Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio for the Yukon [PDF]

Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio for the Yukon FINAL REPORT Date: April 17, 2013

Submitted to: Yukon Energy Corporation Yukon Electrical Company Limited

Submitted by: ICF Marbek 300-222 Somerset Street West Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2G3 Tel: +1 613 523-0784 Fax: +1 613 523-0717 [email protected] www.marbek.ca

Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio for the Yukon FINAL REPORT Date: April 17, 2013

Submitted to: Yukon Energy Corporation Yukon Electrical Company Limited

Submitted by: ICF Marbek 300-222 Somerset Street West Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2G3 Tel: +1 613 523-0784 Fax: +1 613 523-0717 [email protected] www.marbek.ca

Table of Contents 1 

2 

3 

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1  1.1 

Objectives & Scope ..................................................................................................... 1 

1.2 

The Planning Process ................................................................................................. 1 

1.3 

Report Presentation .................................................................................................... 6 

Portfolio Summary .............................................................................................................. 7  2.1 

Portfolio Structure....................................................................................................... 8 

2.2 

Overview of Portfolio Benefit/Cost Results .............................................................. 9 

Proposed General Service Program................................................................................ 13  3.1 

Market Research Results.......................................................................................... 13 

3.2 

General Service Program: An Overview ................................................................. 17 

3.3  Description of Program Elements ........................................................................... 20  3.3.1  Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive ........................................................... 20  3.3.2  High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive .................................................................... 35  3.3.3  ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive ...................................................................... 44  3.3.4  Building New Construction Incentive ....................................................................... 50  3.4  4 

Engagement, Training and Communication ........................................................... 59 

Proposed Residential Program ........................................................................................ 64  4.1 

Market Research Results.......................................................................................... 64 

4.2 

Residential Program: An Overview ......................................................................... 68 

4.3  Description of Program Elements ........................................................................... 70  4.3.1  LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates ................................................. 70  4.3.2  Low-Cost Electricity Efficient Products .................................................................... 77  4.3.3  CCHP and GSHP Initiative ...................................................................................... 88  4.4  5 

Engagement, Education and Communication ........................................................ 95 

Summary ............................................................................................................................ 98 

ICF Marbek

iii

Table of Exhibits Exhibit 1: Program Design Process .............................................................................................. 2  Exhibit 2: Priority Opportunities Screening Process ..................................................................... 3  Exhibit 3: Priority Opportunities ..................................................................................................... 4  Exhibit 4: Four Standard Cost-Effectiveness Tests Used in Energy Efficiency............................. 6  Exhibit 5: Portfolio Structure ......................................................................................................... 8  Exhibit 6: Portfolio Results Excluding Government Buildings ..................................................... 11  Exhibit 7: Portfolio Results Including Government Buildings ...................................................... 12  Exhibit 8: Portfolio View of the Utilities’, and Energy Solutions Centre Building Programs......... 17  Exhibit 9: Participation Process for the Lighting Program Element ............................................. 23  Exhibit 11: Archetype Lighting Conservation Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 24  Exhibit 12: Prescriptive LED Incentive Layer for Non-Government Buildings ............................. 25  Exhibit 13: Archetype Lighting Conservation Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 25  Exhibit 14: Prescriptive LED Incentive Layer for Government Buildings .................................... 26  Exhibit 15: Logic Model of the General Service Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive .... 29  Exhibit 16: Explanatory Note on the General Service Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive Theory ......................................................................................................................... 29  Exhibit 17: Participation Projections – Lighting Redesign and Custom Lighting Incentive for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 31  Exhibit 18: Participation Projections – Prescriptive LED Incentive for Non-Government Buildings .................................................................................................................................................... 32  Exhibit 19: Participation Projections – Lighting Redesign and Custom Lighting Incentive for Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 32  Exhibit 20: Participation Projections – Prescriptive LED Incentive for Government Buildings .... 33  Exhibit 21: Budget – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 33  Exhibit 22: Budget – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 33  Exhibit 23: Savings Targets – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 34  Exhibit 24: Savings Targets – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 34  Exhibit 25: Cost Effectiveness – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 34  Exhibit 26: Cost Effectiveness – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 35  Exhibit 27: Participation Process for the High Efficiency Refrigeration Program Element .......... 37  Exhibit 28: Archetype High Efficiency Refrigeration Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 38  Exhibit 29: Archetype High Efficiency Refrigeration Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 38  Exhibit 30: Logic Model of the General Service High Efficiency Refrigeration Element.............. 40  Exhibit 31: Explanatory Note on the General Service High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive Theory ......................................................................................................................................... 40  Exhibit 32: Participation Projections – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 42  Exhibit 33: Participation Projections – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive for Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 42  Exhibit 34: Budget – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings.. 42 

ICF Marbek

iv

Exhibit 35: Budget – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings... 42  Exhibit 36: Savings Targets – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 43  Exhibit 37: Savings Targets – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 43  Exhibit 38: Cost Effectiveness – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 43  Exhibit 39: Cost Effectiveness – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 44  Exhibit 40: Prescriptive List of ENERGY STAR Computer Conservation Measures for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 45  Exhibit 41: Prescriptive List of ENERGY STAR Computer Conservation Measures for Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 45  Exhibit 42: Logic Model of the General Service ENERGY STAR Computer Element ................ 46  Exhibit 43: Explanatory Note on the General Service ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Theory ......................................................................................................................................... 47  Exhibit 44: Participation Projections – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive for Non-Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 48  Exhibit 45: Participation Projections – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive for Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 48  Exhibit 46: Budget – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive without Government Buildings ........ 48  Exhibit 47: Budget – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive with Government Buildings ............. 48  Exhibit 48: Savings Targets – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 49  Exhibit 49: Savings Targets – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 49  Exhibit 50: Cost Effectiveness – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 49  Exhibit 51: Cost Effectiveness – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 50  Exhibit 52: Participation Process for the New Construction Element .......................................... 52  Exhibit 53: Archetype Electricity-Efficient Non-Government New Construction Projects ............ 53  Exhibit 54: Archetype Electricity-Efficient Government New Construction Projects.................... 53  Exhibit 55: Logic Model of the General Service New Construction Incentive ............................. 55  Exhibit 56: Explanatory Note on the General Service New-Construction Incentives Theory ...... 55  Exhibit 57: Participation Projections – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive for NonGovernment Buildings................................................................................................................. 57  Exhibit 58: Participation Projections – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive for Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 57  Exhibit 59: Budget – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 57  Exhibit 60: Budget – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 57  Exhibit 61: Savings Targets – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 58  Exhibit 62: Savings Targets – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 58  Exhibit 63: Cost Effectiveness – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 58  Exhibit 64: Cost Effectiveness – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings................................................................................................................. 59  Exhibit 65: Budget – Engagement, Training and Communication excluding Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 63  ICF Marbek

v

Exhibit 66: Budget – Engagement, Training and Communication including Government Buildings ..................................................................................................................................... 63  Exhibit 67: Portfolio View of the Utilities’, Energy Solutions Centre, and Yukon Housing Residential Programs .................................................................................................................. 68  Exhibit 68: Prescriptive List of Residential LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Energy Conservation Measures .............................................................................................................. 72  Exhibit 69: Logic Model of the Residential LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates .. 74  Exhibit 70: Explanatory Note on the Residential LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Theory .......................................................................................................................... 74  Exhibit 71: Participation Projections – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates ..... 76  Exhibit 72: Budget – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates ................................ 76  Exhibit 73: Savings Targets – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates ................. 77  Exhibit 74: Cost Effectiveness – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates.............. 77  Exhibit 75: List of Energy Conservation Measures Based on Low-cost EE Products ................. 81  Exhibit 76: Logic Model of the Residential Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products......................... 83  Exhibit 77: Explanatory Note on Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products Theory ............................ 83  Exhibit 78: Participation Projections –Low-cost Energy Efficient Products ................................. 86  Exhibit 79: Budget – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products ........................................................... 87  Exhibit 80: Savings Targets – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products ............................................ 87  Exhibit 81: Cost Effectiveness – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products ......................................... 87  Exhibit 82: Inputs and Assumptions of Residential New-Construction CCHP and GSHP Initiative .................................................................................................................................................... 90  Exhibit 83: Logic Model of the Residential CCHP and GSHP Initiative ...................................... 92  Exhibit 84: Explanatory Note on the Residential CCHP and GSHP Initiative ............................. 92  Exhibit 85: Participation Projections – CCHP and GSHP Initiatives ........................................... 94  Exhibit 86: Budget – CCHP and GSHP Initiative ........................................................................ 94  Exhibit 87: CCHP and GSHP Initiative ........................................................................................ 95  Exhibit 88: Cost Effectiveness – CCHP and GSHP Initiative ...................................................... 95  Exhibit 89: Budget – Engagement, Education and Communication ........................................... 97 

