energy Specialist, that provide specific recommendations on cost-effective energy improvements to manage and reduce energy load and provided savings. • Residential Energy Conservation Rebate Program: TDPUD provides a comprehensive residential energy efficiency incentive program, focusing on peak load reduction and energy savings. Generous rebates and technical support are available to residential customers to promote the installation of energy efficiency measures. This includes an appliance efficiency program for clothes washers, dishwashers and refrigerators; building efficiency program includes building envelope and forced -air distribution system leak testing and mitigation; residential CFL's efficiency program including a multi -family unit CFL light bulb give away; space heating system efficiency program includes ground source heat pumps and the water heating efficiency program includes the purchase of energy efficient electric water heaters and solar water heater tanks. • Low -Income Weatherization: In addition to the new ESP program described above in the 2009 highlights, the TDPUD provides home energy weatherization services to low-income residential customers along with targeting this customer base for lighting and other give -a -ways by working with local non -profits and agencies. • Solar PV Program: TDPUD offers financial incentives to residential customers who incorporate solar PV technologies into their homes (SB-1). This program is fully subscribed into 2011. 2009 Community Programs • Energy Conservation & Efficiency Workshops: TDPUD staff offered numerous energy conservation and efficiency seminars and workshops in 2009. • Million`CFL Program: The Million CFL program is a 10 -year program starting in 2008 designed to provide incentives and CFL give -a -ways that will result in significant lighting efficiency savings. All CFL give -a -ways are done face-to-face allowing for education of the customer and promotion of other programs. • LED Holiday Light Swap Program: The District began an LED (light emitting diode) Holiday Light swap program in 2007. The program involves giving District customers up to three strands of LED holiday lights in exchange for their old inefficient holiday lighting. In 2009, this cost- effective program served —6% of our customer base in a 4 -week period. In additional, all of these customers visited our Conservation Department to participate in the program where the TDPUD educated them on the many other energy savings opportunities and handed out free CFL's. 208 • Green Building Education/Installer: TDPUD has partnered with the local Sierra Green Building Association and the Town of Truckee Green Building Committee to design and implement green building education and training programs for the Truckee -Tahoe communities. • Green Buildings Tour: TDPUD works with the Sierra Green Building Association and local groups to provide tours of buildings in the community that incorporate green building design features. 2009 Education Programs - Public Schools & Community: • Energy Education: A TDPUD personnel gives presentations on energy topics to local schools each year. • "Living Wise" Resource Efficiency Program: TDPUD collaborates with the 6th grade staff at the local middle school to provide the curriculum and resources for the "Living Wise" Resource Efficiency program. • Green Building Symposium: TDPUD helps organize and conducts a presentation at the Truckee Home Show's Green Building Symposium. 2009 TDPUD Website The TDPUD continues to improve our website and conservation/energy efficiency pages that are an on- line resources to our customers regarding programs, rebates, application information, and local resources. The TDPUD is going to upgrade its website in 2010 with a Power of Conservation focus and an on-line energy efficiency competition. There will be many new enhancements added to the website that will go a long way in promoting energy efficiency, conservation and renewables. 2009 TDPUD Demand Reduction Programs The TDPUD does not currently have any demand reduction programs in place since there is very little air conditioning load and the TDPUD high demand time is winter. However, many of our energy efficiency programs address our unique load profile. 2009 TDPUD Water Conservation Programs: The TDPUD serves both water and electric power services to our customers. In fact, the TDPUD's largest electric customer is the TDPUD Water Department and we fully understand the links between water conservation and energy savings for both ourselves and our customers. Current water conservation programs include: TDPUD Water Wise Demonstration Garden: TDPUD began installing residential water meters in 2009 and will begin billing water by usage in 2010. For many customers, water usage is driven by landscaping and irrigation. To help our customers manage their irrigation use, TDPUD developed a water wise demonstration garden at our main headquarters to educate our customers on techniques to maintain beautiful landscaping and save water. The garden includes almost 100 native and drought tolerant plants along replacing our traditional lawn with a variety of native bunch grasses that can use 80% less water. 209 • Commercial Water Conservation Rebate Program: TDPUD offers rebates to commercial customers for the installation of water -saving measures including water -efficient clothes washers. Additional water -efficient investments including low -flush toilets; waterless urinals and other water saving devices may soon be eligible for this rebate. • Residential Water Conservation Rebate Program: TDPUD offers financial rebates to residential customers for the installation of water -saving measures including water -efficient clothes washers. TDPUD also hands out for free low -flow showerheads and sink aerators. New for 2009 was a Customer Leak Repair Rebate Program that intents customers to repair leaks on the customer -side of the meter. Additional water -efficient investments including low -flush toilets and other water saving devices will soon be eligible for this rebate. Landscape Water Conservation Workshops: TDPUD partnered with local nurseries to conduct landscape water conservation workshops for the community. 210 Appliances HVAC: Appliances Cons Elect's HVAC -__......,.. .,.. Lighting -...-. Poor Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehen,__,-,.,, Process HVAC HVAC Lighting . . . .......... . ........ . Pmcess Procegg Refrigeration__ _ HVAC Process Comprehen Other SubTotal TRUCKEE DONNER PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar year ending 12/31/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 23 Res Clothes Washers Ras Cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics . ..,.. . ___._,-,............... Rees Heating Res Lighting Res Peal Pump ............ ._ - Ras Refrigeration Res Shell i .. . -_ Res Water Heating Ras COmprehenshe Non -Res Cooking_ NOn-Res Cooling Non -Res Heating_,,,, Non -Res Lighting._,._,._,._. Non -Res Motors . .. .. Non --Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Nor -Res Shell - - - - - Nan Res Process .. . . ....... . Nan Res Comprehens5e Other 3 2795` 23 54.622 546,224: Net Lifecycle GI -18 Utility Utility Uplity Mktg, Net Demand , Net Peak kW Net Annual , Net Lifecycle Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install.- EM&V, and Total LHility cast (Tans) (5) Cost (9) Admin Cost (8) (8) $ 302 3 8,892 , . ..... 115,596 '._.. ... . . . .. . 84 491 1,757,508 ' ----- 15,082,897 8,052 9 -__- 57,362% 1,032,516 56Q 9: 3,611 .-�. 63,988. 38 25 ) 88,973. 794.900 434 521,210 i 3,210 058 3,575,039 34,526,705 0.054 275 18,776 1.5,180 97,860 ... .__ �. .,..,,,.. $ 104,403 $ 22,407 __-- $ 3.732 $ 5,932 ........ 8 560 $ 1,075 $ ......,15 503 $ 318487 $ 258,890 $ 27584 $.. 15,970 5 202253 $..._.. ,..26,139 6,551 $ 23.378 5 87.015 $ 577,383 T8D 1T&❑ T0191 3.210 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test Excluding MD 5.06 898 3,575,935: 34,528,706: 15,778 $ 318,457 : Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar year ending 12/31/2010 208,0961 $ 577.363 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Category Appliances HVAC . . .,. .. . .. Appliances Cons Elect's HVAC ., . ......... Lighting ....._ P781 Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehen Pmcess. ... . . . .. . . ... . . HVAC HVAC Lighting Process PromCBSs Refrigeration HVAC Pmcess Cs Comprehen Other SubTotal Res Clothes Washers Res cooling Res Dishwashers Res Electronics - .. . . . ..............- Res Heating Res Lighting. . ..,.,.... Res Pool Pump Res Refilgeralron_,_,._. Res Shell Ras Water Healing Res Camprahensie NomRes Cooking Non -Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Nan -Res Lighting Nan -Res Motors Non -Res Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration Nan-Res Shell Non Res Process Nun Res Comprehenslee Other Net Demand Savings(kW) 19 2,500 828 3,031,700 Net Lifecycle GHG 1Hility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW ' Net Annual Net Lifecycle € Reductions Incentives Cast �I Direct Install; EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh savings (Tons} (5) ' Cost (8) ' Admin Cost (5) (5) 457,800. 253 5 20,240 $ 3,840 $ 23,080 3000 2 $ 3,000 • $ 3,000 ......,.,172320 . ..... . 62 $ 15,180 .,.., .. .. , .. . .., ...,.., $ -.,......- 017. $ ... 18,097 Savings ''.kWh Savings 19 45,760 120 5.540 14,654,517'," 4 14,654517 7,823 54,308 .977 568 530 8,637 113,487 1 64 71,495 i 1,072,425 425 _.... 604 229 1,121,0q?Ll 12,390808: 70,363 562,906 39,344,540 6,836 297 16,472 5 84.454 $ .104403 $ 168,857. $ 23,115 $ 3 674 $ 26.789 $ $ 12,602 5 560 5 13,461 17,45 6 5 15603 $ 32,959 $ 96,849 , $ 45,542, $ 322,939 $ 89,234 $ 186,084 40,865 $ 90,707 258,896 $ 581,834 780 MD 'Total 2,590 826 I 3,031,750 ; 30344 545 16,472.1 9 322,930: 258,896 $ 581,8341 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Teel Excluding T&D 4.31 211 TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER & POWER • Serving C, tat Califernrs SiP.,rp I882. Established in 1887, the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) was the first publicly owned irrigation district in the state and is one of only four in California today that also provides electric retail energy directly to homes, farms and businesses. Organized under the Wright Act, the District operates under the provisions of the California Water Code as a special district. TID is also an independent control area and is governed by a five member board of Directors. Since 1923, TID has been providing safe, affordable and reliable electricity to a growing retail customer base that now numbers in the excess of 99,000 residential, farm, commercial, industrial and municipal accounts in an electric service area that encompasses 662 square -miles in portions of Stanislaus, Merced, Tuolumne and Mariposa counties. TID provides Irrigation water to more than 5,800 growers in a 307 square -mile service area that incorporates 149,500 acres of Central Valley farmland. The District has been delivering irrigation water to growers since completing its gravity -fed water conveyance system of canals and laterals in 1900. TID SYSTEM OVERVIEW: • 99,453 customers • 72% are residential • Peak demand 493 MW (2009 Summer Peak) • 2009 energy use: 1,989 gigawatt-hours TID ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: The TID Board of Directors adopted an aggressive 10 -year plan to promote energy conservation by assisting customers with efficiency projects. For 2009, the goal was to conserve 12,592 megawatt -hours of electricity. TID was able to surpass the annual goal for a third consecutive year. TID continues to help customers achieve energy savings through the implementation and promotion of a variety of programs that provide rebate opportunities for all rate classes to encourage customers to conserve energy. A significant portion of the energy efficiency measures were implemented by industrial and commercial customers. TID provides a variety of options for businesses that are looking to make changes in their existing systems by making upgrades or retrofitting their existing facility. Rebates are available that address areas such as lighting, compressed air systems, refrigeration systems, motors, gaskets, chillers and many other systems components. 212 • CURRENT TED ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS Commercial, Industrial and Agricultural Customer Programs • Meter Manager: TID offers an on-line energy management tool for business customers so they can monitor their energy usage and utilize that information to more efficiently manage their energy consumption simply by logging into a secure web site. • Energy Audits: TID offers free on -site energy audits to commercial, industrial and agricultural customers who have concerns, questions or an interest in implementing measures to manage their energy usage and reduce consumption. • Commercial, Industrial, Agricultural Energy Efficiency Rebates: TID offers rebates along with comprehensive technical support for all commercial, industrial and agricultural customers to promote the purchase and installation of commercial equipment and systems that support and enhance load reduction. • Keep Your Cool Program: Energy efficiency retrofits of new gaskets, strip curtains and door closers. Residential Customer Programs • Residential Energy Audits: TID provides free in -home energy audits to customers who would like to learn how to reduce their energy use. • Residential Rebate Programs: TID offers customers rebates for purchasing and installing: o Energy Star Refrigerator o Energy Star Room AC o Energy Star Clothes Washer o Whole House Fan o Shade Screens • Shade Tree Rebate: TID provides rebates for up to 3 trees per year that are planted to provide shade. • Air Conditioner Replacement Rebate: TID provides a rebate for replacement of an existing air conditioner or heat pump, with a new energy efficient model. • Refrigerator Recycling: TID will pay customers to get rid of an old refrigerator or freezer and TID's contracted recycler will pick up and recycle the unit for free. • CFL Rebate Program: TID provides a rebate for the purchase and installation of CFLs. • New Construction Rebate: TID offers a rebate to home builders for exceeding Title 24 energy standards. • "Energy Wise" Education Program: Provides energy saving education and kits to 5th grade students in the TID service territory. • Education Specialist: Outreach education provided to schools and community groups. 213 Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/09 EXTERNAL MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION OF SAVINGS In 2009, TID underwent an independent evaluation measurement and verification of their energy efficiency programs reported energy and demand savings. The 2008 program was evaluated and the findings concluded with verification of 98% of the reported savings. TM will continue to use this evaluation process on an annual basis. PROPOSED NEW ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS (2010): • TID will continue to expand our rebate programs to ensure that all cost-effective energy efficiency is achieved. TID is evaluating and expanding program offerings until all cost-effective energy efficiency is achieved in our service territory. MODIFICATIONS TO EXISITING ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS: (2010) • All programs are evaluated annually to ensure they meet program objectives. ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS: • TID CARES Program: An energy assistance program for qualified customers to receive a discount on their monthly energy bills. The CARES program reduces the monthly customer charge of $11 to $2, a savings $9, and provides a 15% discount on the first 800 kWh energy charges. • Medical Rate Assistance: The District provides a 50% discount on the first 500 -kWh energy charges for customers who use additional energy due to life-support equipment or a medical condition. • Weatherization: TID has contracted with organizations within our community to provide weatherization services for families who meet the income qualification guidelines. The program enables families to reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient. TID DEMAND SIDE PROGRAMS: While TED does not have a formal program in place, a communication structure exists with large customers to meet demand reduction needs as necessary. TID RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS: • Tuolumne Wind Project: TID invested in a 136.6 megawatt wind facility in 2008. With this purchase it puts TID ahead of its Renewable Energy goal; with approximately 28% of load being served with eligible renewable energy. • Fuel Cell Project: TED installedthe largest fuel cell in California partnering with the City of Turlock's Regional Water Quality Control Facility. • Solar: TID has interconnected 1,819 kW and paid $5,462,483 in rebates. 214 • Small Hydroelectric: TID was the first in California to construct small-scale hydroelectric power plants using its own canal system and those of neighboring irrigation districts that were not in the retail electric business. Combined, the eight plants constructed beginning in the mid 1970's provides a total of 20 megawatts of electricity. TID also owns and operates a 5 megawatt hydroelectric power plant at La Grange Dam on the Tuolumne River. • Geothermal: In 1984, TID acquired an interest in a geothermal power plant in the Geysers Stearn Field located in California's Lake County. The project has a capacity of generating 6.8 megawatts. 215 TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT Time Period for Reporting Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Category Appliances Res Clothes Washers HVAC Res Cooling Appliances ResDishwashers Consumer Electronics Res Electronics HVAC Res Hea11n0 Lighting Res Lighting. Pool Pump Res Pool Pump Refrigeration Res Refrigeration Net Demand Net Peak kW Savings (kW) ; Savings 7 67 67 Water Heating Res Water Healing . .. _. . i . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. '. . . .. . . ... ... Comprehensive Res Comprehensive Process Non -Res Cooking HVAC Non -Res Cooling HVAC Non -Res Heating - -- - -i. .. . ...,.. . . .. . .... ..... . Lighting Non -Res Lighting Process Non -Res Motors Process Non -Res Pumps Refigeration Non -Res Rehigeration - -- HVAC Non -Res Shell Process Non Res Process Comprehensive Non Res Comprettenslw Other Other SubTotel Net Lifecycle GNG Utility Utility Utility Mktg, Net Annual i Net Lifecycle . Reductions Incentives Cost' Direct install; EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings kWh savings (Tons) ($) 00st ($) Admin Cast {$) (5) 17,099 170,884 94 $ 25,795 ; $ 753 $ 26,545 .......45 . .. . .. .. ..... ...... 2........... ....39...... . ........42... . .. . .... .... . ..... ... . ....... . ...... .. .,,.... .� 716, 49,572 i 819,502 - 3% $ 42,496 $ 3,239 $ 45,776 : ..,.. ._..._ - 53 425,,485 3829361 2,044 .. ..,.. . _._-... .. . .. ..,.... ..... .,....��,�,. . . .. . . .,., . .:........ .. . . . . _ a .. _. .,. ...,.,..,. 