introduction€¦ · web view2020/03/14 · 272.595 tss89 z8941 11/28/2019 0.8 24,027.277 2.12%...
TRANSCRIPT
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Energy Efficiency / Demand Response Plan: Program Year 2019 (CY2019) (1/1/2019-12/31/2019)
Presented toComEd
DRAFTMarch 14, 2020
Prepared by:
Paul Higgins, Guidehouse Eric Stern, GuidehouseCarly Olig, Guidehouse Ethan Young, Guidehouse
www.guidehouse.com
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Submitted to:
ComEd2011 Swift DriveOak Brook, IL 60523
Submitted by:
Guidehouse (which acquired Navigant in 2019)150 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 2100Chicago, IL 60606
Contact:
Randy Gunn, [email protected]
Jeff Erickson, [email protected]
Carly Olig, Associate [email protected]
Disclaimer: This report was prepared by Guidehouse for ComEd. The work presented in this report represents Guidehouse’s professional judgment based on the information available at the time this report was prepared. Use of this report by any other party for whatever purpose should not, and does not, absolve such party from using due diligence in verifying the report’s contents. Neither Guidehouse nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates assumes any liability or duty of care to such parties, and hereby disclaims any such liability.
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 12. Program Description................................................................................................................................ 13. Program Savings Detail........................................................................................................................... 14. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings....................................................................................................35. Program Savings by Measure................................................................................................................. 56. Impact Analysis Findings and Recommendations...................................................................................5
6.1 Impact Parameter Estimates........................................................................................................56.2 Other Impact Findings and Recommendations............................................................................5
7. Appendix 1. Impact Analysis Methodology............................................................................................137.1 Energy Savings Methodology....................................................................................................137.2 Peak Demand Savings Methodology.........................................................................................16
8. Appendix 2. Impact Analysis Detail........................................................................................................179. Appendix 3. Total Resource Cost Detail................................................................................................3210. Appendix 4. Stipulation Agreement......................................................................................................33
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings.....................................................................................5Figure 6-1. Load Data for Feeder C057 on Substation TDC205................................................................7Figure 6-2. Voltage Data for Feeder D5001 on Substation TDC550..........................................................8Figure 6-3. Voltage Data for Feeder F461 on Substation TDC446.............................................................8Figure 6-4. Voltage Data for Feeder G6971 on Substation TDC469..........................................................9Figure 6-6. Voltage Data for Feeder H787 on Substation DCH78..............................................................9Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder C858 on Substation DCC85............................................................11Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder W513 on Substation DCW51..........................................................11Figure 6-8. Voltage Data for Feeder E81 on Substation DCE8................................................................12Figure 6-9. Voltage Data for Feeder W190 on Substation DCW119........................................................13
Table 2-1. CY2019 Volumetric Findings Detail...........................................................................................1Table 3-1. CY2019 Total Annual Incremental Electric Savings..................................................................2Table 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings (CPAS) – Electric.........................................................4Table 7-1. Data Reconstruction Priority Sequence...................................................................................15Table 7-2. Data Reconstruction................................................................................................................16Table 8-1. CY2019 Verified VO Energy Savings and Voltage Reductions by Feeder..............................17Table 8-2. CY2019 VO RRs by Substation..............................................................................................29Table 9-1. Total Resource Cost Savings Summary..................................................................................32
Page i
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the impact evaluation of ComEd’s CY2019 Voltage Optimization (VO) Program. It includes a summary of the energy and demand impacts for the total program broken out by relevant measure and program structure details. The appendix provides the impact analysis methodology and details of the Total Resource Cost inputs. CY2019 covers January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019.
2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The VO Program comprises ComEd’s plan to install hardware and software systems on a significant fraction of its electric power distribution grid to achieve voltage and reactive power optimization (volt-var optimization, or VVO) over the 2018-2025 time frame. VVO is a smart grid technology that uses distributed sensors, two-way communications infrastructure, remote controls on substation transformer load-tap changers and line capacitor banks, and integrating/optimizing software to flatten voltage profiles and lower average voltage levels on an electric power distribution grid. ComEd is working with an automation-optimization hardware and software vendor1 to implement the VO program on selected parts of its distribution grid over the 2018-2025 period.
Unlike energy efficiency programs that achieve savings by providing financial incentives to encourage customers to adopt energy-efficient equipment or behavioral suggestions to encourage them to adopt no-cost energy-saving behaviors, the VO Program involves no direct customer engagement. Instead, savings is achieved by operating the voltage and reactive power controls on VO-enabled feeders and substations in a manner designed to maintain the voltages delivered to affected customers in the lower part of the allowable voltage range.2
The program installed and commissioned VO systems on a total of 386 feeders at 68 substations in CY2019, as shown in the following table.3
Table 2-1. CY2019 Volumetric Findings Detail
Participation Count
VO-Enabled Substations 68
VO-Enabled Feeders 386Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis
3. PROGRAM SAVINGS DETAIL
Table 3-2 summarizes the incremental energy and demand savings the VO Program achieved in CY2019. As VO is not a customer facing program there is no free ridership and no spillover and as such
1 Open Systems International (OSI) of Medina, Minnesota.2 The bulk of the energy savings that occurs is thus expected to occur on the customer side of the meter, although additional savings is expected from reduced current flows along the full length of the affected circuits.3 CY2019 VO installations occurred throughout the program year. Error: Reference source not found shows only those substations and feeders on which installation, commissioning and system testing were completed by December 31, 2019.
Page 1
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
the net-to-gross (NTG) ratio is 1 and net and gross savings are identical. The program did not claim, and the evaluation did not examine, gas savings.
It should be noted that Guidehouse calculated the gross realization rate (RR)4 shown in Table 3-2 using estimates for ex ante savings that ComEd derived from a 2014 VO potential study5 that did not follow the methodology specified by the 2019 Stipulation Agreement6 between ComEd, the Illinois Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), and other parties. Thus, there is no presumption that the expected RR for the CY2019 VO Program should equal 1.0.
Table 3-2. CY2019 Total Annual Incremental Electric Savings
Savings Category Energy Savings (kWh)Non-Coincident Demand
Savings (kW)Summer Peak* Demand
Savings (kW)ElectricityEx Ante Gross Savings 198,403,000 NR NRProgram Gross Realization Rate 0.87 NR NRVerified Gross Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942Program Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) 1.00 NR 1.00Verified Net Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942Converted from Gas†Ex Ante Gross Savings NA NA NA
Program Gross Realization Rate NA NA NA
Verified Gross Savings NA NA NAProgram Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) NA NA NAVerified Net Savings NA NA NATotal Electric Plus GasEx Ante Gross Savings 198,403,000 NR NR
Program Gross Realization Rate 0.87 NR NR
Verified Gross Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942
Program Net-to-Gross Ratio (NTG) 1.00 NR 1.00Verified Net Savings 172,573,526 NR 20,942NR = Not reported (refers to a piece of data that was not reported, i.e., non-coincident demand savings)NA = Not applicable (refers to a piece of data that cannot be produced or does not apply)* The coincident summer peak period is defined as 1:00-5:00 p.m. Central Prevailing Time on non-holiday weekdays, June through August.† The evaluation did not estimate gas savings for this program.Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis
4 The gross RR is defined as the ratio of verified gross savings to ex ante gross savings.5 AEG, Voltage Optimization (VO) Feasibility Study, Final Report, March 9, 2015.6 Joint Ex. 1.0, Stipulation Agreement, Docket No. 19-0580, between Commonwealth Edison, the Staff of the ICC, the Citizens Utility Board, Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the People of the State of Illinois (AG), hereinafter referenced as “Stipulation Agreement.” <https://icc.illinois.gov/docket/files.aspx?no=P2019-0580&docId=291954>
Page 2
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
4. CUMULATIVE PERSISTING ANNUAL SAVINGS
Table 4-3 and Figure 4-1 show the measure-specific and total verified gross savings for the VO Program and the cumulative persisting annual savings (CPAS) for the measures installed in CY2019. The electric CPAS across all measures installed in 2019 is 172,573,526 kWh (Table 4-3). Guidehouse did not evaluate gas savings for this program and as such electric CPAS is equivalent to total CPAS. The “historic” rows in the table are the CPAS contribution back to CY2018. The “Program Total Electric CPAS” is the sum of the CY2019 contribution and the historic contribution.
