Fan VFD Standard Protocol Recommendation

1. Fan VFD Standard Protocol Recommendation Regional Technical Forum September 17, 2013

2. Estimate of Fan VFD Market Potential

3. Estimate of Market Potential (continued) • Potential limited due to requirement of constant system curve in pre/post case • Similar concern expressed by subcommittee • Industrial potential limited to about 2 projects per year in BPA territory • Not enough to prove out a protocol in a timely fashion • Larger projects would likely warrant a detailed custom analysis • Would not generate more projects beyond status quo

4. Estimate of Market Potential (continued) • Commercial sector faces similar challenges • Dynamic system curve in post case • New construction market limited by code • Market potential small for CAV systems • Simplified method does not appear to provide practitioner with a better means of estimating savings reliably • Engineering judgment likely to be needed

5. Deciding on a Path Forward – Option 1 • Option 1 - Develop protocol and calculator to just do pre/post data entry and annualization • Essentially a Best Practice approach • Subcommittee agreed this made sense from technical standpoint • Need input from program implementers on usefulness in programs

6. Deciding on a Path Forward – Option 1 • Option 1 – Pros • Provides a regionally consistent method to do annualization and length of time for metering pre/post • Consistent with most utilities custom approach • Minor modifications needed to existing protocol and calculator • Option 1 – Cons • Still much variability on site by site basis; requires engineering judgment in most cases • Structured annualization tool might not be what programs are currently used to; will take some effort to conform to format and requirements • Subcommittee unsure of the benefit of this approach over a custom analysis by a qualified engineer

7. Deciding on a Path Forward – Option 2 • Option 2 – Reverts to custom analysis by program • Abandon Standard Protocol and associated savings calculator • Point to established M&V documents for evaluation Fan VFD savings • Guidelines provide high level guidance on custom measures

8. Deciding on a Path Forward – Option 2 • Option 2 – Pros • Provides program implementers and evaluators with a consistent guideline for many application variations • Doesn’t constrain programs to standardized data collection and calculation methodology • Option 2 – Cons • Still much variability on site by site basis; requires engineering judgment in most cases • Subcommittee concern that this is getting too deep into the M&V realm instead of focusing on savings estimation • Custom analysis from programs will likely vary even with guidance for each case

9. Deciding on a Path Forward – Option 3 • Option 3 - Develop the protocol and calculator as-is knowing that it is a niche application • Continue to develop other niche protocols as the need arises • Pros: • Retains a lot of work done already • Cons: • Long time projected to get enough provisional data to prove out simplest reliable method • Likely confusing and process heavy to update multiple protocols for many similar applications

10. RTF Decision • I recommend that the Fan VFD Standard Protocol be developed further under Option ______.