West Penn Power AMENDED Program Year 3 Final Annual Report
West Penn Power AMENDED Program Year 3 Final Annual Report
West Penn Power AMENDED Program Year 3 Final Annual Report
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
ADM evaluated the commercial and industrial programs using stratified ratio estimation. Separate<br />
samples were drawn, at the 85% confidence level with 15% precision at the annual evaluation level, for<br />
each operating company, program, and quarter. A 'sample point' denotes a particular rebate which was<br />
randomly sampled within its population.<br />
At the end of the second, third, and fourth quarter ADM reviewed tracking data to define a discrete list<br />
of rebates that became the'sample population for that quarter. Once separated Into their respective<br />
operating companies and programs, this population was then stratified according to measure category<br />
(prescriptive vs. custom), common drivers of realization rates or the variability of the realization rates,<br />
modes (e.g. "Standard Lighting Rebate" rebates vs. other prescriptive rebates), and the magnitude of<br />
rebated savings (used to create 'certainty' strata). ADM used a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.5 for all<br />
qualitative strata that 26 , based on the PY2 evaluation, are expected to have homogenous realization<br />
rates for sampled projects and a CV of 1.0 for strata that, based on the PY2 evaluation, are expected to<br />
have homogenous realization rates for sampled project. In late PY3, many conservation kits that<br />
included CFLs were mailed out to small commercial customers. The CFL mailings were placed into three<br />
separate strata in ADM's sampling framework. ADM conducted a metering study to establish hours of<br />
use for CFLs installed in facilities that fall into the 'other' category.<br />
Table 9-1: Commercial & Industrial Equipment <strong>Program</strong> - Small <strong>Report</strong>ed Results by Quarter<br />
<strong>Report</strong>ed Gross<br />
<strong>Report</strong>ed Gross<br />
Energy Savings Demand Reduction<br />
Incentives<br />
<strong>Report</strong>ing Period<br />
Participants<br />
(MWh/yr)<br />
(MW)<br />
($1,000)<br />
PY3 Ql* 60 4,367 0.9 $308<br />
PY3 Q2 + 80 4,895 0.9 $225<br />
PY3Q3 34 6,092 0.8 $358<br />
PY3 Q4 25,867 45,168 15.4 $1,915<br />
PY3 Total** 26,006 59,193 17.7 $2,797<br />
CPITD Total** 26,154 71,478 . 19.9 $3,285<br />
Note: 'Includes results originally reported under Commercial Products Efficiency <strong>Program</strong>, Commercial HVAC Efficiency <strong>Program</strong> and Custom<br />
Technology Applications <strong>Program</strong>.<br />
"Due to Plan change mid PY3: PY3 and CPITD totals include adjustment for Governmental projects reported under Commercial HVAC<br />
Efficicncy <strong>Program</strong>, Commercial Products Efficiency <strong>Program</strong> and Custom Technology Applications <strong>Program</strong> and moved to Governmental &<br />
Institutional <strong>Program</strong> amounting to PYTD (35) participants, (1,329) MWh, (0.308) MW and ($9) incentives. CPITD (60) participants, (2,183)<br />
MWh, (0:54) MW arid,(Sl8) incentives.<br />
• 2G<br />
Streetlights are given a CV of 0.4 but the PY2 evaluation proved that the variance is in fact much smaller than<br />
that.<br />
<strong>West</strong> <strong>Penn</strong> <strong>Power</strong> Company j Page 67