7B 796 53 ,044 $ 1,140 $ 59,678 $ 15,979 $ 33 33 263,729 F 2,518,400 1,308 $ 51,927 $ 10,755 $ 62 382 818 818 88 06 229: 229 14,787 125,509 8,953,383 1,108,309 i . . . . . . . ... 40,203 2,010,634 43,773 295,740 187 5 1898,985 1,057 $ 98,487,213 54,547 $ 18,825,885 8,842 $ 803,045 321 $ 5,357,546 _ - 4,933 $ _.- 856,595 381 $ 19,962, 6,336 1,514 $ 21,498 9,779 $ 15,109 454,480 $ 435,914 $ 090,394 42,437 --- $ 72,787 $ 115,225 2,016 .. . . ..... ... . $ . .... . ... 2,840 5 .._ .....4,650 16.366 $ 93,611 $ ---35,407 $ 147 ,384 2,188 _---- : $ - 2,997 $ 5,185 1,209 1,290: 13,053,861 ? 135,083,355 74,120 $ 686,842 $ 153,287: $ 590,758 $ 1,410,885 LT&D T&❑ Total SE Program Portfolio :MC Test Excluding T8D 1,289 ` 1,298 [ 13,353,661 ' 135,053,355 3.81 74,1281 $ 866,842 $ 153,267: 5 580,758 Time Period for Forecast Data: Calendar Year ending 12/31/2010 Program Sector ` Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category E Savings (kW) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting Pool Pump: Refrigeration, HVAC Water Heating.-- Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC Lighting _.- . . . . Process Process Refigeratlon ... ... HVAC Process . ,. Comprehensive Other SoSTotal ittNalkt Net Peak kW Savings ',kWh Savings!. kWh -Ruing" Res Clothes Washers j ....... . . .... 2 . . ... . .... ..... 2 ,.........._21;592 Res Cooling 62,598 Res Dishwashers . . . • . .. Res Electronics_._,- . ., ., ., .,> .... .... .... .. . . . . ... . ... . .. . .. . . Res Heating .__,... .. . .. ., ., ., . Res Lighting 18 - 18 ' 444,354 3,963,184 _... Pool Pool Pump Res Rshigerai on R80 Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehensive ... . . Nonn-R-R es Cooking Non -Ras Coolin0 ....., Non -Res Heatlpg Non -Res Lighting ., , 270 270 8,045,050 49,495,550 9 9 Non -Res Motors r 28 _ 1,119,747 18,796,206i Non -Res Pumps ] 40,815 - 609 218 Non -Res Refrigeration 76z 76 2,331.219 9,453,353 Non -Res Shell I < Non Res Process � 2 . , . ... . . .. .0 .... . Non Res Comprehe0nsivee Other 215,915 782,385 11 333.035: 3180.230 18,073 : .. . 373,459 127,895 1,918.427 44,221 663,317 Net Lifecycle GNG Net Annual y Net Lifecycle i Reductions (Tons) 429 i 429 13,285.000 137,451,170 Utility iUtility Direct, Utility Mktg, Incentives Cost Install Cost EM&V, and ($) ($) Admin Cost ($) $ 37,085. ', $ 1,083 $ 61,382 . ....... . ....... . ...._ $ 4.844 1,639: $ 85,797 $ 22,974 15,483 $_-'-- 28,729 ' $ 2,176 $ 8.101 L 9 12.921 $ 653,405 - $ 626,712 $ 01,312 $ 104046 $ _ 2,890: : $ _ 3,798 $ 28,404 ; $ 134.584 5 56,905 $ 3,147 , $ 4,306 $ 958,718 $ 220,381 $ 849,328 $ 2,028,425 $ 1,410,585 Total Utility Cost ($) $ 38,169 . . .. . $ 85,72B 5 _,.30,905 21,722 $ 1,280,117 $ 165,058 6856 5.... 211,803 $ 7,455 T&D T&D [Total 429 429 ` 13,285,000: 137,451,170 1$ 958,716 $ 228,381. $ 849,328 1$ 2,228,42$ UKIAH PUBLIC UTILITY History and Load Data • The City of Ukiah is Mendocino County's only customer -owned electric utility. • The City supplies electricity to Ukiah's 16,000 plus residents and businesses. • Peak demand: 36 megawatts —July 2006 • Annual energy use: 117,000 megawatt -hours • Power content (4th quarter 2008): Geothermal 42 percent, small hydro 11 percent, large hydro 20 percent, Natural gas 13 percent, Nuclear 1 percent, Coal 13 percent. [53 percent eligible renewable] • Renewable generation and hydropower provide over 70 percent of Ukiah's power needs City of Ukiah Energy Efficiency Program Overview Ukiah manages a comprehensive energy efficiency incentive program for residential & commercial customers focusing on peak load reduction and energy conservation. For residential customers, rebates are offered for the installation of various energy efficiency measures. For commercial customers, rebates are available for upgraded lighting, HVAC equipment, and in cases where an analysis is performed rebates can be offered for additional equipment that reduces energy use and/or demand. Residential Programs: • Energy Efficiency Hotline: A toll free line with Ukiah personnel is available for our customers to answer questions and provide information on energy efficiency related matters. • Energy Audits: On -site energy audits by Ukiah energy specialists are available to residential customers. Energy efficiency measures are recommended based on each audit and the Ukiah personnel follow up with additional visits to answer questions and make additional recommendations, if requested. • Appliance Rebates: Ukiah provides rebates for the purchase of several EnergyStar® appliances. • Residential Heat Pump and Efficient Air Conditioning Rebates: Ukiah offers rebates for residential and small business customers who install high performance heat pumps or air - conditioners that exceed current state requirement, • Residential Lighting Rebates: Ukiah offers rebates to homeowners who install compact florescent lamps (CFLs). • Weatherization Incentives: Ukiah provides financial incentives for homeowners who invest in weatherization measures. 217 Commercial and Industrial Programs: • Energy Audits and Rebates: This program offers complementary, on -site energy audits for both commercial and industrial customers. Energy efficiency recommendations and follow up visits support implementation of recommended energy efficiency measures. Rebates are available for energy efficiency upgrades identified in these audits. • Commercial Lighting: This program engages local lighting and electrical contractors to promote and install energy efficient lighting upgrades using technical assistance and financial incentives available from Healdsburg. • Keep Your Cool: This limited time offer provides a free, no obligation check of commercial coolers and refrigerators. The Bay Area Gasket Guy (BAGG) looks at the condition of door gaskets, strip curtains and door closers. If BAGG finds that the current door gaskets are in need of replacement, new gaskets will be manufactured and installed for each cooler/freezer with air leaks at no charge to the customer. Public Facilities and Schools: • Energy Audits: Complementary on -site energy audits as requested for all public facilities. Energy efficiency recommendations and audit follow up visits support implementation of recommended energy efficiency measures. Rebates are available for energy efficiency upgrades identified in these audits. Performance Results for 2008-2009 Ukiah's AB2021 Energy Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 197,900 kWh annually. In FY09, they exceeded their annual goal by 179%, with a total net energy reduction of 552,727 kWh. Ukiah's AB2021 Demand Reduction Target for FY07-FY09 was 19.50 kW annually. In FY09, they surpassed their annual goal, with a total demand reduction of 88 kW. Ukiah participated in the Keep Your Cool (KYC) program implemented through ESG and Humitech in 2009 as a pilot for utilities in Northern California. The program offered commercial customers, typically small to mid -sized businesses, with free upgrades to their refrigeration equipment, including door gaskets, strip curtains, and auto door closers. The KYC program contributed highly cost-effective results for the utilities who participated. The pilot (Phase I) was implemented over several months; Ukiah customers were serviced in May and June 2009 and the 7 projects contributed net savings of 396,247 kWh and 47.62 kW in FY09. They would have achieved just 79% of their energy reduction goal without the KYC projects that were completed in FY09. 2009-2010 Forecast Ukiah is forecasted to meet their AB2021 Energy and Demand Reduction Targets, but not exceed them to the extent witnessed in FY09. Their net annual kWh forecast for FY10 is less than 1% greater than their annual energy reduction goal. They did not participate in Phase II of the KYC program (which occurred in Q4 2009) which is the reason for the variance between FY09 results and FY10forecast. The. 218 positive impact of the KYC program on program cost effectiveness can be seen by comparing the FY09 results with KYC projects (TRC 1.96) and the FY10 forecast without KYC projects (TRC 1.26). Ukiah Evaluation, Measurement and Verification For 2007-2008, Ukiah did not undertake an EM&V study. The process to hire a firm to perform an EM&V study for the 2008 — 2009 performance period is currently underway and is expected to be completed by Spring of 2010. The report will likely assess program operations, for commercial lighting and the Keep your Cool program which provided the most significant savings. Revision to Annual Energy Savings Targets for 2011-2020 A recent assessment of energy savings potential in Ukiah conducted by Summit Blue indicated that an appropriate 10 year goal (2011-2020) for their energy -efficiency programs would be 7,024 mWh. Taking into account current economic conditions and the demographics of the City, staff has decided to revise that target to 4,045 mWh and target an average of 270 mWh per year over the next three years as a start towards that target. 219 UKIAH PUBLIC UTILITY Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector Net Demand (Used in CEC Report) Category Sayings(kW) Appliances HVAC Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting .. ... Pool Pump --- _ -- - Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehensiri,a. Princess HVAC HVAC Lighting - _-- Process Process Refrigeration- HVAC P io a8as5..:................................ s Comprehensiie' Other ....... . . .... .. SubTotal Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling -_ Res Dishwashers Res Eleckunlcs liesHeating Res Lighting --��� Res Pad Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Resting Res Compr¢Ilensiw Non -Res cooking Non -Res Cooling- _-- Non -Res Heating n. . g.-...-,.., Non -ices Lighting .. . . .......... Non -Res Motors Nan -Res Pumps Nan -Res Refrigeraticn Non -Res Shell nRes...roces.. ........... Non Res Process Noe Res Canipfehenei+,e Other --- - 1 18 Net Lifecycle GHG U5lity Net Peak kW Net Annual Net Lifecycle I Reductions Incentives Cost (Tons) ($) Savings kWh Savings kWh savings 1' 2,653 36 .. 12 ' 4,6 132 26,523 82,587 1 1,718 128 , 1,152 ! 3,383 60,888 1,140 22,a04 88 53 552,727: 3,788,705 2,059 $ 50,451: $ 28,757 $ 39,519 15 53 33 13 930 1,015 1,100 .. . 5.488 100 13 ..-.....- �.�.-.._�......-85 1,500 $ 5,085 $ 2,053 $ 2,130 utility Utility Mktg, Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Coat Cost (9) Adm(n Cast (5) (8) 56 944 2,202 10,233 145 9,721 9,914 3,302 15,720 245 $ 8,588 $- - 4,183 $ 78,885 41.925 $ 148,727 T&D T&D Total 98 83 552,727. 3,788,705 2,059 $ 80,451: $ 28,757: 5 39,510 $ 148,727 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 1,96 Excluding 700 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 Program Sector (used in CEC Report) Appliances tiJAc __ Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC Lighting ...., .... Pool Pump Refrigeration HVAC Water Heating Comprehensive Process HVAC HVAC ....... Lighting Process Process Refrigeration HVAC Process Comprahanslss Other Sub -fetal Category Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers......,.. Res Electrenics,_ Res Heating Ras ughting Res Pool Pump _- -- Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating P ensltia NonRes Cooking .:.: .:............: ResCom rah Non -Res Ccoking Non -Res Cooling Nan -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Nari-Res.Motors Nan -Res Pumps Nan -Res Refrigeration Non -Ras Shrill -, Non Ras Process Non Res Comprehensive _,._...1. Other Savings (kW) _ Savings 1 50 45: 198,361 I 2,357,523 1 1,305 $ 55,552 $ 4,313 $ 39,519 $ 129,394 Net Lifecycle GH0 Utility Ufiiity Utility Mktg, Net Demand Net Peak kW i Net Annual; Net Life cycle 1. Reductions Incentives Cost :Direct Install EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings kWh sayings - (Tons) (5) Cost (8) ' Admin Cost (5) (8) 1 2,785 12 4,827 139, 27.854: 15 80.696 ; 55 1,6021 1 134 r ...... ..... . .. 1,210 3,552 53942 ! 35 1,157 23945- 14 121,508 &4,578 1,885,515 1,032 280559 152 $ 1.155 1. 5,782': 5 105 $ 13 8 ....._.....1,575 2,156",,,- $ 407 1,463 30 20 1,072 401 $ 74,305 $ 31.271 $ 488 $ 4,313 $ 4,804 $ 2,847 $ 2557 $ 105,579 T&D T&D (Total 50 '. 45 198,861 ` 2.357,523 1,205 1 $ 85,582, $ 4,313 $ 39,519 1 $ 129,3941 IEE Program Portfolio TRC Test - 1.26 Exofudfng T&0 220 CITY OF VERNON LIGHT & POWER • The City of Vernon began serving industrial customers in 1933. In 2005, the City celebrated its 100th anniversary. • Vernon is part of the California Independent System Operator Control Area and is a Participating Transmission Owner. • Vernon's customer base is comprised primarily of industrial and commercial interests. • During the fiscal year ending 2008, the electric system served approximately 1,959 customers, supplied approximately 1,232,000 megawatts, and had a peak demand of 204 megawatts. City of Vernon Energy Efficiency Program Objectives • To provide a host of programs that will enable business customers to conserve energy and utilize energy efficiently. • To inform Vernon electric utility customers of the Public Benefit Programs and the associated benefits of participating in these programs. • To monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the programs. Overview of City of Vernon Energy Efficiency Programs: Public Facilities Programs: • LED Traffic Signal Retrofits Current Commercial Customer Programs: • Customer Incentive Program: Fund the exploration and implementation of energy efficient technologies and equipment, such as lighting technologies, variable speed drives, air compressors, motors, refrigeration, and air conditioning. Provide cash incentives to businesses that install energy efficient technologies. • Customer -Directed Program: Fund customized projects demonstrating energy and cost savings and/or commercial market potential in the area of energy efficiency. Customers must fund at least 25 percent of total project cost. Projects are only eligible if they do not qualify for any of the other programs. • Energy Education & Demonstration Workshops: Provide customers with an array of information resources to encourage energy efficiency measures through energy efficiency workshops and other forms of customer outreach. 221 • Energy Audit. Program: Provide on -site audits for commercial/industrial businesses. A comprehensive audit includes an analysis of energy usage and costs, identification of energy conservation measures, and recommended actions. Proposed City of Vernon Energy Efficiency Programs and Services: (for FY 2008-2009) • Maintain existing programs. • Ensure that all new electric load is efficient. • Evaluate the appropriateness of any new energy efficiency technologies. • Ensure that energy efficiency is part of integrated resource planning by determining and implementing the most cost-effective, reliable, and feasible energy efficiency measures. • Measure and evaluate the impact of energy efficiency programs. Investment in Renewable Energy: Vernon plans to examine options for future investment in renewable energy. Transmission and Distribution Energy Efficiency Efforts: During the reporting period ending June 2009, one new distribution capacitor bank totaling 1.2 MVARS were installed on a distribution 16 KV line resulting in 70 KW of system demand reduction and a combined 613 MWh of energy conservation on annual basis. Vernon Demand Reduction Programs: • Interruptible Service Program: Reduce demand load in case of system emergencies. Stimulus Funding: The City of Vernon didn't receive any stimulus funds. 222 CITY OF VERNON LIGHT & POWER Time Period for Reporting Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2009 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Category Savings (kW) Savings Appliances HVAC . ... . . ..... . . .... . . .... .... ........... .... . . Appliances Consumer Electronics HVAC • Lighting Pool Pump Refigeration.,,�,,, HVAC Water Healing Comprehenske Process HVAC ,... .._ HVAC Lighting Process Refngeratien__ HVAC Process Comprehend' e Other 0ubTotal Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling Res Dishwashers_ Res Electronics Res....:....:....::...:.:....:......:.::,:,......i Healing Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating. Res Comprehensite Non -Res Cooking Nan Res Cooling Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Mon -Res Pumps'„ _ Non -Res Refrigeration Non -Res Shell Non .. . . . .. .. .. .. .. oRes Process Non Res Com rehens5e Other Net Lifecycle GHG Utility Utility r. Utility Mktg, Net Demand Net Peak kW ! Net Annual - Net Lifecycle i Reductions Incentives Cog Direct install: EM&V, and Total Utility Cost kWh Savings kWh savings irons) (5) Cast (5) t Admin Cost (6) (0) 541 417 2,438,139 38,939,531 21,624 271,445 271,458 $ 542,107 512 :: .... . . ..... . . . 41 0 2,397,443 30,359,091 21,318 10 __._. 7: 36,898 € 580,440 : 306 $ 464,389 -$- - 76,521 T&D T&D Natal 541 EE Program Portfolio TRC Test 6.53 Excluding T&D 417 2,436,139 28,939,531 21,624 $ 271,448 Time Period for Forecast Data: Fiscal Year ending 6/30/2010 $ 271,459 1 $ 542,507 Program Sector (Used in CEC Report) Appliances HVAC..,.,. .................. ..,.....,., . ... . . ,... .. Appliances ConsumerEtectrunlcs HVAC Li9hliog. Pool Pump Refdgeratton Water Heating_,. ComprehensNe_ Process HVAC HVAC ....._,... Lighting . .. ,, Process Process . :...... Refrigeration ._.._-.. HVAC Process Comprehensioe -- Other SubTotal Net Demand Category Savings(kW) Res Clothes Washers Res Cooling ., . Res DlshwashBr0 Res Eleclmnles - � Res Heating Res Lighting Res Pool Pump Res Refrigeration Res Shell Res Water Heating Res Comprehen5se�� Non -Res Cooking Non-Res Cooling. ...... ..... .... ..... .. Nan -Res Cooling -, Non -Res Heating Non -Res Lighting Non -Res Motors Non-Re8 Pumps Non -Res Refrigeration- - Non -Res shell Nen Res Process - - Non Res Comprehensise Other -- -- - Net Lifecycle f ' GHG Utility Utility' "s Utility Mktg, Net Peak kW : Net Annual . Net Lifecycle I Reductions Incentives Cost Direct Install i EM&V, and Total Utility Cost Savings :kWh Savings, kWh savings (Tons) 1$) . Cost 15) ' Malin Cost (5) (0) 701 540' 3,155,372 50,447,255 28,019 $ 330,382 :$ 276,868 $ 607,270 533 3,116,876 49,865,519 . . , . 7 . 36,896 ..... .. . . 580440; 27,713 306 T&0 T&D Total 701 TEE Program 70ltfcli0 TRC Test Excluding T.D L 7.19 540 3,155,372 ; 50,447,259 223 28,0191 $ 330,382 $ 276,858 1$ 607,270 V1CTORVILLE MUNICIPAL UTILITY SERVICES • The City of Victorville established the Victorville Municipal Utility Services (VMUS) in 2001 to provide safe, reliable and cost-effective service to retail customers that were building new facilities located in the designated service territory. • VMUS began serving commercial and industrial customers in 2003. • VMUS receives wholesale power through its 12 kV switchgear as well as on -site generation facilities. • VMUS serves approximately 30 non-residential meters. • Peak demand for the utility is 6.0 megawatts and annual energy sales were 33,000 megawatt - hours. Victorville Energy Efficiency Program Highlights Energy Efficiency Program Goals: • Replace on -site generation facilities with power delivered from the wholesale transmission network. • Design and install distribution facilities that reduce system losses. • Provide information and analysis to VMUS customers that allow them to make informed decisions about reducing energy consumption. • Prioritize energy efficiency technologies and opportunities. • Provide direct assistance to qualified customers who are unable to otherwise implement cost- effective and approved savings energy efficiencies. System Design • Customers are served through 12,000 volts underground facilities with larger gauge ASCR conductors to improve system reliability and reduce system losses. • VMUS evaluates circuit load performance to optimize performance and reduce system losses. • VMUS purchases and installs efficient transformers to reduce system losses. Commercial Customer Programs: • Time -of Use Rates Program: All customers receive time -of -use pricing bills; enabling them to reduce their energy costs through the time management of their energy usage. VMUS Demand Reduction Programs: • On -Site Generation Program: —VMUS has available on -site emergency back-up generation systems. 