Page 3
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Table 4-3. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings (CPAS) – ElectricVerified Net kWh Savings
End Use Type Research Category EUL
CY2019 Verified Gross Savings (kWh) NTG*
Lifetime Net Savings (kWh)† 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
All VO 15.0 172,573,526 1.00 2,588,602,890 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 CY2019 Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS 172,573,526 2,588,602,890 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 Historic Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS‡ 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 Program Total Electric CPAS 66,014,049 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - Historic Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings‡§ - - - - - - - - Program Total Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - -
End Use Type Research Category 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038All VO 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 CY2019 Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 172,573,526 - - - - - Historic Program Total Electric Contribution to CPAS‡ 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 66,014,049 Program Total Electric CPAS 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 238,587,575 172,573,526 - - - - - CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - - 172,573,526 - - - - Historic Program Incremental Expiring Electric Savings‡§ - - - - - - 66,014,049 - - - - - Program Total Incremental Expiring Electric Savings§ - - - - - - 66,014,049 172,573,526 - - - -
Note: The green highlighted cell shows program total first year electric savings. The gray cells are blank, indicating values irrelevant to the CY2019 contribution to CPAS.* A deemed value. Source: is to be found on the Illinois SAG web site here: https://www.ilsag.info/ntg_2019.† Lifetime savings are the sum of CPAS savings through the EUL.‡ Historical savings go back to CY2018§ Incremental expiring savings are equal to CPAS Yn-1 - CPAS Yn
Source: Evaluation team analysis
Page 4
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 4-1. Cumulative Persisting Annual Savings
-
20,000,000
40,000,000
60,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
120,000,000
140,000,000
160,000,000
180,000,000
200,000,000
201820192020202120222023202420252026202720282029203020312032203320342035203620372038203920402041204220432044204520462047204820492050
Verif
ied
Net
kW
h
YearCY2019 Program Total Contribution to CPAS CY2019 Program Incremental Expiring Savings§
* Expiring savings are equal to CPAS Yn-1 - CPAS Yn.Source: Evaluation team analysis
5. PROGRAM SAVINGS BY MEASURE
There is only one measure in this program and so measure-level results are the same as the program-level results discussed in the previous section. See Section 8 below for detailed savings results.
6. IMPACT ANALYSIS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Impact Parameter Estimates
The VO Program does not have relevant impact parameters.
6.2 Other Impact Findings and Recommendations
The evaluation team developed several recommendations based on findings from the CY2019 evaluation. Note that the Stipulation Agreement prescribed a data reconstruction process, which filled in data that was missing or removed by data cleaning. Guidehouse followed the Stipulation Agreement and guidance provided by ComEd in implementing said reconstruction process.7 The data cleaning and reconstruction processes are described in Section 7.1.
Finding 1. Following the methodology outlined in the Stipulation Agreement, Guidehouse found energy savings of 172,573,526 kWh for the CY2019 VO feeders resulting in a RR of 0.87. However, the ex ante savings ComEd reported for the CY2019 VO feeders were derived from a 2014 VO potential study that did not follow the methodology specified by the Stipulation
7 ComEd’s guidance was provided in a PowerPoint titled 2019 VO Measurement & Verification Methodology dated November 6th, 2019.
Page 5
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Agreement. Thus, there is no presumption that the expected RR for the CY2019 VO Program should equal 1.0.
Recommendation 1. Guidehouse recommends that in the future ComEd provide ex ante savings values that align with the evaluation methodology being utilized so that the RR reflects an apples-to-apples comparison.
Finding 2. Feeder data provided by ComEd appears to include some feeders with time stamps in Central Prevailing Time and some feeders with time stamps in Central Standard Time. Guidehouse was unable to reliably distinguish between the two. As the majority of feeders appear to be in Central Standard Time, Guidehouse assumed Central Standard Time for all feeders.
Recommendation 2. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd include time zones with their time stamped data in the future or provide Guidehouse with a list of which feeders record time in Central Standard Time and which in Central Prevailing Time.
Finding 3. Guidehouse identified several instances where the identifier associated with a VO transformer changed over time. For example, ComEd labeled one transformer TR51 in 2018 and TR1 in 2019. Guidehouse believes we identified all these instances and correlated the appropriate data together.
Recommendation 3. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd keep the VO transformer identifiers the same from year to year. Alternatively, if ComEd needs to change an identifier we recommend they provide Guidehouse with a list explicitly mapping the changes from year to year.
Finding 4. Guidehouse found that many feeders labelled as single phase in the feeder information file we received are actually three phase. For example, feeders B961, C801 and D164 had “1” values entered in the Phase field of the feeder information file, but had separate amps readings for phases A, B and C in the time-series data ComEd provided. Guidehouse identified these feeders and treated them appropriately.
Recommendation 4. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd review the phase information in the feeder information file and update it as needed.
Finding 5. Guidehouse found that the data received for this program included many different values indicating bad or missing data. These included but were not limited to: “Bad Quality”, “bad quality”, “No Data”, “Historical data not extracted”, “missing”, “NA”, and “#N/A”.
Recommendation 5. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd standardize their values to indicate bad or missing data.
Finding 6. Many feeders have jumps or dips in load when load shifting occurs across feeders. These changes are observed in the actual data but are obscured by the data reconstruction process Guidehouse had to use to estimate missing data.8 Figure 6-2 shows an example of this for feeder C057 on substation TDC205, where the red line is showing actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.9
8 The data cleaning and reconstruction process are discussed in detail in Section 7.9 The colors of the reconstructed data refer to the priority bins shown in Table 7-4.
Page 6
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 6-2. Load Data for Feeder C057 on Substation TDC205
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Finding 7. For many of the feeders on substation TDC550, Guidehouse found that most of the actual voltage and load data is missing or removed by the stipulated data cleaning process starting in September 2019. The reconstructed load data appear to match the actual data fairly well. However, the actual voltage data appear to increase at this time without an increase in the reconstructed data. Figure 6-3 shows an example of this for feeder D5001, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Page 7
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 6-3. Voltage Data for Feeder D5001 on Substation TDC550
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Finding 8. For many of the feeders on substation TDC446, Guidehouse found that much of the reconstructed voltage data is lower than the actual data in the same or a neighboring time period. This appears to be caused by an increase in voltage in March 2019. Figure 6-4 shows an example of this for feeder F461, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Figure 6-4. Voltage Data for Feeder F461 on Substation TDC446
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Finding 9. For many of the feeders on substation TDC469, Guidehouse found that much of the data in the first half of the year is missing or removed by the data cleaning process. The reconstructed load data appear to match the actual data fairly well. However, the actual voltage data during this time frame is very high compared to the reconstructed data and the rest of the year. Figure 6-5 shows an example of this for feeder G6971, where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Page 8
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 6-5. Voltage Data for Feeder G6971 on Substation TDC469
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Recommendation 6. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate why actual voltage was anomalously high during the first half of 2019 for feeders on substation TDC469.
Finding 10. For feeders on substation DCH78, reconstructed voltage data for January through March is low compared to contemporaneous actual values and to the rest of 2019. This appears to be caused by a sharp increase in actual measured voltage in August 2018; the low values from the first half of 2018 pull down the reconstructed values for 2019. Figure 6-6 shows feeder H787 as an example of this where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Figure 6-6. Voltage Data for Feeder H787 on Substation DCH78
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Recommendation 7. Guidehouse recommends ComEd and Guidehouse work together to revisit and potentially refine the data reconstruction process for future evaluation years, and in consideration of the final methodology for version 9 of the TRM, to better deal with the types of situations raised in findings 6 through 10.
Page 9
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Finding 11. Many feeders have sustained periods of VO off when we expected to see VO on/off testing occurring (i.e., after VO was enabled);10 note that VO savings only accrue when VO is turned on. The Stipulation Agreement states, “the savings reductions during the VO On/Off testing shall not be a basis to reduce the estimated savings, the off periods shall be treated as if they were on during the evaluation.” In this draft report, Guidehouse has annualized savings for all feeders such that the verified savings reflect savings as if VO were on for the entire year and there is no penalization for off periods unrelated to on/off testing.
Examples of feeders with extended (approximately 2 weeks or longer) off periods include, but are be limited to:
Feeder C858 on substation DCC85 had VO enabled in January but had VO off from early July through the end of 2019.
o As an example to illustrate this issue, Figure 6-7 shows reconstructed voltage data for this feeder where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Feeder C211 on substation DCC21 had VO enabled in March but had fewer than 10 days with VO turned on for the rest of the year.
Feeder C661 on substation DCC66 had a sustained off period from August 20th to September 9th. Several other feeders had sustained off periods over the same period including:
o 2 feeders on substation DCD40o 12 feeders on substation TDC216o 1 feeder on substation DCC25
The 10 feeders on substation TDC568 had an extended off period from September 3 to September 19 with just one on period of approximately 14 hours during this time.
The 8 feeders on substation TDC552 had an extended off period from August 19 to September 19 with just one on period of approximately 8 hours during this time.
Feeder G091 on substation DCG909 had VO enabled in March but had sustained off periods from March 26 to April 30 and July 9 to July 29. This feeder also had only 3 half-hour instances of VO on from September 2 through the end of the year.
