program implementation plan template -...

ATTACHMENT A – HOPPs RETRO-COMMISSIONING PROGRAM

Implementation Plan Template

1) Program Name and/or Sub-Program Name: HOPPs Retro-Commissioning (HOPPs RCx)

2) Sub-Program ID Number: SDGE 3317

3) Sub-Program Budget1 Table 1

Administration Marketing Direct

ImplementationIncentive Budget

Total Program Budget

$73,287 $0 $320,405 $587,217 $980,909

4) Sub-Program Budget2 Table 2

Gross kWh Gross kW Gross Therms1,944,400 7.5 224,996

5) Sub-Program Cost Effectiveness (TRC) 0.90

6) Sub-Program Cost Effectiveness (PAC) 1.15

7) Type of Sub-Program: __Core _x_Third-Party __Partnership __

8) Market sector or segment that this sub-program is designed to serve:

a. __ Residential i. Including Low Income? __ Yes __ No; ii. Including Moderate Income? __ Yes __ No. iii. Including or specifically Multifamily buildings __ Yes __ No. iv. Including or specifically Rental units? __ Yes __ No.

b. X Commercial (List applicable NAICS codes: all, according to program eligibility requirements)

c. __ Industriald. __ Agricultural

9) Sub-Program Type:

a. Non-resource program ___ Yes_X_ Nob. Resource acquisition program X Yes ___ Noc. Market Transformation Program ___ Yes _X__ No

1 Due to a delay in program approval and a later than anticipated start, the budget shown in Table 1 represents the forecasted spending for 2016 only to allow for planning and program preparation. An updated budget for 2017 will be uploaded via PIP Addendum upon approval. 2 Savings in Table 2 reflect the total forecasted savings for the twelve month program beginning in 2017. Because customer incentives for the RCx HOPP are paid over a three-year period, the Incentive budget will cover incentive payments through 2020. Note that funding for Monitoring-Based Commissioning (MBCx) is paid through SDG&E’s resource programs and does not come out of the HOPPs RCx budget.2

1


10) Indicate the primary intervention strategies:

a. Upstream __ Yes _X__ Nob. Midstream ___ Yes _X_ Noc. Downstream _X__ Yes ___Nod. Direct Install ___ Yes _X_ No.e. Non Resource ___ Yes _X _No.

Implementation Plan Narrative

1. Program Description:

This proposed HOPPs RCx program will replace SDG&E’s existing Retro-Commissioning program.3 The HOPPs RCx will be a calculated program, similar to the existing RCx program. Traditionally, the savings achieved by RCx projects were calculated using the Existing Conditions baseline. However, Decision (D.) 14-10-046 stated, “We Deny Requests to Use an “Existing Conditions” Baseline for Proposition 39 Projects and/or for All Projects.” In its April 20, 2015 disposition, the Commission reiterated that it “explicitly denied requests to use existing conditions as the baseline for all projects, except where already approved.” With this determination, RCx projects could only claim savings Above Code, which resulted in most projects being no longer cost effective. As a result, SDG&E’s existing RCx program is being discontinued.

Program Rationale:

In its December 30, 2015 Ruling Regarding HOPPs (HOPPs Ruling), the Commission stated that HOPPs “should focus on energy efficiency activities newly permissible under the 381.2(b)4 changes”, which resulted from Assembly Bill (AB) 802. The ruling further stated that HOPPs “should focus on interventions (and associated intervention strategies, savings measurement regimes, and program designs) that 381.2(b) authorizes that PAs could not do previously.” SDG&E offers this Retro-Commissioning HOPP as a program design that is newly permissible under Assembly Bill (AB) 802 and 381.2(b).

Assembly Bill 802 explicitly allows for “retro-commissioning activities reasonably expected to produce multi-year savings” and allows for RCx projects, including monitoring-based commissioning (MBCx) projects, to use the Existing Condition baseline. Further, Senate Bill (SB) 350 requires the Commission to “Authorize programs to achieve deeper savings through operational, behavioral, and retrocommissioning activities.” Most recently, on April 28, 2016, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued an Email Ruling in Rulemaking 13-11-005 recommending that, in adherence with AB802, “Existing conditions baseline will apply, in the case of retrocommissioning and operational measures, where a commitment has been made by the customer to ongoing training and maintenance plans.” Thus, AB802 and SB350 have provided for the reconsideration and redesign of retro-commissioning programs that would allow them to operate in a cost effective manner and provide opportunities for deeper energy savings, thereby encouraging participation by customers who otherwise would not have performed these upgrades. Historically, SDG&E has found that customers do not engage in RCx projects without the active assistance of the utility.

3 SDG&E’s existing RCx program (SDGE3317) was approved as part of the SDG&E 2015 Energy Efficiency portfolio in D.14-10-046.4 Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 381.2(b).

2


Attributes of the New Program

The new HOPPs RCx program will: Demonstrate SDG&E’s influence by using an intake form (Energy Efficiency Business

Incentives Pre-Application form for MBCx projects) to survey customers to determine their likelihood to perform projects on their own;

Offer a no-cost to the customer analysis of the customer facility; Require at least one-year of pre-project and two years of post-project whole building

meter data to be collected and analyzed; Require customers to complete all identified non-functional critical equipment repairs;

and routine maintenance (e.g. replacing air filters); Provide performance-based incentives offered in installments over three years for

customers to implement larger or more costly measures; and Support the Customer in developing and executing a 3 year Maintenance Agreement,

which includes training on how to properly maintain their system enhancements.

2. Program Delivery and Customer Services:

SDG&E will use a third-party implementer to serve as the Commissioning Agent and work with the customer from project inception through completion of the Maintenance Plan. The “Commissioning Agent” shall be defined as the role performed by the third-party implementer or a sub-contractor thereof, or an employee of the customer (provided certain guidelines and requirements are met5). The Commissioning Agent will conduct a no-cost initial analysis of the customer facility and provide the customer with a report of equipment and operational improvement recommendations. The Commissioning Agent’s analysis typically includes reviewing and documenting existing equipment, critical parameters, operating schedules, and sequences of operations. Third-party contractor compensation will be structured such that a portion of the Commissioning Agent’s payments are based on the actual savings resulting from the project.