224 Appendix B: Program Energy Savings Potential and Targets Preliminary Publicly Owned Utilities Energy Savings Targets 2011- 2020 Alameda 1,574: 1,675 i 1,771 1,533 1,857 I 1,935 1,964 :Anaheim 24,264;• 22542: 26,296' 32,291 E 37,785 36,956 34,602 :Azusa 2,068; 1,904E 2,071 ! 2,367 2,591 2,736 2,738 ,Banning 562 706 782 894 944 975 979 970 945 918 9,0761 0,59%; `Biggs 44 33 35 38 42 45 42 39 ` 35 32 385: 0.21%1 4 594 5064 5, 043 4, 627 4 574 ; 14 317 4 092 42082 0 i !Burbank 8,768 1 7,549 8,301 1 9523 ; 10,553 11 125 10 894 10 52 9,928 97 391 ° Calton 3,162 : 2 902 3 508 ,, , , , 0 055 ! Glendale 11,050 : 11,52ridley 75 ; 0 11,280 11,320 75 87 11,380 11,430 11,490 11,55: 11,62 11,620 ' 114,979 ' 0.23% Healdsburg. - � 420r 420 420 515 , 557 643 614 617 ; 617 614 5 396 0.52°k; 153 1,137 0.52%•, 113 122 134 37; 145 0.. ;Hercules 7 26 614 27 674 28 234 $ 28,576 29,9117 240,041 0.56°!° 'Industry 19,7k3 16,480 18,381 21281 24 14,..... -__ Lassen 375, 375 375 501 650 849 1,043 , 1,177, 1,203 1,219 7,767 0.49°k', •Lodi 2,296 ' 1667 1 905 2,242 2,587 2,573 2,948 2,885 3,019 3,063 25 575 0 51%1 :Lompoc 336E 258 11,483 21,765 2,054 21 142 190 776 785 5 811 0 33% 459 544 630 708 ,765 ;Merced 1 316 15.136; 16,154 Nlcdesto 16207, 2e 20,074 19,258 16 2,297 17,866 0.87%; Moreno Valley 274 219 1 234 _-- --_ ,623 186,824 0,67% 2,054 2,143 2 191 2 242 292 276 261 247 2 655. 0 30%3. Needles 205: 160; 181 211 288 2 0 ' 299 � 312 323 334 2,549 0.33%>, Palo Alto 5,799 : 6 290 ` 6,782 7 276 7 906 7 927 7 950 7 973 7 999 8,026 73,9.29: 0.75%; Pasadena 14500 14 500 14,500 i 17,500 17,500 17,500 500 00 17,500 166,000 1.23% ;PittsburgPowell Island:: 42 37 40 ....,...46 55 17,5fi2 17,560: 59 529 ; 0,29%', Plumas Sierra 237 230 247 279 346 491 778' 1,191 1,546 1,688 7,033 0.36/0' _ ..: ; 437 488 523 529 533 541 4,731 0,53% ;.Rancho Cucamonga 446 ; 449.: 455 ' 4305 . 74 , 85 - 93 101 i 110: 118 796 ; 0.12°/a'''. 9 `Redding Z523 Z496 1 3,076 3,776 4,457 4,655 4,649 4,5181 4,402. 4,350 38,903 , 0.38%; Riverside 14,017 12,526'; 13 705 16,071 16,159 19 617 19,994 20 037 20 062 20,169 174,376 a7% Rose'40le 8 390 8,360 - 8,604 8,639 9,054 14 032 10 903 10,470 9,874 9 387 93,713 0.62%1 Shasta Lake 300 ; 300.i 300 713 633 934 1 016 1,073 1,108 1,143 7,719 029°�3 Silicon Valley Power 23 055 - 25 415 i 25 255 28,502 , 29,506 28,413 25,456 23 052 r 21,328 20,020 251,003 0 7735 Tandy 141 13; 14 14 14 14 1 14 141 14 14 1 39' 0,41% _ 1,727 1 762 2,017 2 25 T 12,644. 13,829 ; 15,846. 17,614 i 19,269 19,075 18,675 ; 18,374 8 172 19,880 573°% ruckee Donner 1 978 �7 2 317 2,21 1 640 1 706€ .,- - 9 18172 166,603 0.73h1 Ukiah 250 ., . 7l❑ 12 900 250 310 i. 341 375 413 454 499 3 549 1 804 l 4,045 0.33/0 Vernon 8,020 7,863 7,992. 8,655 9,766 10,716 9,468. 8,073; 6,962, 6,087, 83,601, 0.63/0;. Total 186,049 178,089 191,538 216,268 239,807 249,462 .,245,305-.238,221 231,723 ' 226,444 2,204,905 225 1,982 1,996 2,014 18,631 ; 0.46%i 32,568 30,339 28,238 306,081 1.12%i 2,715', 2,692: 2,6691 24,651 1 0,89%�; ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL POWER Energy Efficiency Program Targets 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 2011 MWH 1,574 14 of Load Forecast 0.41% Technical Potential Energy Potential (M Wh} Residential Non -Residential Total -Ali Buildings Perc6#:ofUtility Forecast 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 1,675 :.1,771 - 1,833 043% '; 0.45% ! 0:46%`. 62,961 47,113 - 47,121 . `47,163 47,281 47,488 47,792 48,192 48,695 49,299 59,499 57,761 :.58,387 .:59496 --,59,865. 59,865 '59,865 59,865 59,865 I 60,004.', 122,459 104,873 105,508 106,659 107,146. 107,353 .107,657-.108,058 108,560 109,303 31.64%.`:.. 2,7,07% ,:27,07.% :27.10°/ .26:88% 26,74°4 26:70?/° '26.68? 26.68%;. 26.72°/0 1,887 1,935 - 1,964 1,982 1,996 - 2,014 0'47/ ,''0.48/ 0,48/ 0:49% 0.49°!°.,: 0.49'/o-',', Demand Potential (kW) t3 �:Sectoi' nR . ° z 1 01.0: Residential - - 12,092 Non -Residential _; 13,479 Total All Buildings - 25,571 Percent'ofUtility: Forecast ; 36.87% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWIi) - T: , 5- P UffiTre : RI n14 2015 2010 _ 20'1'7 20 O 6.: ),, 60,333 ' 45,249 45,256 45,296 :45,409 45,607 45,896 46,281 .46,762 : 47,340 18,209 17,716 'j ::7915 !..18,250 ;'18,363 " .18,363 18,363 18,363, 18,363'„ !,:18,406 '78,542 . 62,965` 63,166: .63,546 :.63,772 63,970 64,261 .64,644 .65,125 65,745 20,30 1.'16.25°/`.;16.21°!° ';ls.1.1% ;16,00% ::15.93% 35.94°/n 15.96°/u 16.01%' 16.07%':< '$,.``207Z:„.��'-.aR2613m,.a ,,2014..�.. �2'.OI�.,�;E"aR.t►"1"6 �: �iF�?7""t' ?r..'2Q.ls1i« �3201#;1il,,,e2©-.0.H 9,594 - 9,597 9,606 9,632 9,678: .-9,744 9,831 9,941 10,072 13,094 x ' 13,235, "13,487 13,571 . 13,571 ;13,571 13,571 13,571;: 13,602,,. 22,688 22,832 23,093 23,203. 23,249 -23,315 -r-23,402 '.23,511-: 23,674 32,46% ':3248% :;32,53% 3227% 22,11%. 32;07° 32.01% 3199%. 3204% Residential Non -Residential Total A11 Buildings, PereentofUtilit' Forecast',.' Demand Potential (kW) EiniNiff • 0 5 °' Residential .- Non-Residentiai Total All Buildings 14,205 : 11,678 11,731 Pereent:ufUUlity;Forecast 20.48/-.::: 16.71% 1669%'.: Market Potential Energy Potential (MWk) Residential NonrResidential _ Total All Buildings Percent of Utility`. Forecast Demand Potential (kW) r£ect¢' ; R:-.' Residential. Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent.,afUtthty(,Forecnst ', 9,364 '- 6,944 -6,945 Tail MAO 6,951,--'...6,968 6,998 4,734 14,786 1.1:4,877 1`:4,907 11,828' /1,875 11,905 16.66% ;:16.524 16144% .748 - .'505 509 '' ..525 562: . 551 826 739 ;: 784 ' -;:$76 :.910 1,574 1,244 -'- 1,293 ': 1,402.. -- 1,472 - .1,399 0.41% ` :' 0.32% !'0.33%-.H:'. 0.36%; 0.37°/a 0.35% 93 99 353 289 297 -- `315 322 0.51% > : 041% =1;;04.4;4 ;`7:4490 0;45°%q 226 2418¢6 '12.49 r . ZO: 7,042 7,101 7,174 7,262 4,907 4,967 4,907 4,918 11,949 12,008 - . . 12,081 12,180 16.44% 16.43%u 1644% 16.495', Rid a ?913 2019, , €2920. 505. 466. 435 411 685 612 %_ 553 1,270 -1,151 --1,047 963 032% 0;28', 026%:;;: .024%;;;', i : ,a 21317 201;8'; 2,0'19:£x1 96 87 - 79 72 67 210 190: 169`: 151 136::1' 307 - 277 248 " 223 0,42V 0.38°h 0,34% 0.30°4,_ 203 0.28% ANAHEIM Energy Efficiency Program Targets 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016 2016 2017 - 2018 2019 2020 M Wll 24,264 22,542 %ofLoad Forecast ;::0,95/° 00.874/0`. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh} NIESEMaERIE1 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings_ Percent o f U ti lity Forecast 149,559. 127,504 532,60E. : 533,781 682,160 661,286 26.58% Demand Potential (kW) Residential 53,133 Non -Residential 112,106' Total All Buildings 165,239 Percent of.Utility Forecast • 30.10% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) EIMENN4OWLVER 11 11E00 i Eii a $' 411,3 A :4. . 15 Pa `21 ,4 - . l r0: '1,, J 1 $is` 101Ci 012!}219 Residential 127,266 104,871 ,.108,054- .112,380 117,993 124,311 130,886' 137,612. 144,477 :151,691 Non -Residential 513,221 .::514,108 ;518,233 520,362. 528,866 535,374 .=,539,046 542,770 1546;493 548,676 Total All Buildings , : 640,487 618,980 626,287 632,742 646,858 _659,684. " 669,932 680,382 690,972 700,367 Percent of Utility Farecast ;'2495%...' 23 88% '.23.70%'.- 23.63% ,23.92% 23:93% 23.99% 24.22°/ 24.45% 24.65°/ 26,296 32,291 37,785 36,956 34,802 32,568 - 30,339 28,238 0,99% i- L21% . 1;40%.. 3 34% 1.25% .1.16% 1.07% : 0.99"/4::+: 01 201.1 2,115 ".. t16'ti1, 1A2011 2 5 1:204 61 131,252. 136,347 142,959 • 150,402 158,149. 166,073 174,161 182,661 :538,064 .:540274 ,:549,103 1555,860 559,673. 563,540 567,407 569,671;1; 669,316 676,621 692,062 706,262 "717,822 729,613 :741,568 752,332 25,32°/0 '''25.26% X25,59°/4 25,62%4 25;71%4- 25,97% 26.24% 26,47%,:. 50,021 51,146 •112,442 : 113,344 162,463 164,490 29.43% I '. 29.37% 40.4",.,. 4 335 4xG ii & 52,680 54,674 56,920 •' 59,258. 113,809 115,669 ' 117,093- .117,896, 166.489. 170,343 174,012 '177,154 ,29.26% 29.68% ,'29.05% 30.28°/0 " 61,650 64,091. 66,658 118,710 119,525 -120,002;,; 180,360 ' 183,616 186,660 30,73% 31.17% 31.69% Demand Potential (kW) 1EgiltE Soctol ial Z 1.4.._. E._ 2.41 s, :211155 �,m 012- ?„j °x$.2`03.6 ,' ` 1Q31C.e11 LU1: y Residential ;27,723 24,203 24,650 25,262 26,058. 26,956 27,891 28,847. Non -Residential 108,061 ;108,336 109,205 109,654 ',111,446. 112,817 113,591 114,376 Total All Buildings 135,784 132,539 133,856 134,916 137,504 139,773 141,482 143,223 Pereek ufUtility „Forecast >'2473% i='24,01% '-2390% -::2371%' 23.96%4 23.97% 24.18% ,24.40% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent ofUtility _Forecast 6,489 3,897 17,775 18,644 24,264 22,542 0.95% •<; _0:87°/ Demand Potential (kW) Residential 5i911 -Residential Total All Buildings Percentof-Utility Forecast ,. FOOSOil 1,144 . , _ 736 3,684 3,830 4,828 4,566 0,88% ;'0.83%,'. 29,823 115,161 144,984 24.62% 102©:43 30,849 115,620 146,470 2013D f ,. U'3. r4.4a S _W ,`Z! A, li (, .91017 >5t2.8 88 ct ,201 i 1; 72Q2* 4,497 5,704 6,800 7,167 6,807 6,405 5,829 5,351 21,799 26,587 x130,986 29,789 -11,994 • 26,163.. 24,5€0 22,886 26,296 32,291 37,785 36,956 34,802 -32,568 30,339. 28,238 0.99% 1.21% . P.4034 :1.34% L25% 1:16% 1.07% -0.99/ 2011 '836 1,044 4,414 5521 • 5,250 : _ 6,565 494%4 ;1:15% 227 :1,263 1,464 -:. .1,364 - - -. . 1,258 •-- :1,125 : _ 1,014 • 5,564 6,378 .6,037 .5',690 5.342 4992' f. 7,826 • 7,841 7,401' .6,948 6,467 6,006 AZUSA Energy Efficiency Program Targets 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWII 2,068 1,904 2,07I % afLoad Forecast '';0.78%; -0.71% 0.77% Technical Potential 2,367 2,591 - 2,736 2,738 2,715 2,692- 2,669 0.87 / - 095% - 0,99% 0,99%x, 0:97%-' 1095%-. :6:94% i; `. Energy Potential (MWh) ` ,241i ;11,2972, (.R.','1,d1J1`....,,l0t4 .,...,.201x'.,...,,' 3616...... B 3r8 '' PE' 20 �, �a2tr1�>64„r21i�18�E�. �9.,:-i,-,4424,..,; Residential 29,673 24,900 24,920 25,015 - 25,185 25,430 25,750 26,146 26616 . 27,161 Non -Residential .'88,484 " 87,497 87,530 ;-88,174 .'88,817 89,461 90;104, 90,7481:1 91,392 92,035:'': Total All Buildings - 118,157. `. 112,396. 112,450 113,188 114,002 114,891 115,855-: 116,894 118,008 :119,197 Percent--ofUEilify Forecast 4459% 42.11154 4180% 41.51% 41.61°/ " 41.63% 41.67%:. 41,75%„ 4185Fo' � 41.97%1' Demand Potential (kW) -" gig-lj ».rSe` ci'.dY'`'>.: , ,, ,i .'.il'sw3-� Residential . 10,761 10,013 Non -Residential `,20,160 `,/9,956:' Total All Buildings 30,921 ' 29,969 Percent of Forecast .4847% 46.61%,. Economic Potential Energy Potential {MWh) NEV.m..iAla1•, alill Residential. Non -Res ide ntinl Total All Buildings Percent of3tility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) l a3 N°A c..m,. $e¢16CL ffi ' j1 Residential,-,. N em -Residential Total All Buildings PercantofUtility' Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) qiETAVAKEMIN %(f 2016'. 1. 203,17. _4-`21018,.: X24)14. 10,016 10,040 10,086- 10,153 .10,242 10,353 10,484 - 10,638 `19960 : - X20,10'? 20;254 -20,400 20,547:: 2.0,694.1 20,841 i>:`' 20,988, 29,976 .30,147 30,340 - 30,554 30,789 .3_1,047 - 31,325 .31,625 46.33% ;46:24% 46..10% • •1915% 46:16%,. 46.27%;' -46.3756 eaM7aE: 2012 2;913 ,20Ta 21.10IKA gr,201 25,852 21,083._-' 21,101 ` 21,184 -. 21,333- 21,546 85,466 84479 84,512 85,134' 85,755 86,376 .111,318 105,562 105,613 106,318 ' 107,088 -107,923 4201% 39.54/0 "39,26% 39.09% 39.08% 39:10% 93"; ,01- , 5,987 ` 5,243 19,372 '-19,168 25,358 - 24,411 1;3.7.9674 t3" 5244 . 12,172 24,415 37,74% iW l' FAMP -2t1i#P OOke li 21,825 .' . '. ' 22,169 :22,578 23,053 :86,998 87,619< 88,241 88,862 108,823 109,788 110,819 111,915 39.14^/' 3921.% 39.30%sl 39.41%l' to o.Q1 «,134 ° 5,253 ,,5,272' : 5,301- 5,338 19,311 19,595 19,736 24,566 24,726 24,895 25,074 37.68% 37;63% "37`.6156 "37.59% 619m1 z4...i 5,385. ..5,442 • 5,508. 19,877! 20,018_.' 20159,: 25,262 25,459 25,666 37.59% 37.61%'.' 37,63% ;_ hk3 �3 9h Y 4 f] � R ;�O1Z.,��?::a2r.Q�3 s.;�, z�?':2;�.�g4:'�w:.�.3�0�7��,. �.�2416a 21Y"12:... t . �,7i01:8_:, n'.2a1`9:.� 6 �?,2'_6"2d.4' - Residential 429 230 262 300 - -- 348 -,.1,8 .. : . . . Non -Residential , ;'.1,b39 8.09 - 2,067 Total All Buildings . 2,068 1,904.. 2,071 '2,367 2,591 Percent ofUfJity_ Forecast 10;789% ' .0.7111/0 !0.77% '0.87% 0.95% Demand Potential (kW) urtnim Residential 19on-Residential 369 Total All Buildings PercentofUtility Forecast 453 0:71 i�2 ;,3f2013 _ h0t 54... ,. 59 68 462 ,498 431 467 529 579 . 0.67/ 0:72% 0.817/ 0.88% 378 408 228 380 387 390 394 396 2,356 2,352 2,325 ' , 2,299 , 2,272 2,736 - 2,738 2,715 - 2,692 2,669 0.99% 0.99% 0.97%? 0.95% _0.94% -- 94 103 - 103 103 : - - 102 523 525 _: 522 :d 519 ' I: 516 616 628 626 622 618 0.938'; , 0.94% 0.93%;; 0.92% 0.91% ` BANNING Energy Efficiency Program Targets 1,200 1,000 800 ego '" 400 200 2011 2012 2013 MWE1 962 706 of Load Forecast <.0.67% .''0.49% Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) i. FE}. R'$` ctQF,.'is=' 'F&1 'su°R Residential 32,775 29,083 Non -Residential ;:':37,517 ;..37,015 Total AEI Buildings 70,292 66,098 Percent of Utility Forecast 48,84%% ;;:45,92%0 Demand Potential (kW) 06a..T. ,m.. ,?132r6.2n . Residential - 13,631 13,052 Non -Residential ;i 7731 '.x:-;7,626 Total All Buildings 21,362 20,678 Percent 011.4114Y Forecast 5215% ',;50.48% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Pore Cast, Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non-Residontial Total All Buildings Percent of 'Utility Forecast Market Potential tR 2014 2010 2015 782 894 944 975. 0.53% ..0.60% :6.62°! .'.0,63% ?...1 „ 01< 4 420W512404% 29,253 29,574: 30,048 .30,678 .37,042 37,068 37,095 37,733 66,294. 66,642 - 67,143 68,411' 4516/° ,44.50°/ .43.96/ 43.91°/ 203 i4325107.011 2014 13,093 13,174 13,296 13,460 ;:7,629 7,632 ;',7,635 7,756 20,721 20,805 20,931 21,226 49.60% 48.83% 48:I5% 47..87% , :: ij -4., ©24 1' 22,291 18,829 I8,810 . 18,791 18,773: 18,754, . 18,735 18,716 18,698 11,792 13,279 I3,294 13,309 - • 13;324 13;554 13;825 ' 14;102 14,384 36,083 , 32,108 32,104: 32,100. 32,097 32,308 . 32,560 32,818 33,081 :22.31% ,.21.87"/0 ',21.44% 21.01%, ,20.74°/ ' 20,49°/ 20.25%, 20.0I% 2017 2018 2019 2020 979 970 945 51$ 0.62% 0.60% 0:57% .0:54% 31,468 32,420 38,488 39,257, 69,956 71,678 44.02% 44.22%. ,007142' 33,538 34,825 40042 E 40,843 :` 73,580 75,668 44.50°/' 44.87°1 13,667 13,918 14,213 14,553 7;921, 8,079 8,241 21,588 21,997 :22,454. 22,959 47.74% 47.69% 47.72%q 47.84% :I Al Cam°: 6,680 2,988 9,667 20.55%% 7,286 6,727 6,720 6,713 6,706 6,700 6,693 ' . 6,586 2,869 ;,;- 2,763 i'c--2,764 2,766 ;2,768- 2,815 '2,872.. 2,929 10,155 9,489 9,484 9,479 ' 9,474 9,515 9,565 9,615. 24.79% :23,17A :22.70°A 22.25% 21.79% 21.46%% 21.15%4 • 20.84% Energy Potential (MWh) MEIN Wakc4. IR OWN Residential Non-Resldential ' Total All Buildings Percent;ofEitility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) mo ma±aaettPonhs a e'�it Residential Non -Residential - Total All Buildings Pe rcent;o f Utddy Fore cos t 583 350 381 380 'J, 356 401 962 - :_ 706 ., 782. 067% 0.49% <. 0.53% 10 2A7:. :415 .468 ?479 476 894 944 0.60°/n 0:62% 515 533 539 526 460 -• 446 ::..432 419 975 979 970 945 0063/ , 0.62% 0.60% 0.57% 18,679 14,672::, 33,350 6,673 3,047 9,720 20.25%', 10.202= 512 .406. 918 0.54./' 6E03.»h20?T_>z 2018. q., 019: ,e .2QTQ3 145 109 118 133 161 194 217 228 222 214 .. 80 75 84 ; 100 99 96 93 90 88 85 225 184 202 233 261 290 310 318 309 299 0.55% 0.45% =:10 48% 0.55% 0.60% 0.66% 0.69°1 .0.69%, 0.66% 0.62% :' 229 BIGGS Energy Efficiency Program Targets 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 1.5 10 3 2011 2012 201.3 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWH 44 33 %ofLoad Forecast .;0.25/ -'.0.19%/ Technical Potential Energy Potential (M%) :45 , c,,$oc 4r,011 Residential .. Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast • Demand Potential (kW) eifilaRI..e $CC4.ot';O. ,::pro, 's Residential Non -Residential 7 Total All Buildings - PercentofUtility Forecast 35 38 42 45 42 39 0.19°/u 0;21% 023% 0.25% 0.23% 0:21/ oi lili3e.E:. 1,707 1,493 .. 1,493 1,494 1,495 ' 1,495 236 235 235 262 , 276 :'.276 1,943 1,728 . 1,729 :1,756 ..1,770 1,771 10.98% 9.73% '.9:70% 9.84% 9:79% 9:72%° 710 32 741 18.74% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 21L. i W2013i 676 676 32 32 708 708 17.89/s 17.89% 20 2(114 676 35 711 17979 wittatilRom • 35 32 0:19% ':.0.17% i. 1,496 1;496 . .1,497 1,497 276 276: 276, '. 276 3 ',. 1,771 1;772.. 1,772 1,773 9 59°/ 9.67% 9.64% 9.61% 677 C' 677 677 677 677, 677 36 36 36 713 713 713 713 713 713 18.01/0 1$.02% 18.'32°l PAT TAW.C4 Residential 1,129 '. 931 931 Non Residential 202 202 202 Total All Buildings 1,331 1,133 1,133 Percent of 'Utility Forecast 7,52/0 ' `16,'37'/ . 635% Demand Potential (kW) a s FO._h`6cto1',? ..,a.,,.,1,, ()3P Residential '- 414 Non -Residential 23 , Total All Buildings 437 Percent of Utility Forecast. 1106/ Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) .a.aa°.:r., ¢ ,egFSC�C4Y ksw LE?siia r.Qi 4 932 932 ' 932 933 229 :242 .'-242 242 1,160 1,174 1,174 1,175 '6.5091 - 6.49% 6'45 : ' 5:43% Aifff > X 0 3__ 382 382 382 382 382 23 s 23 26 28 ;28 406 406 409 410 410 3025% ' 10.251 10.33% 10.37% '10.37% Residential 36 25 Non -Residential 8 Total All Buildings 44 33 Percent of Forecast 0.25% i',:0.19% Demand Potential (kW) Residential 10 8 213 E<204 27 29 7 <9 35 38 0.19°/ ::0.21% 18:02% 18,03% 18 03%', 933 934 242; 1,175 1,176 , 6.40% 934 242 1,176 6.3110/. 382 382: 382: .382 4i0 410. 410 410 10.37% 20 Ei^ G20,17 r :2i 1 -. _ 019 31 32 31 30 28 • 26 • 1.2 1.4 12 42 45 -.42 :".39 .35 :.32;'. 0:23°l0 13 (Yon Residential 1 1 Total All Buildings 11 9 10 I1 13 15 16 Perce1t'ofUtility:Forecast 028/. '0:23% ,0.25/0 0:27°10 0.32% 0.38/0 0.40%, 230 BURBANK Energy Efficiency Program Targets 12,000 10,000 3,000 - 2: 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 MWEI 5,768 % o(Load Forecast Technical Potential 2015 - 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 7,549 8,301. 9,523 10,553. :11,125 10,894 10,524 10,225 9,928 0.62% Ip;0 67/ + 077% : 0:84°/o :0;88% 0:85% 082/ 0:79/ 0.76%_ Energy Potential (MWh) a tg 9'➢ i z - -- Via: _ r .y E c �laTCA !g.Ez4�, Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility I1'orecast' Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percentof` Utility, .Fore cas t 85,226 72,560 73,597 74,925 ' 76,544 -. 