ICF Marbek

vi

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

1 Introduction Yukon residents rely on electricity not only to live meaningful, healthy lives but also to support and strengthen the economy. Given the concerns over environmental implications including climate change, and the limited generating capacity in Yukon, there is growing interest not only in how electricity is generated, transmitted and distributed but also how efficiently it is used at the customer’s end. In Yukon, as well as in a growing number of North American jurisdictions, how electricity is generated and used is being closely analyzed to find innovative ways of meeting individual and corporate energy service needs while minimizing pollution and the creation of greenhouse gases. In response to the above conditions, the Yukon Energy Corporation (YEC), Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL) and the Yukon Government collaboratively commissioned a comprehensive study of the opportunities for electricity demand-side management (DSM) within the Yukon. That study, entitled Conservation and Demand Management Potential for the Yukon 2011, was completed in January 2012 and revealed a significant cost-effective potential for electricity demand-side management (DSM) in the Yukon. Given the identification of a significant Yukon DSM potential, the current challenge is to design a suite of electricity DSM programs to best capture this potential.

1.1

Objectives & Scope

In response to the challenge noted above, the Yukon Energy Corporation (YEC) and Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL) engaged ICF Marbek to design and develop a suite of residential and commercial sector program offerings designed to enhance the Yukon’s electricity DSM program portfolio and provide incremental annual electricity savings of at least 5 GWh/yr by Y5. If the proposed electricity DSM program portfolio is approved by the Yukon Utilities Board, the next steps in this process will be the development of a program implementation plan, including definition of the program operational and transactional infrastructure, followed by program launch. The scope of this current assignment extends to the preparation of a complete program design report suitable for submission to the Yukon Utilities Board.

1.2

The Planning Process

The DSM program portfolio proposed in this report is the product of a multi-step process. Designed to gather and analyze the data necessary to determine optimum program structure and cost-effective design, the planning process was organized into 3 major steps:   

Identification of Priority Opportunities Market Characterization Program Design

ICF Marbek

1

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 1 provides a graphic representation of the steps involved in this program design process and its relationship to the Yukon CPR results. Exhibit 1: Program Design Process

Residential Sector  CPR  Results

Commercial Sector  CPR  Results

Analysis

Step 1: Priority Residential and Commercial Opportunities

Step 2: Market Characterization Barrier  Analysis

Market  Structure

Actors

Baseline

Step 3: Program Design 

Program  Definition

Marketing Strategy

Channel  Partners

Projections

Activities Outputs Markets Measures  Duration  etc

Approaches etc

Opportunities Strategies etc

Participants Costs Savings Benefits etc

Cost Effectiveness Testing

ICF Marbek

2

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

A brief description of the main steps shown in Exhibit 1 is provided below. More detailed information is provided in the appendices that accompany this report.

Step 1: Priority Opportunities This first task in the planning process was to determine which of the several hundred technologies and measures analyzed in the Yukon CPR 2011 should provide the initial program focus. As a starting point the extensive listing of individual measures and technologies contained in the CPR results were screened using a 7 step process, as outlined below in Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2: Priority Opportunities Screening Process

Step 1: The Economic Potential and Achievable Potential results for the residential and commercial sectors were sorted on the basis of the following criteria:

  

Measures providing the largest electricity savings potential by Y3 and by 2020 Measures providing electricity savings at the lowest levelized cost Measures providing electricity savings with the shortest customer payback

Step 2: Based on the results of Step 1, individual measures were assigned priority, with highest priority assigned to those measures that provided the largest savings potential in the period at the lowest levelized cost of electricity under the total resource cost test (see 1.3.3 below). Step 3: Priority measures from Step 2 were grouped into “opportunity areas” e.g., multiple individual commercial lighting measures were combined into a single aggregate “commercial lighting” opportunity. As applicable, complementary measures with smaller savings potential and/or higher levelized costs of electricity were added to the applicable opportunity area. The composition of the package of measures contained in the selected opportunity areas also considered factors such as: commonality of market delivery channels, information flows, typical purchase decision making processes etc. Step 4: The qualitative notes from the CPR achievable potential workshops were reviewed to determine if participants had noted any compelling technology or market considerations, either positive or negative, that would potentially affect the priorities established in Step 3. Customer payback periods, as generated in Step 1, were also considered at this time. The assigned priority for each “opportunity area” was adjusted, as applicable. Step 5: A brief scan of DSM program experience in other jurisdictions was conducted with the objective of identifying potential program delivery experience that would affect the priorities established in Step 3. The assigned priority for each “opportunity area” was adjusted, as applicable. Step 6: The estimated upper and lower achievable potential electricity savings for the resulting combined residential and commercial sector opportunity areas was calculated, together with an approximate weighted average CCE for each opportunity area. The results were compared with the notional 5 GWh/year savings target. Step 7: A select number of opportunity areas were recommended for this initial set of DSM programs.

A summary of the results of the above screening is presented in Exhibit 3. Additional information is provided in Appendix A.

ICF Marbek

3

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 3: Priority Opportunities Residential

   

Appliances and lighting, including CFL and LEDs Relatively low-cost, easy-to-install measures including: low flow showerheads and pipe insulation, programmable thermostats

General Service (Commercial)

  

Lighting including: LED, high performance T8, pulse start MH, high output T5, etc Building optimization – operations and HVAC Refrigeration and computer equipment

Technologies providing significant potential savings but requiring further performance proofing in Yukon conditions including: automotive heater timers, cold climate heat pumps New home construction

Step 2: Market Characterization The priority opportunities identified in Step 1 were bundled into potential program elements and each was subjected to further detailed market research. The detailed market research provided the program design team with a comprehensive understanding of the key factors influencing market penetration of the electricity efficiency technologies and measures which, as outlined in further detail in later sections of this report, informed the design of the specific programs and activities. The detailed market research employed a variety of data collection methods and involved a broad range of Yukon personnel involved in the supply, service, purchase and use of electricity efficiency technologies and measures. The research focused on developing clarity around four key areas, namely: Market Barriers:



Market Structure:



Are there financial, informational, technical, etc., constraints that prohibit or restrict customer use of the electricity efficiency technologies and measures?

 

How do the electricity efficiency products and services get to the customer? What is the policy & regulatory context? Are there market drivers such building codes or certifications?

Actors:

  

Who are the providers of the products, installation and services? Where are decisions made and who are the key decision makers? What are the key decision criteria?

Baseline Conditions:

 

What is the current practice regarding sales of electricity efficiency models? What are the trends?

The market research results are summarized in Sections 3 and 4, which present a description of the proposed programs; additional detail on the research methodology is provided in Appendix C.

ICF Marbek

4

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Step 3: Program Design The knowledge gained from the above market research provided key design inputs into the programs presented in the following sections of this report. For example, as illustrated previously in Exhibit 1, the understanding of market barriers is critical to the selection of appropriate activities or program offerings; similarly, a thorough knowledge of the market structure and major actors within the supply chain provides insight into potential partners and marketing strategies that will be most effective. Finally, the collection of data on baseline conditions provides important inputs to the cost effectiveness testing that is critical to the program design process, and to the eventual program evaluation requirements. The mapping of market research findings to the proposed programs structure is represented by a series of logic models that are contained in Section 0 and 4.3 in the “Program Theory” section of each program element.

