Laserfiche WebLink
2013 -2014 Energy Efficiency Programs <br />Local Government Partnership Program <br />Program Implementation Plan <br />baselines with better access to historical data, and define objectives, design strategies and <br />tactics, implement and then evaluate programs. The collaborative will also provide insights <br />that will set our collective expectations for the size of market effects we can expect, relative <br />to the amount of resources we can devote to MT. No one organization in the collaborative <br />will have all the requisite information and expertise for this huge effort. This truly needs to <br />be a collaborative approach from the start. <br />The metrics and baselines described below in Tables 2 and 3 are presented for the purposes <br />of starting the much- needed discussion between all key participants. These are suggestions, <br />intended to allow key participants to pilot -test processes for establishing baseline metrics, <br />tracking market transformation progress, and for refining evaluation tools. Early trial of these <br />evaluation metrics will reveal any gaps in data tracking so that we may refine our processes <br />before full -scale market transformation evaluations take place. <br />The set of metrics we selected is intentionally a small set, for several reasons. First, as <br />mentioned, the full set of metrics and baselines need to be selected by key participants. <br />Second, we anticipate that market share data for many mid- and low- impact measures will be <br />too sparse to show MT effects and not cost - effective to analyze. Third, we selected core <br />measures and metrics that would both be indicative of overall portfolio efforts. These <br />measures are also likely to be offered on a broad level by other utilities, providing a greater <br />base of sales and customer data that could be analyzed for far - reaching MT effects. <br />Therefore, for the Local Government Partnerships the following approach to quantitative <br />baseline and market transformation information is presented as follows. <br />The utilities recommend development of a baseline, and tracking the number of cities, <br />counties and government institutions that have plans for written energy efficiency provisions. <br />Such a metric relates directly to the Strategic Plan (Goal 12.3.4) in terms of measuring <br />progress towards 50% plans for sustainability. <br />In addition, we propose tracking community adoptions of new construction model reach <br />codes, both residential and nonresidential. This metric aligns with the Strategic Plan (Goal <br />12.3.1). In addition to being a direct indicator of support by local government partnerships, <br />community adoptions of model reach codes are of strategic interest to the CPUC. A <br />proliferation of dissimilar reach codes would confuse the market relative to building codes <br />and incentive programs. Model reach codes to be developed by Codes and Standards would <br />allow energy efficiency efforts across partners to be aligned with a clear target for each <br />climate zone. As discussed in the Local Government PIPS, the IOUs intend to work closely <br />with partners in establishing baseline code compliance levels and pushing for model reach <br />codes. <br />With this discussion in mind, IOUs propose the following metrics for this sector: <br />Baseline Metric <br />Metric A <br />Metric B <br />Baseline inventory of <br />Energy Efficiency <br />cities, counties and <br />Action Plans <br />govermment <br />institutions within the <br />