On substation DCW50 feeders W500 and W501 had a sustained off period from July 8 to August 18.
o Note that feeder W502 was not affected by these off periods but did have several extended periods of VO on throughout the year.
The 36 feeders on substation TSS137 had extended off periods from Feb 21 to March 16, April 15 to April 30, and Nov 20 to the end of the year.
10 Note that the VO on/off testing was designed as an experiment where VO would be on for 4 days and then off for 4 days. This design makes the change in VO status independent of any other variables that affect load or voltage (such as weather, time of day, and day of week) such that the impact of VO can be measured in an unbiased fashion. Extended period of VO on or off comprise the validity of the experimental design.
Page 10
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 6-7. Voltage Data for Feeder C858 on Substation DCC85
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Recommendation 8. Guidehouse recommends ComEd confer with the stipulating parties on how extended off periods unrelated to VO on/off testing (i.e., after VO was enabled) should be treated in terms of CY2019 claimed savings. Any guidance from the stipulating parties should clearly explain any periods for which savings should not accrue for CY2019 (either by explicitly identifying each period for which savings should not accrue or providing a clear time-based cutoff such as any off period over 2 weeks after VO is enabled should not accrue savings) and how those periods should affect savings for the lifetime of the measure for CPAS. Guidehouse also recommends ComEd investigate why on/off testing of VO was ceased for extended periods of time on these feeders.
Finding 12. Feeder W513 on substation DCW51 appears to have little on/off testing occurring and shows voltage inconsistent with the VO status flags. This feeder went live on 6/26/2019 but has fewer than 7 days with VO marked as on from 7/1/2019 to 12/31/2019. In particular, VO is marked off for all of November and December 2019. Additionally, reconstructed voltage in the first 5 months of the year is low compared to actual voltage in the same time period. This feeder’s voltage data is shown in Figure 6-8 where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Figure 6-8. Voltage Data for Feeder W513 on Substation DCW51
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Page 11
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Recommendation 9. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate why on/off testing was not occurring as expected for feeder W513 and whether the VO status flags received by Guidehouse are accurate given the drops in voltage during periods marked as VO off.
Finding 13. Feeder E81 on substation DCE8 has long periods where VO status is on, but voltage cycling appears to be occurring. This feeder’s voltage data is shown in Figure 6-9 where the red dots show actual, measured data and the other colors show reconstructed data.
Figure 6-9. Voltage Data for Feeder E81 on Substation DCE8
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Recommendation 10. Guidehouse recommends ComEd investigate whether the VO status flags for feeder E81 received by Guidehouse are accurate given the cycling voltage during periods marked entirely as VO on.
Finding 14. Guidehouse observed multiple instances of VO status flags being misaligned by several hours with the swings in voltage typically observed under VO on/off testing. This issue is pervasive across many feeders and one example is shown in Figure 6-10 for feeder W190 on substation DCW119. For this feeder, the drop in voltage characteristic of VO starts several hours before the VO status shows on and continues for a few hours after VO status is off. This misalignment causes issues for a few reasons:
1. Since data reconstruction is based on observations with the same VO status flag, such misalignment could result in reconstructed VO off observations being lower than they should be or reconstructed VO on observations being higher than they should be.
2. The same issue as item 1 applies to constructing the counterfactual voltage.3. When regression is used to estimate VO impacts (for example, in peak estimation for
CY2019 or in the methods being used for version 9.0 of the TRM) such misalignment dilutes the relationship between voltage and VO status.
Page 12
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Figure 6-10. Voltage Data for Feeder W190 on Substation DCW119
Source: Evaluation team analysis.
Recommendation 11. Guidehouse recommends that ComEd review how the VO status is tracked and explain why the VO status flags do not seem well aligned with voltage changes.
7. APPENDIX 1. IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The Stipulation Agreement specifies how the evaluator will calculate savings for the CY2019 VO program.11 The relevant text of the Stipulation Agreement (Section II.7) is included as Appendix 4. Guidehouse followed that stipulated approach and guidance provided by ComEd12 in estimating CY2019 savings. The following sections describe how we estimated CY2019 energy and summer peak demand savings from the VO Program.
7.1 Energy Savings Methodology
The stipulation methodology relies on a conservation voltage reduction factor (CVRf), which is deemed at 0.8, and utilizes Equation 7-1 to estimate energy savings.
Equation 7-1. Stipulation Energy Savings Calculation
Energy Savings=EnergyBaseline∗CVRf∗voltage reduction percentage
Appendix 4 reproduces the relevant sections of the stipulation; this section does not reproduce the stiulation but provides relevant details that supplement the information in the stipulation.
Regarding Section c on the energy baseline.
1. In regard to Section c.i, in cases where power (MW) data was not available, Guidehouse converted the corresponding current (amps) value to MW using Equation 7-2 through Equation 7-4. This conversion was applied to pre-VO data for 95 feeders.
11 See footnote 6.12 See footnote 7.
Page 13
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Equation 7-2. Amps to MW Conversion (3-Phase with Line-to-Line Voltage)
Pt=√3∗V t∗I t∗p f
Equation 7-3. Amps-to-MW Conversion (3-Phase with Line-to-Neutral Voltage)
Pt=3∗V t∗I t∗pf
Equation 7-4. Amps-to-MW Conversion (Single Phase)
Pt=V t∗It∗p f
where:Pt Calculated MW data at time tV t Average measured voltage at time tI t Average measured amps at time tpf Power factor assumed to be 0.913
2. In regard to Section c.ii, Guidehouse created a lookup table to reconstruct load (MW) and voltage data that was missing or eliminated by the data cleaning process (see bullet 3) based on the priority sequence shown in Table 7-4. Guidehouse used data from January 1, 2018 through January 31, 2020 to reconstruct data for CY2019. Guidehouse chose not to reconstruct data for feeders with fewer than 1000 measured data points after cleaning; this resulted in two feeders (W258 and C162Y) being dropped and assigned savings based on the average of all the other feeders.
13 Empirical review of the CY2019 time-series data from VO Program feeders shows the actual measured power factor ranges from 0.1 to 1, with the majority falling in the 0.80 to 1 range. Guidehouse used 0.9 to align with ComEd’s assumed power factor.
Page 14
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Table 7-4. Data Reconstruction Priority Sequence
Priority Components and Commonalities of Table
1 Season*, Temperature†, Day Type‡, Hour§, VO Status
2 Temperature, Day Type, Hour, VO Status
3-5 Temperature +/-5||, Day Type, Hour, VO Status
6 Season, Day Type, Hour, VO Status
7 Temperature, Day Type, VO Status
8 Season, Day Type, VO Status
9 Temperature, VO Status
10 Season, VO Status
11 VO Status, Day Type, Hour
12 VO Status, Day Type
13 VO Status* Seasons are: Spring (March to May), Summer (June to August), Fall (September to November), and Winter (December to February)† Temperature was binned to the ceiling of the nearest 5°F interval. Guidehouse sourced temperature data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Quality Controlled Local Climatological Data (QCLCD) weather station geographically closest to each feeder. Guidehouse filled in missing data via linear interpolation (for gaps of 4 or fewer hours) or from the next closest weather station (for gaps longer than 4 hours).‡ Day types are weekdays (Monday to Friday) and weekends (Saturday and Sunday).§ Hour refers to the same hour of the day.|| Temperature +/-5 refers to temperatures one 5°F bin above or below the temperature of the observation being reconstructed. This occurred in three stages where we first looked across the bin above and below and then in just one or the other if there were no data points in one of them.Source: ComEd
3. In regard to Section c.iii, Guidehouse cleaned the MW data by removing anomalous values of the following types:
a. Negative valuesb. Non-numeric valuesc. Zero valuesd. Missing valuese. Repetitive values14
f. Interpolated values15
g. Outlier valuesi. Defined as values above 110% or below 10% of the feeder peak load for feeders
without distributed energy resources (DER)ii. Defined as values above 110% of the feeder peak load or below the expected
reverse power for feeders with DER16
14 Repetitive values are cases where three values in a row match up to six decimal places.15 Interpolated values are detected when the difference between values is the same (up to three decimal places) for at least two values in a row.16 The expected reverse power flow (Prep) is calculated based on the total installed DER capacity on the feeder (PDER) and the expected feeder demand during DER peak time (PDemand = 50% of feeder peak load):
Prev=PDemand−PDER
Page 15
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
4. In regard to Section c.v, Guidehouse accounted for line losses of 3.67%.17
Regarding Section d on the voltage reduction percentage:
1. In regard to Section d.i and d.v, Guidehouse constructed the counterfactual voltage profile based on the same priority sequence as shown in Table 7-4.