78,434 80,594 83,004 85,725 - 88,717 292/42 -'292,144. >'294,647 297605 300,563 303,293 306,023 • 308,526 311,711 314,442i_ 377,368 364,704 368,244 372,530 377,107 381,727 386,617 391,530 397,437: 403,159. 31.23% 29.90°4 :2991% "X3000% ,30.06/ 30.13/ 30;24/ 30:3554 30.56% 30.69%j'.'. fi € ._ ; .013' .:*7163 . 111 i 2 16. ?i 20r:11 WOW ,a.2t12.0_- 30,786 28,911 -29,200 29,572 - 30,028 30,561' 31,172. 31,854 - 32,625 33,474 1.62,716 ,62,753 ,53,290 `--63,926 ..54,561 ,.L6$;(47' 65,734 66,272 66,956 67,542_:;`. 93,502 91,664 • 92,490. 93,498 94,589 - 95,709" 96,906 • 98,125 99,581 101,016 30.76%_ `:2976°/a ::2974% ::19..60/ .:29:65°0 29.72/, .29,:73/4 29.83% 29.40% 30.0654 Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) .gig-" tAaa:." 'n i Will EMU ` 2032;_ Residential 74,285 61,517 Non-Reaidential ':':283,923 :283,848 Total A11 Buildings : 358,208 345,364 PercentofUHlity $'ot'ec4st ,;:129,64% 1.28.311/, Demand Potential (kW) pp;; . . . € cs z - 0 7/5 Residential - . 17,113', Non -Residential : '' 60,408 Total All Buildings - - 77,522 Percent of Utility Forecast :'2550% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) s'4 ti e_ .s ct¢r• i Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings - 8,768 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.73% Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non-Residentml Total All Buildings ..- Percent :ofUtility Forecast 15,113 60,423 75,536 24.5291' '._�,1?1; s .02O _.. :.a 62,419 63,575 64,984 66627 68,506 70,602 . . . 72,968 75,570_ 286,279 289,153 :292,027 294,680 29732 '299,764 • 302,859 305,512' 348,699. 352,728 357,011 361,307 -365,838 370,366 375,837 .381,082- ::-28,32°,4 .,2840% :2846% 28;52% 28.62% 28.71% 28.90' 29.01 o=5 x014 ,!€.?,20,3 oft -or- -417 „ 01 15,236 15,396 15,591 15,820 :.16,083 - 16,3.77 :,60,941 ,:61,552 ,62;164 '62,729 63;293 63,611 76,177 76,948 - 77,755 - 78,549 79,377 80,188 . 24.49% ;124.43% :.24.371° ::'24.39% .24,35% 24.37% 1,477 1,658 6,072 6642 7,549 _ 8,301 :0.62% .1j 0.67°.4 401.5'.g .1"20:16„ t2 :7„tt,„ :0. 1,864 : 2,100 - 2,206 - 2,146 2,068.: ;7,659 ,;8453 ;8,919 ,'8,749 !8,457 9,523 10,553 11,125...-10,894 : 10,524 0.77% j,0.84% 556 327 :. 357 397 458 5/7: - 539 511 1,200. "i; 1,255 .;;1,375 1.,577 11;730' 1,829 1,823 1,793 1,755 : 1,583 :- 1,732 1,974. :' 2,188 _2,346 2,363 2,304 . 0:58% (:.0.51% _0.56%° ,::,0,63% ;-0.69% 0.73/4 0.72% 0.70°%. 231 16,710 17,076 64,470 65,035;';.1 81,180 82,111 24-38% .2444% ,,�b,11T9„4� a�;2,0211?'t 1,996 1,924. 10,225 - 9,928 0.79%.":" 482 1,770;, 2,252 0:68% 311; 456 1,743 2,199 0,65%, j: COLTON Energy Efficiency Program Targets 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 MWH 3,162 2,902 3,508 4,594 of Load Forecast ..0.84/ 0.76% 0.91% 1.17, Technical Potential Energy Potential (M Wli) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings PereentofUtility_Forecast ,,';`.28.25% 37,607 66,501 106,108 • Demand Potential {kW) Residential 15,431 15,243 Non -Residential `14,043 ;;14,099'; Total All Buildings 29,974 . 29,342 Percent: of Utility Forecast ; j-.36.61% 36.5956 474 E0,14 4E4 32,853 33,430 34,187 68,796 69,799 . ;70,818 101,649 103,229 -105,004 2673% ;26,75% 26.82% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) al �^:i it�ee' e„6`tQYez..:aca3 5p0 a"3%20.1,11 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings percent ofUtility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential .Nan .Res idential Total All Buildings Percent of Utt1i1y Forecast' Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) sri• rsssa `s€ x.`. ectoi, s'= ;? 2011 Residential 1,144 Non -Residential 2,018 Total All Buildings 3,162 Percent of Utility Fprecatt p84% 29,233 66,377 95,609 25.45%' Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non-Residential. Total All Buildings PercentofLildity Forecast 8,071 13,567 21,638 26.43% 2015 -2016 2017 - 2018 2019 2020 5,064 5,043 4,827 4,574 4,317 4,092 1.27% 1;.251 1.18% 1.10% 1.03% 0.96% Fl 11 e. X20;18 -.",.,';y2019 :o; ;=„2020 mi 35,128 36,255 37,571 - 39,978 40,780. 42,678 71,851 .:72,899 . 73,962 :75,041 76;135 77,246 106,978 109,154 111,533 114,119 116,915 119,924. 28,08%.: Q14 € 2Q15 ',riffe4'310fti 15,413 15,638 15,920. 16,258 16,654 17,108 17,621 18,194 14,305 ::14,513 14,725 , 14,940 15,158 15,379 15,603 15,831 29,718 30,152. 30,645 31,198 31,811,. 32,487 33,224 - 34,024 36.23%-: 35;93% 35.70°/9 35:53% 35:41/9 35,35% 35.34% 35.38% flOrd ul,61.4.; :E,� ,4tit i it7460a Ndii:1$ ll ,iPle OKti 1114:00 24,385 > 24,825 25,402 26,120: 26,979 27,982 29,131 . 30,428 . , 31,874 .' 66,640 67612 . :68,599 . 69,599 70,614 71,644 72,689 73,750 74,825 91,026 ,92,437. 94,001 95,719 97,594 99,627. '101,821 104,178 106,700. 23.93% 23.96% ' • 24.01%:' 24.10% ' 24.22% .24.37% 24.55% 24:75% 24,9904 70 411#5: 701 , vlaffil1414413 7307 7,367 7,446 - 7,546 7,665 7,806 7,968 8,151 8,355 13,616 .;',13,815 - ',14,016 ;,14;221 - , ,14,42$ 14,639::.14;$52 15,069' ,15289_ 20,923 21,181 21,462 21,766 22,094 22,445 22,820 23,219 23,644 26.09% :25.S2% ''2558% ' 25,36% 25.160 24,98% :,24.83%. 24,70%.'''.24,58.°A- 1. -01M "1°„1; 01'3 :,a.�2014 r 01 - b "`.011 p t. l 1 ,. -:.. .. ,�_���._...�_-�.�4 r+a ..... e. ..a,? 4�S,w�a.,i;2,..:�„�M,�9a4_. 742 854 1,066 1,308 1,395 1,378 1,324 1,242 1,168 2160 2654 3;527 3,755 3,649 3,449 3,250 3,074 2,924::,: 2,902 3,508 4,594' ` '5,064 5,043 4,827 4,574 4,317 ' 4,092 076% 0:91/ '!1.17°/ 1.21 1.25b/° . 1.1004 ; 1:10% 7.03%9 0,96%4 272 213 245 320 467 483: .• 465 403 - 428 519 695 762 75.$ 725 694 675 641 764 . 1,015. : , 1,229 .. 1,241 1,190. 1,121. '. 0.8204 ;,0.8004 0.9304 1:7104 43% 1,41!9 1,32% 1.22% 232 3941 361 654; 623 '; 1,049 984: 1.12P/ 102%.: CORONA Energy Efficiency Program Targets 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 60 2011 2018 2019 2020 MW -11 166 % ofLoad Forecast 0.2394' Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) <El°wr' T ,8 6i7;r..<.MI ECi Residential 1,032 920 Non -Residential j 32,883 I 32,758 Total All Buildings 33,914 33,679 Pane nt:or(.Iility Forecast 1;46.9514 :':46.16%. 167 0.23%. Demand Potentia! (kW) -,1 11 , -..see(e l ,sF_,,F;- 1 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of -Wilily Forecast 20I2 2013 2014 2018 2016 2017 190 227 -256 =` 288 0.26% =0301° : .•033°/u 0.37/° 0039%.' 0:42% 936 960 ;33,414 • .', 34,249, 34,350 35,209 46 62%' :46.849'. 312 335 358 . 381 :0:44%: 989 1,022 1,057 1,096 1,138 1,184. -174,934 35,283 35,636 35,992 36,352 .36,716.:';'_: 35,923. 36,305 36,693 37,088 -37,491 37,899. 46,63% .-,46.20W,: 46.23% 46.27% 46.31%:. 4635( : rP207U..n; 014 .. R11.0103 i1zo39,t aifiR i a01i 429 .413 • 418 - 425 434 - ,444 454 - 466 479 - 492 .. _:; 7,969 _ .8,2 292 8,3 .,, ):7,642 --'7,fi23 ;;7,175 ..8,L29 B 10 8, 7S 8,071 8,036 " 8,193 8,394 8,563 : 8,654 8,746 8,841 8,937 9,036 '59.45% .:58,61% 59;1.6% '60 02% 60.61% 60:65/ 60.69% 69.74%9 60.80%%. 161.. Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential 850 Noll -Residential ,1.31,727,. Total All Buildings 32,577 Percent ufttifity O'arecast Ic45.10% Demand Potential (kW}3 «' ig.x _^i ectoF ,h -6t1., Residential NOn-Ras ido ntial Total .411 Euildiogs Percentof-itility Forecast : Market Potential �Q3 . 237 7,366 7,603 56,01% Energy Potential (MW -h) „� 3E0 . -v=,>E`f0#Etat �t...a"',u,sVRI.:1;,2 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast, Demand Potential (kW) OftENOWWW Residential. - 4 Non Residential 36 .' Total All Buildings 40 Percent of Utility Fosecas t 0.30% 16 150 166 Ii023% 737 231,591; 32,327 44.31°/9 219 7,563 55.16%_ :491L34,y'�5 9 10 12 • 13. . 215 242 2013_;.1? 749 767 32,222 :_33,028, 32,971 33,795 44.74% 44;96% :72016 ' 2017 ,E201; 1 101.9; tF B ���789 814 - 841' • 870..• 902 937 33,689' :':3¢,025 I�'34,366 :34,709 35,0$6'1 .3 4,477 34,839 35,206:: 35,580 35,959 34,344 220 - - 223 _ 226 229_'- 7,491 ;,:7,679 ';7,832 7,910 7,712 7,901 8,058 : 8,140 55.69% :':56.49°A 57,04% `'57.95% s1i ; SI11f$, "?k2.b_"1 2 233 237' . ..242 . .•247 7,990" 8,069 8,150.7: 8,232 .g? .8,2/3 '..8,307. 8,392 ':78,478 57.07% 57,09'/0: 57,10%;:!.= 167 190 ;023/° '0.26% 3 3 41 46 D.30% ,0.33°/9'. 233 227 256 0.3014 0.33% 273- 288 0.37% 15 , 297. 32tr` 312 . ., 335 0,39% 4:42%d 6 70 76 -: 81 ':: 87 70 76 :82 87 92 0.49% 0.53% 0.56% 0.59%,., 0.62% 15' 343 358 444% 15 366 3.88 GLENDALE Energy Efficiency Program Targets 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 z 6,090 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWIi 11,060 % of Load Forecast `11.00% Technical Potential Energy Potential (M Wh) 0a -_y'''x3 SeetolS:: .gil=ii, to Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percento#lltility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential. Total All Buildings Peteen to(Utility Forecast 11,520 11,280 11,320 11,380 11,430. 11,490 11,550 11,620 11,680 100% 1;00% 1:00°r5 ':1.00% 1,00°A .`:1,00°/a :1;00% "1,0096 1:00%; 26111,ani .Z0 106,663 89,746 90148 90,647 91,246. '207,469 ,204,838 :204,858 204,885 6204,905. 314,132 294,585 295,006 295,532 296,151 28.40% • :25.57% !;26.15% 26.11% ;26.02% 2©1.6.1) `28T7 .,?0i$ ",s .efe.2U19;� ii1:161#ra 91,942 92,743 93,622 94,533 95,476: 204,932 204,958 204;955 205,0,.12 206;092';. 296,874 297,701.; 298,606 299,544 301,568 25;97% ".25,91% 25,85% 25:.78% -25.82°6„ 38,546 - 35,945 36,049 36,182 36,343 36,533 36,752 36,993 37,244 46,944 ; 46,407 46,409 46,412 . `46,415 46,418 46,421 46,424 46,427 8 5,48 9 :82,352 82,459 82,595 82,758 82,951 ` 83,173 83,417 83,671 25.44% 24,51%° '':2454°1 '24.58% 24.63% 24.69°A 24.75°4 24.83% 24.90% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ' sz `"as5.9.9.41.fr*«"%a1, . a"1.1 8.'2013 Residential ` - 91020 74,067 .74,420 N9rt-Residential 201,103 ..-198,473 :198,493 Total All Buildings _:: 292,123 272,540 272,913 Percentofllulity'Forecast "2fi41% 23.66% 24.19°1 Demand Potential (kW) M», rhaE;iie"8.fki1'.ni#°. S'.(t Residential. .' 20,828 18,1$1 18,224 :.18,279 18,347 Non -Residential 45,018 2 44,481 44,484 44,457 44.489 Total All Buildings 65,896 62,663 62,798 62,766 62,836 Percent of Utility Forecast 19.60%° ,16 65% 1866% .18.68% ' I8.70% »2! 37,504 46,672:';: 84,176 25.05%', s' 2,0,Sr,»: a016'`. 2017 2018 20I9 h g_,2.O. iOT'`,^a' 74,858 75,382 . 75,991 :76,691 . 77,458 78,254 - .79,078' 198,519 x199,539 .198,566 ;196;592 198,619 198,64.6 ' 199,693;;:. 273,377 273,921 274,557. 275,283 :276,077 276,900 278,770. 24,15% : ;:;24.:07%!:;,;:124.02%;;•:123.96%::.:'!.23.9.0% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential 4,169 2,473 Non -Residential 6,199 6,105 Total All Buildings 10,368 8,578 Percent.oflltility Forecast 0.94% 0.74%. Demand Potential (kW) X?.&,"»kalg1gS¢°E! €Gt44 1e.'r'` Residential Non Residential, 772 525 :1,420 1,398 Total All Buildings 2,192 1,923 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.65% ;'057°1 3,048 3,680 3,926 6807 ;:, 5,588 9;889 9,855 12,268 13,815 0.87% 1:08% ,:::1.21°1° 5.211.1`3 18,427 <'18,519 18,622 .18,72818,839, 44;492 .44,495 , 44,498 44,501: 44,73.6': 62,919 63,014 63,120 63,229 63,574. 18.73°1° 1875°J° " 18.79% 18.82% 18.92%:'; riutog 3,768 : . 3,408 9;207 :8,950 13,475 12,359 1.18% 1.08%;:- 675 922. 'r 896 847 765 1,550, 1,966 2,271 ;2,267 2,078 2,225 2,888 3,168 3,114 2,843 0,66% ; .'0,86/ 0.94/° 0:93/ ' 0.85% 234 3,090 - 2,805 - - 2,688 : 8,210 7,540: 7,012::: 11,300 - 10,346 9,700- 0^98% 0:89% 692 627 597 ,1,900 1,736 1,607- 2 ,592 ' 2,363 2,204 0.77% 0.70%' • 0.66%c:' GRIDLEY Energy Efficiency Program Targets 140 120 100 = 80 S 60 49 20 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016. - 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWA 75 % of Load Forecast ` 0:20%'<' Technical Potential 75 75 87 98 107 111 114 117 - 120 0.19% 0.19% ,1;0.21°/ ' 0:241° 0125% 1' 0:26°A 036°l° "'10 1127% 0:27°!°.', ; Energy Potential (MWh) p , 'fi t c...x..r- 4 C.is.ae,a,Lb.ei.i££4::-1_2101 Residential 6,503 5,892 Non -Residential 6,825 6,908 Total All Buildings 13,328 12,799 Percent of Utility Forecast `: 36.01% ,;33.12%. Demand Potential (kW) ':4;- 1!:-.+Se41!. f . .....;.....201:3. .. -:_3 012: :si:•,2013" =rs20lii ;,c,.201,5 . m��Z016..3w a's 0 tg .-2:1 Residential 2,673 2,604 2,673 2,755 2,549 2,955 3,070 3,196 Non -Residential 1,522 1543 1,577 1,612 • '.1,642 1,670 3,694 1,720 Total All Buildings 4,195 4,148 4,249 4,367 • 4,491 4,625 4,769 4,915 Percent afUtdity Forecast „4L44% ,:40.66% .:4134% :4215% :43.01%0 `44,00% 45:04% 46.17% i201,3r. i r 014". !k3� .2016„Y..¢24111 2618 rzo� F 2(29:` 6,109 6,372. 6,672 7,008 7,375 7,775 8,207 8,672 7,057 -7,215 ; 7,350. 7,476 7,582 . 7,697 7811. 7,927'; 13,166 13,586 14,023: 14,484 14,958 :15,471 16,018 16,599 33.28%. 1:33.62% 33.94% . _34.4I94 , 34:944 35.63% 36.34°4 37.11%`I Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential 4,104 - 3,456 lion -Residential .r. 6,581 ''x:6659 Total All Buildings ' 10,685 10,115 Percent of Utility Forecast ' :28.87% ,,;26 18/0 Demand Potential (kW) Residential 2,026 1,939 1,985 2,039 Non -Residential 1442 ;1461 :1492 1,526 Total All Buildings - .3,468 - 3,400 .- 3,477 3,565 Percent of. Utility Forecast 34.26% ; ", 33.33°A 33,82% 34;41% 3,629 fi,802 10,431 26.3794 42,09 '.1-4 3,837 •: ', 6;955 10,792 26.71% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) �y p F>g�. ��j j?, ytt y Yi£:y.. .Lry�.ro} ^�wS4A1 i iii lQ ..§:it$�:�50iirg11i 4Vlis .�"sir z(it Residential 19 10 Non -Residential '53 Total Ail Buildings 72 67 Percent of. Utility: Forecast 0.20% -017% 57 .. 3013 � 12 b a 13 64 75 75 88 0.19%. Demand Potential (kW) is axl i:1i.sef. 0r. Pd B ` i,,, CO .30124 A o al c Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings ' Percent of Utility: Forecast 7 6 6 12 19 18 20 24. 27 0.18% - ; 0.18% 0.20°4 0.23% 026% 3,332 ,1,745 5,077 47.41%.: 3,478 . 1,771 5,249 48.72°4 :61511F-1 7.0101EitignilaiNtSidl 1703 4,075 4,341 4,632 4,948 5,290 7,085 7,206 7,309 7,419 7,530 11;160 11,547 11,941 12,367 12,820 13,299. 27:.61% 27 43% 27.89`/° 5,658 7,642 20 0 2,102. 2,172 2,249 2,332 2,422 2,520 1,554 1;581 1,603 ;1:,628 1,652: 1,676')lc 3,656 3,753 3,852 " 3,960 4,074 4,196 35,01%;: 35.70% 36,41% 37.20% 38.65% 38:95%:!!. :0:22% 15: "' 17 91 100 108 A UOMM A�.,.A 049.:5 xEr A2 ' • 19 20. 21 22. 94 96 - 98' 113 0.24% 0.26% 0.26% 235 116 -'.119 -121 0.27% . 0.27% ; 0,27/ 11 , , - 14 15 . 15 15 20 20 21' 21' ' -31 . 34 36 36.... 0130°/ 0;32% 0;33,% 0.34%0 0.34°10;'. 37. Residential Non -Residential Total Ail Buildings Perce nt tifUtdity Fore cast Demand Potential (kW) ee 1r,6ect41:,p.4r1, :rE ».: HEALDSBURG Energy Efficiency Program Targets 700 600 500 = 400 S 300 200 100 0 e 2011 MWH 420 % of Load Forecast .- 0:51%. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings. Percent of Utility Forecast`; Demand Potential (kW). t r?: rs,; a ap "SAi,'t0i'.:..,.ie s : Residential Non -Residential Total Alt Buildings Percent of.Utility Forecast 2012 2613 2014 2015 - 2016 2017 2016 2019 2020 420 420 515 557 0,45% =:040% 0.49% 0.52% .:0:56% 0.57% 0.57%, 603 614. 617 617 457% 614 0.56%:: { *111111Y.tiV. 1 .ROOM ¢ ..2oRill 13,500 13,481 : 15,081,. ' 16,725 18,409 20,132 21,883 : 23,669 25,489 ' 27,344 „13,648 ;j;15,483 15567 15,668 15,758 15,847 15,905 15,985 16,060 16,134;. 27,348 ,.28,964 30,648 32,393 34,167' . 35,979: 37,788 39,654 41,549 43,478 33.25% ;31.07% ;'2905%0 ;39.54°! 32.00% 33.51/ 34.99`/ 36.59% 38.14% 39.73%;_'. 32UAllerifitU iiS A1t..,;ij`Ia . 9, ' 2020:.../ 5,668 6,090 6,774 ' 7,478 8,198 8,936 9,685 10,449 11,228 12,022 3,346 d: 3,747 3,768 3,792 3,814 3,836 3,850 3,869 '3,887: 3,905 9,014 9,837 10,542 11,270 _12,012 12,771 13,534 -;14,318 15,115 , 15,927 4L9b/o ° .;4264%.,.. 4334% :46:24% :'48.75% .,51.56% 5439°/ 57.28% 60.20°( 63,26°1;£ Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) a. I'1g<-%�-.: ekectb; saes ..'. Residential 7,750 7,183 Non -Residential Total A11 Buildings Percentof Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) 0w a { 3 ;13,136 1;14,676 20,886 21,860 • ;•2540°/ 2145%. : 2, Residential 3,679 3,693 Non Residential 3,098 3,467 Total Ali Buildings 6,776 7,160 Percent of Utility Forecast ,(:31,55% ?,31,93%, Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ,,red Miliftla 101 - 5,1 61 318 368 - ;.394 Si 419 422 - . . . •.455 051%` _0.45% 0.4330 >`1.01 .., ea 2014 'S'r,4s 44.0K Aorm la t SDI$ : E 1 k MOO 8,106 9,055 10,027 ;14,757 . 14,853 1.4 938 22,863 :23,908 24,965 21.67/ ' 11,021 12,032 .; 13,063 14,113 - 15,183-,. .15;022 ' 15,077 ' 15;153. 15,223 15,294 26,044'.,`27,109 28,215 29,336 30,477 2425% 25.10%' 26.03% 26:93°/0 2785°/ • Qf7, _ ©18.... 3,949 4,213 4,482 4,759 5,039 5,325 13,486 3,508 -;3,529 3,549 • 3,562 .3,579 7,435 7,721 ' 8,011 . 8,307 ' 8,601 8,905 30.57% , 31;68/0 Residential 35 14o n -1t es iit ent i a1 74 Total All Buildings 108 Percent of Utility Forecast 85 _: 114'_ '0.49°1 76 84 88 92 475 514 520 - 520 552 ' 598 609 612 0.52% 0.56% ' 0.56% 0;56°4 . 31 35 42 49 55 90 100 108 117 120 122 136 150 166 175 0,5051 x10.56/ O.61% 0.67% 0.70°/a 236 5,617 - 5,914 '' 3,596': 3,613 9,213 9,527 36:69% :37,8414' WO: ` 2419.; ar.2A2Q s€ 59 60 60 121 1211::' 180 181 181 0.72% 0.72%0 0.72% c: HERCULES Energy Efficiency Program Targets 180 160 140 120 Y 6o 100 60 40 20 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 MWH 75 of Load Forecast''. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 6dz ..:_.%4-...I Sectoiia .°µii¢s ...61E. Residential Non -Residential • Total AU Buildings PercentafUtility Fatecast . . '. Demand Potential (kW) 74 86 - 102 113 044% ;I044% .:'.0.54°.' :0.55% 122 '130 137 0,56% 0:55% 0.54%° 2019 2028 145 153 0.53% 0.52/ 1,527 1,483 1,829 2,283 , 2,860 ' 3,576. 4,449 • 5,499 6;749 :8,225 '.5;772 6,937 6,313 6,602 6,905: .7,221 dl` 6,409 6,529 7,106 :41.02% .],3914% li.39,86% 21 Residential - 272 274 Non -Residential 1,198 .;,:::1,240 Total All Buildings 1,471. 1,514 PercentofUtiitty F <41.87V `38.82°6 Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non Residential Total Ali Buildings Percent ofUtility. Forecast Demand Potential (kW) ia 'F�.v`'%sgi304d.C1.1F.Ti;pr?FF�ss,;,.z Residentinl Nan Residential Total All Buildings Percent 8orecgst, .-, Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ,n=al Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) • ,1.1;3 ,;;;. Sesfer; Res idenfiat Nan -Residential . Total All Buildings Percent ofUtility Forecast :7,802 ":8,632 9,613 - 10,762 12,101 -.13,653 15,446 40,89% 42:22% 43:82% 45.66% 47.72°4 49.97%0 52.39%.- a'2014.> 340 426 537 673 840 1,041 1297 ,1,357 ;1;419 .1,484 ' 1,552 11,623 1,637. - 1,783 , 1,956 2,157 _-.'2,392 2,664 3780°% 38.48% , 39.38°1 40,49% 41;78% 43.24% FloreiN4.oimiodo ifala 1,437 1,378 - 1,704 ' 2,132 • -2,675 '.,3,349 ;4,171 4,371 4,512 i 5;397 '5,645 5,808 5,890 -:6,422 7,066 • '7,836 8,746 • 9,815 37.18/, :.•35.31% -:3602/° . ::3.7.63% 3832% .39.87/° 41:6436 17A.`;RT12, '. ;'20I3 0'14 ? 20"13. 232: 223 ' 275 : 343 429 537 987 ;.,1,020 .1,067 :'1,116 -;1,167 .. • 1,220 1,219 1,243 1,341 .1,458 -- ` 1,596 - 1,757 :34.71% "31.86%" :',30.97%.:'31147% .32.14% 32.97/o 14 7 -- 9 75 '74 -. 86 --. 0,48% .';.0,44% 0,49% 11- - 13 15 91 100 -...107. 102 • 113 122 '.0:55%' 0:56% 'own '. _ 668. .... L276 1,944 33'.95 5;159- 5,903 11,062 43.62% 018;, 825 1,334 2,159 35.66% 17. 19 113 118'? 130 137' 6.54°% 20'd 1,279 1,561 1,697. 