Cost Effectiveness Defined Program design is developed with the constraint of ensuring that the electricity savings are achieved in a cost-effective manner and with minimum impact on ratepayers and electricity rates. As illustrated previously in Exhibit 1, program design and the determination of program cost effectiveness is an iterative process. Differing levels of program expenditures on incentives as well as program promotion and administration costs affect program participation rates and electricity savings. Increased program expenditures increase participation rates but typically at diminishing rates of cost effectiveness. The cost effectiveness results that are presented in this report are consistent with industry best practice and are based on the methods outlined in the California Standard Practice Manual. The four standard tests used were originally developed by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and defined by the California Standard Practice Manual. The four tests used are presented in Exhibit 4. Together, these tests were used to screen opportunities, adjust incentive levels and to set program administration costs as well as related education, training and promotional activities.

ICF Marbek

5

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 4: Four Standard Cost-Effectiveness Tests Used in Energy Efficiency Test

Acronym

Key Question Answered

Summary Approach

Participant Cost Test

PC

Program Administrator Cost Test Ratepayer Impact Measure

PAC

Will the participant benefit over the measure life? How much will the DSM program administrator pay for savings? Will utility rates increase?

Comparison of costs and benefits to the customer that installs the measure or implements the project Comparison of program administrator costs to supply-side resource costs

Total Resource Cost Test

TRC

RIM

Will the total costs of electricity in the utility service territory decrease?

Comparison of administration costs and lost revenue to supply-side resource costs If the RIM test is “passed” then the rates will decrease as a result of the program/measure.1 Comparison of program administration and customer costs to utility resource savings

Based on: US-EPA, Understanding Cost-Effectiveness of Energy Efficiency Program: Best Practices, Technical Methods, and Emerging Issues for Policy-Makers, USA, 2008, available at http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/suca/cost-effectiveness.pdf.

The RIM and the PAC tests noted above in Exhibit 4 were computed from the perspective of the utilities, regardless of the cash flows between YEC and YECL. Some key assumptions employed are provided below.  



The lost revenue was computed based on the rate paid by end users: residential consumers, non-government, and government. The avoided cost of supply that was used is 21 cents/kWh. This value is based on a portfolio cost approach that averages the near term supply options including two hydro enhancements (Marsh Lake and Gladstone), liquefied natural gas, biomass, and wind as described in YEC’s 20-year resource plan. The transmission and distribution (T&D) losses were assumed to be 8.3%. When calculated separately, the RIM test shows a net benefit to YEC and a net loss to YECL. However, the benefit-cost ratios throughout the portfolio assume utility cooperation and therefore display the RIM test as a blended value.

1.3

Report Presentation

The remainder of this report is organized and presented in the following sections:    

Section 2 introduces the programs proposed for the Utilities’ initial electricity efficiency portfolio Section 3 presents the proposed General Service Program Section 4 presents the proposed Residential Program Section 5 provides a Summary of the key conclusions and recommendations

1

This statement assumes that rates would be adjusted based on econometric and financial analyses of the program impacts. ICF Marbek

6

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

2 Portfolio Summary This section introduces the programs that are recommended for the Utilities’ initial electricity efficiency portfolio, and describes the design philosophy that was used to select them. Consistent with best practice program design principles, two broad solutions-based programs are presented, each with multiple program elements: General Service Program and Residential Program. The objective is to offer customers a broad suite of options to meet their electricity management needs, rather than forcing customers to sort through a variety of individual programs. Grouping program elements under these solutions-based umbrellas also enables the Utilities to design sector-based branding, marketing and awareness building initiatives that encourage customers to take action to manage their energy service needs rather than trying to promote participation in a variety of individual programs. Several specific design guidelines were applied to the programs presented. They are:     

Minimize the number of program offerings to reduce the costs of program administration and the market confusion that can arise from too many program requirements. Minimize program design complexity in the interest of speeding up time-to-market, reducing administrative costs, and encouraging participation. Retain design flexibility to enable program implementers to adjust specific designs as dictated by customer response and evaluation results. Balance the need to quickly acquire significant electricity savings with the need to lay a foundation for continued program scale-up and foster a transformation in customer electricity management. Ensure that the program offerings complement existing Yukon energy initiatives and minimize duplication or potential customer confusion. To this end, there has been extensive collaboration with local entities such as the Energy Solutions Centre, Yukon Housing, City of Whitehorse and others.

This portfolio should be viewed as the starting point for the Utilities. It is anticipated that timely adjustments will be made in response to feedback from customers and trade allies, and based on the performance of individual programs.

ICF Marbek

7

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

2.1

Portfolio Structure

Exhibit 5 presents the proposed overall portfolio of the Utilities’ electricity programs. It also shows the current complementary energy programs offered by the Energy Solutions Centre and Yukon Housing. Exhibit 5: Portfolio Structure Outside the scope of this filing yet accounted for in the portfolio design of the Utilities

Program Administrator

Energy Solutions Centre

The Utilities

Programs

General Service Program (Building Sector)

Residential Program

Program Elements

Engagement, Training and Communication

Engagement, Education and Communication

Lighting Redesign & Equipment Incentive

LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates

HE Refrigeration

Low-cost EE Products

Energy Star Computer Incentive

GSHP & CCHP Initiative

Building Program Portfolio

Service Provider Directory Desktop Benchmarking and Auditing

Residential Program Portfolio

Good Energy Rebate Program: Appliances, Furnaces & Stoves, HRVs, Drain Water, SWH

Refrigerators & Freezers Retirement Program

Yukon Housing Corporation

Residential Program Portfolio

New Construction Building Envelope: Green and SuperGreen Labels New Construction: Training for Developers & Contractors Home Repair Program: Lowinterest Loans

New Construction Incentive

Conservation Measures

Illustrative Example of One Element:

LED Lighting Rebates LED PAR lamps LED Potlights Exterior lamps ...

The portfolio shown in Exhibit 5 is built around two broad programs – the General Service Program and the Residential Program; each program contains several program elements designed to provide a range of electricity efficiency options for commercial and residential customers. As noted previously, the selection of specific program elements carefully considered existing Yukon initiatives, which are energy-focused as opposed to electricity-focused.

ICF Marbek

8

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

2.2

Overview of Portfolio Benefit/Cost Results

Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7 present an overview of the portfolio Benefit/Cost results. The results are presented for the five year period Year 1 to Year 5, inclusive, by individual program element as well as for the portfolio as a whole. The results are also organized within two scenarios:  

Without Government Buildings: This assumes that government owned buildings are not eligible to participate in the programs. Government buildings include buildings from all levels of government: federal, territorial, first nation, and municipal. With Government Buildings2: This assumes that all Yukon buildings are eligible to participate in the programs.

In each case, the results presented include:    

Net Savings - Lifetime MWh: These are the lifetime electricity savings attributed to (only) the measures implemented in the year shown and are inclusive of T&D losses. Net Savings - Annual MWh: These are the electricity savings that would occur in the milestone year shown due to the impacts of the measures implemented to date under the program. They are inclusive of T&D losses. Utility Expenditure: These show the associated incentive and non-incentive program costs that would be incurred in each milestone year. Benefit/Cost Ratios: These are the results of the benefit-cost tests described previously in Exhibit 4. Values greater than 1 indicate net positive benefits.

Benefit/Cost Highlights As illustrated in Exhibit 63 and Exhibit 7:    

All of the proposed programs provide positive net benefits to the Yukon, to the electric utilities and to program participants. Benefit/Cost results are not calculated for program elements that are promotional or educational in nature; however, their associated costs are captured and distributed among those program elements that do create electricity savings. The selected occurrences where the RIM results are less than 1 indicates that rates may be affected negatively (i.e., they may increase in the short term as a result of the program expenses). Results are moderately more positive under the scenario that includes government participation.

More detailed descriptions of the programs and program elements shown in Exhibits 6 and 7 are presented in the following Section 3 (General Service) and Section 4 (Residential). Additional details are also provided in Appendix C (Budget) and Appendix D (Incentive).

