RTF Small Saver Review Process Proposal July 17, 2012

1. RTF Small Saver Review ProcessProposalJuly 17, 2012

2. Small Savers as defined per Guidelines • RTF determines that likely savings from a measure are too small to warrant resources needed to meet reliability criteria of active or provisional UES • RTF considers size of regional end use affected by measure • Measure specifications required before RTF can designate measure as small saver • RTF may choose to convene an expert panel to consider proposed measure and formulate consensus opinion • Being revised to indicate that RTF approval is expected

3. Small Saver process development • April Small/Rural Subcommittee meeting • Expect that small savers will come from S/R utilities • Noted a lack of specific criteria and path for approval in the Guidelines for small savers • Talked about mapping out process through Guidelines • Develop template for utilities to apply for small savers • RTF Staff and Eugene Rosolie iterated over draft process

4. Small Saver process development • May Small/Rural Subcommittee meeting • Presented draft flowchart and savings checklist for an example measure (T12->HPT8 in residential homes) • Originally developed checklist specific to small savers • Decided that Appendix A checklist adequately covered Small Saver designation • S/R subcommittee would be advocate for utilities that bring small saver measure forward • S/R subcommittee would help define characteristics with proposer • Proposed a small saver subcommittee as the next step after S/R designates measure as small saver and helps characterize

5. Small Saver process development • May Operations Subcommittee meeting • Presented same flowchart and checklist • Received guidance to develop clearer process and better documentation of process • RTF staff looked at modifying process for small saver review

6. Criteria questions that arose • When should a measure be considered for small saver status? • Should we set a target size for regional potential? Should ≤ 2.5 aMW be the threshold? • Many believe “we’ll know one when we see it” • Who should make that determination? • Would S/R utilities know the resource potential? • Should S/R subcommittee be tasked with determining potential? • How are small savers applied across small, rural and large utilities? • Can’t easily limit measure applicability according to utility size

7. Small Saver process development • June Small/Rural Subcommittee meeting • Presented revised flowchart and documentation • Agreement that process looks good as a start and should perhaps be tested at RTF

8. Small Saver Flowchart: Part 1 SRR committee decides if measure should go forward Data source for measure Small/Rural utility proposes measure YES SRR committee works with proposer to develop measure characteristics NO Measure not pursued or is re-defined by proposer Measure Screening committee decides if measure should go forward Data source for measure Larger utility proposes measure YES NO Measure not pursued or is re-defined by proposer

9. Small Saver Flowchart: Part 2 Is measure likely to achieve Proven status? Measure Screening committee determines which Guidelines path is appropriate Measure put into RTF workplan for prioritization and development YES YES NO Measure is considered a Small Saver SRR committee remains engaged if proposer was S/R utility Measure Screening committee works with proposer to develop Small Saver measure

10. Overall Process Benefits • Follows Guidelines approach that measures should trend towards proven if possible • Both S/R and large utilities have an understanding of where measures go once proposed • Lessens burden on S/R subcommittee to determine resource potential

11. Measure Screening Committee Benefits • Small/Rural and Large utility coordination • Measures from large utilities that might be applicable to S/R utilities get picked up • If S/R checklist leads to measure variation, this modified measure enters through Measure Screening committee and process continues • Others outside of RTF Staff see incoming measures and can help triangulate data

12. Measure Screening Committee Benefits • Committee looks at all new measures, not just ones that are “small” • Don’t form a subcommittee that spends volunteer time solely defining small resources • Measures prioritized in workplan after Screening Committee reviews them • Easier for staff to assess measure needs and allocate resources • Transparent measure prioritization procedure

13. Interface with other processes Online Petition Form Completed SRR Checklist SRR committee decides if measure should go forward Data source for measure Small/Rural utility proposes measure YES SRR committee works with proposer to develop measure characteristics NO Measure not pursued or is re-defined by proposer Online Petition Form Measure Screening committee decides if measure should go forward Data source for measure Larger utility proposes measure NO Measure not pursued or is re-defined by proposer

14. Next steps • Test this out to see how process works • Bring measure through S/R subcommittee and solicit feedback • RTF staff serve as interim “measure screening” subcommittee to test out process • Refine process and bring back to RTF for decision on how to treat Small Savers