1,775:;x:; 2,977 -' 3,336 44.85% 46.59%:.; 6,336 - 7,725 • 6,1T4 6,456.::` 12,509 14,182 45.7831 ' 48.10%,., 1,012 1;396. 2,408 36.28% 1,234 1,459:'._', 2,693 37 61%' �2,020R : 25 123: b 128 ' '. 145 - - 153 0.53% 0.52%':-:. I�:].....: "70.1.13474R.! & ;.,.5014 3._ s...,`_1,P19 ..... 1996 ... 4170 2 . . . I - '.'2 . - 2 2 _ '.. ,2 __ 3 ;' 3 .. 4'. 4 _. 28..,..... . ... .24.'.`._ _<.:30.. :. 16 C;.. 16 - 19 23 :-25 . : 28 30 31 - - 33 34 0.46% .x,042% .044% '.0.49% ;051% .0:52% 0.52/, 9.50% 0.49%% 0,4534 237 IID Energy Efficiency Program Targets 35,000 r 30,000 25,000 • 20,000 S 15,000 10,000 5,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 • 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWD. 19,743 16,480 18,381 21,281 24,147. 26,614 27,674 :28,234. 28,576 28;910 % of Load Fore cast 2:0.51/ 0:42% 1.0.46% 0:52% 0:58/ 063% 0,64°/1 0,64/ 0.63/ 0.63/ Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) eUt9t4-d'Er ` 2;61 ..! 21•40.1111E,;x;2013..-5 ;Ei 414n u2©i5y 2`00. Residential 374,612. 343,890 355,007 367,910 382,634 399,213 Non -Residential ;i, 95,292.:1,202,446 1,225 957 "1,249931 1,274,380 1,299,314 Total All Buildings 1,569,905 1,546,337 1,580,963 1,617,841 1,657,014 1,698,526 Percent of Utility Forecast 40.64/1 • . 39.27% 39.38/q- :39.52% • '39.71%, 39;92°/4 Demand Potential (kW) s iRri.aIAei't0Yr3th7:is Residential N en-Residentlai Total Al] Buildings Pereenl05lltility Forecast 171, xx .-..:'..0T9.4.11-141;452/044 Se 417,681 438,075 460,432 424,788 1,324,741 I,350;673 1,377119 1,404,089 1,742,422 1,788,748 1,837,550 1,888,877 ° . .. %: 49;16%1 40;44% 40.74! 4I.0$/;,'. 154,136 150,435 153,476 157,015 161,061 165,623. 170,712 _ 176,337 182,508 189,237 240,154 241,657 246,381 251,199 256,113 261,124 266,234 271,446 276,760 282,181 394,290 392,092 399,858 39.59% 38.81% ' 38.80% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ',,�OI3^ $R S ctn..s,}" aE Residential Non -Residential Total Alt Buildings •Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) a NTAMPWA Residential Non-Resideniial Total A1I Buildings P ercentofUtility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) __ 1 Sectat .- ai Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent efUtility Forecast, Demand Potential (ItW) Pfei';.aF4117AWtOi "..__ °E'.?"a:»'„ Residential - . . Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent ofDORY: Forecast 408,215::417,174 426,747:,436,946 447,782 459,269 471,418 38.83% 35.91% '.38.84% .43.94% ',44.87% 45.86% 46.90%.', 1,3401i24 giMAIN1124:01M €2016 �E 350,026 317,995. 327,564 338,673 351,352 ..365,632 381,541 399,111 1,145,692 1,151,878 1;174,398 1,197,364 1,220,785 1,244,670 1,269,028 1,293,869 1,495,718 1,469,873 1,501,962 1,536, 037 1, 572,1371,610, 301 1,650,569 1,692,980 38.72% 37,32% 37.41% 37.52% 37.67% 37.8454 38,05% 38:27% 201. .111 20t2.EE.,;e. 2013,.,..1 411 Mi5 :'. E2 yo 135,344 130,165 131,457 132,971- . 134,711 - 136,681 231,903 _,233,244 237,804 242,455 247,197 252,034 367,247 363,409 369,261 375,426 381,908 389,715 35:88°/1 35:97°! ; 35.113% 35.71% 35.62% 35.,38% ,;2Q3g- WOO 418,374 439,362. 1, 319,203 .1,3,45,0391; 1,737,577 1,784,401 38,53% - 38.81%.. 138,886 : ` 141,329 ' 144,016 ' 146,952 256,966 261,996 267,126 ':'272,357}' 395,852 403,325 411,142 419,309 41:05%, 4L72% 39;80% 40:4.1%0 y' 20135 ,812012 °.2'013":; 2U `4 TOYOR:. 2016. , 1..2.4 .2Q}8., 1, ` 4 1 b X02:4. w 9,724 5,948 6,570 7,416 10,019 - 10,532 11,811 13,865 19,743 16,480 18,381 .21,281 0.51% 042% 0.46% :.0:52% 8,543 9,465 9,757 9,753 9,527 9,287 15,605 17,149 ,17,917 „,18,481 19,050 19,623 24,147 - 26,614 27,674 ' 28,234. 28,576.. 28,910 .0.58%....-0;63/0 0.64% 0,64% 0.63% 0:63% 2,730 2,149 2,305 - 2,602 2,053 2;165 2,426 E 2,834 4,783 . 4,313 4,731 5,436 • 0:48% :0.43°/ ;0.46°/ :":0:52% 238 .:291C_, 3401:MInf2a 3,077 ` 3,645 4,033 4,094 3,926 3,743 3,170 ,3,479 3,637 3,750 3,863 3,977'. 6,247 7,124 7,670 7,844 7,790 7,720 .0.58% 0.65% : , '0:77°/n .:0.79% 0.78% 0:77% LASS EN Energy Efficiency Program Targets 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 1.,. 400 400 200 0 2011 .2012. 2013. MWH 375 - % of Load Forecast .:0,25% 2014 2015 ` 2016 - 2017 2018 -2019 2020 3'75 375 501 650 ..'849 ''1,043 ':1,177 1,203 1,219 0,25/0, :0,24%5 =x.0:32/5 x;'0.4.1°/a ];0:54% Ia65% 0.73% a.74% 0.74%�.?. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential 62,371 59,380 Non -Residential ' • , 37,128 ,37,095 Total All Buildings 99,499 96,475 97,735 Percent of Utility Forecast 65.99% s 63.36% ,5:63.57% Demand Potential (kW) Residential- 14,918 - - 13,570 13,805 - 14,089 14,425 - -14,812. Non -Residential "r 6,911 .'-;6,912 ;',6,980 .�'�:7,049 • ':7,119 7,18$ Total All Buildings 21,829 20,483 20,785 21,138 21,543 22,000 Percent.ofUtility Forecast 7168% :'x6654% :' 66.81% 67.22% - 67.78% 68.49%, 2 2Q1' OZQ q 60,275 61,364 62,650 64,133 65,817 67,701 69,790 72,083 37,460 ;,37,829 38;201 ' ; ;38,577 38;957 139,341 • 39,728 40,119, 99,193 700,851- 102,711 104,774 107,042 109,518 112,202 63.89% ,64:32/0 64;57°/ '65.52/ 66.29% 67.16%5 : :68.14% : Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) • '; N: Sfof . „;W KK z201i Residential 40,536 > 37,435 Non Residential 31,526 :31,438 68,873 Percent ofUtility Forecast 4780% 4524% Total All Buildings 92,061 Demand Potential (kW) n.• nm:.g?a lT§:4ta1311"s"41 x Residential Non -Residential Total Alt Buildings Percent ofUtility Forecast Market Potential 1:111 15,250 15,742. 16,286 16,883 7,259 7,331 7,403 7,476 22,510 23,072 23,688 24,359 6933% 70.31% 71.42% 72.66% ?t)13,, 214.:dqa0.)th , R4.011q1 tl2 E 37,876 38,414 39,051 39,787 . 40,624 41,561. 42,600 43,742. 31,747 32,060 ,;32,375 • 32,694 33,016 33,341 33,669 . 34,001:; 69,623 70,474 :'71,427 72,481 73,640 74,902 76,269 77,743 45.28% 45:39% 45.55V :45:78% 46,05%....46,39% 46.77'3' 47.21%? _ __ -_ 1 P rar cxrs u. m. �o� � :�€ .,. a6a? � �.:%. � : .r 11,143 : 9,825 . ;_ 10,012 10,239 . 10,507 10,816.. 11,166 '_ 11,558 • 6,170 5,164 , 6,224 6,286 6,348 " 6,414 6,473 6,537 17,313 15,989 16,237 - 16,525 • 16,855 • 17,226 17,639 18,095 56:85% : 51.94%' :,52.19% '52.55% 53.03% 53.63% 54.33% • 55.14% Energy Potential (MWh) {,zni3 g 3eeiar `'a u€ : 3 e.'2011 2012 e,.._, 10131„', 2014',, Residential 316 198 236 302 Non -Residential 137 • 145 164 194 Total All Buildings 453 . 343. 400 496 Percent of Utility Forecast .0.3094 -•'023% :<10.26% D32% Demand Potential (kW) Residential 159 107 NoaResitlentinl 28 • 30 Total All Buildings 188 137 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.62% 0.44% 425 606 788 :'.216 ;:234 244 .-643 840 1,032. 0;41% 0.53% 0.65°% •116 • 128 -.143- -- 158 168-. 33 38 .. f43 46 48.' 149 I66 - '186 204 :216 .0,48% ;`0:53% 0;59% 0,64/0 0,67'/0. 239 11,991 12,467 6,601': 6 666 18,593 19,133 56.05% - 57:07%x.': iN.OZig NOWT M.0012-1 911 - 928 935 2531 . 262 272 £ '; 1,164 1,190. 1,206 0.721 , 0.73% :673% 225 230. 234 0.69°/0 0.69% 0.79°A 3' of Load Forecast. 049% Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) y :1No z E Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings -. Pettent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential .. . Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of i7tdity:Forecast LODI Energy Efficiency Program Targets 3,500 • 3,090 2,500 • 2,000 • 1,500 1,000 000 n - 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 MWH 2,296 1,667 1,905 2,242 .2,587 2,873 - 2,948 0,35% 0.39% 040/ -0.52/ :0:58% 0.593' 2018 - 2019 2020 2,985 3,019 3,053 0.59°/ 0.59% 0 59% : _Haig 21112,. 2013,.3.R. 014..,!. BlacfE: 261:36.. 2011 X41':$=.. 2919":. 2020 55,213 : 48,695: 50,109 51,719 ..53,514 55,500 57,642 - 59,951 62,425 65,065 _'127�b2 ;:1.27,291 ;128,327 1129543 ,130;695 .131,187 ,132,034 133,857 134,865: 135,581:'. 182,475 -175,986 -178,437' 181,262 :184,2-09 -.187,387 .190,476 193,808 197,291 200,947 38,63% '36.77%" :37.05% %37.3054 37.6154 37.0854 36:27% 18.66% 390$%., 1 ..:25,704 24,897 25,360 27,514 `'-27,526 „.;27,750;. ..:53,218.-.52,423 53,110 1:'43.03/ 14213/° Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential . Total All Buildings Percent ofUttlily Forecast Demand Potential (kW) ra2015,; i '2.01.6. ,.,.,2011.9 <,.,g2018s. .._2,0,tA.�..1 x,•2,92,05A 25,887 26,477 - 27,131) 27,835 28,596 . 29,412 . 30,203 ;:28,013 '.26;262 28,520 _28,725 28,94-& 29,164,: 29,384, 53,900 54,739- 55,650 56,560 57,542 58,576 59,666 42:53% .43.25% � 43;76°/ 44;28°4. 4486%q 45.47%, 46 12%-!: 43,512 36,105 .. :36,511 -7.36,976 .'37,497, =38,076 :'38,703 ".39,380' 40,106_ 40383•x ?..123,235 ,:123,222 124,225 ;125,402 126,517 ;127,671 128,586 129;578 130;554. 131,538 ,. 166,741 159,326 160,736 162,378 ,164,015 165,747 167,290 168,957-,170,660 172,421 35 305 33 17°. 33:12% 33:19°/ 3.3;21% 33;2614 _33.27°/a 33.36% :33.44% 33.53% tass .017a,_r 13 Residential Non -Re sidentiol Total All Buildings Percent_a('.Utdtty .Frecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWit) ?. `I 3. cli `„"$ee3'r 4' 2 c a,;?�s:. 1,. ._r`.n.e 0,5,5 $14.014 Vj54`2OL$3'�-,-'90 "41 a. �:at11>l�_ ,�a, � Residential - - 1,227 520 609 699 792 852 . 864 Non -Res ide ntiol 1,069 _'r 1,147 1,296 1,544 1,795 2,021 2,085 Total All Buildings - 2,296 1,667 1,905. 2,242 - 2,587 2,873 2,948 PercentofUiility Forecast ,_0.49% .;0.35% .0139% 0.46% . 0.52! --..0.58% 0:59°/ 3'3201,tf m_E,.-2,015��€ 201.6 .. 0'1" c 12910 11,983 ':'.12,307 .12,675 13,087 13,543 14,034 _ 14,564_ 15,131 15,737 26,485 ;'26,486 26,702 " 26,955 .• 27;195 27,443 127,610 27,852 28,062 28,274 '. 39,395 '38,469 39,009. 39,630 40,282_ 40,935 41,674 42,416. :"43,194 44,011 31.85% 30.92% • 2'31.17%. :31,49%: '31.83°f 32.23°1° -32:b3% .133.07% 33.53°%' 34.02%:`:. Demand Potential (kW) '',,.rf g.5' 11.1,8edtor.,e z 1 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent 0fTltility Forecast ...237 128 - 145 166 223 '.:x240 ':270 ,. 318 461 .367 415 -. . 484 0.37% ;,0,30% x,.0.33% :13.38'%. 240 866 866 864 2<I19,: 2,154 2,189 2,985 : 3,019- -3,053 0 59%' 0.595' 0.59% A, °A .>196 234 264 269 271, 272 364 403 419 . 431'-_ 442 1t, 454 560 - 638 683 : 700 :714 726 !Q44%-__ 0.5054 0.53% 0.55%%. 0.55.%.:.. 056%:': LOMPOC Energy Efficiency Program Targets 900 800 700 600 2 500 E 400 300 200 100 0 201.1 2012 2013 2014 • 2015 2016 MW14 517 336 % of Load Forecast _.0.36% ,023% Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 7t1.046`°" Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility:Eorecasl Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non Residential Total All Buildings PercentofUtility Forecast 395 0:27°/ 459 544 0.31% 0,37% 2017 2018 2019 2020 630 708 '760 776 785 0,43% ''0,48% 0,51/ >0:52/ 0.52/ i4 „ ;2 AR.4.4flAn 106 21,751, 17,368 17,829. . 18,358 ' 18,946 19,591 29,282 ..18,918 .;18,447 ,18,573 ,;18,709 ;,18,824 ; , 18,934 ::19,018 '40,669 _' 35,815 36,402 37,066 •`37,769 38,525 39,300 28.5754 24,89% „2508/0 '"25.3754 :25..66% 26.02%a 26.38% atag 82414N,I, .O:1.S,'a °z ,tii;6-y; 4,366 3,717 3,827 3,955 4,096 4,251 4,417 4,076 3,978 ;::4,005 4,034 4,059 4,083 4,101 8,442 7,695 7,833 7,989 8,155 8,334 8,518 32.71% ':'29.61% ' 29.96% , 30.42% 30.86% 31.41% 31.913% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings PercentofUtility Forecast,. Demand Potential (kW) Residential Nod -Residential ., Total All Buildings �2n1 21,023 21,813 19;113 19,207 19,301 40,136 . 41,020 . 41,955'. 26.83% .27.28% 27.77%; 71Q1..$`� , 724f18v 4,595 4,185. 4,987 4,122 4,142 4,162 8,717 8,927 9,149 32.60% 33.26"/ 33.96%-i: Itengfatiliag 18,948 14,829 15,171 15,563 16,000 16,479 16,992 17,543 18,130 18,755. 11,326 z 10,791 10,865 10,944 11,011,'. 11,076 ;.1,125 11,181 11,235 11,291 30,274 25,620 26,035 26,507 27,011 .' 27,555 ` 28,117 28,723 29,366 30,046 21.27% 17.80% :%17.94% 18:14/0 • :18.3536 18.61% 18.88% :19.20% .• ` 19.53% 19.88% 2411 i.600 Ez4a OZ4Oz.,o-a,O: , 15003 ,p 1124 s. 3,105 2,445 2,500 2,563. 2,516 2,406 2,422 . ..:2,440 5,622 . 4,850 4,922 5,003 5,088 5,180 5,274 , 5,375 5,482 5,595 Percentafi:Utdtty Forecast 21,78% ,18.68% 18.83°/ 19.05% } 19.25A , 19,52% 19.80%, 20.16% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ag 8 g"s.a.. Asa 8 for e.,;., ' d t 0 >as. s a -r g4 rs., €, rs?''�'_2i01 i,'w�`al`a�� 12::� Residential 356• 176 213 251 296. : Nun -Residential 161 „159 182 208 249 - Total All Buildings • 517 .. :336 395 459 544 Percent of Utility Forecast '056% 0.23% • 0.27% 0.31% -037°4 2,633 2,711 ' 2,793 2,882 2,977. 3,078 2,455 2,469 2,480 .. 2,493 2,505 2,517',i', Demand Potential (kW) 1,F2Q1:.y` 325 342 357 ;:305. 566 ' 630 708 760 0.43% 0.48°/ 0.51% .e.§ ee z91.t§`ia ».».9.16 „s €.:3 370 407, 776 0:52% 381, . 404 785 0,52%.'.;'' Residential 59 30 36 43 50 56, 58 60 62 , ' 64 Non=Residential ;' 33 33, 38 44 „-55 ]0 83i 911: 92 92 ' Total All Buildings 92 63 74 87 105 125 .: 141 . . 152 155 156 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.36% 0:24% 0.28% 0.33% 0.40% . 0.47% 0:53°! 0.57% 0.58% 0.581;:;:_ 241 MERCER Energy Efficiency Program Targets 2,500 2,000 1,500 z 1,000 500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2010 2020 MWA 1,316 % of Load Forecast 1: 0.27% ;0.22%_ Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) z4nec=1Y m...SeCtor 3.M11.1 Residential Nan -Residential Total All Buildings Percent Forecast` Demand Potential {kW) Nt.%tgrtlittggeirdili.7 Residential 6,951 Non -Residential 32,454 Total All Buildings 39,406 Percent :ofUtility Forecast 39,53% 15,469 ]70,817 186,286 38.69%` Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWhj gggnagkentRIE Residential - Non•Residential Total All Buildings. Percent of 604' forecast Demand Potential (kW) 1,117 1,258 1,483 1,765 2,054 - 2,143 2,191 2,242 - 2,297 0.25% 0.29% 0:33/ 038% 0.3.8.%1 0:38% 0.38% 0.3856 fi.,'.,-; 07:TI5TTOlit t°,, o-, 7, 14,342 15,370 16,538 17,851 19,313 20,926 . 22,695 24,623 26,714 .173,428 '177715 s 182113 186,624 1'191,252 ,-'196018 .200871:,':205,849 .210,949.' 187,770 193,085. 198,651. 204,475. 210,565 .2I6,944 223,568 230,472 237,663 3'2:31% ;38.21°/0 138.38% 38575' 38.75% ' 38:99°/0 6,926 7,260 7,641 8,069 8,546, 32,932 .:33,745 :34,581 35,437 36,3i6- 39,857 41,006 X42,221. 43,506 .'44,861 ;38.73 / 39.02% .39:23% ...39A63.1...!': 39.73% 9,072 37,221 46,293 40:03%. 9,650 38;143 47,792 40;34°% 24 202(1 10,279 10,962 39,088 40,056" 49,367 51,018 4(.68% 41.04%;; 011 .20 . _ ROM '=. 01 , ',400 m 42007 -' 24109E -Er ` NN 12,548 '11,178 11,925 : 12,774 ; 13,728 14,791 15,964 17,250 18,652- 20,172 166,332 168,846 ,173,020 .177302 181,694 :186,200 190,839.. 195,567 200;414 205,376,; 178,880 180,024" 184,945 190,076 195,422 200,990 .206,803- 212,817 219,063 225,548 3 7.15% 'i 3625°/ !36.45% 36.56/ ; 36;68%6 36,,82% 36:96% 37.11% 37.28%0 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh} Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Pereent.00Utility Forecast' Demand Potential (kW) Residential - - Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast 3,450 30,721 34,171 34.10% x2014 :v :2 . 1 201;6 ',,t0 '7="' 3,227 3,333, 3,454 3,590. 3,742 3,909 4,093 4,294. 4,512' ;31,161 31,931 32,721 -13,532::- 34;363 ;35;219 36,092 .36,986; 37,902;'.: 34,387 35,264. 36,175 37,121 - 38,105 39,129 40,185 41,280 -42,414 33 Al°/ 33.55/ 53.61% 33.67%0 " 33.75% 33.83% 33..9231 34.02% 34.12%;` 171402. ;ac213t?,. #>rc°4 3 3?a t 563 302. 335 - 374 , 422 752 - ,' 815 - ((.923 1,109 1,343 1,316. 1,117 1,258 1,483 1,765 0.27°! 0,22% 0.25% 0.29% 0;33% 0013 .,.:.x2114 128 ; .` 87 - 93 103 121 140 127 137 156 186 221 - : :259 255 224 249 289 - 342 399 ;0.25% 0.22% 0,24/° 0.27% 0.3i% 74t, 446 . 435 ' 421 410 1,608 1,709 1,770 '1,833 2,054 2,143 '.2,191 2,242 0.38% 0.38% 0.3894 0.38%, 242 iii p, o o N 4439=fm:: 491 1,896;'; 2,297. 0.38%o -''I'. 148 137 127 118 275 287 f 298 `= 310 423 424' 425 428 ,0.37% 0.36% 0.35%1' 0 34% ' MODESTO Energy Efficiency Program Targets 25,000 20,000 15,000 E 10,000 5,000. 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 - 2616 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWR 16,207 15,136 16,154 18,161 20,252 %afLoad Forecast .i , 0,63% ';058%:'; ':061% ,5'0,67% ,0;74/0 Technical Potential Energy Potential (141Wh) .i g . ":',A:,SeF 4r._. 4 x 1,2E-7',:,gJ 1t,...e:'�3191 „``-.:2033 °„ 2014, __201 Residential 231,289 203,694 211,003 220,274 231,565 Non -Residential ;566,855.'1:570,964 578,295 :1586,074 594,592 Total All Buildings 798,144 774,659 789,297 806,348 826,157 Percent ofUtility Forecast ;:'31.06% ,29.65% _'29.66% ;29.80% 30.02% Demand Potential (kW) N gi,RSIRMVOitKe Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent'of Utility Forecast 21,857 21,102 20,074 19,258 18,623 0;78/° 0174% 244,935 603,222 848,157 30.29°% agtilliTUferMalf 260,446 278,163 298,154 320,489 612;440 ':622,086 632,432 643,204::; 872,887 900,250. 930,586 963,693 30:64%. 31.02% 31.46% 3€.93%•:: cumj),T2» 301 , 101 , 11 S. ::; � ,016 *1 106,781 103,339 105,672 ,108,643 , ` 112,269 116,569 121,564 127,275 ' 133,723' 140,932 114,755 4`115,544 .,117,028 :1118,602 :;120,326 122072 •. 123,938 (125,890 127,983 130,163.:: 221,536 218,883 222,700 227,245 232,594 238,641 245,502 253,165 261,707 271,096 32.77°% -'31.77% 31.72% 31.74% 31.86% '32.08% -32.39% 32.67"/ '33.09°/ 33.55%` Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non Residendel Total Ali Buildings Percent ofUtility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential , Total All Buildings . . Percent of Utility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential. Total All Buildings Percent of :Utility Forecast 1;109,941: 188,678 :::551,541 740,219 ..::;28.81% 114 46:61M.TAIM IDAttil S' M 00E5 E,71Sifii,,E7MOIE 159,611 164,929 , , .171,678 179,900 555,41.3 562,544 ' :570,111 ;578,397 715,024 727,473 741,790 758,297 4737% " : ', 27.34%, :; 27.42% •,27;56°% 54,009 - 49,393 ' 50,134... . 51,082 52,243 110,655 ',112,076 1.113,584 :115,235 163,950 160,048 162,211 164,666 167,478 24.25% ':23.23% :23.11% 23.00% 22.94°% 2,760 1,499 1,695 .13,447 ':;13,638 ;1'14,458' 16,207 15,136 16,154 1,063% :=..0,58% 061/ Demand Potential (kW) a v xgiti ,x}Si i.SiK II.V.' ,-2, iiir2 lit Residential 646 Non -Residential : '. ; 2,563 Total All Buildings - 3,209 Percent of Utility Forecast - 0.47%..': 0] 189,639 200,938 ''213,846 228,411 , 244,686 586;792 595,759 605143 615,207 625,685_:, 776,431 796,698 818,988 843,618 870,371 27173% , 27.97% .2522% 28.52%n .003. eIalaRi 53,622 35,227 ' 57,064 59,141 61,464 116,907 118,694 120,563 122,568 124,656;' 170,530. 173,921. 177,627 181,709 186,120. 22;92% 22 91°/ 22:92°% 22:97°% ,23.03% 6.4u1tig oo 1,929 2,231 2,454. 2,511 2,550 2,586 2,622 16,232. :' 18,0,21 19,403 18,590 :17525 16,672 16,001! . . 18,161 20,252 21,857 : 21,102 :' 20,074 19,258 18,623 0,67% 0.74% 0.78% 0.74% 0,69% 0;65% 0.62% 453 498 .565 2612 -''2781 3;108. 3,065 3,279 3,674, 0.44% :.047% =0.51°% 243 falP11 : 2;OI 1 € 2U V 679 817- 910 3,409 3,622 .3.531 4,088 • 4,439 4,441 0.56/6 0.60% .0.59% bA 916 ' 914 911. 3,403 „ '5,300 3,218 4,320 4,214 4,129 0,56% 0,53,% 0,51%a} MORENO VALLEY Energy Efficiency Program Targets 350 -. 300 250 = 200 150 100 50 • 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 MWH 274 % of Load Forecast 0.31% Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 219 234 260 0.25% 0.26% 0.299 Residential 9,265 8,348 8,358 Non -Residential 3,306 3,268 3,268 Total All Buildings ' 12,571 11,616 11,625 Percent( of utility Forecast .1421% `:13.13°/ :';_13.14% Demand Potential (kW) r T,E2r S41"00:. ¢. 