2

For example, the DSM plan could include a caveat that some level(s) of government will not participate in DSM programs that are funded from rate-base. 3 Program-level evaluation, measurement and verification costs are included in the utility expenditures presented in Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7. ICF Marbek

9

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Savings Highlights As illustrated in Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7: 

  

Over the course of the 5-year program period and under the scenario that includes government buildings, the General Service Program and the Residential Program will generate 98.9 GWh of measure-lifetime net savings, 9.3 GWh of annual net savings, and 2.3 MW of coincident peak savings. Under the with-government scenario, the General Service Program will generate 67% of the measure-lifetime net savings and the Residential Program will generate 33% of the net savings. Under the scenario that excludes government buildings, the programs will generate 75.1 GWh of measure-lifetime net savings, 7.1 GWh of annual net savings, and 1.8 MW of coincident peak savings. Under the without-government scenario, the General Service Program will generate 56% of the measure-lifetime net savings and the Residential Program will generate 44% of the net savings.

In Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7, “Net Savings – Lifetime MWh” are lifetime electricity savings attributed to (only) the measures implemented in the year shown and are inclusive of transmission and distribution losses; “Net Savings – Annual MWh” are the electricity savings that would occur in the milestone year shown due to the impacts of the measures implemented to date under the program and are inclusive of transmission and distribution losses. An asterisk is included in the ENERGY STAR computer element because there is no incremental cost to the participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

ICF Marbek

10

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 6: Portfolio Results Excluding Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses

Program Elements Lighting Redesign and Equipm't Incentive excluding gov. buildings New Construction Incentive - excluding gov. buildings High-Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding gov. buildings Energy Star Computer excluding gov. buildings Engagement, Education and Communication excluding gov. buildings Total General Service Program excl. gov. buildings LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Low-cost Energy Efficient Products New-construction CCHP and GSHP Initiative Engagement, Education and Communication Total for the Residential Program Grand Total All Programs Portfolio

ICF Marbek

Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW:

Year 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 8 1 N/A N/A N/A 32 8 1 718 36 13 1,849 169 60 148 7 3 N/A N/A N/A 2,715 213 76 2,747 221 77

Year 2 2,476 333 79 306 15 3 0 0 0 205 59 11 N/A N/A N/A 2,988 408 93 3,149 199 71 3,969 543 194 188 17 6 N/A N/A N/A 7,306 759 271 10,294 1,167 363

Year 3 6,240 1,140 269 1,377 84 19 6,301 630 72 335 143 26 N/A N/A N/A 14,253 1,997 385 3,207 368 131 3,672 896 319 188 26 9 N/A N/A N/A 7,066 1,289 460 21,319 3,287 845

Year 4 7,132 2,062 486 2,142 191 44 0 630 72 0 143 26 N/A N/A N/A 9,274 3,027 627 3,207 537 191 3,540 1,236 441 1,223 87 31 N/A N/A N/A 7,969 1,860 664 17,243 4,887 1,290

Benefit/Cost Ratios for the 5-Year Period

Utility Expenditure ($1,000s) Year 5 7,132 2,985 703 2,448 314 72 6,301 1,260 143 0 135 24 N/A N/A N/A 15,881 4,693 942 3,207 705 252 3,342 1,558 556 1,075 141 50 N/A N/A N/A 7,623 2,405 858 23,504 7,098 1,800

Total 22,981 N/A N/A 6,273 N/A N/A 12,602 N/A N/A 573 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 42,428 N/A N/A 13,487 N/A N/A 16,371 N/A N/A 2,821 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32,679 N/A N/A 75,108 N/A N/A

Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total:

Year 1 $4 $77 $81 $0 $4 $4 $0 $10 $10 $2 $26 $28 $0 $167 $167 $5 $284 $290 $12 $82 $94 $34 $165 $199 $5 $18 $23 $0 $113 $113 $51 $379 $429 $56 $706 $762

Year 2 $96 $78 $175 $4 $31 $35 $0 $91 $91 $10 $12 $22 $0 $251 $251 $111 $463 $574 $51 $84 $135 $48 $179 $227 $9 $34 $43 $0 $130 $130 $108 $427 $535 $219 $824 $1,043

Year 3 $213 $81 $294 $19 $5 $24 $122 $17 $138 $17 $15 $32 $0 $224 $224 $371 $341 $712 $52 $55 $106 $43 $145 $188 $9 $28 $37 $0 $134 $134 $104 $361 $465 $474 $670 $1,145

Year 4 $239 $85 $323 $30 $31 $60 $0 $54 $54 $0 $2 $2 $0 $175 $175 $268 $346 $615 $52 $59 $111 $36 $153 $189 $24 $39 $63 $0 $138 $138 $112 $389 $501 $380 $703 $1,083

11

Year 5 $222 $111 $333 $34 $12 $46 $122 $42 $163 $0 $5 $5 $0 $217 $217 $377 $387 $764 $52 $107 $159 $30 $169 $199 $19 $24 $43 $0 $142 $142 $100 $443 $543 $477 $815 $1,292

Total $773 $432 $1,205 $87 $82 $169 $243 $214 $458 $29 $60 $89 $0 $1,034 $1,034 $1,132 $1,822 $2,954 $217 $387 $604 $192 $811 $1,003 $65 $144 $209 $0 $657 $657 $474 $1,999 $2,473 $1,606 $3,718 $5,325

TRC 1.1

PAC 2.8

PC 2.5

RIM 0.9

4.2

4.9

6.3

1.0

3.2

4.5

4.2

1.0

1.8

1.2

*

0.6

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.3

2.1

3.2

0.8

1.9

3.0

2.5

1.0

1.8

2.7

2.8

1.0

0.9

1.7

1.2

0.8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.4

2.0

2.4

0.9

1.3

2.1

2.9

0.8

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 7: Portfolio Results Including Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses

Program Elements Lighting Redesign and Equipm't Incentive including gov. buildings New Construction Incentive - including gov. buildings High-Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including gov. buildings Energy Star Computer including gov. buildings Engagement, Education and Communication including gov. buildings Total General Service Program incl. gov. buildings LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Low-cost Energy Efficient Products New-construction CCHP and GSHP Initiative Engagement, Education and Communication Total for the Residential Program Grand Total All Programs Portfolio

ICF Marbek

Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW: Lifetime MWh: Annual MWh: Coincident kW:

Year 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 107 27 5 N/A N/A N/A 107 27 5 718 36 13 1,849 169 60 148 7 3 N/A N/A N/A 2,715 213 76 2,822 240 81

Year 2 4,314 507 127 471 24 5 0 0 0 681 197 35 N/A N/A N/A 5,466 728 167 3,149 199 71 3,969 543 194 188 17 6 N/A N/A N/A 7,306 759 271 12,772 1,487 438

Year 3 10,711 1,731 432 2,118 129 30 7,580 694 80 1,111 475 85 N/A N/A N/A 21,520 3,029 627 3,207 368 131 3,672 896 319 188 26 9 N/A N/A N/A 7,066 1,289 460 28,586 4,318 1,087

Year 4 12,241 3,128 781 3,295 294 67 0 694 80 0 475 85 N/A N/A N/A 15,536 4,591 1,013 3,207 537 191 3,540 1,236 441 1,223 87 31 N/A N/A N/A 7,969 1,860 664 23,505 6,451 1,677

Benefit/Cost Ratios for the 5-Year Period

Utility Expenditure ($1,000s) Year 5 12,241 4,526 1,129 3,766 483 110 7,580 1,388 161 0 448 80 N/A N/A N/A 23,587 6,845 1,480 3,207 705 252 3,342 1,558 556 1,075 141 50 N/A N/A N/A 7,623 2,405 858 31,210 9,250 2,338

Total 39,506 N/A N/A 9,651 N/A N/A 15,161 N/A N/A 1,899 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 66,217 N/A N/A 13,487 N/A N/A 16,371 N/A N/A 2,821 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32,679 N/A N/A 98,896 N/A N/A

Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen: Total: Incentive: Non-Incen.: Total:

Year 1 $6 $81 $88 $0 $28 $28 $0 $36 $36 $6 $36 $41 $0 $202 $202 $12 $383 $395 $12 $82 $94 $34 $165 $199 $5 $18 $23 $0 $113 $113 $51 $379 $429 $63 $762 $824