2. In regard to Section d.iii and d.iv, Guidehouse cleaned the voltage data by removing anomalous values of the same types as for the MW data (see bullet 3 regarding Section c) except outlier values are defined as values above 1.10 per unit (p.u.) and below 0.90 p.u. of the nominal line-to-line voltage level for regular transformers and the line-to-neutral voltage for DC-in-a-box (DCIAB) transformers. Guidehouse reconstructed missing and eliminated voltage data using the same priority sequence as shown in Table 7-4.
Table 7-5 shows how much of the reconstructed data came from each priority bin in Table 7-4.
Table 7-5. Data Reconstruction
Priority Bin Percentage
Actual Measured 70.90%
1 16.70%
2 10.70%
3-5 1.50%
6 0.00%
7 0.10%
8 <0.01%
9 <0.01%
10 0.00%
11 <0.01%
12 <0.01%
13 0.00%Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis
7.2 Peak Demand Savings Methodology
Summer peak demand savings are not mentioned in the Stipulation Agreement. Guidehouse’s method utilized a regression model that takes advantage of the VO on/off testing to estimate summer peak period savings. We felt this was more accurate than modifying the Stipulation methodology as it does not rely on using a deemed CVR factor of 0.8, which may not be correct for the summer peak period.18 Additionally, the regression analysis utilizes the experimental design, wherein VO was meant to be turned on and off on a set schedule independent of any other factors, which is the gold standard for evaluation.
17 Distribution system energy losses is 3.67% based on ComEd’s filed 2018 ComEd Distribution System Loss Study.18 Assuming 0.8 is the correct CVR factor for the entire year (all seasons, all day types, all hours of the day), it would be unlikely to also be the correct CVR factor for the summer peak period.
Page 16
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Guidehouse only utilized CY2019 feeders which had VO enabled by August 1, 2019 in order to have sufficient peak period on/off testing data for the regression; we applied the average savings from these 153 feeders to all 386 CY2019 feeders to get total summer peak demand savings.
For the summer peak demand savings estimation, Guidehouse utilized the cleaned data, before reconstruction, from the energy savings methodology described above. We subset the data to contain only summer peak period days: non-holiday weekdays from June 1 through August 31. We then ran the pooled regression models shown in Equation 7-5 across all feeders to estimate VO’s impact on load and voltage. We utilized this pooled approach rather than feeder-by-feeder estimation because it achieved a higher level of statistical significance, and the summer peak savings averaged across all feeders provides sufficient information for cost-effectiveness modelling.
Equation 7-5. Summer Peak Demand Load and Voltage Regression Models
MW ¿=ηi+τh+αV O ¿+βV O¿∙ offpeak t+γCH D¿+ωCDH ¿2+e¿
k V ¿=ηi+ τh+αV O¿+βV O¿ ∙ offpea k t+γCH D ¿+ωCD H ¿2+e¿
where:MW ¿ Load (MW) on feeder i at half-hour tk V ¿ Voltage (kV) on feeder i at half-hour tηi A feeder fixed effect for feeder i, controlling for fixed feeder
characteristics that may affect VOτ h An hourly fixed effect for each hour of the day hV O¿ An indicator equal to 1 when VO is on for feeder i during half-hour toffpeak t An off-peak indicator equal to 1 when half-hour t is between 12:00 AM
through 12:59 PM and 5:00 PM through 11:59 PM in Central Prevailing Time
CDH ¿ and CDH ¿2 Cooling degree hours, base 65, for feeder i during half-hour t and its
square to capture nonlinear impacts of temperature on cooling load
e¿ The cluster-robust error term for feeder i during half-hour t19
The coefficient α represents the impact of VO during the summer peak period.
8. APPENDIX 2. IMPACT ANALYSIS DETAIL
Table 8-6 presents the verified CY2019 VO Program energy impacts by feeder and Table 8-7 presents the RR by substation.
Table 8-6. CY2019 Verified VO Energy Savings and Voltage Reductions by Feeder
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
DCA37 A372 10/31/2019 0.8 16,392.878 4.19% 530.427
DCB96 B961 5/24/2019 0.8 26,536.456 3.60% 718.359
19 Cluster-robust errors account for heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation at the feeder-level.
Page 17
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
DCC21 C211 3/8/2019 0.8 8,265.529 2.94% 183.247
DCC25 C253 7/5/2019 0.8 18,798.601 3.38% 461.601
DCC61 C615 2/28/2019 0.8 25,443.738 4.45% 859.000
DCC66 C661 5/8/2019 0.8 24,588.606 3.48% 638.798
DCC85 C858 1/25/2019 0.8 13,434.492 4.20% 430.087
DCD20 D2002 1/18/2019 0.8 15,375.187 3.52% 407.429
DCD351 D5111 2/9/2019 0.8 25,934.212 4.15% 812.892
DCD40 D4020 4/30/2019 0.8 24,184.492 4.31% 794.627
DCD40 D4021 4/30/2019 0.8 21,017.671 4.54% 728.841
DCD46 D4602 1/8/2019 0.8 23,264.401 3.97% 686.316
DCE16 E134 7/29/2019 0.8 21,199.355 4.53% 733.318
DCE16 E135 7/29/2019 0.8 17,655.757 3.76% 497.554
DCE17 E175 3/8/2019 0.8 13,371.415 3.80% 389.361
DCE29 E295 6/26/2019 0.8 16,376.895 3.57% 440.139
DCE29 E296 6/26/2019 0.8 20,390.844 3.88% 601.030
DCE35 E355 10/23/2019 0.8 10,218.189 5.02% 392.808
DCE35 E356 10/23/2019 0.8 20,298.953 4.15% 639.109
DCE46 E465 6/26/2019 0.8 15,563.112 3.88% 457.842
DCE79 E792 8/1/2019 0.8 18,020.974 2.90% 374.071
DCE8 E81 7/31/2019 0.8 15,602.137 4.58% 545.686
DCE8 E82 9/9/2019 0.8 16,263.316 4.58% 567.362
DCF45 F457 6/4/2019 0.8 25,102.307 4.00% 755.930
DCF45 F458 6/4/2019 0.8 25,016.755 3.60% 687.045
DCG121 G211 2/28/2019 0.8 18,016.167 3.93% 536.145
DCG42 G429 9/13/2019 0.8 27,440.670 3.73% 770.235
DCG88 G881 2/9/2019 0.8 21,678.329 3.58% 581.334
DCG909 G091 3/24/2019 0.8 6,261.016 2.46% 116.279
DCH27 H275 10/31/2019 0.8 23,447.726 3.82% 681.556
DCH56 H565 10/31/2019 0.8 6,436.410 3.75% 189.115
DCH56 H566 10/31/2019 0.8 3,023.239 3.74% 89.709
DCH65 H652 8/23/2019 0.8 16,446.342 2.40% 308.203
DCH76 H761 10/5/2019 0.8 30,620.019 1.21% 291.910
DCH78 H786 12/12/2019 0.8 22,271.717 4.21% 719.690