9(11 141 Residential 3,986. -' 3,842 - 3,844 Non-Residen(ial 796 ' 787 - :787 Total All Buildings 4,782 4,629 4,631 Percent Forecast 24,90% `.'24,11%' 24.12% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential ' Total All Buildings Percent of Utddy Forecast Demand Potential (kW) ...:. iNti„ ile,S,IAF,ri. Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent, of Utility, Forecast 1514%0. ;114,35% Market Potential 2017 2018 2019 2020 288 304 292 276 261 247 01331 0.341 _:0.33% 0.31% 10.29% 90.28%` 32Q14...':._7,11151. .,�2016r.€?..2017 2418 ...,82414 {.21.E 9 -£ 8,371 8,387 . ` 8,408 8,431 8,458 - 8,489 : 8,523 3,268 3,268 I., `:3,268 .,. 3,268 3,268 3,2682 3,268 11,638 :31,655: 1 1,6 75 11,699 11,726- 1I,757 11,791 13.16% 13:18% 13'20% ::13.231° )3.26% , 13;29°/4 13.33%; 20,14...3. 2015.w._P aS.2016 2017 n 3,846 3,850 3,855 3,860 ;;':787 787 7$7 787 4,633. 4,637 • ', 4,642: 4,648 2413% ' :24.15°1° 24,18% 24.21%a 3,867 3,875 3,884 .787 787'e 787 4,654 4,662 4,671 24,24% 24:28% 24:33%"'. 5: 1? 1 ROTOR TyO[,' `' _' ]]0 c a `` " 0 4 ate? DI 311:6 Oi.'f Y4f8'°- 21:9 ° `202 maa Sa ,.�., engirt w,$"� il�:G?az�.cc' :!t 7,971 7,053 7,059 7,069 3,251 3,212 'I3,2I2 3,212 11,222 10,265 10,271. 10,281 12,69%. 's 11.60% 1:1161/0 ::.11.62% 2,126 - 1,981 782 r 773 2,907 2,754 Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings . Percent_ofUtdity Forecast is Demand Potential (kW) 3»'>lth.3.-, :61:°9 9: r Residential Nan -Residential Total Ali Buildings Of1€l 147 96 274. 219 0.31% 0.25%: 7,081 7,096 7,113 7,133 7,156 7,182 3,212 3x12 3,212 3,212 3,212. 3,212 y, 10,293 10,307 - 10,325 ., 10,345. 10,368 10,394 11.64/° 11.1,65% '11,67% 11,70% 11,72% 11,75% • IWiO46 "3 I7 2018 20. 1,981 1,981` E 1,982 ' 1,9$3. 1,985 '1,987, 1,989 1,992 773 773 ;773 773 773 773 773; 773','.:' 2,754 . 2,755 2,755 2,757 2,756 .1,76 0 2,762 2,765 P 1)13 014. tigiliAN 107 123 146 163 127 137 143 141.. 234 260 288 304 0.26% . 0.29% 1:0.33% >'.0.34% 162 160 157 155 129 116 103: 92 292 276. 261 247 0.33% 031% 029% 0.28% 29 28 29 31 33 - 34 31 281 25:' 65 56 59 66 75 84 84 78 ' 73 0.34% : ' 0.29% 0.31% ;: 0.34% 0.39% 1344% 0.44% 0.41% 0.38% 244 NEEDLES Energy Efficiency Program Targets 400 350 300 250 z too 160 2011 2012 2013 2014 -2015 2016 2017 2019 2019 2020 • MWH 205 160 181 ' . -2I1' V. of Load Forecast 0.33% .0.25% - :::0.27% ;'10.30°%:' Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) a?v::s:`riG..a;,. r'.ea�S@F.FU,Tgvli ys lfd.I'..k :7�1Y,��:.�tl', Residential 7,617 7,085 Non -Residential - i'.: 15,079 :,; 15,510 Total All Buildings 22,695 22,595 Percent of Utility. Forecast 36.28% „',34651 .. 246. -280 299 312 323 334 - 033% 036% 0.37% 0:37°% 0.37% 037% DOME 7,442 7,881 8,405 : 9,019 16,169 ;'16,857 '.17,573 18,321 23,611 24,738 25,979 ` 27,339 ".34.73% 34.90% 35.16%:. :':35.49% 11141P4 9,725 10,527 '19,099 79,912- 28,824: ; 30,439 35.89%' 35:35!0 Demand Potential (kW) MINEIRMWERit s:?.� s :l.` 7011; ... ,e:,201.2e, . 013,.,°® ,e;' 4'i..,i IOW* ,,, s}21,116'? g'2.( Residential 3,103 3,051 3,148 Non -Residential ".2,860 2,942 :''-3067 :'. Total All Buildings 5,963 5,993 6,215 Percent of Utlity Forecast 28.47% i 2733% 27.06%' Economic Potential Energy Potential (N1Wh) =A x,3scenxa : x 3,266 3,408 3,574 3,766 3,197 3,333 3,475 3,623 6,463 ;- 6,741 7,049 `. 7,388 26,88% 26.78% .'.26.74% <'26.76%." Residential - 7,141 6,572 6,881 7,262 7,716 Non -Residential • °:14,240 :`'14,636, 15,258 15,907 16,583 Total Ali Buildings 21,382 21,208: 22,139 ` 23,168 - 24,299 25,535 Percent of Utility Forecast 3418°1 - 32.52%...:3257°/ 32.69% 32..89% 33.15%, Demand Potential (kW) Residential - - 2,742 , -. 2,648 Non Residential 2,721 • , 2,797 Total All Buildings . 5,462 5,445 Percent' of Utility Forecast, 2608% !24.83%`:, Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) %" " E- ectoialtrig;" Residential - - '149 . I00- 112 128 Non Residential 55 60 . .': 69 83 Total A[1 Buildings 205 169 181 211 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.33% 0,25% 0 27% °:0.30% 2,691 _ 2,744 2,808 2,916 • ;3,040 3,169 5,607 5,784 5,977 24A2% ,;24.05% 23;74% Demand Potential (kW) Residential - tN'on-Residential : Total All Buildings Pe rcent of Utility Fore cast 8,247: 17,288 ..8,859 18,023 26,882 33:48% . 2024;:'. 11,430 12,438 20,758 21,641 32,188 .. 34,079 36,8810 37;45% 3,983 - 4,228 4,502 3,777 3,937 4,105 7,760 ..8,166 8,607 26.84% 26.98°% 27,15%.:.' 20 &Pia" 2Px9..,.,�921Z=" 9,554 10,337. 11,210 18,789 19,588 20,421 28,344 29,925 31,631, 33:86% 34.29°/ 54:7C%a': 2,882 ': 2,969 -- 3,067 : - 3,178 : 3,302 3;304 3,444 3,591 3;743 1903 6,186 6,413. 6,658 6,922 7,205 23`47% :23.23% 23.03% 22.07°/ 22.73%; 2115 L2.016. N2P1 .ing1R.10 sI g°& 0'19, 0 2026;, . 149 168 178 183 184 186 112 121 124 138: 148;: 246 280 299. .312 323 334 9.37° 0:36% 0.37% 0.37°/0 0.37°70 0:37% pp w 91 6 64.,014v5ri �Z'.Hh 7;Y'3'eie��aA A 48 41 45 51 60 70 79 81 80 79 11 12 13 16 19 22' 24 25 e 27 29.' :'`' 59 53 58 67 79 92 102 107 108 108 0,2.4%. <!025% 0.28% 031% . :'0.35/a 0,37% 0,370/0 0,36% 0.34%.l: 245 PALO ALTO Energy Efficiency Program Targets 9,000 1 8,000 7,000 6,000 • X 5,000 S 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2011 2012 - 2013 2014 2015' 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWH 5,799 6,290 6,782 7,276 7,906 7,927 7,950 7,973 7,999 8,026 % of Load Forecast 0.60% 065%,. 0.70%, 0.75% :0.80% 0.80% 0.80% 0;80% 0180% O.BO%.:' Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) o d R i x '-re8Y I i °a a ,M .1 Ez " a?= #,a:,�..z,....See19r.6�t?s`')„r�.-,:i�fia,P�01?,eer. �,2it12, �2Q1$:,.€� 2.OI4`j..,�¢;"ti0lr�ss' s��4.�fztcr ?a2tli.�`i....24$ �<2hF9,a,r3;2d,24;:' Residential 46,0€4 38,229 38,210 38,190 38,168. 38,145 38,122 38,100 38,078 38,055 Non -Residential" 235,333 :',233,297 X13,317 ,;233,337. 233,696 233,746. 233,957 234,742 235,580 236,477 Total All Buildings ; 281,347 271,526 271,526- 271,527 '-271,864. 271,890 272,080 272,842: 273,658 274,532 Percent of Utility Forecast 28.95% ,28.09'4."28.06%' •,28:02% 28.02% 27.51% 27.46% 27.46°/ = 27:96%0 27.46%:; Demand Potential (kW) tOfraa 11 ''191, 9.20 0,1 6 Residential 17,456 16,237 16,228 16219, 16,209 16,198 16,188 16,178 16,168 16,158 Non Residential 61009 60,592 60,594 „ 60,597 60,638 60,643 60,692 60,896 61,113. 61,3461': Total All Buildings 78,465 76,829 "76,822 76,816 76,846 76,842 : 76,881 `. 77,074 77,281 77,504 Percento€Utility Forecast •40.66% :41102% .'39:8094 39,80% .39.82°/0 39.61% 37.875' 37.78% 37.70% 37,81%;;. Economic Potential Energy Pote of ial (MWh) � :'i6�`P ` , v;W'.•`.%p�£ta* : ac�%, �t ,'.#: U .Y?..ii ]%"., , 012,; �. 8J1 `P € �"`2d14. 'rra'.t? 1 3 $' c. �13, 8�@ a1) .' 0)..8 gaE2019' Residential . 4I,878 34,095 34,077 34,060 r 34,039 , 34,018 :' 33,998 31,978 33,957. . 33,937. Non-Residentlal 226,473 ;224,437 .224,457 1:224477 224,837 224,886 225,091 • 275,846 ' 226,653 227,516 Total All Buildings 268,351 258,532 258,534 258,536 258,876 258,904 259,089 259,824 260,610 261,453 PQreentof-Htility Forecast ' 27.6210 126,75✓0 .26.7234 26.68%' 26..69%'; 26.20%0 E., 26.15% 26.15% 26,15% 26,15%.'',; Demand Potential (kW) `a39� c uz s '� ' .,a =da' s u,' L a F *qei ra 7' Is6 "° ��:� �,zA,M,.O.,�'ec el„,a �;sztir� r�_zo1z�„p.� �,4�,�,,.,�4„�7,��4.>�E�.2i#i5 :sEr�20"i'�a:sE3��i01;�;,����3s � Via_?4�P.,�k Residential. 10,152 8,937 8,931 8,924 8,918 8,911 8,905 8,898 . 8,892. Non -Residential 57,015 56,598 56,601 56,603 56,644 ' 56,650 56,696 , 56,886 57,089 57,306 Total All Buildings 67,167. 65,535 65,531 65,527 65,562 65,561 65,601 -I"65,784' 65,981 : 66,192 Percents futility Forecast ':34.80% 34.13% 33,95% 33,95% .'33.97/ -3279% 32.32'/ ' 32.25% 32,19°4 32.29%,:6 Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) r x ;$140l ee.(ti t ". a a o 23%1.1,.>m 1017.:;-? 4hk3 F aiihN elakatupt4tWitAtalive,„201 Residential 1,596 1,070 .`, 1,220 1,378. : 1,553 1,625 1,552 1,463 1,368 • 1,269 Non -Residential 4,079 , [5,105 " '',5,655 6,542 - 7,286 7,654 .7,586 7,445 • 7282: Total All Buildings 5,675 6,175 6,875 - 7,920 8,839 9,279 • 9,138 8,908 8,650 8,368 Percent ofljtillty Forecast 458% 0.64/ 0,71/° •I a82/o 0.91% 0;94°/a Q:92%a 0:90% 0.$N/°_ 084%`.:h_ 8,885 Demand Potential (kW) r"EIPzc..: "'..:,S.eeCt 1?m2013 .a=? 2004, ,.�.2 :1 , �l#.20-1tl.a� .w: 017 . a 01t¢ra 3-x,'2019 4__2020 Residential ",on•Residential , Total All Buildings - - Percent oftlt,lily Forecast. : • 377 . 316 • 343 377 428 467 .: '459 • 418 376 . : 337, -, 1,261 1,398 1,611 7;718 1,863 1,858 ;83 1,000 9 1812'> 1,377. 1,578 1,741 - 1,986 ' 2,206 2,330 2,318. 2,257 2,188 2,114 • • •;0.8296 •0,9 39 '• .1:03% . 1.14% - " 1:20% 1[14'/ 131% 1.0734 1.03% 246 PASADENA Energy Efficiency Program Targets 20,000 18,000 • 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 • 4,000 2,000 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 M WR 14,500 14,500 14,500 17,500 : .r 17,500 17,500. 17,500 . 17,500 . 17,500 17,500 % of Load Forecast :1.15% 1:13% 1.12% L33% L31% 1.29% 1.27% %1.25% % ;' 1.23% 1.22%',, Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) X015 01# ,.,,2017 201 ; :201 ,x? 202 Residential 5,280 3,520 3,830 4,114 4,400 4,385 4,064 3,759 3,483 3,259 Non -Residential 8,831 9,261 10,198 - 11,777 12,929 ' 'r 13,6$0 13,861 13,908 13,955 13,996 Total MI Buildings 14,112 12,781 14,028 15,891 17,329 18,065, 17,925 17,659. 17,437 17,255 Percent; ofUtility '<Forecast:< 1.12% 1.00% 1.08% , 1.21% 1.30% ° "133% 1.30% 1.26% 1,23%. 1.20% Demand Potential (kW) Wifitia Residential 1,086 829 870 920 1,009 1,480. ' 1,059 937 835 754 Non -Residential , 2,070 • 2,179 2,399 2,762 3,033, • 3,226 3,284 3,307 3,327 3,345 Total All Buildings 3,156 3,009 3,268 3,682 . 4,042 4,306 4,343 4,244 4,163 4,099 Percent;ofUtllity Forecast 1.01% 0.94% 1.00% .. 1.12% 123% 1.30% 1.31% 1.27% L24% . 1.22% 247 �1��.i PITTSBURG POWER/ISLAND ENERGY Energy Efficiency Program Targets 70 60 50 = 40 30 20 10 2011 2012 2013 2014 20I5 2016 . 2017 2019 2019 2020 MW11 42 % of Load Forecast -.:0.23%a Technical Potential Energy Potential (MAW Residential NenResidential Total All Buildings Percent, of. Utility Forecast:: Demand Potential (kW) .»,.,E„ X04:. Sc4tgr e Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility. Forecast: 37 40 46 55 021% 'CO22/ 0:26/ 0:30% 64 64 62 60 59 0:35% " 0.35% :.934%° '.:'0.33% 0.32%p: .'. ss 1112.. , ,.s 2013 ?.Ql °S 4.41 ",3 1: 9fG 017 550 550 551 552 > 553 554 556 : 558 7,494 ' ':'.7,494 7,494 7,494 7,494 7,494 7,4941 7,494 8,043 8,044 8,044 8,045.. 8,046 ;. 8,048 8,049 8,051 44.54% :144.54% 4455% '44.55% • 44.56% ,44.57% 44.58% 44.58°% 308 293 1,782 , .,,` 1,768 2,090 2,061. 4644'% : ,45.79% Economic Potential Energy Potential (WWII) St.cfoi;l 2012 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings PercentnfUtility Forecast,, Demand Potential (kW) Residential . 151 _Von -Residential 1702 Total All Buildings 1,853 Percent of:Utility Forecast 41.17°/ 7,424 7,943 ['43.98%1 Market Potential Energy Potential (l [Wlt) y }':m PI ".oE?'sxa Sectolr'. .Ia ."s"",,..c ,z ai�014t,,:,�d.2012 E�� ;.? 013 ..�, .. 01rt_:ii::,4 2.20.1 , rio.36 1201 ,nE Ri s :1 g „2039„ �s792V,.,ea Residential 13 7 8 9 11 11 11 11. Non -Residential 29 30 • 32 ; 37 , 44 52 52: „ 51'' Total All Buildings 42 37 49 46 55 64 64 62 Percent of Utility Forecast 023% 021% . :' 0.22% 0.26% ,:0.30% . '0:35°/ 0:35% 0.34°4 4044.,. €r 011 560 7,494' 8,053 43;40% 293 293 294 294 . 294 295 295 296 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 2,061 2,061 . 2,061 ' : 2,061 2,062. 2,062 2,063 2,063 45.80% ,,45.80% 45.80% 45.81% 45.82% 45,93% 45:84% 45.85%' X2014 , v' ' q14 9 01 1 44454 �'•x2t 17 ,. ,,33i8, %E,i3019 iry. `2020 425 425 425 426 427 428 429 - 430 ` 432 ;7,361 "7,361 • ,7,361 7,361 7,361 7,361- .7,786 7,786 7,786 7,787 7,788 7,789 7,790 7,791' , 7,792 4311% %43,12/ ;43.12%' 43:12/° 43.13% `43.13% 43;14%/° 43.14° 43.15%' 11.?.:1.°4 136 : 136 '136: .: 136 '.1,688 :1,688 21,688 1;688 1,824 1,824. 1,824 1,824 40:53% ,40 53% ' 40.53%° ' •40.53%: 0'TZ 201;8 : 2030e 020. ` -136 136 136 136 136 1;688 1,688 1,688 1;668 1,688 .1,824 1,824 1,824 1,824 ' 1,824' 40:53% 40:53% ,40.53°/ 40.53% 40.540 ', i Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast;: 248 6111Z '41, 4 4 5 4-4.._ 4- : . ,_,4. 7 8 8 8,. 7 `,:- 7 10 12 12 12 12 12 122%0 ;0,26% '.'0,27% 0.27% 0.26/0 0.26% 11 11 60 59 0331. 032%;, Residential Non -Residential ,. Total All Buildings Percent of:ptilityForecast Plumas Sierra Energy Efficiency Program Targets 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 = 1,009 2 Boo 600 400 200 2011 MWH 237 of Load Forecast ,' 0.14%:'. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 44,767 43,400 44,869 • 46,602 i. 44,618 ';:45,068 "95,872 46,735 89,385 88,468 90,740 93,337. .52.04% <'50.00% !!-5025%!, ,:59781 2012 2013 - 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2920 230 247 279 346 491 778 1,191 1,546 1,688 013% :'.'0.14% 015% 0.18% 0:26% 0.40% 0.61% 0.78°/6 0.84%::' Demand Potential (kW) n li rises l e'itiT]'li -,:.:r- Residential 10,731 Non -Residential 8,953 Total All Buildings 19,684 PercentofUtility Forecast ';64,72% Economic Potential ""was 48,564 50,748 53,112 55,679 58,450 61,426 47,477 48,190 48,769 49,418 50,0.72 50,734" 96,041 98,937 101,881 105,098 108,522 , 112,161 51.296/ 52,01%.,.,':52,77%'.1.53.78% ;:'54.81% 55.91%!. L'10.0.21:... d-4`. .m2U1S 9,976 . 10,359 10,810 11,321 11,890. 12,505 13,173 9,054 9,216 9,389 9,538 9,682 9,798 9,928 19,030 19,575 20,200 20,860 21,571 22,303 23,102 61.70% - 62.66% ".63.73% < 64.93% ',66.48% 68;06% 69.111°A Energy Potential {MWh) a "' '_F s9utdr y' ; WiffWILW7 7 Residential 31,188 29,211 29,947 30,817 31,893 32,901 34,091 Non -Residential - :.38,323 ;38,643 I'39,332 x;40,072 4.0,708 41,320 41,816 Total All Buildings 69,511 67,854 69,279 70,889.. 72,511 ' 74,220 ; 75,907 Percetit ofUtility Foretast ;:40,47% ,38,35%6 38.37%6 38.57% 38.726/6.39.02% 39.31! Demand Potential (kW) r, 0.1 11- Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent ofTjtrlity Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ,480 4,568 4,762 4,991 5,251 5,539 5,851 5,679 5,713 5,815 5,924 ,':.6,018 - 6,109 6,182 11,158 1 0,2 81 10,577. .1 0,915 11,269 11,647 12,033 36,69% :33.33% ::33.826/0 34.44% 35:.08%6 35.9061 „36.72% ectti 'ro-h 5x.,.r ,2q4 x: 1:0M1 151 185 260 413 638 850 972 128 160 231 365 553 696. 716 279 346 491 778 1,191. 1,546 1,688 0.15% 0.18% 0.266%6 0.40°/ 9.61% 0.78°A 0.84% Residential Non -Rea de stiol Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) ul=taiEW diireEMICATJ, MORN Mitit 140. 98 : 237 .'0,14%6 127 135 '103'i 112 230 247 0.13% 0.14% Residential 21 14 Non -Residential - - Total All Buildings 28 21 Pe tee ntofUtility ;Forecast 0.09% <007°A 2 9' _,1520'$ 13,894 14,669 10,060 10,193 : 25,954 24,862 71:69% 73.69%0 .35,383 36,778 38,277 42;373 42,934 43,50.2':: 77,756 79,711` $1,778 • 3979%, 40.26% 40.76%:-: 152.*47 _i 20 'm=. .,74t02'.b 10 9„ 2620 6,190 6,555 6,948 6;264 6,347 6,431 22,454. 12,902 13,379 37„63% 38.61% 39.66%,'s 17 19 9 1 23 .26 30 .' 0,07% :0.08°/ ::0.09% 249 24 ` 33 15 21. 39 54 0.12/ 0.17% 45 . 54 ..60 38 75 91 0.23% 0:27%: 0.29% 98 PORT OF OAKLAND Energy Efficiency Program Targets 600 500 400 300 200 100 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWR 406 420 424 430 437 488 523 529 533 541 of Load Forecast; 0529 -053% .o.s1% G.048% :.:0;48% 0.53°!0 056% 0.56% 0:560 057%,'`; Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) .m( SSGtoc&3n_a` vTg;A 01', _ 01 Residential -p Q- -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . 2,8 .. : .; Non -Residential ' �:' 1L,O12 11,471� .12,3 IO >I2,480 '12,527 12,773 I2,874 13,000 13,123. . 13,248'.-' Total All Buildings '..11,012 11,471 - 12,310 12,480 - 12,627 12,773 12,874 13,000 13,123 - 13,248 Percent o€Utility Forecast P' 1424% x14.36% 514,72% '.:03.91% 13.89% 13;88% 13.83% 13:85% 43.05% 13.85% Demand Potential (kW) .4011:ve Residential - 0 ', 0 :0 Nan -Residential r. 1,980 2,060 ;.,'2,211 Total All Buildings T 1,980 . 2,060 2,211 Percent of Utility Forecast 1599°j° 1':''16.04°/ 1628% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ga-.00TMEg..0401111110IN .11:4:,,O '2,242 :.,2203 2,294 ' 2,313 ;.2,335 -2,357. 2,387 2,242 - .2,268 -. ..2,294 .2,313 ...'2,335. 2,357 .2,380 . 1.5,Cc'% 14:94% 14.97% :14;77° (4;7006 14.63°!° 14.56d1c'j 1 i ('WS ta) .- 0 0 : ..:0 0 0 8,966 it 4,324 .`-.110,011 10,149 . : . . -;110,2fi9 14;;387 10,470 10,5';:2 :30,672 10,773,:' 8,966 - 9,329• ,,10,011 - 10,149 10,269 10,387 10,470 10,572. X10,672 . 10,773. 11.59°!0 ,',11.68% ;.11.979 ;11,31% 11.29'! 1129"; tl,2i% .11.27% 11.26% 11.26%" Residential Non -Residential - Total All. Buildings Percent otUtility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) a sw `ss .012',W�6.e23 . .'....z....._. 2011 '...x._.2.032,....: '2003, 4.' Residential • r. . - - 0 0 .0 - 0 _0 ',:0 0 a- E4on-Residential 1,344 ;-1,447 .'2.1,553 -, 3,574 ..1,593 Total All Buildings -- 1,394 1,447 1,553 - I,574 '.1,593 `1,611 '. 1,624 1,640. .' 1,655 .1,671 0 ° 0 .. 1?ercentufiihhty Forecast ::.11.26%!rk1.261 ��11A3lu .10;58% 10.¢9%' 30:90.% 10;37/ 1032% 10.27% }0.22%° Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Z-3 U1 .A ;," i01,b,,. ,.€,�0 7 ,r, qa& t 707 X029„ssri Residential -. 0 0 0- 0 -. - 0 - 0 - 0 0 0 0 Non-Residentinl '; 123 ". 133 :.155 -181 x.226 286 289 281 272 263 Total All Buildings 123 133 155 . . 181 - - --: 226 '286 289 281 - - 272 . 263 Percent of.Utility Forecast >0.16% I: 0.17% 1,7.18% 0.20% :"0.25°% 0.31% 0.31% 0:30°/0" 0.29% 0.27% Demand Potential (kW) gr,, `r ,..,,v ector,. = 18 ...,, 12.. ,2,07,9;; Residential -: . - 0 ' 0 0 .. 0 -0 . . : 0 - 0 0 V 0 ,- 0 Non -Residential 20 21 24 28 ;35 43 43 42 40 39 Total Ail Buildings 20 21 24 28 35 43 43 42 40 39 :0.164 18% .0.19% 0..23°/° '0.28% 0...27% 0.6% 0.25% 424f°: Percen{�ii€1St;€it Fare cast �<.-0.16% ' 0 2 250 Non -Residential Total All Buildings .. Rancho Cucamonga Energy Efficiency Program Targets 2011 2012 2013 201.4 2015 2016 -2017 2018 2019 2020 MWR 46 % of Load Forecast . 0;47"/ Technical Potential Energy Potential {MWh) 49 55 0.08% >' 0.09%'_ Residential 0 0 0 Non -Residential 25,695 •'25,612 .',25,865 Total All Buildings 25,685 25,612 25,868 Percent of Utility Forecast 4077%'-'40.65% _:40.65%' Demand Potential (kW) s ORI :."Se tar E gTOR Residential 0 0 0 0 Non -Residential 6,007 5,996 ,":'6,055 6,116 Total Al] Buildings _i 6,007 5,996 6,055 6,116 Percent of Utility Forecast ;,'4137!4 .,41.29% -4129% "41.29°/ 65 74 85 93 0.:10% j 0.1'3% 0.14% 0. 0 0 0 0 0 26,127 ;26,388 . x26,652 26;9;18 27,1.88 :27,460 26,127 26,388 26,652 :,26,918 27,188 27,460 :40.65% 40.65% 40.65% 40.65% .'40.65% 40:65% • 101 110 118 0:15% 0,16"/ 0.17.% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) __;4.' w i Q1.1 WO) ROWS 211 l 111 T ...., l i , 14151 a1 .41i Residential " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,014 '1;24,935 25,184 25,436 25,690 ' 25,947 26,206 26,468 26,733 27,000. 25,014 24,935 25,184 25,436 25,690 25,947 26,206 26,468 26,733 27,000 Percent o f Utility Forecast ?39.70% 39,58% :3958% :;39,58%4 ;39.58/ 39,58/ .39.59/ ,39.58°/ 39,58% 39.58%: 0 27,734. . 