Year 2 $135 $77 $213 $6 $9 $15 $0 $100 $100 $35 $52 $88 $0 $290 $290 $176 $529 $705 $51 $84 $135 $48 $179 $227 $9 $34 $43 $0 $130 $130 $108 $427 $535 $284 $957 $1,240

Year 3 $294 $66 $360 $25 $6 $32 $132 $19 $151 $57 $74 $131 $0 $255 $255 $508 $420 $928 $52 $55 $106 $43 $145 $188 $9 $28 $37 $0 $134 $134 $104 $361 $465 $612 $782 $1,393

Year 4 $327 $72 $400 $39 $33 $72 $0 $86 $86 $0 $6 $6 $0 $200 $200 $367 $398 $765 $52 $59 $111 $36 $153 $189 $24 $39 $63 $0 $138 $138 $112 $389 $501 $478 $787 $1,266

12

Year 5 $299 $127 $427 $45 $16 $61 $132 $49 $180 $0 $17 $17 $0 $252 $252 $476 $461 $937 $52 $107 $159 $30 $169 $199 $19 $24 $43 $0 $142 $142 $100 $443 $543 $576 $904 $1,480

Total $1,062 $425 $1,487 $115 $93 $208 $263 $290 $553 $98 $185 $284 $0 $1,199 $1,199 $1,538 $2,192 $3,730 $217 $387 $604 $192 $811 $1,003 $65 $144 $209 $0 $657 $657 $474 $1,999 $2,473 $2,012 $4,191 $6,203

TRC 1.2

PAC 3.8

PC 2.4

RIM 0.9

4.7

6.1

6.7

1.0

3.2

4.3

4.6

1.0

2.0

1.3

*

0.6

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.3

2.5

3.2

0.8

1.9

3.0

2.5

1.0

1.8

2.7

2.8

1.0

0.9

1.7

1.2

0.8

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

1.4

2.0

2.4

0.9

1.4

2.3

2.9

0.8

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

3 Proposed General Service Program This section presents a description of the proposed General Service Program (GSP) 4 as well as a detailed description of each of the proposed program elements. The proposed program offerings set out in this section have been developed based on the results of market information collected during the research phase of this program design study. The remainder of this section is organized and presented as follows:   

Market Research Results Program Overview Description of Program Elements

The Utilities made the working assumption that all general-service ratepayers would be eligible to participate in the General Service Program.

3.1

Market Research Results

This section presents a summary of the information gathered during the market characterization phase of this study. The market characterization was primarily focused on lighting systems and HVAC systems: lighting systems are by far the most electricity-intensive end use in existing buildings in the Yukon. HVAC systems are the second most electricity-intensive end use in existing building and first in new construction. Further detail on the research methodology employed is presented in Appendix C. The main research findings, which form the basis for the proposed program design, are presented below.

Lighting Distribution Chain The main findings with regard to the current Yukon lighting distribution chain are: 



  

4

There are no manufacturer representatives or agents in the Yukon. Distributors do business with representatives or agents in BC and Alberta, or even in the US, in the case of OSRAM/Sylvania. However, there seem to be no ordering or shipping difficulties, and no limitations regarding the types of items that can be procured. There are only two electrical distributors in the Yukon: EECOL and Guillevin. However, these distributors are key market actors. Electrical contractors buy primarily from local vendors rather than from vendors located outside of the Yukon, who are primarily distributors, although there are some purchases from retailers. Electrical distributors sell a variety of electrical equipment, of which lighting equipment is a large portion. Electrical distributors often maintain relationships with a variety of market actors situated both upstream and downstream in the supply chain, including lighting designers, building owners, electrical contractors and manufacturer agents and representatives. Electrical distributors are keen to participate in programs and are easier to engage than electrical contractors because new incremental projects mean increased sales. Yukon-based electrical distributors are slightly less prone than distributors in the South to offer “value added” services such as creating the lighting layout and equipment specifications, perhaps because of staffing limitations and market size. It could be assumed

General Service Program and GSP are, respectively, a preliminary name and acronym.

ICF Marbek

13

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

 



 





that if the electricity efficiency market started to grow, distributors could agree to offer these services in order to increase their market share. There are a few independent lighting distributors selling to the Yukon residential and building sectors. Electrical contractors are typically the last step in the building lighting supply chain before the end user. Their role is to be “the installers”. Depending on the type of project, electrical contractors may have a contractual relationship with a general contractor, or directly with the building owner. Electrical contractors active in the territory are smaller regional firms with a handful of employees. They are a hard-to-reach group of people as they are very busy and are on the road much of the time. Electrical contractors typically have a business model that promotes quick project turnaround with an emphasis on short lead times and few callbacks. This tends to discourage design changes and, in some instances, creates a barrier to the uptake of electricity-efficient lighting. According to electrical distributors and contractors, 50% of the equipment is sold for new construction projects and 50% is sold for retrofit projects. Approximately 60% of the equipment is sold to the commercial sector and 40% to the government sector. Most of the lighting designer business (80%) is for new construction projects. Much less business is with retrofit project (20%). Lighting designers sell services mostly to the government (60%) and to the commercial sector (40%). In the commercial sector, they primarily sell services for offices lighting designs. A significant share of the retrofit projects is done without a formal designer, particularly in the non-governmental sector. Electrical contractors in the Yukon frequently create simple designs for customers during retrofit projects. However, electrical contractors are not as involved in the design of new buildings unless it is a design-build situation. An important share of retail lighting equipment sales is to commercial end-users (approximately 55%). This is an important finding. It could indicate that retailers are an important channel serving the commercial and governmental buildings sectors, more so than in other jurisdictions.

The drivers and motivations of the supply-chain actors are: 

 

Electrical distributors seek higher profit margin. Energy efficiency is a tool to gain market share. Energy efficiency is consistent with their business model. Their stocking practices are strictly dictated by headquarters and based on customer feedback. The main motivation of the sales people is monetary recognition such as commissions or bonuses. Lighting designers seek a feeling of achievement or a sensation of a job well done. Electrical contractors react to clients requests. Providing the best customer service is their main driver. Providing information on newer products to their customers is not a priority.

HVAC Distribution Chain The main findings with regard to the current Yukon HVAC distribution chain are:   

Manufacturers are multinational corporations headquartered outside of the Yukon – and outside Canada most of the time. For the purposes of this study, we divided these into three categories: control hardware, control software and equipment. For the most part, there is no distributor in the distribution chain. Control and HVAC contractors are dealers for specific manufacturers. The control system of a building significantly influences with whom the building owner/manager will do business. Once a specific system is selected, it is difficult to change to another system, and it is difficult maintain more than one system in the same building or even in many buildings. In theory, systems should be capable of working together, but in practice, this is often challenging. For this reason, customer loyalty is high.

ICF Marbek

14

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio





   

There are a large number of equipment manufacturers: Rheem, Cleaver-Brooks, Viessmann, Bryant, York, Carrier, Mitsubishi, Lennox, and many others. There are fewer control system manufacturers: Honeywell, Siemens, Johnson Controls, Delta Controls and few others share the market. There are only a few large manufacturers of control hardware and software. They are often horizontally and vertically integrated: they offer equipment, installation services and design directly to the end-users. They often sell HVAC equipment as well. Examples of large manufacturers of this sort are Siemens and Honeywell. Other examples of major providers in North America with little to no presence in the Yukon are: Trane, and Delta Controls. The two control contractors in the Yukon consist of a Honeywell dealer and a Siemens dealer. Approximately 50 to 60% of the control contractor business is in government buildings and 40% to 50% is in commercial buildings. Results are similar for HVAC and control designers: 50 to 60% in the government sector; and, 40% to 50% in the commercial sector. Among commercial buildings, approximately 60% of the control contractors’ business is in office space and, the remainder is in warehouse and wholesale facilities. Results are similar for HVAC and control designers: 50 to 60% in office space, and 10 to 15% in non-food retail. For control contractors, 60% of the business is new construction projects and 40% is retrofit projects. Results are similar for HVAC and control designers: approximately 55% in new construction office space, and 45% in retrofit projects.