Using the initial analysis, the Commissioning Agent will work with the customer to identify two categories of measures -- repair and maintenance issues, as well as more extensive energy saving measures. In order to receive the initial analysis, customers must commit to implement all identified non-functional critical equipment repairs and maintenance with no cost contribution by SDG&E. Customer also commits to implement these repairs before implementing the more energy extensive measures ensuring that the project’s baseline reflects the repairs already in place. By doing so, SDG&E ensures that these obvious repairs and routine maintenance are addressed, while not compromising the cost effectiveness or effective useful life (EUL) of the overall program.

The program will provide technical services to the customer facility through the Commissioning Agent and will provide performance incentives to enable the facility to improve their operations and reduce their energy consumption. The services provided through the HOPPs RCx program are described in the list below. Each phase is further described in the supporting documentation section.5 Complete guidelines will be provided in the Program Manual, and will include the requirement that MBCx customers who use their own staff or contractors allow SDG&E and/or the Commissioning Agent to perform measurement and verification of the work performed both upon installation and at the end of each year of the Maintenance Plan.

3


1. BUILDING ANALYSIS: The program staff will: analyze the customer’s whole building energy data; meet with customer to discuss their load profile, baseload, EUI operating schedules,

and sequences of operations. The operation of any critical equipment, such as valves, dampers, VFDs, etc., will be verified through trending or functional testing;

benchmark other similar buildings as a proxy for the potential energy savings; conduct a thorough on-site analysis of the building at no cost to the customer to identify

repairs and routine maintenance required by the program, as well as more extensive energy efficiency measures; and

provide a report detailing the routine repairs and maintenance, the proposed extensive energy efficiency measures, the estimated savings from both categories, the estimated incentives and implementation costs.

2. IMPLEMENTATION: The Commissioning Agent will provide assistance throughout project implementation to ensure the customer’s installation contractors understand what is required in order to achieve the energy savings outlined in the Commissioning Agent’s Report.

3. MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION: Upon completion of measure installation, the Commissioning Agent will verify measures were implemented and calculate the project energy savings in a verification report. The energy savings reported at this stage will serve as the basis by which to calculate the customer’s first incentive installment.

MAINTENANCE PERIOD: The Commissioning Agent will train the customer and provide them with written instructions on how to maintain the energy savings associated with each efficiency measure. The Commissioning Agent will continue to meet with the customer at least twice per year throughout the three year period to help ensure savings persist and receive notice of any operational changes. The Program Administrator will calculate and pay the next three annual performance incentive installments to the customer based on the incentive calculation methodology outlined below.

Customers will document their project costs using copies of paid invoices, as well as records reflecting in-house labor and materials. It is important for the Customer and Commissioning Agent to track these costs accurately so not to exceed the Incentive Cap. The “Incentive Cap” shall be defined as 50% of the total project cost for HOPPs RCx projects whereas MBCx projects will be capped as described in their Master Agreement.

Finally, the customer also will be required to commit to a three-year Maintenance Plan, which will include:

Training on maintaining the upgraded equipment; Understanding the proper metrics to collect in order to analyze equipment performance; Establishing regular check points and processes to measure the equipment

performance; and Maintaining a log of building operations, starting when the full year of pre-project data

begin and continuing through the end of the three-year Maintenance Plan. The log should record all major changes to building operation, building scheduling, building remodels / additions / retrofits, and equipment replacements.

The purpose of the Maintenance Plan is to transform the customer’s mindset and behavior to place a high value on the energy efficiency (EE) upgrades already made, such that the customer takes into consideration the importance of EE in any future upgrades.

4


3. Program Design and Best Practices: Describe how the program meets the market barriers in the relevant market sector/end use. Describe why the program approach constitutes “best practices” or reflects “lessons learned”. Provide references where available.

Barriers How Current Design Will Address Challenge

In a recent disposition, the CPUC determined that no future projects may use the Existing Conditions baseline. This change rendered most RCx projects non-cost effective. As a result, SDG&E’s existing RCx program has been discontinued leaving no program to address Retro-Commissioning measures.

AB802 and SB350 call for the specific inclusion of retro-commissioning in IOU EE portfolios. Further, the ALJ, in its April 28, 2016 Ruling in Rulemaking 13-11-005, recommended that the Existing Conditions baseline apply to retro-commissioning programs “where a commitment has been made by the customer to ongoing training and maintenance plans”, which is a requirement of this program. By requiring a Maintenance Plan, SDG&E will ensure persistence of project savings, which is a concern and a best practice for RCx programs. This proposed HOPPs RCx will allow SDG&E to address the retro-commissioning potential in the marketplace and is intended to target customers who would not have otherwise performed these upgrades.

Customers find it difficult to secure funds for RCx projects because often times these projects compete with the same funds that are used for basic building maintenance.

The program will provide a no-cost analysis of the customer’s facility which will help the customer identify upgrades and help them understand the tangible benefits of optimizing their equipment and systems. Additionally, ongoing monitoring through their EMS will demonstrate to the customer the measurable benefits of their upgrades. These benefits can then be monetized so that an apples-to-apples comparison can be done with other competing projects. It is a best practice to engage customers by demonstrating the value of their EE projects. Though customers will be financially responsible for performing all routine repairs and maintenance, they will receive incentives, up to 50% of the project costs, for more complex and/or costly measures. The no-cost analysis and education about EE benefits is intended to encourage the customer to perform the upgrades and produce savings that would not have occurred without this program.

In order to pursue and complete RCx projects, customers require assistance from someone specializing in building commissioning, which is not typically someone they have on staff. Because of the in-depth analysis required to conduct commissioning, this type of practice usually falls outside of standard

The HOPPs RCx program will provide a Commissioning Agent who will conduct a no-cost in-depth initial analysis of the customer facility and provide the customer with a report of equipment and operational improvement recommendations. This added feature is expected to eliminate the lack of resources barrier thus making it easier for the customer to participate.

5


Barriers How Current Design Will Address Challengemaintenance and beyond facility manager / engineer expertise.