27,734 40,65%'.I� b ? h ,018, ,', 3tt 2019 ;, „, 0470, 0 0 0 0 0 6,177 6;239 6,3131 6;364 6;428 6,492;'J, 6,177 _ 6,239 6,301 6,364 6,428 6,492 41:29°/ 41.29°/ 41.294/ 41.29°/ 41.29°/ Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All B aildings Percent ofUtdity Forecast, Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential 46 Total All Buildings 46 Percent ofUtility .Forecast 0.07% 1.12 1.1,. DD.k..• 404E - 0. 0 0 0 -• 0 • 0 5,850 5,837 5,895 `;:5,954 6,014 6,074 • 5,850 5,837 5,895 5,954 6,014 6,074. ':40.29%'':40.2099 •:'40.20%• ':40.20°/4:, :40.20% 40.20% Demand Potential (kW) ResidentialNon-Residential 1 ] Total All Buildings 11 Fereent of Utility Forecast 0.07% 0 0 49 55 0.08% 0.09% 0:10 - 0. 74 74 0.11% 0 0 -0 :0 13 0 0 6,134 6,190 6,134 6,196 :40.20%E:.40.20% 0 0 6,258 6,320 6,258 6,320 40.20% 40.20°A :GY.t7..s.. , 1f01„ fda:o €ai 0 0 0 0 0 85 ';93 101 110 118 +; 85 93 , 101 110 118 0.13% 0:14% . 0.15% 0;16% 0.17% 0 11 - 13 95 17 20 0.08% ,:0,09% 0.10% .I 0.12% :'.0113% 251 012a,u.s�Q 0 0 0 22 24. 26• 28 22.. 24 :. 26 .28 0:.144/4 •0;:16% ,.0,1750 0:18% REDDING Energy Efficiency Program Targets 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 • 500 0 2011 MWH 2,523 % of Load Forecast ::'031% Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2,496 3,076 3,776 0.29% " 034/° 0.395' Win 7 Residential Non-Re3identia! 104,505 .92,729. 94,334 - 96,353 -1-:190,948 ''204,885 '232,417 "243930 Total AO Buildings 295,453 297,614 326,750 342,283 Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 4,457 - 4,655 4,649 0.44/ .0:45/ 0.43%' _:35,72/° 3161 ,'36.33/ .35.33%` 35.64% Residential , 42,651 40,985 41,475 Non -Residential :44,692 .47,999 `54,449 Total All Buildings - - 87,343 88,984- _ 95,924 Percent of Utillty Forecast -_.34.16% .33,05% 34,54% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Z§Ir s €%` @9kRPi'..? . Residential Nort•Residential Total Ail Bnildings Percent of Utility _Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Nan -Residential . Total All Buildings.., FercentofUt7ity Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential {MWh) !iiie ia...r.�,C ekr, ,ti ai j .e 201E-..-.,,g2012g; n 201313' Residential - - - 1,505 1,236 1,334 Non -Residential 1,018 ,;1,260 1,742 Total All Buildings 2,523 2,496 3,076 Percent ofUtility ,Forecnst 0.31% (0.29% 0.34% 22,653 21,215 -185,599 x;199,091 208,252 2.20,306 247,313 260,765 274,487 288,328 302,483 311,248 .314,643 318,234., 25.18%4 „25.62% 27.50% , _2692% 27 2.9%.!:"27'62% ',;2797% 27 79%° 27'46% :'.27 48°/n !• x., 98,794. 101,659 104,947: -108,666- 112,818 : 117,401 259,653 273,426 287;452 295;860 298,675. 301,609 ' 358,447 375,084 392,399 404,526 411,492 ' 419,010 35.94/° 36.28°/ 36.11% 35.92% 361186 4,518 4,402 4,350 0.40% 0.38%'_ 0.38% ' 42,094 - - 42,846 43,730 `44,747 45,899 47,185 X57,615 X60,836 64;056 67,342 69,312 64,971..: 99,709 `103,676 107,786 112,089 115,210 317,1.57 - ° ° 33.75/ 3363Je 33.49°1 33.45% -3354% 33.26%: ANN 48,608 70,659;:` 119,266 33.041% -'S-.M, o1;0 ilioregR,T2d 21,468 21,789 22,177 22634 _ .23,159 23,754 - - 24,419- - 25,154 225,845 ,238,976 252,311 255,694 279;324 287,494 290,229. 293,080:' 0,11 .,, 1032 s %$21113 (1 x2014 2015, '201.6 ,,. ..2411-`,7,,, , 761 a. 12,606 12,355 ;12,389 12,436 12,494 _12,563 . 12,645 ' 12,738 12,844 12961 .• ,;:41498 ;'.45,623 ;55:1,754 '54,763 .57;818 :60,885 -.64,009 :65,8.61 66,308: 67151.;.' 55,105 57,978 64,143 ` 67,198 70,312 73,449 '76,653 - 78,619' 79,351 80,122 ;2S 55/ 21 54°f° ':23 10 :-22.7556 .22;.61%' .22:82°J° 22:07% 22,89%, 22,53.% 22,19°!4 Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total AEI Buildings Percent aft hhty,: Forecast A4g-i )`;2Ti1,8 1,471 ' 1,419 ., 1,090 .':2 05 ;3,038 js3,565: 3,776 4,457 4,655 0,39% . ,0.44% 0.45% r =2Q13 .2156'1 ,.� 4i 9 600 615 - 630 - - 645 660 675 : 1,000 _1,125 3,250 ' :1_;375 1',500 1,625 • 1,600 1,740 , 1,880 : 2,020. 2,160 2,300 0.63% . 0.6554 -'.0;68% 0;68% 0,703' 0;71% 252 � #a 7.16 - .: 491 336 - - 245 3,902 4,027 4,066 4,649 =.4,518 4,402 4,350 0.43% " 0.40% 0.30'-9 ,0.38/': 690.- .•.705 - 720 735 1,750 1875:,:i 2,000; 2,125'J 2,440 2,580. 2,720 2,860 0.756° 4:73% RIVERSIDE Energy Efficiency Program Targets 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 141WH 14,017 % of Lo ad Forecast :''065%.: Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) LMIMigtVait4CEaiidgg 34134 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) * Residential &on -Residential Total All Buildings PercentoflJtility Forecast 12,526 13,705 :16,071 18,159 0.59% :::0.641/ 0:73% '::0.80%. 2017 2018 2019 2020 19,617 19,994 0.84% 0.84% 20,037 20,082 20,069 0:82/ 0.81% 0.80% 12 g_.i 41 3..'..li i.'12%a S'._ 75x .W'.10 41' ii lTs'.,» 11 ,r aa24119r.F° 2Ij C;? 258,674 225,727 225,907 . 226,756 227,628 228,523. _ 229,443 230,386 231,354 232,449 " >1657,446 651,142 651,657 672,592 691,886 :708,851 724,155 735,661 747,121 759,744 915,719 876,869 877,563 899,348 919,514 937,374 953,597 966,047. 978,476 992,193 42.69% ''41.29% : 4493% c40.77% 40.3564 40,12/° :' 39.92% 39.62% 39.46% .. 39.36% 105,614 142,855 248,469 45.17% Economic Potential 100,463 100,470 100,654 100,844 101,040 101,242 101,452 141,595 141,654 146,192 , 150,386 154,073, • .157,399 159,900 242,058 242,124 246,846 251,229 255,113. 258,642 261,352 A4.28% .45.85% 43'.60% 43.20% 43.02% . 42.81% 42.54% Energy Potential (MWh) M.. rl«.¢Bi3Whf 07:,,. RDIDE z Y 4031;, a1 $46.1.7t0 r Y °tia 113.3 Residential 227,268 194,326 : 194,480 Hon -Residential 641,628 ' 635,725 ',:636,239 Total All Buildings 868,896 830,050 830,719 Percent of1tility Forecast 40.51% x3909% ':38,74°10 , Demand Potential (kW) 101,667 - 101,916 162,391 165,135 264,059 267,051 42.39%' 42.28%: 0, 4; andeVrak ii'NUM C.211 -1,$"e 195,209 195,958 196,727 I97,516 198,327 199,158.:: 200,098 656,682 675,520 692,083 707,025 • 718,259 :729449; 741,773, 851,891 871,478 888,810 904,542 916,586 928,607 941,871 38.62% 38.24%° 38.04% 37,86% 37.59% 37,45% 37,36%' `'- Residential 63,704 58,559' 58,550 58,625 Non -Residential 139,019 ':137,760 137,818 142,234 Total All Buildings 202,724 196,319 196,369 200,859 Percent pfT5tility Forecast 3685% :35.91% : 35.56/ . 35:48% Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast 58,702 58,782 58,866 58,952 59,041 59,146 146,314 149,902 153,138 155;571 157,995 160,664.:", 205,016 208,684. 212,004 214,523. 217,036 219,811 35.25% 35.19% , 35.09% 34;92°/ 34.8494 34.8096 oi %1i17 4,275 2,528 2,829 3,213 3,722 4;104 4,127_ 9,742 .9,997 10,876 12,858 - :14,437 15,513 15,867 14,057 12,526 13,705 16,071. 18,159 ' 19,617 '_19,994 0.65% 0:59% :' 0.64/° 073% 0.80% 0:84% 0.84% Demand Potential (kW) y �dOiktirst Residential 1,001 736 806 918 1,110 ` 1,336. 04n -Residential 2,213 2,273 2,467 2,897 3,2:53 3,511 Total All Buildings 3,214 3,009 3,273 3,815 4,364 4,847 Percefit efUtility Forecast 0.58% 0.55% 0,59% :0.67% 0.75% 0.82% 253 1,454 - 3,608 5,062 0.84/. 4,095 4,052 4,005 15,942 - 16,0301: 16,164 20,037 20,082 20,169 0.82% 0.81/o 0.80% 1,429 -1,392 . 1,352 3,635, 3,660'; 3,693 5,064 5,051 5,045-. 082/0 0811e 0.80% ROSEVILLE Energy Efficiency Program Targets 12,000 I 10,000 8,000 x 6,000 E 4,000 • 2,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201.6 017 2018 2019 2020 MWH 8,390 8,360 % of Load Forecast::! 0.63°10' ;' 0.61%.: Technical Potential 8,604 8,639 9,054 -10,032 10,903 10,470 9,874 9,387 0.61% -{:0.6066 0:61°/4 ::0:66%4 1;9.70° . :o:ss% 0,60% ':'056%-:' Energy Potential (MWh) iNEINUMigiNflat 2U12' R 20 3€ ?"` .fit Residential - - 138,307... 127,027 Non -Residential :::1328,531 ':335,422 Total A11 Buildings ` 466,838 462,448 Percent -ofl:7tility Forecast =:135.16% 'z 33.80% Demand Potential (kW) �s Er p -°n i Est�-w....�}.i��e h�etet4�,>'v35`,`^z: Residential -- Non-Residential Total All Buildings Percent ofUtility Forecast ' 132,942 140,087 148,331 157,774':, - 168,169 I79,641 - 192,214 205,911 344,787 354,597 , 363,320 372,875 • 380,395 388,948 397,693 406,634:; 477,729 494,685 511,651 530,650 548,565:.'566,589 589,996 612,545 3389% ;3414% 34.34/9 34.76% .35.01% 35.57% .36,0996 36,65% ' 2l3.2,:. o1 'e, aa4,15] ri2315, 2016 Ei'€ 2067c 3-:40.0 4i?0k9 =..2020 .57,315 56,412 58,414 -60,834 • 63,6/8 66,831 70,358 - 74,252 - 78,521. - • 83 172 72,519 >74,091 `:;76160 :'.78,327 -, 80;253 82364 ` `84,025 _.85914 87,846 89,8217, 129,834 130,503 134,5.73--139,161 143,882.. 149,195. 154,383 ••160,166 166,367 172,993 138,02% 3715°fa -_:•31.25% 37.34/° 37.47%, 37;85,0 38:18!° 38;65°/4 •39.20% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWiI) loom -- -.x• ror -ss = ^.' Residential Non -Residential • Total A11 Buildings Perce nt OrUtility .Pore cys t Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) a 24,$x ._ If 48,614 . 49,057 49,619 • 50,305 • 51,103 E186,926 191;529 '.196,877 202,478 , 207,459 • 235,540.240,586 246,496 252,784 .258,562 . 17.49% 17.45!° MON 27,242 27,684 '.' 28241'-. 39,954 i-.40,952 :',42,095 67,195. '68,636 :.70,336 %.19.68/0• :19 54°/4 :"..19.47% <. Residential Non Residential - Total 41113 utldings : Percent of. Utility! lForecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings - Percent of Forecast 28,916 43,293, 72,209 19.37°% 52,022 53,037 212,915 ' 217;209 264,937 270,246 17;35% ,17.25% 1016 2017;:ti 30,596 31,565 ;45,524 46;443 76,120 :.x78,028 19,31% 19;30 6 54,161 55,396 -.56,745 222;093 227;006 232,192, 276,254 ;282,483. 288,937 17.28.% ,17 28%4 17.294.4! 32,679: 33,880' :'55,1.89 47,487 ,48,554 - 49,646- -: 80,166 - ` 82,434 84,835 19.34% 19.42% 19.54%, .01.K'l 014„ 4 9V:, (4.nl ;°, SAC., ` 44 5 abrag 106T 401 - 425 -. - - 452 490 - 550 : 660 " : -. 776 889 . 1,043 1,148 7,989 7,935 8,152 6,150 ' <;8,564 9,371 10,127 9581 8,831 8,239 .8,390 '- - 8,360 - : 8,604 8,639 "` 9,054 10,032 10,903 - 80,479 - 9,874 . ..9,087. 0.63% :10.61%' ',06104 0.60/, :'9,61% 8.66% 0,70% `0.65% '.0"60%° 0.56°00 168 1,655 1,823 0.53%'s 2.017,r P ; 2018 2 3 1 179 191 -.-206 - 229 • 272 • 337 -- 443 601 = 737 " '1,669.-' „1,679 ;1,784 1;989 2,161 2,052 1,890. - 1,762,5% I,817 - 1,860 [ 1,884' •-2,013- 2,261: -.'2,498 2,495 2,491 2,499. 0.52%' '051% .0.51% 0.52% 0.57', 6.62% 0.60% 0.59b/o 0.5890`? 254 SHASTA LAKE Energy Efficiency Program Targets 3011 3013 2913 2014 2015 2016. • 2017 -- 2018 2010 • 2029 MW11 300 % of Load Forecast 1' 0.16%: Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) S€ek ..g c c.$sFfd'1•-4 r4hi;i7'' Residential Nan -Residential Total All Buildings Percent_ of Utility Forecast Demand Potential {kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast 12,349 74,692: 87,041 ''45.86% 300 0.15% 300 713 0.14% 9.30% 833 934 1,016 - 1,073 1,108 1,143 0:33°/ 0:36% Oi37°/ ::::0:37% '0.38% -0:38%...- rr` 30.1 � . `2,11{!,'7 ,°2,01& 14 5.;..e0TO 11,001 11,181 11,409. 11,690 12,022 •12,405 ' 12,840 13,327 13,867' 80,102 .;90,845 :'96,149 :101,514.....106,898.-:- .12,382:1; 115;669 116,7:70 117;917 a,' 90,103: 102,046 107,558 113,204 118,920. 124,787 .' 128,509 :130,097 :131,784 : 45.30% (47.56% 45.17% 45.29% .45;38°J 45.51% 44.85% 44.23% 44.3551 5,129 4,941 . 17,150 '18,409 22,278 23,350 64.55%-".` '64:26% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh).� °a''"'".,ase:aF?-i�il a'�S r�.e 14lr:3L�;%4�0 ....aa Res Idential Non -Residential Total All Buildings. Percentofiltility Fore easij Demand Potential (kW) VNittiligtAURMIP- Residential Non -Residential .Total All Buildings' Percent of Utility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) x a - IEFR <Sec..iREEI1 Residential Non Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast l . 201,1; <20 " 8,096 6,733 72,111 ::;77,306: 80,207 84,040 42.26% 41.79% 74011Iti al?2.Q 7F. 4,089 3,888 16,328 < 17,519 20,417.. - 21,407 59.15% :58.91% Demand Potential (kW) Residential 32 27 29 34 41 51 "' 60 ' - 64 Non Residential 79 90 113, 138 162 182 Total All Buildings 111: 116 143 173 204 233 258 274 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.32% ::;'0.32% ''0.38/ " :0.43% 0:49°/ 0.54°% 0.57% 0:59% 5,001 - 5,077 - 5,171: 5,282 5,410 20,883 , ;;22,097 23,330 24,568 25,828 25,884 27,174 28,501 . 29,850' 31,238 69.05% ,.61$.15% I:68.40% 68:72% 169.06% 6,992 87,695 94,587 44.081. 5,557. 5,720, 5,902 26,583 .26,836 ' 27,100'.'_ 32,040 ; 32,557 ' -` 33,002 69.32%' 68:4$% 67.73% ZOlt s _ 20 $ - 2'0021 ,�01:C 7,094 7,341 7,632 '- 7,968 8,349 8,775 9,248 :92,794 9;7,971 . X103,168 108,460 111;433 112,695 113,802'; 99,887 105,313.. 110,800 116,428 :119,982 121,470'. -123,050, 41:95% 42.13°1° 42;28% -42.46% 41:89% 41305.0 ::41.41%;:! >w291 ..,E. .. Q14. 1015< l ir45,,QX . _.2418 -_.Z.4i9. 24:410 74 3,930 ', 3,984 4,050 4,129 -' 4,219 -.4,322 , 4,438 : 4,567-'• 19,873 :, 21,029 22,202 ,23,380 24;579 25,298 25,539.. :. :25790..: 23,804 25,013 26,252 27,508 28,798 29,620 29,977 30,356 63.505/o 62.7351 ,63,08%' 63:3351 .63,67%:,:.;.63.88% 63.06% 62.30%:' 89 47 54 61 70 79 : 86 337 384 ;..987 600, 703 787 856 426 431 540 - 661 773 866 _ 942 0,22% 0.21% 6.0.25°/ 0281 0."31% 0.33% 0.34% 91 - 94 96 904 933;[ 964:::; 995 1,027:" 1,060 0.35% r 0.3551 • '0.36%. 255 65. 66 216 , . 223 r' 282 289. 0.599 0.59°/ SILICON VALLEY POWER Energy Efficiency Program Targets 35,000 30,000 25,000 = 20,000 £ 1s,000 10,000 5,000 2011 2012 2012 2014 2015 - 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MW13 23,055 25,415 26,255 28,502 %6 of Load Forecast :::10.75% ;:681% `:;0,83% 4.89% Technical Potential Energy Potential (WW1]) Residential Non -Reside ntiel Total All Buildings Percento€Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) . : .. ._ N ri'.3V10, , . ,i , ,<.. .� •. a .t r '1+G.�.a.,�21�.15...n. pCG....>s'::2P1�.�l�sk.24J�$w1 ...<?�'} )_..,7,020_[ Residential 33,541 32,024 32,717 33,556 34,545 - . 35,685 36,977 38,423 40,026 41,787 Non -Residential 158,170 ;:159,414 1161438 <::.163,4438.. 365,565 1167,667 169,797 171;953 .174,13.7 176,348: Total All Buildings 191,711 191,438 194,155 197,045 200,110 203,352 206,774 .210,377 214,163 218,136 Percent of Utility Fore east ;3969%; -58.9956.':3905%6 -39.13% 39.24% 39.38°/6 39.54%6' 39.72%6 39.93% '40,16%': 29,506. 28,413 25,456 0.916/6 886/ :0176°/: 3?"201.11,1: 2012< ..i 2013' 2014_r .2015 rz 2016 87,596 75,908 77,865 80,235 83,023 86235, 89,874 ; 93,946 683,908 :::688,927:,...:697,677:.::::706,537::::::;.715,510 724,597 733;799 ._743;119. , 771,504 764,836 775,542 786,772 798,534 810,832 823,,.. 673 837,065 25.10°/6 24.48°/6 24.51 '.1124.55%::: 24.55%6 24:61%.:'' 24.67°/6 ' 24.75°6'0 .24.84% 23,052 21,328. 20,020 0.68% 0.62% 0.58% 98,457 .103,411 :752;556 762,114: 851,013 865,525 24.93% 25,04%1:.= Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non-Resiiteittial Total All Buildings Percent 6f Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Nan Re6idenllal Total All Buildings Percent of.Utility Forecasf Market Potential Energy Potential (114Wh) Residential Nan Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All B uildings . Percent of Utility: Forecast 24,621 23,843 24,144 24,511 ' `24,945 602,608 ;;607,867 615,587 623,405 631,322 627,229 631,710 639,731 647,916 . 656,267 20.41% 1 20.22% 1::20.22% .''20.22% ::-20.22% ._ 0Iii s igt2 25,446 26,016 26,655 639,340 < 647;460 655;652 664,786 673,475 682,337 20:23% .20:24% ::'20:25% ly�V 27,364 .28,144 664,009 ' 672,442 691,373 700,586 311..x1,i:..201z?73...`.2013,..3 ?'2014a ifi. Zlil ; . 2Wee: 6 0f1 ,�...'2013.`1.4 MOE. 'j07r1j<ii 3,790 _i 3,709 3,738 3,772 3,814 3,862 3,917. 3,979 4,047 4,123 142,685 :i 143,994 145,823 ;1;147,675 149,550 151,449 153;373..1.155321. 157;293 159,291;:'. 146,475 147,703 149,560 151,447 753,364 155,311 157,290 159,299 161,341 163,414 30.33% :30.08%6 ;30.08%6 :1:30,08%1: 30.0036 ' 30.08%. 30:0816 30.08616 300814, 30.09°7a'.'. j6111 .5 1,213. ;21,842 23,055 2 1 rE 1.2015 2016 21017F 2141;8 <.: .,.201 ,2020,«r 1,197 . 1,254 '- 1,421 1,639. . 1,635 1,415 . 1217 1,049 ;24,218 ;'.75,001 27,081 - 127;867., ;:28778 :24,041 21;835 20,279 25,415 26,255 28,502 29,506 -2S,413 .25,456 23,052 21,328 `0.8I% 0..83°/6 089°/6. 0;41%o ',0.86/° ..0;76/ 0;68% 0:62/ 256 202 209 228 5,930 6,459 6,697 6,132 6,668 6,925 1;23% 1,32% 1.36% 914 20,020 E 0i9 2020,,: 223 ` ,193 `167 : 145 126 6,355 6,102 5',697 5,3711 5092;,'; 6,778 6,295 :' : 5,864 5,515 5,218 1,31°/6 1.21'16 , 1.116/6 1,03°!6 0.96% 1: TRINITY Energy Efficiency Program Targets 16 14 12 10 a 6 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 MWA 14 13 14 14 %ofLoad Forecast -:-001% --":0.01% `f:002%- ;:0.01% 2016 2017 2018 2010 2020 14 14 0,01% 0;015$ 14 - 14 14 14 :0,.01% .x:0,01% ;0.01% 0.01°%:,f Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) I" : ....`:amaAdetRlallii< €„4 pi ...'. 9.l,l.niaRi ,:e.:24.i3.,.420143;v ,il201 ., Res identia[ 34,638 ' 32,979 33,487 Non -Residential ;'17,405. "_17,397 :;17,571 Total All Buildings -52,044 50,377 51,058 Percent afUtility Forecast 57.24% .-'54.86% ;5505% Demand Potential (kW) ::. Aii4 ia.6r,.,,.: ^m...i ..1 Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent, Of Utility. Forecast 34,106 34,836 35 679 17,747, • '.:1.7,924 18;104 51,853 52,761 53,783 55:36% 55.77°% 156.29% 36,637 37,709 38,898 40,203 18,285 , 18,468 18,652 ' . 18,839...:. 54,922 56,177 57,550 59,042 56.91% .57.63% 58.46% 59.38% 1 z."iiihi 0141,.:.. .241. ki 016 e.20 7 m..2Ql$ ' iT'2089la'...2020 . 8,32.5 7,576 7,709 7,870 . - .8,060 - 8,279 8,528 8,807 - 9,116 : 9,455 3,242 ':3,244 3,277 3;310 3;343 3,376 3,410 :3,444 ' ' ,3;479 3,513. : '. fI,567 :'10,821 .10,986 11,179 11,403 11,656 11,938 12,251 12,594. 12,968 59.65% •55,25%...''55.54/0 ,'55,96% .::56,51% 57'.19% :58.0056 58:935 •59.9904 61.:15%'<' Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) EWEN Residential 22,505 20,575 Non -Residential ;.1,099 1,080 Total All Buildings 23,604 !.21,654 Percent of Utility Forecast 25.96% ;23.58% #:24i E ..t,?,014E_ 201 , l! 0 aM,A, 20,581 20,593 : 20,610 20,632 - 20,661 20,695 20,734 - . . 20,780 1,090 1,101 1,112 1,123 1,135 1,146 . 1,157 1,169'" 2I,671 - 21,694 21,722 -.21,756 21,795 - 21,840 31,992. 21,949 23.37% 23.16%, :22:96% .22.77% 22.585 22.41% 22.24% 22.07°l Demand Potential (kW) i E IN E r $0:0,?;..:..'i1, ....; .aa. 24 261`. ; .. 3,930 • 3,110 3,109 . 3,109 3,110 115 112 113 115 116 4,045 3,222 3,223 3,224 3,226 2086%:`:':1645%n .'16.29% • '16.14% 15.99% Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Fereent-ofUtility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings PercentofUtility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) BriaMtWiii Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of: Utility. Forecast 0117 G 201:8 .3,x,'01 ..,. 020" n 3,111.. 3,113 3,115 3,118 3,122 117 118 119 123 122 3,228 3,231 3,235 :. 3,239 3,244 15:84% 15.70% 15,56% 15.43% 15..29% :_ ?21t ?„€;.2417,,L01140 3:ig21)1,9 51)20.€t 14 - I1 14 21 35 - 57 82 101 - 108: 113 0• ; 0 0 0 0 "'0 0 0'i 0:' . 0• ; '' 14 11 I4 21 35 57 82 101 108 113 3 1 001% ":001A 1 , 2 0,01/ 0.01%:'. 257 .0,04%6 :0.0610 6.08% 0.14°/a 4: 0.01/0 0.02/ 0:03 0,03% 6. 7 7 0 6. 7 7 0.03% 0.031.',=h TRUCKEE DONNER Energy Efficiency Program Targets 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 2051 2012 20I3 - 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 MWII _ 1,978 % of Load Fnrecast'- -1,23°/0.. Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Sectp'r: =,; : i ti01 # Residential' Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) 1,640 1,706 1,727 1,762 2,017 2,257 2,317 2,214 2,263 1.00% L02% 1.01% :'1,01% 1,14% -1:25% 1.25% .:1:17°% '.1;18%.