Building Owners/Managers Investment Barriers and Drivers The following observations helped the program designers owners/managers’ investment decision making process:  

 



understand

the

building

All supply-chain actors cited initial cost as the main purchase decision criteria for end-users. Supply-chain actors and end-users unanimously reported higher initial cost of as the most important barrier to the purchase of electricity-efficient equipment. Building owners/managers will not do a retrofit project to gain electricity savings. They will do a project to gain more comfort. If the technology can be obtained in the Yukon within a reasonable timeframe, then they will be interested in buying equipment that can generate monetary savings. The higher cost of electricity-efficient equipment will still be an issue, but they could be willing to proceed regardless. Environmental considerations seem to be a relatively minor driver. Building owners/managers focus on the initial cost of capital investment. They rejected other potential drivers such as increasing the value of their property, or increasing tenant retention and satisfaction. They will fix equipment if it breaks, and perhaps then they could agree to go with an electricity efficiency option rather than the standard. HVAC/Control contractors in the Yukon take part in the design of projects. Contractors have more influence in retrofit projects than in new construction. As one of the contractors eloquently said: It’s a close-knit community so contractors can get involved with engineers – better jobs get done that way.”

Current Institutional, Regulatory and Programmatic Framework The key findings regarding the current stakeholders and market framework were: 

It appears that Yukoners in the building retrofit sector are open to the idea that YEC, YECL or both could deliver electricity conservation programs. There is no clear preference between YEC and YECL. YEC and YECL credibility is about the same as that of Energy Solutions Centre. There would be a significant level of trust in YEC and YECL and this trust would be greater than for equipment suppliers.

ICF Marbek

15

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

 



No organization, program or piece of regulation other than the City of Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw has had any form of influence, positively or negatively, on the electricity efficiency of the building sector in the past five years. Currently, the Energy Solutions Centre (ESC), responsible for electricity efficiency on the behalf of the Yukon Government, has had very little activity specifically targeting the building sector other than maintaining a list of service providers. However the ESC can help to provide guidance if requested and has recently starting a benchmarking and auditing program for commercial and institutional buildings. There are no trade organizations to gather people from the building industry as there are in the South. ASHRAE does not have a chapter in the Yukon, nor do the IES, the AEE, BOMA, etc. The Association of Professional Engineers of the Yukon does not actively promote energy efficiency.

Existing and Prospective Information Dissemination Mechanisms The key findings regarding existing and prospective information dissemination mechanisms were: 

 

 



Information needed to install electricity-efficient equipment and systems generally comes from the manufacturers of the equipment, either through printed or website documentation, or the salespeople of the manufacturers. Information flows through the chain: manufacturers to distributors, distributors to contractors and then contractors to building owners/managers. Designers are another key intermediary for information and education to the customers. The fact that there are no manufacturer representatives or agents in the Yukon limits the interaction and the dissemination of information on innovation. In the building lighting channel, it was found that manufacturers and distributors do not attempt to reach out directly to building owners/managers as much as typically occurs in other jurisdictions. Electrical contractors are reluctant to spend as much time educating their customers about innovative equipment as is typical in other jurisdictions. There is a general distrust in suppliers among building owners/managers. Owners/managers would have a higher level of trust in a third party such as the Utilities. All supply-chain actors generally agree that they have all the information they need if they want it; they obtain it either through the manufacturer websites or through the widely available engineering handbooks. This information is applicable and they agreed that no “adaptation” of the information to the Yukon context is required. However, Yukon supplychain actors do need to know about successful installations of specific technologies. News about good or bad installations is disseminated quickly and is remembered for a long time. Generally speaking, market actors preferred the direct engagement approach to providing information to them. If short in-person information sessions were to be held, they showed no preference for morning, lunch time or after hours. All three options would probably work. They agreed that if full-day training were offered, it would probably be successful given the limited offering of continuous education. They generally liked the idea of trade events and ranked it second after direct engagement as a mean to convoy information to them.

Barrier Analysis Barriers which emerged as themes during the market research activities include, in priority order:     

Prohibitive cost of electricity efficiency equipment both in retrofit and new construction Split-incentive barriers inside governmental or municipal organizations Clogged information channel between manufacturers in and end-users in the Yukon Limited offerings in energy engineering Reactive building maintenance rather than preventive building maintenance.

ICF Marbek

16

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

3.2

General Service Program: An Overview

The General Service Program and its components are presented in a schematic format on the left hand side of Exhibit 8. Other energy conservation building programs offered in the Yukon are presented on the right hand side of the exhibit. As shown in this exhibit, the General Service Program avoids overlaps and exploits potential for synergy. Exhibit 8: Portfolio View of the Utilities’, and Energy Solutions Centre Building Programs

The General Service Program will integrate resource acquisition and market transformation offerings and activities aimed at building owner/managers, and at building industry actors. Through this program, the Utilities will increase the demand and the supply of electricity efficiency systems, with a focus on lighting systems in existing buildings, and both lighting and HVAC systems in new construction.

ICF Marbek

17

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The General Service Program consists of four distinct program elements, as presented below: Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive: The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have their lighting systems retrofitted. The total incentive will be the sum of three layers:   

Lighting redesign incentive Custom lighting incentive Prescriptive LED lighting incentive

The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have a lighting redesign conducted in their building. The purpose of the lighting redesign will be to design the optimal lighting system in term of visual comfort, ease of maintenance, and electricity savings considering the existing spaces, windows and fixtures. The incentive for the redesign work will be determined using a dollar-per-square foot rate. The lighting designers will be required to develop designs that meet minimum power density thresholds. The custom lighting incentive includes a base incentive for the equipment and installation determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate. This approach provides flexibility in choice of lighting technologies and also allows contractors and designers to be innovative. For the prescriptive LED incentive layer, the Utilities will add a flat amount of money per unit for LED products selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. Building owners/managers will be able to combine the custom incentive layer, the LED prescriptive incentive layer, and the lighting redesign incentive layer to best suit their needs and to generate a larger incentive for LED technologies: the initial-cost hurdle is higher for the LED technologies and the Utilities have a goal of accelerating market penetration of these products. The prescriptive list of eligible LED products will be consistent with that used in the Residential Program. High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive: The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers who retrofit their refrigeration systems. This will be a custom incentive for equipment and installation, i.e. it will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour rate for each kilowatt-hour of savings realized annually as compared with the pre-retrofit consumption and demand level. In addition to the incentive, the Utilities will provide extensive refrigerationspecific technical assistance to identify the opportunities, to develop the projects, to manage the construction works, and to measure and monitor the performance of the projects. It is expected that this program element will aim at hockey and curling arenas and grocery stores in particular. ENERGY STAR Computers Incentive: The Utilities will pay an incentive to participating Yukon-based companies or organizations that purchase computers and computer equipment that meet ENERGY STAR requirements. The incentive will be prescriptive i.e., it will be determined using a fixed amount per piece of equipment installed. The rebate will be offered year-round. However, it will be advertised and offered for a limited period of time i.e., until the end of Y3, to create a sense of urgency and cause early replacement of non-ENERGY STAR computers. New-Construction Incentive: The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers for high performance new buildings. The incentive will have two paths: a prescriptive path for small buildings and a custom path for large buildings. On a preliminary basis, the Utilities are considering using a threshold of 600 square meters (6,458 square feet) to decide whether a building should use the prescriptive or custom path. Under the prescriptive path, the incentive might be determined using a dollar-per-square foot rate if the building complies with a certain standard. Under the custom path (or performance path), the incentive will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate for ICF Marbek

18

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

each kilowatt-hour of savings realized above a minimum level. Savings under the custom path will be determined through building modeling. Engagement, Training and Communication: The Utilities will disseminate information, train and receive feedback from building owner/managers and other building industry actors through the following methods:         

Direct engagement with building industry actors: emails, phone calls and in-person meetings with electrical distributors, lighting designers, electrical contractors, as well as HVAC contractors, architects, building controls contractors, and HVAC designers Hands-on, in-person courses for local building industry actors, including course on advanced electricity efficiency lighting design, electricity efficiency project business cases, and energy performance contract (EPC) project implementation approach Project-specific, in-person or distance advanced lighting design or advanced HVAC design technical support to building industry actors Trade events supported by the Utilities and gathering local building owners/managers and building industry actors, with a focus on building electricity conservation, advanced lighting design and/or advanced HVAC design Direct engagement and key-account management for building owners/managers. In particular, the Utilities will leverage their partnerships with retail store managers Support for building owners/managers to do asset management planning and to identify in which buildings to develop projects Support to building owners/managers on optimizing decisions about implementation and procurement Support to building owners/managers before and during the tendering of project design services, particularly if the procurement approach is EPC. Public relation activities including press releases to the local newspapers and radio, web content, joint events with interested applicable trade, commerce, non-profit and community organizations, engagement with electrical contractors during the health and safety training of the Utilities.