In the absence of hard evidence, there is a perception that the savings produced by RCx projects do not persist and that RCx projects are akin to regular maintenance.

This program will help to ensure the persistence of RCx project savings by requiring customer participation in a three-year Maintenance Plan, which will include customer training on how to maintain the optimal performance that is achieved through their Retro-Commissioning project, as well as education about the importance of retro-commissioning.

4. EM&V: Describe any process evaluation or other evaluation efforts that the Program Administrator (PA) will undertake. Identify the evaluation needs that the PA must build into the program. These might include:

a. data collection strategies embedded in the design of the program or intervention to ensure ease of reporting and near term feedback, and

b. internal performance analysis during deployment performance metrics.c. performance metrics

Measurement and Verification for the HOPPs RCx program will be based on the International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocols (IPMVP). Under IPMVP, there are four high-level M&V options:

Option A: Retrofit Isolation: Key Parameter Measurement; Option B: Retrofit Isolation: All Parameter Measurement; Option C: Whole-Building; and Option D: Calibrated Simulation.

Whereas Options A and B isolate individual systems or equipment, Option C and D generally consider the whole building. Option C will be the default M&V method employed so long as projects achieve savings greater than 10% at the whole building meter. However, in the event that savings are not as great as expected, SDG&E will employ Options A or B. The Option selected for each HOPPs RCx project will depend on the size and complexity of the project, as well as the specific data available.

Option C – Whole-BuildingIn general, IPMVP Option C is the preferred method for all projects, provided that the sum of measures appreciably affects the whole-building energy usage. M&V approaches other than IPMVP Option C (i.e. Options A, B, or D) will only be considered if circumstances preclude the use of Option C. Such circumstances may include low expected energy savings (<10%) or the loss of either baseline or post-Retro-Commissioning energy trends. Sub-metered data per Option B will be used to gain additional information on specific measures when appropriate. Options A and D are intended to supplement metered data for either simple projects where all parties are in agreement that extensive sub-metering is unnecessary or where the complexity of a given measure or project is such that engineering models are necessary to fully characterize the savings. Using alternative M&V approaches requires approval from SDG&E Engineering.

Length of Trend PeriodsIPMVP Option C entails creating energy use models for each metered utility entering a building using whole-building interval trend data. In order to create accurate energy models, at least twelve consecutive months of baseline and post-implementation whole-building energy trends

6


shall be collected. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that energy use is trended over a period which captures a range of independent variables (IVs -- typically outside air temperature) representative of most of the annual operating conditions.

Energy Use CorrelationAn Option C analysis involves correlating energy use (usually at either hourly or daily intervals) to one or more IVs and then extrapolating to annual energy use based on typical or normalized IV values over an entire year. The most common IV used is outside air temperature. Other IVs include, but are not limited to, building occupancy, daily operating hours, and time-of-day.

There are three metrics identified in the IPMVP and ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002 for use in evaluating the correlation between energy use and an IV which should be reported for all regression analyses: the coefficient of determination (R2), the coefficient of variation of the root mean square error (CV-RMSE), and the t-statistic. All three metrics should be reported as part of an analysis whenever applicable. Regression models will not be strictly held to the acceptance criteria/guidelines given below, but attempts should be made to optimize their values where possible. Additional information on these metrics can be found in Appendix B of the IPMVP (EVO 10000 – 1:2010) and Section 5.2.11 of ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002.

The coefficient of determination (R2) is the most commonly used metric for determining whether or not the IVs adequately explain the variation in the dependent variable, in this case, energy consumption. In other words, it is a measure of how well the regression model represents the consumption. However, a model should not be accepted nor rejected based on this metric alone. High R2 values indicate that energy use is very dependent on an IV. A low R2 means that energy use is not very dependent on an IV, but does not necessarily mean that a model is bad or should not be used. For example, CHW or HHW use plotted against outside air temperature will usually show a “knee” in the data. Energy use on either side of the knee is typically modeled with separate linear regressions. The regression representing the “baseline” usage and having a flatter slope will usually show a very poor R2, even if the actual energy use is visually very close to the regression line. ASHRAE-14 gives no general acceptance criteria based on R2 values. The IPMVP states that “though there is no universal standard for a minimum acceptable R2 value, 0.75 is often considered a reasonable indicator of a good” correlation.

The coefficient of variation of the root mean square error (CV-RMSE) indicates how accurate a model is, but not the degree of dependency of energy use on the IV. ASHRAE-14 gives acceptance criteria for the CV-RMSE of ≤20% for energy use and ≤30% for demand.

R2 and CV_RMSE are standard outputs of all regression analyses. In the modelling tool Universal Translator 3 (UT3), they can be shown on the “Model Assembler” tab under both the “Baseline” and “Post Implementation” tabs in the M&V Module. In Excel, R2 can be shown on a chart alongside the regression formula for a data set or calculated using the Regression analysis tool in the Data Analysis Tool Pack and the CV-RMSE can be calculated by dividing the Standard Error (in the Regression Statistics section of the output) by the average of the Predicted Y values (in the Residual Output section).

Options A and B – Retrofit IsolationOptions A or B can be used if energy savings are expected to be very small compared to whole-building energy use (<10%) and discrete measures are being implemented which can easily be calculated and supported by baseline and post-project sub-metered or spot measured data. Measurement periods for these Options should attempt to follow the requirements detailed in

7


the Option C section; however shorter trending periods may be warranted depending on the equipment and measures being modeled.

These approaches will likely only be used when energy efficiency measures which were scheduled for implementation have not been able to be implemented and the originally expected savings levels will not be reached. Approval must be given from the SDG&E Engineering to utilize either of these approaches. Whole-building metering is still required if Options A or B are used.

Option D – Calibrated SimulationOption D should be used only if either baseline or post-project whole-building trend data is unavailable. Use of Option D entails creating a whole-building energy use model and calibrating it to either baseline or post-project energy use. Depending on which data set the model is calibrated to, energy efficiency measures will then be implemented or un-implemented in the model to represent the actual project scope.