DCH78 H787 12/12/2019 0.8 22,322.540 4.15% 707.105
DCJ19 J195 7/29/2019 0.8 21,075.416 3.81% 605.268
DCJ19 J196 7/29/2019 0.8 17,743.019 4.10% 547.319
DCJ87 J875 3/1/2019 0.8 23,058.321 3.55% 607.612
Page 18
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
DCS67 S675 9/30/2019 0.8 14,727.059 2.79% 312.285
DCW115 W152 4/30/2019 0.8 22,953.866 3.19% 538.909
DCW115 W175 4/30/2019 0.8 15,750.174 4.13% 497.200
DCW119 W190 9/27/2019 0.8 23,754.803 3.33% 589.424
DCW119 W191 9/27/2019 0.8 11,303.343 4.41% 375.623
DCW148 W140 11/27/2019 0.8 22,253.947 4.51% 778.005
DCW148 W142 11/27/2019 0.8 20,714.645 4.24% 680.143
DCW25 W258* 4/30/2019 0.8 NA NA 447.082
DCW304 W041 10/23/2019 0.8 20,929.278 3.24% 522.505
DCW41 W4101 10/23/2019 0.8 26,945.310 3.51% 715.850
DCW44 W4401 12/5/2019 0.8 22,136.297 3.32% 569.052
DCW46 W467 12/6/2019 0.8 17,969.549 3.83% 531.495
DCW50 W500 4/30/2019 0.8 18,780.405 4.06% 579.023
DCW50 W501 4/30/2019 0.8 18,889.397 3.59% 514.946
DCW50 W502 4/30/2019 0.8 24,248.372 4.22% 794.569
DCW51 W511 2/1/2019 0.8 19,159.873 4.39% 635.012
DCW51 W513 6/26/2019 0.8 27,238.067 0.18% 39.414
SS311 H113 3/30/2019 0.8 17,266.898 3.50% 451.971
SS459 F595 4/30/2019 0.8 13,059.280 4.01% 394.904
SS459 F596 4/30/2019 0.8 17,080.917 3.73% 483.976
SS513 W1310 11/1/2019 0.8 24,498.836 2.70% 504.047
SS513 W1311 11/1/2019 0.8 23,580.408 3.73% 678.641
SS513 W1312 11/1/2019 0.8 24,891.768 3.42% 636.882
SS513 W1313 11/1/2019 0.8 21,507.720 3.70% 609.544
SS553 W530 8/14/2019 0.8 15,576.870 4.40% 513.662
SS553 W531 8/14/2019 0.8 14,234.067 2.99% 294.903
TDC205 C050 4/30/2019 0.8 17,090.946 4.58% 599.139
TDC205 C051 4/30/2019 0.8 30,594.234 4.07% 945.599
TDC205 C0510 4/30/2019 0.8 21,202.601 4.58% 735.295
TDC205 C052 4/30/2019 0.8 21,924.230 4.07% 681.589
TDC205 C053 4/30/2019 0.8 19,965.126 4.56% 690.424
TDC205 C054 4/30/2019 0.8 13,990.849 4.57% 488.413
TDC205 C055 4/30/2019 0.8 15,346.197 4.54% 531.401
TDC205 C056 4/30/2019 0.8 33,966.806 4.07% 1045.678
TDC205 C057 4/30/2019 0.8 20,005.799 3.98% 609.595
TDC205 C058 4/30/2019 0.8 15,940.095 4.55% 550.347
TDC205 C059 4/30/2019 0.8 18,287.675 4.06% 562.657
Page 19
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TDC216 C160 7/29/2019 0.8 24,605.045 3.72% 696.919
TDC216 C161 7/29/2019 0.8 25,987.191 4.42% 851.927
TDC216 C162X 7/29/2019 0.8 31,624.910 3.74% 889.816
TDC216 C162Y* 7/29/2019 0.8 NA NA 447.082
TDC216 C163 7/29/2019 0.8 15,138.705 4.42% 493.953
TDC216 C164 7/29/2019 0.8 27,515.252 3.80% 785.465
TDC216 C165X 7/29/2019 0.8 7,140.424 4.39% 230.773
TDC216 C165Y 7/29/2019 0.8 13,324.632 4.42% 444.921
TDC216 C166 7/29/2019 0.8 3,858.788 3.67% 103.587
TDC216 C167 7/29/2019 0.8 17,854.968 4.42% 596.434
TDC216 C168 7/29/2019 0.8 18,720.046 3.73% 520.913
TDC216 C169 7/29/2019 0.8 10,812.692 4.40% 363.028
TDC317 H1777 11/27/2019 0.8 18,323.053 4.27% 594.613
TDC317 H1778 11/27/2019 0.8 21,642.820 4.26% 705.412
TDC317 H1781 11/27/2019 0.8 9,150.769 4.25% 294.370
TDC317 H1782 11/27/2019 0.8 26,566.427 4.24% 859.549
TDC372 H7270 9/27/2019 0.8 19,193.164 2.17% 313.871
TDC372 H7271 9/27/2019 0.8 25,045.139 2.14% 403.804
TDC372 H7274 9/27/2019 0.8 8,453.894 3.32% 208.009
TDC372 H7275 9/27/2019 0.8 26,565.909 2.99% 600.212
TDC372 H7276 9/27/2019 0.8 22,937.947 2.99% 514.186
TDC435 F3571 12/20/2019 0.8 14,406.947 2.55% 279.348
TDC435 F3572 12/20/2019 0.8 24,224.365 2.55% 472.217
TDC435 F3573 12/20/2019 0.8 16,334.891 2.50% 313.780
TDC435 F3574 12/20/2019 0.8 16,195.021 2.50% 308.095
TDC435 F3575 12/20/2019 0.8 16,343.695 2.59% 325.793
TDC435 F3576 12/20/2019 0.8 17,935.408 2.52% 349.494
TDC435 F3577 12/20/2019 0.8 20,224.598 2.49% 390.390
TDC435 F3578 12/20/2019 0.8 22,535.586 2.50% 430.673
TDC435 F3581 12/20/2019 0.8 19,366.869 2.40% 353.858
TDC435 F3582 12/20/2019 0.8 14,910.909 2.41% 276.902
TDC435 F3583 12/20/2019 0.8 13,549.894 2.56% 270.992
TDC435 F3584 12/20/2019 0.8 23,041.872 2.56% 454.164
TDC435 F3585 12/20/2019 0.8 25,506.924 2.07% 409.158
TDC435 F3586 12/20/2019 0.8 27,129.947 2.03% 426.668
TDC435 F3587 12/20/2019 0.8 17,191.211 2.03% 270.604
TDC435 F3588 12/20/2019 0.8 20,600.137 2.05% 330.691
Page 20
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TDC444 J4401 11/27/2019 0.8 19,529.323 4.30% 650.624
TDC444 J4402 11/27/2019 0.8 12,465.382 4.27% 411.490
TDC444 J4403 11/27/2019 0.8 26,267.199 4.31% 871.244
TDC444 J4405 11/27/2019 0.8 21,408.384 3.85% 635.257
TDC444 J4409 11/27/2019 0.8 23,382.331 3.88% 699.380
TDC444 J4410 11/27/2019 0.8 22,943.171 3.86% 685.469
TDC446 F461 9/9/2019 0.8 9,510.456 3.06% 217.718
TDC446 F462 9/9/2019 0.8 17,736.142 3.09% 408.685
TDC446 F463 9/9/2019 0.8 23,359.731 3.11% 547.513
TDC446 F465 9/9/2019 0.8 22,269.734 4.08% 682.106
TDC446 F466 9/9/2019 0.8 17,732.572 4.12% 550.393
TDC446 F467 9/9/2019 0.8 11,691.475 4.12% 354.420
TDC446 F4674 9/9/2019 0.8 15,960.866 3.05% 358.023
TDC446 F4675 9/9/2019 0.8 13,721.237 3.05% 309.338
TDC446 F4681 9/9/2019 0.8 20,824.597 4.12% 641.324
TDC446 F4684 9/9/2019 0.8 20,175.165 4.10% 617.292
TDC469 G6971 8/30/2019 0.8 24,773.712 4.02% 760.096
TDC469 G6972 8/30/2019 0.8 20,547.431 4.05% 640.261
TDC469 G6973 8/30/2019 0.8 23,312.296 4.07% 740.299
TDC469 G6974 8/30/2019 0.8 22,587.335 4.10% 708.116
TDC469 G6975 8/30/2019 0.8 19,647.075 4.04% 614.881
TDC469 G6976 8/30/2019 0.8 18,402.343 4.04% 568.044
TDC469 G6977 8/30/2019 0.8 5,382.511 3.78% 156.486
TDC469 G6979 8/30/2019 0.8 17,792.035 3.70% 502.803
TDC469 G6980 8/30/2019 0.8 15,118.217 3.62% 408.063
TDC469 G6983 8/30/2019 0.8 19,493.384 3.70% 556.390
TDC469 G6984 8/30/2019 0.8 22,325.283 3.71% 636.989
TDC499 J9901 12/5/2019 0.8 30,340.864 4.66% 1072.480
TDC499 J9902 12/5/2019 0.8 19,214.085 4.66% 682.362
TDC499 J9903 12/5/2019 0.8 21,391.081 4.67% 755.042
TDC499 J9904 12/5/2019 0.8 26,248.035 4.65% 942.488
TDC499 J9905 12/5/2019 0.8 19,322.095 4.55% 676.484
TDC499 J9906 12/5/2019 0.8 11,820.324 4.53% 414.172
TDC499 J9907 12/5/2019 0.8 18,709.655 4.61% 665.529
TDC499 J9909 12/5/2019 0.8 20,369.373 4.61% 721.499