The Utilities hope to work with the Energy Solutions Centre (ESC) to advertise and maintain the Service Provider Directory.

ICF Marbek

19

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

3.3

Description of Program Elements

As noted above, the General Service program offers four distinct program elements in addition to engagement, training and communication. This section provides a description of each program element; in each case the discussion is organized and presented as follows:            

Objective Target market Description Participation process Duration and milestones Eligible measures Marketing and communications strategy Incentive strategy Program theory Projected participation Budget Cost effectiveness

Program Theory – Definition The program theory explains how the program's actions are expected to achieve the intended outcomes. It is designed to build a common understanding among program staff and stakeholders related to the program’s choice of activities and their intended outputs and expected impacts. Program evaluators will also use the program theory to assess whether the theory is plausible, to suggest improvements, and to establish hypotheses to test during process and impact evaluation. Program theory is a central component of a program-level evaluation, measurement and verification plan.

3.3.1 Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive Objective The objective of this program element is to achieve optimized lighting systems in terms of visual comfort, ease of maintenance, and electricity and demand savings. Electricity savings will be achieved by increasing the number of lighting retrofit projects and the savings from each project by improving the quality of the lighting design. Participation will be facilitated by reducing the initial-cost hurdle of the lighting design study. The program component will emphasize LED lamps and fixtures by increasing the incentive amount if LED products are used in the lighting design.

Target Market The primary target market is existing buildings in the Yukon including Whitehorse and the communities. The non-governmental sector is of primary interest but the eligibility of government and institutional customers will be determined with direction from the regulator.

Description The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have their lighting systems retrofitted. The total incentive will be the sum of three layers: a lighting redesign study layer, a custom incentive layer, and a prescriptive LED incentive layer. Lighting Redesign Incentive The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have lighting redesign conducted in their building. The purpose of the lighting redesign will be to design an optimized lighting system in term of visual comfort, ease of maintenance, and electricity savings, given the ICF Marbek

20

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

existing spaces, windows and fixtures. The incentive for the redesign might be determined using a dollar-per-square foot rate with a cap. The lighting designers will have to meet defined maximum power density limits. The redesign should include replacement and/or relocation of fixtures, optimal use of daylighting and dimming, change in wall colours, specification of high performance lamps and fixtures, reduction of the light level to meet but not exceed the Illuminating Engineering Society standards, motion detectors, and task lighting. The main deliverables of the designer will be the business case for the proposed solution, as well as the lighting layouts, equipment specifications ready to be inserted in tendering documents; and perhaps a large portion of the content of the application form for the lighting incentive component. Custom Incentive The custom incentive for the equipment and installation will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate. This approach provides flexibility in choice of lighting technologies and also pushes contractors and designers to be innovative. The Utilities will provide a tool (most likely a simple spreadsheet) that will compute the incentive amount when baseline and retrofit lighting system characteristics are input. The standardized tool will be designed to be used as a “job aid.” Prescriptive LED Incentive There will also be a prescriptive incentive for LED lamps and fixtures. The Utilities will pay a flat dollar amount per unit to owners/managers when LED lighting lamps or fixtures are purchased from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The prescriptive amount will be rolled into the total lighting incentive. The purpose of the prescriptive LED incentive is to increase the incentive amount if LED lamps are used, because the initial-cost hurdle is higher for LED technologies than for other technologies, and because the Utilities would like to accelerate the market penetration of LED technologies. Subject matter experts generally agree that the LED technology is (or will soon be) more efficient, longer-lasting, more resilient to power quality issues, and easier to dispose of than fluorescent technologies. The incentive will be available at any time of the year. We propose reviewing the incentive level once per year, at the end of the year. All market actors will be made aware of this. The incentive can be increased or decreased to modulate uptake and react to market circumstances.

Participation Process The participation process for the lighting redesign study and equipment incentive program element is shown in Exhibit 9. As shown:  

 

The participation processes for the custom and prescriptive lighting incentives are synchronized with that of the lighting redesign incentive. Participation in the lighting redesign incentive element is optional. Participants can skip directly to the implementation of a lighting retrofit project. This might happen if the participant and supplier(s) feel comfortable with a simple design (e.g., one-to-one replacement) without a formal study or business case and if they want to move quickly. The outcome of the lighting redesign should flow well into the application for the lighting incentive component. There will be a “pre-approval” step to the redesign incentive component to check eligibility criteria and estimate the incentive amount for a certain building or set of buildings. The

ICF Marbek

21

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

  

 



lighting equipment incentives will also require pre-approval. The Utilities will track application-processing time and will make sure it meets application turnaround targets. After completion of the lighting redesign, the participant will submit a simple redesign completion form and provide backup documentation (eg. invoices and deliverables) to receive his/her first incentive payment. After completion of installation work, the participant will submit a simple project completion form and provide backup documentation (e.g. invoices) to receive their incentive payment. There might be two incentive payments for the lighting redesign component: one payment after the completion of the redesign (most likely 50%), and the second payment after the completion of the work (most likely 50%). Consequently, once the lighting installation work is complete, the participant will submit a simple work completion form to get his/her payment. In principle, this approach should increase the rate of implementation after the redesign work. If and when any application or form is rejected by the Utilities, the applicant will be informed and provided with information on what is missing and/or what to change. Applicants will be able to talk to their account manager to get support. A sample of projects will be selected for site verification. The verification will check a significant portion of the information that was provided in the application form, completion form and in the backup documentation. Incentives may be clawed back if errors, omission or fraud are uncovered. The site verification selection will be made based on a sampling plan that will be prepared during the implementation planning. In general, it is expected that larger projects will be more likely to be visited.

The tasks and responsibilities of the parties involved (i.e., the Utilities, the participant and the suppliers) will be clearly defined, consistent with the processes set out in Exhibit 9.

ICF Marbek

22

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 9: Participation Process for the Lighting Program Element Lighting Redesign Incentive & Lighting Incentive Participation Process The Utilities

Prospective Participant/ Participant

Service & Equipment Providers

Search & Find Service Provider

Door-to-door Marketing

Engagement and Communication

Fill Out Application Form & Sign Participation Agreement Redesign Study Pre-Approval

Accepted

Rejected

Give Go Ahead to Lighting Designer to Carry Out Design Implement Lighting Redesign Study & Invoice for Services Fill Out Completion Form & Send Back-Up Documents

Redesign Study Completion Approval

Rejected

Accepted Send of 50% of the Redesign Incentive to Participant

Engagement and Communication Door-to-door Marketing

Lighting Incentive Pre-Approval

Accepted

Redesign Study Final Approval

Fill Out Lighting Incentive Application Form (Incl. Custom & LED Prescriptive) & Sign Participation Agreement

Lighting Design Work & Support to Fill Out Application Form

Rejected

Give Go Ahead to Electrical Contractor to Implement Work Fill Out Redesign Study Work Completion Work

Construction Work & Invoice for Equipment & Services

Rejected

Accepted Send the Remainder of the Redesign Incentive to Participant Lighting Incentive Final Approval

Fill Out Lighting Incentive Completion Form & Send BackUp Documentation Rejected

Accepted Send the Lighting Incentive to Participant

Spot-Check Site Verification?