Length of Trend PeriodsWhether trending occurs in the baseline or post-project phase, the trending requirements detailed in the Option C section are to be followed. Additional sub-metering/trending will also be necessary to verify the assumptions used in the calibrated simulation which result in energy savings.

Energy BalanceIf the simulation is truly a whole-building simulation, then an energy balance will be inherent in the model and the entire model will be compared to whole-building trend data for calibration. If the simulation only includes HVAC energy (or some portion thereof), then an energy balance needs to be performed to verify the portion of whole-building energy represented by the model. Typical EUI values for various end-uses in various building types can be found in the California End-Use Survey for use in an energy balance.

CalibrationIf baseline trend data is available for an entire year prior to the RCx project, the whole-building simulation should be calibrated to that annual use. (The trend data may need adjustments to make it more similar to a typical (TMY) year.) It is more often the case, however, that much less than a year’s worth of either baseline or post-project trend data is available. In that case, Option C-type energy models will need to be created in order to determine annual energy use to calibrate to.

ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002 references the Normalized Mean Bias Error and the CV-RMSE as the two metrics used for determining the degree of calibration of a whole-building calibrated simulation. (Reference sections 5.2.11.3 and 5.3.2.4,f of ASHRAE Guideline 14-2002.) Though calibrated simulation models will not be held to the acceptance criteria listed in ASHRAE, these metrics should be reported for all analyses.

Energy Models

An RCx program best practice is to create whole-building energy models. One good modelling tool is the Universal Translator 3 (UT3) and its M&V Module. The DOE2 software eQUEST is another good choice for creating a whole building model.

8


The UT3 M&V tool allows the user to quickly develop and evaluate the accuracy of empirical models that are based on short-time interval energy use and independent variable data. It allows users to estimate annual energy use and savings from short periods of measured data. The UT3 M&V tool provides the user with an interface to vary model input parameters (including analysis time interval, amount of data), modeling algorithms (temperature and time-of-week, temperature only, time only, simple average, number of line segments), and data filtering (occupied/unoccupied periods, weekday/weekend/holiday) in an effort to develop the most accurate energy models possible. The energy models are used to adjust baseline and/or post-installation energy use to a common set of conditions, usually defined by the dry bulb ambient temperature from a TMY3 weather file. The UT3 M&V tool allows export of all data streams as well as model goodness-of-fit and uncertainty metrics. Stakeholders may set minimum requirements for modeling, such as the minimum number of points per model, the maximum allowable CV, and so on.

There are several forms of regression model types used for Option C whole building M&V. The most well-known are simple linear regressions of monthly heating degree days with monthly energy use. As more frequent measurements of energy use have become available, regression models have improved. The following is a summary of the most familiar types of regression modeling as well as available tools that help develop them:

Simple linear and multivariate linear regressions. These are well-known regression modeling methods, descriptions of which are in most statistics handbooks. Excel spreadsheets have regression functions, or a regression analysis tool pack that may be activated. Users can develop simple or multivariate regressions with whatever number and amount of independent variable data that are available, and manually develop and evaluate the goodness of fit and accuracy of models they develop.

ASHRAE Change-Point Models. ASHRAE’s Research Project 1050 identified a series of change-point models that accurately modeled energy use with independent variables (usually ambient dry-bulb temperature) and validated them in over 400 buildings. The project also developed software to assist users in the development of change-point models for their building projects. The models are known by the number of parameters in the resulting change-point regression equation; a 2p model has two parameters and is a simple linear regression (y = mx + b); a 3p model describes a two-segment model, with one segment having a flat slope, a change-point, and another segment with a non-zero slope (y = a + m(x - c)+, where c is the change point, and m is the value of the slope when x is greater than c, and y = a when x is less than c.). Change point models are recommended to be used with daily values of energy use, which may be sufficient for most projects. Software is available to run ASHRAE’s change-point models; Energy Explorer from one of the original researchers is available from the University of Dayton.

Advanced Regression Models. When short time energy use and ambient temperature data is available for buildings that operate in a regular schedule, accurate regression models may be developed using an advanced regression algorithm that includes a time of week variable. The rationale is that the energy use at 10am on a weekday morning when ambient temperature is 65°F may be much different than the energy use at 4pm when it is also 65°F outside. LBNL’s temperature and time-of-week model (TTOW) algorithm uses a time of week indicator variable and allows continuous or piecewise linear modeling of the independent variable, usually ambient temperature. The time-of week indicator variable applies a correction factor to the energy use predicted from the temperature. The model is represented by a matrix of coefficients, the dimensions of which depend on the analysis time interval (usually hourly or

9


daily), and the number of line segments used for the temperature dependence. This regression algorithm has been tested on hundreds of commercial buildings and found to be very accurate.

The Universal Translator, version 3 (UT3). UT3 is a free tool downloadable from http://utonline.org/cms/ after an account is created. It has many features that help users manage large sets of data, including merging files, re-sampling time intervals, filtering, charting, calculating, importing and exporting. The tool was designed so that anyone with the software could share data and analysis with anyone else who had the tool, such as project reviewers. This increases project transparency. There are many tutorial videos provided on the website.

The website provides a system development kit that allows UT3 users to develop their own analysis modules. The California Energy Commission’s PIER program sponsored the development of several analysis modules, one of which is the M&V analysis module. Referred to as the M&V Tool, this M&V analysis module allows users to develop LBNL’s TTOW model, or simpler temperature-only and time-only models. Users may use filters to set up analysis bins of occupied or unoccupied periods, and the M&V Tool allows different models to be developed for each of these periods and pieced together. It provides the R2 and CV(RMSE) metrics for each model development run so that users may evaluate the model’s goodness of fit and accuracy. The M&V Tool calculates savings for actual projects by adjusting the baseline energy use to post-installation conditions. It also allows users to calculate savings under normalized conditions, such as those defined by TMY3 weather data sets. This feature also allows users to estimate annual energy use and savings based on a shorter period of measured data, such as three months. A tutorial video on the use of the M&V Tool is also available on the website.