TDC499 J9910 12/5/2019 0.8 28,046.767 4.61% 990.959
TDC499 J9911 12/5/2019 0.8 12,477.214 4.58% 439.001
Page 21
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TDC510 W1031 11/8/2019 0.8 16,879.402 4.52% 578.661
TDC510 W1032 11/8/2019 0.8 22,566.419 4.53% 762.861
TDC510 W1036 11/8/2019 0.8 17,871.237 4.50% 613.183
TDC510 W1039 11/8/2019 0.8 28,217.861 4.44% 944.676
TDC517 D1778 10/31/2019 0.8 17,593.693 3.08% 418.045
TDC517 D1779 10/31/2019 0.8 18,008.635 3.09% 427.899
TDC517 D1781 10/31/2019 0.8 31,742.749 3.09% 752.275
TDC517 D1782 10/31/2019 0.8 14,887.459 3.07% 350.598
TDC517 D1783 10/31/2019 0.8 19,834.692 3.07% 464.390
TDC517 D1784 10/31/2019 0.8 5,977.631 3.07% 141.405
TDC517 D1786 10/31/2019 0.8 21,555.418 1.43% 219.013
TDC517 D1787 10/31/2019 0.8 20,323.304 1.45% 209.017
TDC517 D1792 10/31/2019 0.8 26,137.855 1.44% 269.200
TDC517 D1793 10/31/2019 0.8 5,756.995 1.46% 63.069
TDC550 D5001 11/27/2019 0.8 19,862.217 2.35% 357.217
TDC550 D5003 11/27/2019 0.8 17,773.180 2.47% 340.043
TDC550 D5004 11/27/2019 0.8 29,652.884 2.76% 634.634
TDC550 D5005 11/27/2019 0.8 30,804.555 2.46% 593.128
TDC550 D5006 11/27/2019 0.8 23,791.437 2.73% 507.334
TDC550 D5007 11/27/2019 0.8 11,829.865 2.46% 227.336
TDC550 D5008 11/27/2019 0.8 15,064.889 2.51% 292.569
TDC550 D5009 11/27/2019 0.8 27,861.520 2.49% 543.493
TDC550 D5010 11/27/2019 0.8 26,199.661 2.55% 527.058
TDC550 D5011 11/27/2019 0.8 17,138.321 2.54% 339.306
TDC550 D5012 11/27/2019 0.8 15,101.803 2.55% 298.453
TDC550 D5013 11/27/2019 0.8 25,530.242 3.65% 711.548
TDC550 D5014 11/27/2019 0.8 14,428.088 3.67% 403.101
TDC550 D5015 11/27/2019 0.8 29,531.265 3.70% 829.398
TDC550 D5016 11/27/2019 0.8 18,814.666 3.62% 520.489
TDC550 D5017 11/27/2019 0.8 10,145.738 3.79% 295.056
TDC550 D5018 11/27/2019 0.8 12,496.851 3.78% 359.838
TDC552 W5202 5/24/2019 0.8 23,564.491 2.95% 535.387
TDC552 W5203 5/24/2019 0.8 14,617.184 2.68% 303.261
TDC552 W5204 5/24/2019 0.8 27,280.078 2.72% 568.937
TDC552 W5205 5/24/2019 0.8 15,896.200 2.89% 347.900
TDC552 W5206 5/24/2019 0.8 14,832.966 3.09% 355.760
TDC552 W5208 5/24/2019 0.8 19,674.282 3.11% 478.380
Page 22
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TDC552 W5209 5/24/2019 0.8 15,403.126 3.09% 369.830
TDC552 W5210 5/24/2019 0.8 14,407.677 3.09% 344.501
TDC559 W590 10/31/2019 0.8 16,030.387 4.59% 574.621
TDC559 W591 10/31/2019 0.8 16,916.077 4.61% 607.546
TDC559 W5910 10/31/2019 0.8 10,055.350 3.80% 295.927
TDC559 W5911 10/31/2019 0.8 12,986.251 4.60% 465.167
TDC559 W592 10/31/2019 0.8 14,783.333 4.59% 529.876
TDC559 W593 10/31/2019 0.8 13,717.524 3.78% 402.430
TDC559 W594 10/31/2019 0.8 11,035.547 3.79% 322.975
TDC559 W595 10/31/2019 0.8 11,949.624 3.82% 349.972
TDC559 W596 10/31/2019 0.8 8,340.722 3.83% 253.992
TDC559 W597 10/31/2019 0.8 14,040.731 3.82% 410.981
TDC559 W598 10/31/2019 0.8 25,088.371 4.61% 894.216
TDC559 W599 10/31/2019 0.8 19,618.450 4.62% 702.389
TDC568 W680 6/26/2019 0.8 4,669.495 4.00% 142.134
TDC568 W681 6/26/2019 0.8 19,876.199 4.00% 609.391
TDC568 W682 6/26/2019 0.8 23,445.759 3.99% 715.999
TDC568 W683 6/26/2019 0.8 21,956.254 4.00% 671.242
TDC568 W684 6/26/2019 0.8 14,713.150 3.56% 388.482
TDC568 W685 6/26/2019 0.8 547.977 3.58% 14.657
TDC568 W686 6/26/2019 0.8 16,049.447 3.55% 425.588
TDC568 W687 6/26/2019 0.8 18,035.000 3.55% 483.201
TDC568 W688 6/26/2019 0.8 22,572.021 3.56% 606.294
TDC568 W689 6/26/2019 0.8 17,537.061 3.55% 463.615
TDC595 W9501 11/27/2019 0.8 23,591.673 3.31% 603.248
TDC595 W9502 11/27/2019 0.8 14,272.098 3.31% 369.347
TDC595 W9503 11/27/2019 0.8 17,503.041 3.31% 441.143
TDC595 W9504 11/27/2019 0.8 16,650.674 3.31% 428.917
TDC595 W9505 11/27/2019 0.8 20,773.483 3.31% 527.955
TDC595 W9506 11/27/2019 0.8 13,312.501 3.30% 345.002
TDC595 W9507 11/27/2019 0.8 15,925.238 3.18% 395.000
TDC595 W9508 11/27/2019 0.8 18,649.750 3.27% 473.244
TDC595 W9509 11/27/2019 0.8 20,984.188 3.27% 528.053
TDC595 W9510 11/27/2019 0.8 18,574.033 3.26% 471.770
TDC595 W9511 11/27/2019 0.8 15,207.030 3.26% 386.254
TDC595 W9512 11/27/2019 0.8 28,506.012 3.26% 714.049
TDC595 W9513 11/27/2019 0.8 20,680.575 3.16% 507.825
Page 23
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TDC595 W9514 11/27/2019 0.8 23,640.361 3.16% 579.299
TDC595 W9515 11/27/2019 0.8 14,171.980 3.16% 350.831
TDC595 W9516 11/27/2019 0.8 15,093.233 3.16% 368.711
TDC595 W9517 11/27/2019 0.8 38,679.605 3.16% 945.390
TDC595 W9518 11/27/2019 0.8 18,979.117 3.15% 464.186
TDC595 W9519 11/27/2019 0.8 11,643.136 3.15% 287.938
TDC595 W9520 11/27/2019 0.8 14,135.611 3.14% 345.903
TDC595 W9521 11/27/2019 0.8 17,102.444 3.17% 419.408
TDC595 W9522 11/27/2019 0.8 38,417.013 3.28% 973.882
TDC595 W9523 11/27/2019 0.8 14,626.366 3.19% 367.510
TDC595 W9524 11/27/2019 0.8 18,867.121 3.17% 459.894
TDC595 W9525 11/27/2019 0.8 25,974.514 3.28% 655.940
TSS111 W1131 11/27/2019 0.8 14,319.640 3.97% 431.420
TSS111 W1132 11/27/2019 0.8 29,079.518 3.98% 868.693
TSS111 W1133 11/27/2019 0.8 19,663.246 3.86% 585.074
TSS111 W1134 11/27/2019 0.8 25,424.827 3.85% 743.762
TSS111 W1135 11/27/2019 0.8 28,779.769 3.98% 870.342
TSS111 W1136 11/27/2019 0.8 12,835.664 3.85% 383.633
TSS111 W1137 11/27/2019 0.8 16,956.834 3.98% 520.004
TSS137 Z13731 1/25/2019 0.8 22,811.475 2.92% 506.301
TSS137 Z13733 1/25/2019 0.8 17,925.144 2.93% 404.627
TSS137 Z13734 1/25/2019 0.8 22,627.829 2.96% 514.468
TSS137 Z13735 1/25/2019 0.8 24,259.538 2.92% 542.984
TSS137 Z13736 1/25/2019 0.8 18,690.439 2.83% 404.153
TSS137 Z13737 1/25/2019 0.8 17,770.438 2.93% 399.641
TSS137 Z13746 1/25/2019 0.8 16,502.566 2.94% 373.552
TSS137 Z13750 1/25/2019 0.8 21,622.706 2.94% 487.288
TSS137 Z13751 1/25/2019 0.8 17,937.031 2.93% 400.187
TSS137 Z13752 1/25/2019 0.8 19,076.000 2.94% 428.616
TSS137 Z13753 1/25/2019 0.8 25,504.621 2.92% 574.728
TSS137 Z13754 1/25/2019 0.8 25,624.518 2.95% 578.024
TSS137 Z13755 1/25/2019 0.8 23,579.753 2.92% 525.410
TSS137 Z13757 1/25/2019 0.8 27,890.358 2.90% 619.135
TSS137 Z13758 1/25/2019 0.8 29,007.859 2.95% 659.842