-'. 1 . a 0 Y 56,245 53,448. 55,229 57,398 59,963.. 62929 66,306 39,106 ; 39,475 40,264 41,070 ..'48,891 42,729 43,583:- 95,351 92,922 95,494 98,468 101,854 105,658. 109,890 .5929% ;;5664%' :5707% :57,69°/ ;58.51% 59.50% • 60.67% 8. Residential 15,290 13,91I 14,370 Non -Residential 7,285 7,362 " :'7,509 Total All Buildings 22,575 21,272 21,879 Percent of Utility Forecast ;'63,23% 59.42% 60.94% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential Nod -Residential Total All Buildings 74,433 Percent'of Utility Forecast . ':46.28% Demand Potential (kW) ff1.4415:fliait .1'410:5,1110P.1114 Residential -:8,333 Non -Residential ;;:4,694, Total All Buildings , 13,027 Percentoflitillty Forecast 36.49% 40,217 34,216 Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) <'.....dkigitiiaaiiijiSiiiM .. 10.110 Residential 257 Non -Residential 865 Total All Buildings 1,122 Percentof Utility Forecast r 0.70% Demand Potential (kW) X .,,. i.#rhS0S1Q4°,WEE... Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings 197 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.55% 77 120 36,841 34,488. 71,329 43.48% 6,807 :. 4,719 11,527 32.20% 37,889 35,177 73,067 43.67% l :2,0,1;8. sE, 2111 70,101 74,323 78,978 :44,455 :45;344 46,251':: 114,557. 119,667 125,229 62;01% 2014 : 2, 1 F. ?$l x'201 6 ;E P 07. „,a ,. �� Ss, �_ ,�. _ 1 ,�.., � 14,930 15,591 16,356 17,228 18,206 19,295 20,496 7,659 7,812 "7,969 8,128 8,291 ;0,456 • 8,625 22,589 23,403 24,325 25,355 26,497 27,752 29,122 62.75% ;64.83! ,67.20% 69;85% 72.79% 76.03% 79.575:,: ' iz.01=f a 20 S O:f.. . s 39,166 49,677 42,425 44,416 46,654 ` 49,144 51,821 35,881 36,598 .;37,330 38,077 ,'_38,839. 39,615 40,408;;; 75,047 ` -77,275' - 79,756 82,493 85,493 88,760 92,299 43;97% 44'39% 44;92°/ 45.55%6 46.28% 47.1056 48,02°%': 201 '2014 7,009 7,411 4,814 4;910 11,894 12,321 33.13°1 .'34.23 7,803 5,008 12,811 35.49% :8,256 :5,108 13,364 j6:0%: 4ni7,s 8,771 5,210 13,982 34.52% .1010,1.1 9,350 .9,994 ;. 5,315 5,42.1 . 14,665 • 15,415 40',29%" 42:23% 10,704, 16,233 44.35%a 20i41c.�.Z01 _° i..$'s t'q.2,0 9 2920``3 173 211 278 399 558 708 825 867 992 921 ::1,053 1,292 1,559 1,816 . 1;947, 1,901 • 1,738 1,093 1,264 1,570 1,958 2,373:..2,655 2,726 2,605 2,514 :0.6756 '::0.76°10 0.92% '.1.121 1.34% :1,47% L48% >:l.38% 11.31%' 37 44 53 27 143 171 164 187 224 0,4656 0,52% "a-0.62%: 258 4 2pi�o a 81 67 195 211 262 291 0.72% 0:81% 91 100 217 215 . . . . . . . . 308 .31 15 0:85% 0.86% 105 110 207: 201 313 312 0:86% 0.85%',' TID Energy Efficiency Program Targets 25,000 20,000 15,000 2 F 10,090 5,900 2911 2012 MWB 12,900 12,644 of Load Forecast: _ 063/ : '',; 0.60/n, Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 2 Oda Residential - 177,460 : 155,516 Non -Residential :.:i 572,898 'r 584,879 Total All Buildings 750,358 740,395 Percent of Utility Forecast ,::36.8.16 ;.135.29% Demand Potential (kW) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 13,829 15,846 17,814 19,269 .19,075. .18,675 18,379 18,172 0,64% 0.72% 0 79% 0 84% ' 0.82% '.,0.79% 0.76% 0.74%;;:„ ;;=!613 �s .,..:;2014:..,: ,r�201.�. `� 2.2036„... :�1}37,z!I'.�,Z618 .2QS.._. t. 624;;1✓ 160,185 166,040 173,109 181,396 190,606. 280,982 212,272 224,593 `596218 .:607,647 619,322 631,125 642,382: :.6S3,703- 756;404 773,687 792,431_.812,521. 833,068 854,685 877,456 901,549 34 99% 3�5 11% :::35.28% 35.:49% 35;71°fo 36:00% 36 32% 36.67 :] Residential 82,054. Nan -Reside nhal 119,009: Total All Buildings X201,063 Percent' of Utility Freest Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 34 :2015 „3616 ..,.,,2917 -„ 2018 5 2110 a 79,180 80,666 82,536 84,801 87,465 '.:121,475 _ 123,830 ':126,204 128,629 ,131,080 200,655. 204,496 -208,740 213,430, 218,541 36.47% F': 36,30% .36,36% 136.48% .36,66% Residential - '147,383 - 174,574' Non -Residential _ ''-:554,501 <i565,925' Total. All Buildings . . 701,884 690,499 I?ercent;:afUtdety Forecast .1:;3446/ ' :i',-32.91%: Demand Potential {kW) g 612.E Residential - -. 41,776 38,155 Non-13esidentml - 1i 113,721. 1 116,028 Total All Buildings - -.155,497 154,183 Fereenl.0iTtility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) Residential - 1,832 Nqn-Residential Total All Buildings Percent of'Utility :Fore c6s 11,068. 12,909 -,12,644. 0.63% Demand Potential (kW) iitl.' , 51,...Se4tor'Pa6 ,.,20 Residential 435 Nan -Residential . 2,225 Total Alt Buildings - 2,660 Percent of Utility Forecast 0.49%,: 309 2,352 . 2,661 040% 90,446 - 93,758 97,392 -. -101,361: ,133,458 135,770 138,154 140,599:: 223,864 229,527 235,546 241,960 36.85/ 37;14/ 37;411% .37,86%': riOS.1.. MOON 158,772 167,267 176,540 643,627 : 655,01.8:: 791,291. 830,895 831,558 33,56% 128,083 132,435 137,802 _ 144,035 151,025 576,1397 ).587,955 ':!599,251 610,673 ' 621,564 704,980 720,440 737,053 - 754,708 .-772,589 3261% 32.69% 32;$2%_' , 32;97% 33:12,4 giOSTO 632,519 :'33.:33°/° '2414.:.... 20 s.E,x 2ealMidift0 38,636 39,245 39,984-.'.40,854 41,832 42,918 118,278 :;.120,545 ,;.122,861 1;125,202 127,435 129,681 156,914 159,789 162,844 166,056 169,267. 172,599 27.86°/e .27.83% .27.83% 27.859' 27;.86% 27;93%" 1,138 :12,691 13,829 0:64% 1,300 :14,546 15,846 `.'0.72°/ 90131 ;x'. -:.342 391 ,bj2,573 ;':2,931 2,916 3,322 0.52% „0.58%. 259 3,249 3,721 0:64% 1.506 1,669 16,308 .',17,600 _17,361 ' , .16,932 17,814 .19,269 - - 19,075 18,675 0.79% . 0.84% '(0.82% 0.79% 472 575 3,476 4,051 0.68% 20799.° '2152.1V 44,111. 45,415 131,959 134,29.4 176,070 179,710 28:0204 28.1266 1,772 1,801 6,607 18,379 18,172 0.76% 0.74%, "41214010 We 3,486 ,53,464 3,452 3448 4,134 4,121 4,111 4,109 0.6851:, .0.67'19 :0:65% 0.64%.::' 1 714 .- 1 744 UKIAH Energy Efficiency Program Targets 700 600 500 = 400 300 200 100 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 MW11 - 250 % of Load Forecast Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) EMM`Se>rtar. I,x'MI ACC .,.4R12.,;.,.,4Ri3.,.ORO ;E l2 tea, WOi° Residential 17,809 Non -Residential 35,712 TetalAll Buildings 53,521 Percent of Utility Forecast 43,88%> 2417 2008 207.9 2020 250 310 341 375 413 .. 454 499 549 6114 1.0.206/0 ", 0.25% ;'. 0.28% C:: 0:31°/ ;:0.3.4% <:-0:3.7% ..0.41% . ->0.45% ;.0.50%- .: Demand Potential (kW) Residential 7,400 7,228 7A39 Non -Residential ; 8,362 8,388 8,477 , Total All Buildings 15,762 , 15,616 15,916 Percent afUtility Forecast • 4922% -',.48366/0 .2:48.90% 15,992 16,493 17,077 17,734 .'';18,460 19,241 = 20,083 20,986 21,949 35,778 . 36157. 36,572 :36,921 37,257 37,5.16 37,805 38,095 38,387: 51,770 52,650 53,649 54,655 ; - 55,718 56,757 57,888. 59,081. 60,337. 41.73% 4191% _42,26% '42.56% 42.98% - 43.39% - 43:95% 44.51% 4511% :: Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWh) ? ` 5 * + F1¢ .r .. n >2 11,.... ae. 2112,.,_ 5if 1 Residential 10,208 8,371 8,664 Non -Residential 32,557 32,584 32,929 Total All Buildings 42,765 40,955 41,593 Pereekifor fdity Forecast 35.06% ','33,01% :33.17%, Demand Potential (kW) 2 s y4, 1 ; ectilr115 Residential Non -Reside ntLa1 • Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential (MWh) 15 2 J1 17 € 3 , 2111* i .. 2319s v. 20211 7,685 7,962 8,268 8,597. 8,952 9,332 9,739 :)=8,574 8,656 8,735 8,796 8,864 8,932 9,000:;,_ 16,259 16,618: 17,003 17,393 17,815 18,264: 18,739 4958% !:50:30% 51:15% 52.04% ',53.02% 54.07% 55.20°lo:;: ledidaAkatMtftibita 20ftilt 3 s"24l't , co? if 2020:':`( 9,006 9,390 .9,815 10,271 10,763 .` 11,291 11,854 33,307 .;:33,625 33,931 34,166 34,430 134,644 34,960.' 42,313 43,015. 43,746--44,438...45,193 - 45,985 s 46,814 33,50% 33:75.46 .33,97/6• 34,31% ;34.64% 5,313 . 5,044 5,122 5,213 7,599 7,615 7,696 7,784 12,912 12,659 12,818 12,997 40.32% ;'..39.20°A0 :'39.38% '.39.63% fif2,01.tNn.E`L.Q1.fE. M401 „':.$.r,el67,OX n,a'a'. i,4 '04,3 ?,W-{),° 5,316 5,430 ''5,553 5,685 5,828 5,980 7,859 7,930 7,985 8,047 8,109 8,171'- 13,175_ ".13,360. 13,538 13,732 13,936 14,151 39.88% , 240:19% 40.50% 40.87% 41.26% 41.68% «01O Eg w205 53 63. 537 619 590 683 0.46%.. .0.53% Residentlal Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) 86 , 42 46 417' 429 471 • • 503 471. 518 0.41% . 0.38% 0.410/ �1. Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings 128 125 137 Percent of Utility Forecast 040% iG0 39% ;'.;0.42°A 30 24 26 101 111 260 70 - . . 74 - 77. 80 83 698 743' 779 813 842 769 `817 857 - 893 925 0.59°/ '0,62°/ X0.65% 0,67% 0,69%''<: 31 38 46 53 125 3:143 163 J73 156 181 209 227 o.68'i 58 59 59 . I82 190 ,196 240 249 '' 256 0.7I! 0.74% 0.75%'.' % efLead Forecast -0.64% x'0.61% ..4.61% :Q,6fi°!s ,074°!0 Technical Potential Energy Potential (MWh) rr i��ae*ax,,,� 5`eslor;°Sig,..e,mea Residential Non -Residential Total Ail Buildings Percent of Cllility Porecaat Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential Total All Buildings PercentQflUtility Forecast VERNON Energy Efficiency Programs Targets 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2019 2019 2020 MWH `8,020 7,863 7,992 8,655 9,766 10,716 9,468 8,073 6,962 6,087 0;80% 10:70% ".0:59% 0.50%: 0.43,4 2.011,.`, W 201 ,'1201&.,=qa,. 2.014..,, .,.'2010,,; `�;`?03fi „� , 61 2,Ol;S. ' (.20,1:9,c' it '202.0p. 49 •42 43 • 43 • • 44 •44 45 _ _ ` 46 • ` 46 ' 47 298,486 ;::;500,784 .303,502 305,814 309,777 .312,823 -.3.17,277. 322,036 .326,866 .331,769.. 298,535. 300,827 .3 03,545 305,857 - .309,821 i 312,867 317,322. 322,081:'`326,912 331,816 •:23.69%,-:.1,!; 23.499:4, .23.33% 23:291° 23,42%..'...!23.35%.-:,•23::45%.,.. 23.47°/. 23.47% 23.47°/a P 012 s, 2013 : ". 101 : 2015 °„ 2016 , xNOW 01 e.. ;. r +, r c,',.2 8. 18 17 .':56,313 :'..56,694 57,207 ;,:57,642 56,331 56,712. -57,224 .57,660 (27.60% .27.27% 26.99% X26.94% Economic Potential Energy Potential (MWb) .Est..i»..�:�rsa�t'?�,tf�7'gau: sR#t7io Residential - Non -Residential Total All Buildings Percent; of Utility Forecast Demand Potential (kW) Residential Non -Residential .. . Total All Buildings Percent 'of Forecast Market Potential Energy Potential WW1') Residential Non Residential 'Total A11 Buildings Percent of Forecast 18 18 18. 19 '19' 19. 58,389 .:58,963 59,803 60,700 61,610 62,5353. 58,407. 58,982- 59,821 60,718 61,629 62,553 27.17% 27.06% 27:198/° 27.2396 27.15°/x 27.20%.': ; .291,589 ::293,776 :296,430 ....298;688:!: '302;558 305,533 309,884 291,631.293,811.296,466. 298,723 302,595 -305,570.309,921 '';22 78% .22;75/ 22:87/ 22,;60°/ 22190°/q 54,877 26.89% 0 2tt`6 °rra, 013. i< d^ .0..15t.r3 1'291,6, u.x„ . . . . .0C-0 8 8 55,226 :55,725 :;56,149:' „56,877 57,436 .59254 55,234 55,733 56,158 56,885 57,445 58,263 .26.55% 126.29%4 26.24% " 26.46% .:26.35% . 0 0 ,' 0 . 0.: 8,020 • .: :'.7 863 • : :: ":' 7,992 :. 8,655 . , . , 8020 •_ , .. , .7,863 • 7,992 . 8,655 : • :: 0.64! 0.61 % 0.61"/ 5.6614 Demand Potential (kW) iil'i , _ a,15j Blom ✓ 2b3114:111401K giVn Residential Nod -Residential TotalAllBuildings PercentofUlddy Forecast "015.x,12:05:1P1- 0 0 0 9,766 10,716 9,458 9,766. 10,716 _ 9,468 0;74/ aso% 0,70°7. me „rd;fs 0 . ' 0 0- 0. : 0 973 d'C451 961 1,070 8;205 973 '' 958 `" 981 - 1,070 • 1,205 :048% - "0.46% :0.46% • -'0.50°/q x.0:56% 261 � U 2t sg 0„111294 38 38 39 514,532 .3.39,250 524,039, 314,569 319,288 324,077 .219251. 22.92%S. - .Z01 ?2019.". 2020 ss 59;128 99,015' 60y15.: 59,136 60,023''60,924 26.52% ia °na 02g,,o: 0 •0 • a 8;073. 6,9625' . 6,087 9,073 .:6,962 .6,087:.. 0,5996 0,50/, '0.43%1 l 2,057 2018; ., 2059 ? l 12t1!€'s. i'y317 1,179 . 1,023 - 900 ',:_ 804 1,317 1,178 1,023 900 -_ 804 0.60/ 0.54% 0.46% 0.40%' 035% Appendix C: References to Documents Supporting Report California Energy Commission, Funding and Energy Savings from Investor -Owned Utility Energy Efficiency Programs in California for Program Years 2000 through 2004, CEC Publication CEC-400-2005-042-REV2, August 2005. California Energy Commission, 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report, CEC Publication CEC-100-2007- 008-CMF, November 2007. California Energy Commission, 2008 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update, CEC Publication CEC-100- 2008-008-CTF, November 2008. California Energy Commission, 2006, California Commercial End -Use Survey California Energy Commission, 2004, California Statewide Residential Appliance Saturation Study California Institute for Energy and Environment, 2009, Behavioral Assumptions in Energy Efficiency Potential Studies California Municipal Utilities Association, Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector: A Status Report, December 2006 California Municipal Utilities Association, Energy Efficiency in California's Public Power Sector: A Status Report, March 2008 California Public Utilities Commission, Rulemaking R.04-04-025, Various Decisions D.05-04-024, 0.06-06- 063, and Decision D.08-01-006 regarding avoided cost methodologies and the Total Resource Cost test. Energy and Environmental Economics, "Methodology and Forecast of Long Term Avoided Costs for The Evaluation of California Energy Efficiency Programs." Available at http://www.ethree.com/cpuc avoidedcosts.html Itron, 2008, California Energy Efficiency Potential Study KEMA Incorporated. Measure Quantification Methodology: Statewide Savings and Costs, 2006 Report, August 2006. Available at http://www.ncpa.com/energy-efficiency-reports.html KEMA Incorporated. Measure Quantification Methodology: Statewide Savings and Costs, 2008 Supplement, Addendum 2008-1, February 2008. Available at http://www.ncpa.com/enemy-efficiency- reports.html KEMA Incorporated. Measure Quantification Methodology: Statewide Savings and Costs, 2009 KEMA Report, December 2009 262 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Model Energy Efficiency Program impact Evaluation Guide, A Resource of the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, November 2007. California Air Resources Board AB 32 Scoping Plan, adopted December 11, 2008. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm 263 Appendix D: List of Available Evaluation Reports The below listed evaluation reports are available (unless otherwise noted) for download at: httn://www.ncpa.com/energv-efficiency-m-v-reports.html Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, May 2009, Summit Blue Consulting 2. FY 2009 Evaluation Report, Residential CFL program, Global Energy Partners, available June 2010 Anaheim 3. Energy Efficiency Evaluation Report, Lincus Energy, Inc., available in 2010 Biggs Burbank 4. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Jun 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 5. FY2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation, February 15, 2010, Navigant Consulting 6. Energy Efficiency Evaluation Report, Lincus Energy, Inc., available March 31, 2010 Gridley Healdsburg 7. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Jun 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 8. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report, February 26, 2010, Optimized Energy and Facilities Consulting 9. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Jun 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 10. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report, available in 2010, Optimized Energy and Facilities Consulting 11. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report, March 2010, Optimized Energy and Facilities Consulting 12. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, May 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 13. Process Evaluation of Lodi Electric Utility's Efficiency Program and Impact Evaluation of the Non -Residential Custom Program - Lighting and Appliance Rebate, Nov 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 14. Impact Evaluation of the Nonresidential Customer Program and the Residential Home Improvement Program, FY2008/09, November 20, 2009, Summit Blue Consulting Lassen Lodi Lompoc LADWP 15. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Jun 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 16. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Mar 2009, Summit Blue Consulting 17. 2006-2007 Evaluation Report, Report available from SCPPA website 18. 2007-2008 Evaluation Report, Availability TBD Modesto Irrigation District 19. Evaluation, Measurement and Verification Plan for Modesto Irrigation District, April 2009, Taylor Systems Engineering 264 Palo Alto 20. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Feb 2009, Summit Blue Consulting 21. FY2008/2009 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation, March 5, 2010, Navigant Consulting Plumas Sierra REC 22. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, May 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 23. Engineering Evaluation of GeoExchange Program, February 8 2010, Efficiency Services Group 24. Evaluation, Measurement, & Verification Report for PSREC2009, February 26 2010, Efficiency Services Group Port of Oakland 25. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Feb 2009, Summit Blue Consulting Redding 26. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Jun 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 27. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Mar 2009, Summit Blue Consulting Roseville 28. Evaluation, Measurement and Verification Plans for Roseville Electric, Dec 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 29. Process and Impact Evaluation of Roseville Electric's Residential New Construction, HVAC Retrofit, and Commercial Custom Rebate Programs: FY2007/08, Feb 2009, Morrison Energy Services 30. Evaluation, Measurement& Verification Report, available in March 2010, Efficiency Services Group Shasta Lake 31. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report, March 2010, Optimized Energy and Facilities Consulting Silicon Valley Power 32. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Mar2009, FY 2007/2008 Program, Summit Blue Consulting 33. Evaluation, Verification & Measurement Study, FY 2008/2009 Program, December 31, 2009, Summit Blue Consulting SMUD 34. Evaluation of Prescriptive Lighting Program, Nov 2007, ADM Associates, Inc. 35. Measure and Verify Savings of Refrigerator Recycling Program, May 2007, ADM Associates, Inc. 36. Residential HVAC Program Evaluation, Mar 2008, RLW Analytics, Inc. 37. The Impact of Home Electricity Reports, September 2009, ADM Associates, Inc. TID 38. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, May 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 39. Evaluation, Verification, and Measurement Study, Mar 2009, Summit Blue Consulting 40. CY2009 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation, Navigant Consulting, available June 2010 265 Truckee Donner PUD 41. Evaluation, Measurement and Verification Plan for Truckee Donner Public Utility District 2008Energy Efficiency Programs, Feb 2009, Robert Mowris and Associates 42. Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report for Truckee Donner Public Utility District, February 26, 2010, Optimized Energy & Facilities Consulting, Inc. 43. Truckee Donner Public Utilities District Calculation Evaluation, Measurement & Verification Report, February 26, 2010, Optimized Energy & Facilities Consulting, Inc. Ukiah 44. 2008 Energy Efficiency Program Evaluation Plan, Aug 2008, Summit Blue Consulting 266