Other Analysis Tools: Other regression analysis tools can be used but should be able to perform an energy savings analysis based on short-time interval energy use data and independent variable data (such as outside air temperature). Many IPMVP Option C projects use multi-variate regression models to predict baseline and post installation energy consumption. As the name infers, multi-variate regression models use multiple independent variables. Unlike the UT3, multi-variate regression models can use many independent variables not related to time, such as outside air temperature, outside air wet-bulb temperature, building cooling load, etc. The multi-variate regression models may also use time based logical independent variables like holidays, weekdays, classes in session, night time, etc. A properly constructed multi-variate regression model can be more sophisticated and accurate. The tool should indicate the quality of the model by displaying its R2 and CV-RMSE values. The tool should create annual energy savings estimates by applying the pre and post implementation models to TMY3 weather data.

Description of the LBNL Temperature and Time-of-Week ModelThe following description includes paraphrased descriptions of the temperature and time-of-week model (TTOW model). For a more comprehensive description of the modeling algorithm, please consult the publication by Matthieu, et. al.6

A building’s energy use (natural gas use, hot water, steam, or chilled water, as well as electricity) is generally a function of ambient temperature and the time of week. In some cases, additional parameters influence energy use in buildings, such as humidity and a production variable. The TTOW model may include independent variables in addition to the time-of-week and temperature, if their data are provided in concurrent time intervals (such as hourly or daily time intervals). As the dominant influencing parameters for building energy use is the schedule of operation and ambient temperature, this model

6 Matthieu, J.L., P.N. Price, S. Kiliccote, and M.A. Piette, “Quantifying Changes in Building Electricity Use, With Application to Demand Response,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 6 2:507-518, 2011.

10

http://utonline.org/cms/


description focuses on the use of these parameters. The following discussion uses electric kWh as the energy data, however it applies equally well for other energy sources.

The time-of-week parameter is modeled as an indicator variable. This allows some flexibility to define this parameter according to the time-interval of the data. Electric energy use data (kWh) from advanced metering systems is typically available in 15-minute intervals, ambient temperature data from weather stations are typically available in hourly intervals. Natural gas energy use data (therms) from advanced metering systems is also available in hourly time intervals from San Diego Gas & Electric. Therefore, the time intervals used in the TTOW models will be hourly, and models based on daily time intervals will be used if more accurate models are needed. The following description assumes hourly time intervals, but also applies for daily time intervals.

Each week is divided into hourly intervals (indexed by i), with the first interval from midnight to 1 am Monday morning, the second from 1 am to 2 am, and so on for the 168 hours each week (7 for daily time intervals). A different regression coefficient for each time of week indicator variable, αI, allows each time-of-week to have a different predicted load.

Energy response to temperature in a building is non-linear but may be modeled as continuous and piecewise linear. At low temperatures, electric energy use may increase as temperatures lower due to more use of heating system equipment such as pumps, fans, and electric heating elements. In moderate temperatures, the building does not require heating and cooling and therefore energy use is not sensitive to temperature. At warm temperatures, energy use increases with increasing temperature due to use of cooling system equipment. At the highest temperatures, energy use may again be insensitive to temperature as cooling equipment has reached its maximum load. There may be multiple regimes of energy response to temperature.

For natural gas use in multi-family buildings, we expect high gas use at low ambient temperatures, with use decreasing as temperature warm. At some point, space heating is no longer required, and the only use for gas is for water heating, which is expected to have a milder relationship with ambient temperature. We therefore also expect multiple regimes for natural gas use, though they are likely fewer than for electric use.

The piecewise linear and continuous temperature at time t, T(ti) (which occurs at time of week interval i) is broken down into a number of component temperatures, Tc.j(ti), with j = 1 to ns (ns being the number of line segments, usually no more than 10 to avoid overfitting). Each Tc.j(ti) is multiplied by βj and then summed to determine the temperature dependent load.

Boundary values of the temperature segments are defined by Bk (k = 1…ns-1). And component temperatures are determined with the following algorithm (assuming ns = 6):

o If T(ti) > B1, then Tc,1(ti) = B1. Otherwise, Tc,1(ti) = T(ti) and Tc,m(ti) = 0 for m = 2 … 6 and algorithm is ended.

o For n = 2 … 4, if T(ti) > Bn, then Tc,n(ti) = Bn – Bn-1. Otherwise, Tc,n(ti) = T(ti) – Bn-1 and Tc,m(ti) = 0 for m = (n + 1) … 6 and algorithm is ended.

o If T(ti) > B5, then Tc,5(ti) = B5 – B4 and Tc,6(ti) = T(ti) – B5. The building is anticipated to have a different response to temperature in occupied

periods versus unoccupied periods. The occupied load is estimated using the following equation:

B0 ( t i , T (t i ))=α i+∑j=1

n

β jT c ,1(t i¿)¿

11


Unoccupied loads are expected to have a single temperature parameter, since the building is expected to operate without sensitivity to temperature when systems are off during these periods. Unoccupied load is modeled with the following equation:

Bu ( ti , T (t i ))=αi+βuT ( ti)

The parameters αi, for i = 1 to 168, βj for j = 1 to n and βu are estimated using the data from the baseline and post-installation periods with ordinary least squares.

The total energy use estimated by the model is the sum of the occupied and unoccupied terms for each time interval.

B=∑t=1

n

(Bo¿−Bu)¿

The model produces residuals that are auto correlated and heteroscedastic, and the regression parameters αi and βj are correlated. This means that the standard errors associated with each regression parameter underestimates their level of uncertainty.

However, uncertainty on the load predictions can be approximated with the standard error, which can be computed at each interval i.

Two methods for implementing the TTOW model exist:1. This algorithm is available in Python programming language at the following link: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/loadshape/0.2.1. This includes an R program and a Python wrapper so that it can be called from within Python. The software allows the user to input streams of dates and time stamped energy use and ambient temperature data, manipulate parameters and develop linear regression models with time-of-week indicators and ambient temperature as independent variables. The software calculates the αi and βj parameters according to the user-specified analysis time interval (e.g. hourly or daily) and number of line segments for the piecewise continuous temperature dependence. The Python and R programming environments are free to the public.