TSS137 Z13759 1/25/2019 0.8 18,434.209 2.95% 416.574
TSS137 Z13760 1/25/2019 0.8 25,605.546 2.94% 574.899
TSS137 Z13761 1/25/2019 0.8 30,562.850 2.92% 685.321
Page 24
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TSS137 Z13763 1/25/2019 0.8 18,074.206 2.71% 375.633
TSS137 Z13765 1/25/2019 0.8 22,003.143 2.77% 467.288
TSS137 Z13766 1/25/2019 0.8 11,046.920 2.72% 231.714
TSS137 Z13767 1/25/2019 0.8 20,136.302 2.77% 431.134
TSS137 Z13768 1/25/2019 0.8 23,055.226 2.77% 490.935
TSS137 Z13769 1/25/2019 0.8 17,995.399 2.73% 376.933
TSS137 Z13778 1/25/2019 0.8 28,470.125 2.75% 602.919
TSS137 Z13779 1/25/2019 0.8 16,602.987 2.74% 345.784
TSS137 Z13781 1/25/2019 0.8 28,663.415 2.74% 607.259
TSS137 Z13783 1/25/2019 0.8 11,307.051 2.93% 257.090
TSS137 Z13785 1/25/2019 0.8 26,237.917 2.77% 565.013
TSS137 Z13786 1/25/2019 0.8 25,333.258 2.76% 537.288
TSS137 Z13787 1/25/2019 0.8 18,944.032 2.76% 407.443
TSS137 Z13789 1/25/2019 0.8 20,264.255 2.74% 427.896
TSS137 Z13790 1/25/2019 0.8 18,199.944 2.78% 392.199
TSS137 Z13791 1/25/2019 0.8 18,965.223 2.77% 410.042
TSS137 Z13792 1/25/2019 0.8 20,111.959 2.76% 428.906
TSS137 Z13793 1/25/2019 0.8 19,846.125 2.77% 424.991
TSS151 E511 5/24/2019 0.8 23,174.277 2.37% 431.992
TSS151 E5112 5/24/2019 0.8 23,011.613 2.38% 429.555
TSS151 E5113 5/24/2019 0.8 14,702.852 2.34% 271.080
TSS151 E5116 5/24/2019 0.8 14,332.177 2.38% 267.756
TSS151 E514 5/24/2019 0.8 20,842.903 2.39% 391.056
TSS172 C720 9/27/2019 0.8 14,582.841 3.11% 343.511
TSS172 C721 9/27/2019 0.8 12,139.274 3.12% 288.862
TSS172 C7210 9/27/2019 0.8 16,698.851 3.18% 405.395
TSS172 C7211 9/27/2019 0.8 24,774.715 2.95% 556.093
TSS172 C7212 9/27/2019 0.8 22,915.136 3.13% 541.401
TSS172 C7213 9/27/2019 0.8 15,461.233 3.18% 370.536
TSS172 C7214 9/27/2019 0.8 15,666.227 3.18% 374.232
TSS172 C7215 9/27/2019 0.8 17,331.094 3.11% 406.334
TSS172 C7216 9/27/2019 0.8 14,115.016 3.13% 337.120
TSS172 C7217X 9/27/2019 0.8 18,639.143 2.92% 419.775
TSS172 C7217Y 9/27/2019 0.8 16,782.820 2.92% 372.138
TSS172 C7218 9/27/2019 0.8 11,491.730 3.18% 277.938
TSS172 C7219 9/27/2019 0.8 13,976.954 2.92% 309.085
TSS172 C722 9/27/2019 0.8 13,568.514 2.95% 304.432
Page 25
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TSS172 C7220 9/27/2019 0.8 27,532.277 2.92% 610.019
TSS172 C7221 9/27/2019 0.8 19,712.710 2.92% 436.742
TSS172 C7222 9/27/2019 0.8 24,920.335 2.92% 558.494
TSS172 C7223 9/27/2019 0.8 21,434.876 2.95% 481.722
TSS172 C7224 9/27/2019 0.8 22,223.688 3.12% 522.885
TSS172 C7225 9/27/2019 0.8 21,448.878 2.92% 476.230
TSS172 C7226 9/27/2019 0.8 16,366.434 2.92% 361.067
TSS172 C723 9/27/2019 0.8 13,995.108 3.11% 327.872
TSS172 C724 9/27/2019 0.8 15,130.816 2.95% 335.945
TSS172 C725 9/27/2019 0.8 14,060.738 2.91% 311.919
TSS172 C726X 9/27/2019 0.8 9,137.312 3.11% 213.441
TSS172 C726Y 9/27/2019 0.8 15,196.978 3.11% 361.644
TSS172 C727 9/27/2019 0.8 23,030.241 3.11% 537.943
TSS172 C728 9/27/2019 0.8 12,880.584 2.95% 289.019
TSS172 C729 9/27/2019 0.8 24,235.063 3.18% 581.673
TSS174 Z17431 4/30/2019 0.8 19,049.759 1.15% 166.803
TSS174 Z17432 4/30/2019 0.8 21,684.516 1.16% 192.994
TSS174 Z17434 4/30/2019 0.8 19,083.211 1.15% 165.014
TSS174 Z17435 4/30/2019 0.8 16,641.747 1.14% 151.549
TSS174 Z17437 4/30/2019 0.8 26,958.446 1.16% 243.760
TSS174 Z17439 4/30/2019 0.8 30,476.501 1.16% 262.730
TSS174 Z17440 4/30/2019 0.8 18,907.992 1.15% 163.794
TSS174 Z17441 4/30/2019 0.8 21,302.464 1.15% 185.277
TSS174 Z17443 4/30/2019 0.8 17,809.812 1.27% 173.706
TSS174 Z17445 4/30/2019 0.8 22,480.330 1.10% 187.210
TSS174 Z17446 4/30/2019 0.8 17,365.113 1.28% 168.461
TSS174 Z17448 4/30/2019 0.8 21,266.836 1.27% 205.279
TSS174 Z17450 4/30/2019 0.8 27,611.654 1.28% 268.357
TSS174 Z17451 4/30/2019 0.8 27,495.736 1.27% 267.006
TSS174 Z17452 4/30/2019 0.8 19,591.641 1.27% 190.935
TSS174 Z17454 4/30/2019 0.8 26,296.806 1.25% 251.847
TSS174 Z17455 4/30/2019 0.8 14,189.086 1.25% 135.426
TSS174 Z17457 4/30/2019 0.8 33,336.090 1.25% 322.254
TSS174 Z17458 4/30/2019 0.8 20,709.430 1.25% 199.955
TSS174 Z17459 4/30/2019 0.8 19,690.626 1.25% 188.456
TSS174 Z17461 4/30/2019 0.8 22,914.029 1.24% 216.991
TSS174 Z17464 4/30/2019 0.8 22,063.381 1.24% 210.357
Page 26
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TSS174 Z17465 4/30/2019 0.8 21,113.621 1.24% 199.626
TSS174 Z17466 4/30/2019 0.8 21,864.995 1.11% 185.205
TSS174 Z17467 4/30/2019 0.8 18,399.761 1.11% 159.135
TSS174 Z17468 4/30/2019 0.8 16,188.019 1.12% 133.817
TSS174 Z17469 4/30/2019 0.8 26,312.953 1.11% 224.366
TSS174 Z17470 4/30/2019 0.8 15,123.058 1.09% 126.195
TSS174 Z17472 4/30/2019 0.8 3,172.841 1.22% 28.341
TSS174 Z17473 4/30/2019 0.8 20,417.896 1.19% 187.296
TSS174 Z17474 4/30/2019 0.8 25,808.060 1.12% 229.261
TSS174 Z17475 4/30/2019 0.8 15,675.594 1.20% 134.640
TSS174 Z17476 4/30/2019 0.8 22,911.009 1.21% 210.175
TSS174 Z17477 4/30/2019 0.8 18,724.473 1.26% 177.816
TSS33 Z3331 10/23/2019 0.8 19,161.917 1.81% 259.232
TSS33 Z3332 10/23/2019 0.8 22,313.814 1.81% 305.124
TSS33 Z3333 11/8/2019 0.8 12,043.859 1.18% 104.443
TSS33 Z3334 10/23/2019 0.8 18,657.349 1.77% 245.747
TSS33 Z3335 11/8/2019 0.8 14,461.056 1.26% 131.397
TSS33 Z3336 11/8/2019 0.8 27,096.056 1.50% 292.878
TSS33 Z3337 11/8/2019 0.8 21,589.805 1.47% 220.315
TSS33 Z3338 11/8/2019 0.8 27,843.604 1.48% 283.097
TSS33 Z3339 11/8/2019 0.8 13,408.685 1.32% 130.409
TSS33 Z3340 11/8/2019 0.8 25,048.837 1.49% 261.758
TSS33 Z3341 11/8/2019 0.8 28,370.517 1.39% 295.698
TSS33 Z3345 10/23/2019 0.8 5,969.200 1.73% 77.748
TSS33 Z3346 10/23/2019 0.8 19,292.507 1.78% 258.006
TSS33 Z3347 10/23/2019 0.8 18,436.515 1.87% 262.983
TSS33 Z3348 10/23/2019 0.8 22,979.834 1.89% 322.815
TSS33 Z3349 10/23/2019 0.8 22,807.281 1.77% 302.800
TSS33 Z3350 10/23/2019 0.8 3,880.663 1.85% 53.546
TSS33 Z3351 10/23/2019 0.8 36,319.580 1.87% 512.423
TSS33 Z3352 10/23/2019 0.8 17,194.547 1.82% 237.205
TSS89 Z8931 11/28/2019 0.8 24,220.190 1.86% 349.045
TSS89 Z8932 11/28/2019 0.8 12,355.435 1.87% 178.948
TSS89 Z8933X 11/28/2019 0.8 18,778.902 1.89% 273.219
