West Penn Power AMENDED Program Year 3 Final Annual Report

algorithms and/or ex ante assumptions (i.e. fixture quantities, motor horse-powers, EFLHs, etc), and
identifying key parameters to be researched on-site. This review informed ADM's fieldwork by
identifying missing data and sites at which ADM needed to install monitoring equipment. The desk
review was also used to flag sites that were claimed using prescriptive algorithms, but whose savings
needed to be calculated using a custom approach. This Is the case for several of 'Motors & Drives'
rebates which were flagged late in the fourth quarter.
Many prescriptive applications with rebate amounts under $10,000 were submitted through the
"Standard Lighting for Business" program component. This program component targeted smaller
rebates and strived to simplify the application process for small commercial applicants who may not
have the required time or skill to fill out a detailed inventory of the lighting projects. At the time of
program design, the 2009 PA TRM was the prevailing guidance document, and Table 12 of" that
"deemed" the baseline fixtures based on the new efficient fixtures. ADM evaluated all sampled
"Standard Lighting for Business" (SLB) projects by applying Appendix C from the 2010 PA TRM and by
determining the baseline fixtures through on-site inspection (post only), site contact interviews, and by
baseline fixture descriptions available in rebate project documentation. The SLB projects tended to
have high verification rates and much of the variability in the realization rates was attributable to
differences between Appendix C of the 2010 TRM and Table 12 of the 2009 TRM. The SLB rebate forms
are being phased out in favor of the "Non-Standard Lighting for Business" rebate forms described below.
The great majority (over 80% of all prescriptive lighting savings in the C/l sector) of lighting projects
were submitted through the "Non-Standard Lighting for Business" (NSLB) program. The NSLB
application process requires the applicant to fill out a version of the Appendix C calculator from the
2010 TRM. As such, these projects generally conformed with TRM-algorithms. Inconsistencies were
limited to discrepancies in EFLH claims and occasionally, usage of 'cut-sheets' for novel lighting
fixtures 2 "* The overall realization rates for the prescriptive lighting measures are near unity across all
three operating companies, indicating that for the most part, results are reported in accordance to TRM
protocols-
For custom projects, desk reviews were performed in order to create an Evaluation, Measurement, &
Verification plan for each sampled site. ADM used the project documentation and site contact to
determine what monitoring equipment needed to be installed and if baseline monitoring was required.
ADM worked closely with SAIC and WPP to identify custom sites at which pre-rnonitoring would be
required by reviewing site documentation for sites early in SAlC's approval process and flagging sites
which would only be evaluable with monitored baseline data. ADM reviewed each Custom Incentive
application before its approval to ensure its evaluabifity.
34
The general guidance used in this impact evaluation is that if one can find a similar fixture in Appendix C with a
connected load within 5% of the proposed fixture, then one should defer to Appendix C.
West Penn Power Company | Page 65