Under a California Energy Commission Public Energy Interest Research program grant, the TTOW model has been programmed as an analysis module in PG&E’s Universal Translator version 3 software, available at no cost at the website www.utonline.org. The freely available software enables program administrators to prepare and develop M&V analysis, and allow technical reviewers to review the analysis for consistency, accuracy, and conformance with program and policy rules.

5. Pilots: SDG&E does not anticipate any pilots associated with the program at this time.

6. Additional information: No additional information

Supporting DocumentsAttach the following documents in Word:

1. Program Manuals and Program RulesSDG&E will submit the Program Manual following the contracting of the Third-Party Implementer who will administer the HOPPs RCx program.

2. Program Logic Model:

12


3. Process Flow Chart:

Third-Party Program Implementers SDG&E will use a third-party implementer to operate the program. The program will also use qualified third-party providers to serve as the Commissioning Agents. The Commissioning Agents will work with the customer from project inception through completion of the Maintenance Plan. MBCx projects allow customers to use their own staff or contractors to act as the Commissioning Agent, provided certain guidelines and requirements are met. Third-party contractor compensation will be structured such that a portion of the Commissioning Agent’s payments are based on the actual savings resulting from the project.

13

1. Customer Identification & Enrollment

2. Establish Baselines &

Conduct Initial Analysis

3. Measure Implementation

4. Measurement & Verification

5. Maintenance

Plan

6. Project Completion /

Final Incentives Paid


Customer Identification & EnrollmentCustomers will be recruited to the program by Implementer, SDG&E account representatives, and Commissioning Agents, similar to the SDG&E’s previous RCx program. SDG&E will target, but not require, buildings that offer savings greater than 10% of whole building consumption. For those identified more complex and/or higher cost measures, SDG&E will offer a performance-based incentive calculated according to the energy savings resulting from each project. These projects typically produce large savings because of the breadth of enhancements that take place. Customers are not required to implement these measures, but will be educated by the Commissioning Agent on their value with the intent to gain their commitment to implement.

Building AnalysisTo determine if the project is a good candidate for the program, the Commissioning Agent will meet with the customer and review their pre-project whole building interval data and natural gas usage. If the site has strong savings potential and meets the program requirements, and if the customer chooses to commit, then the Commissioning Agent will conduct a thorough on-site analysis at no-cost to the customer. The Commissioning Agent will provide the customer with an investigation report detailing the non-functional critical equipment repairs and routine maintenance issues7, as well as more extensive energy conservation measures (ECM). For each recommended efficiency measure, the report will describe the recommended change, the estimated energy savings and the estimated implementation cost. In order to receive the no-cost analysis, customers must commit to: implement all non-functional critical equipment repairs and routine maintenance and complete the three year Maintenance Plan. By requiring implementation of all non-functional critical equipment repairs and routine maintenance, SDG&E ensures that these are fixed, while not compromising the cost effectiveness or effective useful life (EUL) of the overall program.

The Commissioning Agent’s activities during the analysis include 1) documenting existing conditions (e.g. site walk through with facility operators and control vendors, reviewing building design drawings and sequences of operations, analyzing building automation system (BAS) trend data and/or datalogger data); 2) estimating savings and cost; 3) determining the appropriate EM&V IPMVP option and drafting the site-specific M&V Plan; and 4) writing the an investigation report. This process helps customers identify energy savings opportunities that they typically would not be able to identify on their own. The investigation report, along with the screening form, will enable SDG&E to determine the customer’s intent related to their likelihood to implement ECMs absent of SDG&E’s influence.

ImplementationThe Program Implementer will review the analysis documents to ensure the project meets all requirements of the program prior to Implementation. In order to receive an incentive, the customer will be required to document all project costs. Documentation may include copies of paid invoices, as well as records reflecting in-house labor and materials. It is important for the Customer and Commissioning Agent to track these costs accurately, since the incentive will be capped at 50% of project cost (for RCx-only projects).

Measurement & Verification

7 Per CPUC Staff White Paper of Energy Efficiency Baselines (April 27, 2016), baseline adjustment for regular maintenance will not be necessary under this program, as there will be a requirement for a three year maintenance plan and training. All savings will be claimed from existing conditions baseline.

14


The Commissioning Agent will perform M&V at completion of the implementation phase similar to the existing SDG&E RCx program. This entails documenting the implemented ECM and often includes: a site walk through, reviewing the updated sequences of operations, and analyzing building automation system trend data and/or datalogger data. The Commissioning Agent will then create a verification report documenting the implemented ECMs, how each was verified, the project IPMVP M&V method planned for use during the maintenance period and for incentive calculations, the project’s estimated savings for the customer, and first incentive calculation. IPMVP Option C will be the preferred verification method for estimating project energy savings during the maintenance period and will be used where applicable. The Program Implementer will review the M&V documents to ensure the project meets all Program Guidelines and provide all final documents to SDG&E.

Maintenance PeriodThe customer will be required to commit to a three-year Maintenance Plan, which will help to enable the customer to maintain the energy savings associated with each ECM over time. This will include training and written instructions created by the Commissioning Agent on how to maintain the energy savings strategies associated with the ECMs. This training will include:

What metrics and how to collect and analyze the associated data in order to track equipment performance over time;

How to maintain a record of building operational changes through the end of the three-year maintenance period and why it’s important. The record will describe all major changes to building operation, building scheduling, building remodels / additions / retrofits, and equipment replacements and when they occurred;

Regular check-ins by the Commissioning Agent to help the customer ensure savings are persisting, report on any operational changes and enable them to perform M&V as required.

The Commissioning Agent will estimate annual project energy savings using IPMVP Option C yearly during the maintenance period by analyzing the whole building meter data adjusted for any changes determined during the regular check-ins. This will enable the program to determine the performance incentives that will be paid to the customer for each of the three years.

The primary purpose of the Maintenance Plan is to preserve the savings from the implemented ECMs. The secondary goal is to transform the customer’s mindset and behavior to place a higher value on the energy efficiency upgrades already made, such that the customer takes into consideration the importance of energy efficiency in any future upgrades.