TSS89 Z8933Y 11/28/2019 0.8 20,134.356 1.85% 304.899
TSS89 Z8934 11/28/2019 0.8 23,103.609 1.85% 328.362
TSS89 Z8935 11/28/2019 0.8 20,186.048 1.87% 295.514
Page 27
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation Feeder VO Go-
Live Date CVRfEnergy
Baseline (MWh)
Average Voltage
Reduction (%)
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
TSS89 Z8936 11/28/2019 0.8 18,515.139 2.18% 312.402
TSS89 Z8937 11/28/2019 0.8 18,485.589 2.07% 296.802
TSS89 Z8939 11/28/2019 0.8 24,177.550 2.13% 395.987
TSS89 Z8940 11/28/2019 0.8 17,187.726 2.08% 272.595
TSS89 Z8941 11/28/2019 0.8 24,027.277 2.12% 389.913
TSS89 Z8942 11/28/2019 0.8 19,012.422 2.14% 315.087
TSS89 Z8943 11/28/2019 0.8 12,713.086 2.15% 209.469
TSS89 Z8944 11/28/2019 0.8 13,192.411 2.14% 216.299
TSS89 Z8945 11/28/2019 0.8 13,634.372 2.15% 226.261
TSS89 Z8946 11/28/2019 0.8 21,511.027 2.13% 354.691
TSS89 Z8947 11/28/2019 0.8 22,816.411 2.13% 368.702
TSS89 Z8948 11/28/2019 0.8 5,552.198 1.70% 73.028
TSS89 Z8949 11/28/2019 0.8 18,679.614 1.72% 247.067
TSS89 Z8950 11/28/2019 0.8 14,754.620 1.64% 181.919
Total172,573.52
6* Two feeders (W258 and C162Y) did not have enough data for reconstruction. Guidehouse assigned these feeders the average of all other feeders.Source: Evaluation team analysis
Table 8-7. CY2019 VO RRs by Substation
Substation
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
Ex-Ante Energy Saving
s (MWh)
Realization Rate
DCA37 530.427 1,042 0.51
DCB96 718.359 602 1.19
DCC21 183.247 325 0.56
DCC25 461.601 324 1.42
DCC61 859.000 961 0.89
DCC66 638.798 459 1.39
DCC85 430.087 679 0.63
DCD20 407.429 672 0.61
DCD351 812.892 780 1.04
DCD40 1,523.468 1,779 0.86
DCD46 686.316 784 0.88
DCE16 1,230.872 1,420 0.87
DCE17 389.361 683 0.57
DCE29 1,041.169 1,471 0.71
Page 28
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
Ex-Ante Energy Saving
s (MWh)
Realization Rate
DCE35 1,031.916 1,658 0.62
DCE46 457.842 614 0.75
DCE79 374.071 467 0.80
DCE8 1,113.049 1,391 0.80
DCF45 1,442.976 965 1.50
DCG121 536.145 732 0.73
DCG42 770.235 914 0.84
DCG88 581.334 725 0.80
DCG909 116.279 333 0.35
DCH27 681.556 714 0.95
DCH56 278.825 387 0.72
DCH65 308.203 1,129 0.27
DCH76 291.910 720 0.41
DCH78 1,426.794 1,359 1.05
DCJ19 1,152.587 1,406 0.82
DCJ87 607.612 927 0.66
DCS67 312.285 570 0.55
DCW115 1,036.110 1,458 0.71
DCW119 965.047 1,045 0.92
DCW148 1,458.148 1,209 1.21
DCW25 447.082 874 0.51
DCW304 522.505 1,328 0.39
DCW41 715.850 959 0.75
DCW44 569.052 1,176 0.48
DCW46 531.495 1,260 0.42
DCW50 1,888.539 2,255 0.84
DCW51 674.426 1,531 0.44
SS311 451.971 606 0.75
SS459 878.881 1,554 0.57
SS513 2,429.115 2,214 1.10
SS553 808.565 1,297 0.62
TDC205 7,440.137 5,298 1.40
TDC216 6,424.819 7,474 0.86
TDC317 2,453.944 2,437 1.01
TDC372 2,040.082 3,145 0.65
TDC435 5,662.828 653 8.67
TDC444 3,953.465 3,473 1.14
Page 29
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
Substation
Verified Energy Savings (MWh)
Ex-Ante Energy Saving
s (MWh)
Realization Rate
TDC446 4,686.814 628 7.46
TDC469 6,292.428 7,388 0.85
TDC499 7,360.017 6,894 1.07
TDC510 2,899.381 1,566 1.85
TDC517 3,314.912 5,940 0.56
TDC550 7,780.000 9,564 0.81
TDC552 3,303.955 5,427 0.61
TDC559 5,810.092 6,392 0.91
TDC568 4,520.604 5,031 0.90
TDC59512,410.70
0 14,810 0.84
TSS111 4,402.928 1,346 3.27
TSS13716,876.21
8 12,170 1.39
TSS151 1,791.441 4,576 0.39
TSS17211,713.46
6 18,696 0.63
TSS174 6,514.034 7,637 0.85
TSS33 4,557.624 6,924 0.66
TSS89 5,590.208 15,176 0.37
Total172,573.5
26 198,403 0.87Source: Evaluation team analysis
Guidehouse estimated average summer peak demand reduction from the pooled model of 54.3 kW per feeder per hour. Multiplying by the 386 feeders claimable in CY2019 brings the aggregate summer peak demand reduction across all feeders to 20,942 kW per hour (+/- 4,226 kW at a 90 percent confidence level). Across all feeders and peak period hours, Guidehouse found total summer peak period energy savings of 5,361,056 kWh (+/- 1,081,859 kWh at a 90 percent confidence level).
Guidehouse also estimated the voltage reduction during the summer peak period. We found an average voltage reduction across all feeders of 2.51%. Converting the demand savings to a percentage gives 1.83%. Dividing these two values gives an implied summer peak period CVR factor of 0.73.
Page 30
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
9. APPENDIX 3. TOTAL RESOURCE COST DETAIL
Table 9-8 shows the Total Resource Cost (TRC) cost-effectiveness analysis inputs available at the time of finalizing this impact evaluation report. Additional required cost data (e.g., measure costs, program level incentive and non-incentive costs) are not included in this table and will be provided to the evaluation team later.
Table 9-8. Total Resource Cost Savings Summary
End Use Type Research Category Units Quantity EUL (years)*
ER Flag†
Verified Gross Electric Energy
Savings (kWh)
Verified Gross Peak
Demand Reduction
(kW)
Verified Gross
Gas Savings
(Therms)
Gross Heating Penalty
(kWh)
Gross Heating Penalty
(Therms)
NTG (kWh)
NTG (kW)
NTG (Therms)
Verified Net Electric Energy
Savings (kWh)
Verified Net Peak Demand
Reduction (kW)
Verified Net Gas Savings
(Therms)
Net Heating Penalty
(kWh)
Net Heating Penalty
(Therms)
All VO Feeders 386 15.0 No 172,573,526 20,942.00 NA NA NA 1 1 NA 172,573,526 20,942.00 NA NA NA
Total NA 172,573,526 20,942 0 0 0 NA NA NA 172,573,526 20,942 0 0 0
NA = Not applicable* The total of the EUL column is the weighted average measure life (WAML), and is calculated as the sum product of EUL and measure savings divided by total program savings.† Early Replacement (ER) measures are flagged as YES, otherwise a NO is indicated in the column.Source: ComEd tracking data and evaluation team analysis
Page 31
ComEd Voltage Optimization Impact Evaluation Report
10. APPENDIX 4. STIPULATION AGREEMENT
This section shows the text of Section II.7 of the Stipulation Agreement which describes the CY2019 VO evaluation methodology.
TEXT TO BE ADDED
Page 32