Project Close-OutUpon completion of the three-year Maintenance Plan, the project will be considered complete and the final incentives paid. The Program Implementer will review all final documents to ensure the project meets all requirements of the program and provide all final documents to SDG&E for program EM&V.

Free RidershipThe HOPPs RCx is designed to target buildings with high energy use intensity that have not been retro-commissioned in the past five years. SDG&E’s Account Executives will contact potentially eligible sites directly, thus avoiding customers self-selecting into projects. For this reason, SDG&E anticipates that this approach will minimize free-ridership.

15


SDG&E will also use a verification report and contact the customer to document the customer’s intent related to their likelihood to implement ECMs absent of SDG&E’s influence in a customer intake form. The following questions are examples of what may be asked on the intake form:

Before today did you have any plans to implement ECM in question? If so, when did you plan to implement it? Would you say it would have happened within

one year? Within 5 years? When it can no longer be repaired? What are the reasons you have not implemented this ECM before now? What maintenance or repairs have you done in the past or did you plan to do in the

future to keep this equipment operational?

This approach will provide SDG&E with more information to guide the next program design. SDG&E will work with Commission Staff on additional information that they find useful for conducting the NTG analysis as part of the formal EM&V study for this program.

4. Incentive Tables, Workpapers, Software Tools: Provide a summary table of measures and incentive levels, along with links to the associated workpapers. Templates are available at:http://eestats.cpuc.ca.gov/StandardTables/GuidanceDocument.aspx.

Customer incentive payments will be performance-based, tied to the project’s actual annual kWh and therm energy savings obtained and verified by the M&V activity described below. Customers will receive their incentives in installments, which is intended to ensure the persistence of long-term savings, according to the following schedule:

40% of the incentive will be paid upon installation of the energy efficiency measure(s), completion of the post-inspection and receipt of copies of the equipment invoices. This payment is offered to offset a portion of the project costs;

20% of the incentive will be paid upon determination of persistence and participation in the maintenance plan one year after project completion;

20% of the incentive will be paid upon determination of persistence and participation in the maintenance plan two years after project completion; and

20% of the incentive will be paid upon determination of persistence and participation in the maintenance plan three years after project completion.

The purpose of incentive installments is to encourage customers to maintain their facility improvements over the three-year EUL of the ECMs.

The performance-based incentive will be calculated based on the actual annual kWh and therm savings achieved, as measured by whole-building metering where available, or EMS / sub-metering, as determined through M&V.

For HOPPs RCx projects, the incentives will be paid at a rate of $0.08 per gross kWh and $1.00 per gross therm. The maximum electric and the maximum gas incentives will be calculated separately to allow for differing levels of achievement by fuel. The sum of the electric and gas incentives will equal the Total Incentive and will not exceed the Incentive Cap.

For MBCx projects, incentives will be honored as described in their Master Agreement and funded through SDG&E’s resource programs.

Upon completion of installation and M&V of measures, the Max Electric Incentive, Max Gas Incentive, and Total Incentive will be calculated based on the actual electric and gas savings achieved. The actual savings measured at M&V become the measuring sticks used to evaluate the subsequent years’ incentive payments and shall be referred to as the electric and gas

16


“Expected Savings”. Upon M&V, the initial incentive payment of 40% of the Max Electric and Gas Incentives will be paid.

The incentives to be paid at year-end of Years 1, 2 and 3 will be based upon the actual measured electric and gas energy savings, referred to as the electric and gas “Measured Savings”. For each year and each fuel, the following calculation will be performed:

Year X Incentive=[ (Measured SavingsExpected SavingsxTotal Incentive)−Previous Incentive Payments

(4−Year X ) ]In Year 1, 2, or 3, if the Measured Savings are equal to the Expected Savings, defined above, the customer will receive the full 20% payment for that fuel in that year. In Years 2 and 3, if the Measured Savings are greater than the Expected Savings, the customer may be eligible for an incentive greater than 20%, prorated for the overachievement, but not to exceed 60% of the Max Electric or Gas Incentive in Year 1 or 80% of the Max Electric or Gas Incentive in Year 2. In no case will the sum of the incentive installments paid exceed the Total Incentive amount, where:

Total Incentive=Maximum Electric Incentive+MaximumGas Incentive

In Year 1 or 2 of performance, if the Measured Savings is less than the Expected Savings, resulting in a negative incentive, no payment will be made at that time. Final payment will be determined in Year 3. If the project continues to underperform, resulting in a negative incentive, no further action will be taken with the customer.

As with all RCx projects, this incentive design is an integral part of the project. Pre- and Post-metered information, when used for baseline and savings calculations, will form the basis for the incentives. If EMS or sub-metering data is used to characterize the baseline and calculation project savings, then that data will also be used for the incentive calculations. Post-installation M&V data will be evaluated according to the site-specific M&V plan developed as part of the project application and adjusted to assure that only the savings actually achieved are provided incentives. This methodology will mitigate the risks associated with providing any payment upfront. All payments are subject to auditing by SDG&E.

5. Quantitative Program Targets: Provide estimated quantitative information on number of projects, companies, non-incentive customer services and/or incentives that program aims to deliver and/or complete annually. Provide references where available.

17


MeasureExpected

Quantity of Projects

Customer Rebate

Avg. RCx Project 12 $32,757

Of note: The incentives will not exceed the Incentive Cap.

6. Diagram of Program: Please provide a one page diagram of the program including subprograms.This should visually illustrate the program/sub-program linkages to areas such as:

a. Statewide and individual IOU marketing and outreachb. WE&T programsc. Emerging Technologies and Codes and Standardsd. Coordinated approaches across IOUse. Integrated efforts across DSM programs

As a single year HOPP, the RCx program is not linked to any of these efforts.

Program Manuals:

SDG&E will submit the Program Manual following the contracting of the Third-Party Implementer who will administer the HOPPs RCx program. The Program Manual will also include specific information for MBCx projects.

The goal of the HOPPs RCx program is to implement ECMs that: Address problems with existing controls; Enhance control and operation of existing equipment; and Make repairs/upgrades to existing equipment such that it operates more efficiently.

1. Eligible Measures

The most common system and equipment enhancements for RCx projects include: air handlers, chillers, cooling towers, economizers, boilers, lighting and controls. Eligible measures will be determined on a project-by-project basis. The following list includes some of the most common RCx measures that will be considered:

Scheduling Equipment Loads:o Time of Dayo Optimum Start-Stopo Lighting Controls

Economizer/Outside Air Loads:o Inadequate Free Coolingo Over-Ventilationo Demand Controlled Ventilation

Control Problems:o Simultaneous Heating and Coolingo Sensor/Thermostat Calibration and/or

Optimal Relocationo Hunting and Loop Tuningo Damper/Valve Actuator Calibrationo Zone Rebalancing

Controls: Setpoint Changes:o Duct Static Pressure Setpointo Piping Differential Pressure Setpointo Reduction of VAV Box Minimum

Setpointo Implementation/Adjustment of

Heating/Cooling, and Occupied/Unoccupied Space Temperature Setpoints

Controls: Reset Schedules:o HW Supply Temperature Reset or HW

Plant Schedulingo CHW Supply Temperature Reseto CW Supply Reset for Chiller Efficiency

Optimization (for Newer VFD Chillers)

18


o Supply Air Temperature Reset: Cooling and Heating

o Duct Static Pressure Reset Equipment Efficiency Improvements / Load

Reduction:o De-Lamping of Over-Lit Spaceso Pump Discharge Throttled, Over-

Pumping and Low Delta T–Trim Impeller Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) Fans and

Pumps Equipment Maintenance:

o Leaking Valves (hot water or chilled water valves)

o Actuator / Damper Operation

19

The HOPPs RCx program will not offer incentives for the replacement of large pieces of equipment, such as installing a new chiller.

2. Customer Eligibility Requirements: Provide requirements for program participation (e.g., annual energy use, peak kW demand)

All Commercial customers who meet the following criteria will be eligible for the HOPPs RCx program. In order to participate, a customer facility must:

Include >50,000 square feet of conditioned space in a single metered building (for RCx-only projects);

Have a direct digital control (DDC) / Building Automation System / Energy Management System (EMS) in place;

Contain the central plant within the participating building (for RCx-only projects only);

Present with central plant mechanical equipment in relatively good condition; Have an owner willing to commit approximately 40-60 hours of senior building

operations staff time, or contracted time, to the project; Have not participated in either the Retro-Commissioning or Monitoring-Based

Commissioning program in the previous five years, except for those projects that were stranded by the discontinuation of the previous RCx program;

As indicated on their intake form, have no intention of performing these improvements or repairs without SDG&E involvement;

Have no known barriers to implementing retro-commissioning improvements or repairs;

Agree to participate in the three-year Maintenance Plan with the Commissioning Agent;

Agree to implement any non-functional critical equipment repairs and maintenance items; and

Agree to refrain from participation in any other utility efficiency programs during this project period (typically four years total, one year for screening, analysis, implementation; three years for the maintenance period)8. (If the Customer participates in another EE program during their Retro-Commissioning project, the savings resulting from the non-Retro-Commissioning project will be measured or otherwise verified by the other EE program and subtracted from the overall savings for the Retro-Commissioning project to avoid double-counting).

3. Contractor Eligibility Requirements: List any contractor (and/or developer, manufacturer, retailer or other “participant”) eligibility requirements (e.g. specific IOU required trainings; specific contractor accreditations; and/or, specific technician certifications required).

The third-party program implementer may serve as the Commissioning Agent and/or subcontract to Commissioning Agents from the current SDG&E RCx program. The third-party implementer and Commissioning Agents must have experience with RCx projects, but will not be required to hold any special certificates or accreditations.

8 If the Customer participates in another EE program during their Retro-Commissioning project, the savings resulting from the non-Retro-Commissioning project will be measured and verified by the other EE program and subtracted from the overall savings for the Retro-Commissioning project to avoid double-counting.

20

4. Participating Contractors, Manufacturers, Retailers, Distributers: For upstream or midstream incentive and/or buy down programs indicate

N/A

5. Additional Services: Briefly describe any additional sub-program delivery and measure installation and/or marketing & outreach, training and/or other services provided, if not yet described above.

N/A

6. Audits: Indicate whether pre and post audits are required, if there is funding or incentive levels set for audits, eligibility requirements for audit incentives.

In order to participate in the HOPPs RCx program and receive incentives, customer must agree to receive a no-cost analysis (audit), performed either by the Commissioning Agent or by the customer’s own qualified staff. Funding for these analyses will come from the program’s Direct Implementation – Non-Incentive budget. Customers must meet the Customer Eligibility requirements described above in order to participate and receive an analysis. Incentives will be paid based on the savings measured at the whole building meter according to the Incentive Calculation Methodology.

7. Sub-Program Quality Assurance Provisions: Please list quality assurance, quality control, including accreditations/certification or other credentials.

The HOPPs RCx third-party implementer has committed itself to ensuring that all program deliverables meet the standards established by SDG&E. The third-party implementer will be perform the following quality assurance for each of its deliverables:

Subcontractor Hiring: With any subcontractors used, such as Commissioning Agents, the program implementer will conduct one-on-one program orientations to review the appropriate RCx tasks, the program tools, and the expectations for deliverables to bring them up to the level of more experienced providers.

Reports: All reports will be rigorously reviewed for accuracy by both the Commissioning Agent and the third-party implementer.

Energy savings calculations: Measurement and verification of energy savings will be performed by the Commissioning Agent and reviewed by SDG&E’s Engineering group. Feedback will be provided to each provider to verify and improve savings calculations on existing and future projects.

For Market Transformation Programs Only: N/A

1. Quantitative Baseline and Market Transformation Information: Provide quantitative information describing the current energy efficiency program baseline information (and/or other relevant baseline information) for the market segment and major sub-segments as available.

21

2. Market Transformation Strategy: A market characterization and assessment of therelationships/dynamics among market actors, including identification of the key barriers and opportunities to advance demand side management technologies and strategies A description of the proposed intervention(s) and its/their intended results, and specify which barriers the intervention is intended to address.

22