No Legend

Yes Verification Site Visit

Long-term Energy and Demand Savings

Lighting Redesign Incentive Lighting Incentive

ICF Marbek

23

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a period of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Y1) and finishes in the last quarter of Y6, the main milestones of this component are:         

Q1 of Y1: Program preparation, including engagement and communication planning Q2 of Y1: Creation of the lighting incentive calculation tool and finalization of the incentive levels Q3 of Y1: Program launch, including the first incentive advertisement campaign Q3 of Y1: Incentive level for the next year is planned and then disseminated Q1 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the incentive Y3, Y4, Y5, and Y6: Repeat the same cycle as described above Q3 of Y6: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y6: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y7: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

Eligible Measures The proposed incentive layers as well as archetype projects are presented in Exhibit 10 to Exhibit 13. Exhibit 10 and Exhibit 11 also include the lighting redesign study incentive. Exhibit 10: Archetype Lighting Conservation Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for NonGovernment Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM91

Lighting Redesign Study

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 0.00 kWh/ft2 .00000 kW/ft2 110%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$1.20/ft2

16.0 yr

$0.40/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 11,759 ft2

Level of Incentive

ECM80

Typical Lighting Project in

1.99 kWh/ft2

.00060 kW/ft2

95%

$1.40/ft2

15.4 yr

$0.16/ft2

15,000 ft2

ECM81

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Food Retail

4.85 kWh/ft2

.00092 kW/ft2

95%

$2.30/ft2

15.4 yr

$0.39/ft2

30,000 ft2

ECM82

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Non Food Retail

3.64 kWh/ft2

.00072 kW/ft2

95%

$1.90/ft2

15.4 yr

$0.29/ft2

10,000 ft2

ECM83

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Hotel/Motel

1.84 kWh/ft2

.00036 kW/ft2

95%

$2.10/ft2

11.5 yr

$0.15/ft2

20,000 ft2

ECM86

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Restaurant

6.65 kWh/ft2

.00140 kW/ft2

95%

$3.10/ft2

13.0 yr

$0.53/ft2

4,000 ft2

ECM87

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation

1.79 kWh/ft2

.00043 kW/ft2

95%

$1.90/ft2

15.7 yr

$0.14/ft2

25,000 ft2

ECM88

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse

1.85 kWh/ft2

.00045 kW/ft2

95%

$2.00/ft2

15.7 yr

$0.15/ft2

30,000 ft2

ICF Marbek

24

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 11: Prescriptive LED Incentive Layer for Non-Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

Level of Incentive

ECM92

Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb

$18.00/unit

ECM93

Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb

$12.00/unit

ECM94

Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs

$10.00/unit

ECM95

Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs

$20.00/unit

ECM96

Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs

$20.00/unit

ECM97

Commercial Spot or task lighting

$10.00/unit

Exhibit 12: Archetype Lighting Conservation Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for Government Buildings Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$1.20/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.24/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 26,209 ft2

95%

$1.40/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.10/ft2

15,000 ft2

.00035 kW/ft2

95%

$1.40/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.12/ft2

95,000 ft2

1.15 kWh/ft2

.00042 kW/ft2

95%

$1.40/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.06/ft2

33,000 ft2

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation

1.79 kWh/ft2

.00043 kW/ft2

95%

$1.90/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.09/ft2

25,000 ft2

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse

1.85 kWh/ft2

.00045 kW/ft2

95%

$2.00/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.09/ft2

30,000 ft2

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 0.00 kWh/ft2 .00000 kW/ft2 100%

ID

Measure Short Name

ECM912

Gov. Lighting Redesign Study

ECM802

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in

1.99 kWh/ft2

.00060 kW/ft2

ECM842

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Health

2.45 kWh/ft2

ECM852

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Education

ECM872 ECM882

ICF Marbek

Level of Incentive

25

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 13: Prescriptive LED Incentive Layer for Government Buildings Level of Incentive

ID

Measure Short Name

ECM922

Gov. Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb

$10.80/unit

ECM932

Gov. Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb

$7.20/unit

ECM942

Gov. Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs

$6.00/unit

ECM952

Gov. Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs

$12.00/unit

ECM962

Gov. Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs

$12.00/unit

ECM972

Gov. Commercial Spot or task lighting

$6.00/unit

The lighting redesign incentive will likely be calculated based on square footage of the building. The custom incentive will be calculated based on $.080/kWh (i.e., dollars per annual savings) for the non-government buildings and $.048/kWh for the government buildings. The prescriptive LED incentive will be added to the custom incentive, and will be computed based on a dollars per unit approach as shown above. Archetype building sizes are an average given an assumed building type mix and are primarily used to estimate transaction costs. During program implementation, each transaction will be treated as a custom project having a specific square footage and a specific total eligible incentive amount. The LED prescriptive incentives were added in the budget and accounted for in the costeffectiveness tests. However the LED savings and measure costs were not accounted in the targets and the cost-effectiveness test because the savings are already included in the archetype lighting conservation projects shown above. If LED measure savings and costs were included in the targets and cost-effectiveness tests, it would be double-counting. The lighting redesign incentive layer yields no direct savings; consequently, the projected transactions will be rolled into the program modeling as an incentive and program cost only. The benefit/cost ratio for this program element is not computed. It is assumed that the redesign studies will (1) increase the savings achieved through the lighting incentive component by improving the quality of the lighting designs, and will (2) increase the uptake of the lighting incentive by reducing the risk of investing in project preparation and by making it easier to complete the custom application. The program performance will be modeled using the archetype projects presented in Exhibit 10. However, during program implementation, each transaction will be treated as a custom project, with a specific project cost, a specific level of consumption and demand savings, and a specific total incentive amount. Measure lifetime is assumed to be 15 years and net-to-gross ratio is assumed to be 95% in all cases. Specific details on the minimum technical specifications for each of the items in Exhibit 11 (prescriptive LED lamps and fixtures) will be determined during the program preparation phase. The Utilities intend to use external equipment qualification agents instead of creating and maintaining a resource-intensive product qualification operation. ICF Marbek

26

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Prospective performance and safety qualification agents include, but are not limited to: the Office of Energy Efficiency’s ENERGY STAR Program, the US Department of Energy’s Solid State Lighting program, the Consortium for Energy Efficiency, the DesignLights Consortium, the Canadian Standards Association, and the Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. The Utilities reserve the right to revise eligible measures and incentive level as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. The Utilities propose to review the lighting incentive level on an annual basis. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money should fraud or omissions be identified.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will disseminate information, train and receive feedback from the building owner/managers and the building industry actors through multiple means as described in Section 3.4. To promote the uptake of the redesign element, the Utilities will focus primarily on the lighting supply-chain and building owners/managers channels.

Incentive Strategy Lighting Re-design The incentive for the study will be determined using a dollar-per-square foot-rate with a cap. We propose this approach, instead of using a percentage of the cost of the study, for the following reasons:  

It is easier for the building owners/managers to estimate the incentive level on a preliminary basis without waiting for a service provider to submit a price quote. It reduces the risk that service providers inflate their fees because the incentive covers part of the increase.

We assumed that smaller buildings, where doing a design is not economic, will not apply to the program because the low incentive amount will not justify the required paperwork. To ensure that the redesign incentive will create additional impact, we will require lighting designers to propose designs that comply with the Illuminating Engineering Society minimum lighting level and that are equal or below a certain power density (W per square foot) threshold. Power density is relatively easy to verify based on lighting layouts and specifications. On a preliminary basis, we propose the maximum power density threshold to be 0.83 W/sqft. The 2011 National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (2011 NECB) suggests using the ASHRAE standard 90.1 of 2010; which recommends a lighting density of 1.11 W/sqft for a closed office; and 0.98 W/sqft for an open plan. Thus 0.83 W/sqft is 25% below is the value prescribed by the 2011 NECB for closed offices. Custom Incentive The custom incentive for the equipment and installation will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate. This type of approach has the following benefits:  

Provides flexibility in choice of lighting technologies and also encourages contractors and designers to be innovative Allows for greater accuracy in tracking impact because the participants provide project baseline information with their application.

ICF Marbek

27

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

On the other hand, the Utilities acknowledge that the main disadvantages of the custom approach are:  

Requires a lengthier application form that is more resource-intensive to complete. Makes the incentive amount more challenging to compute

In order to address these hurdles:   

The Utilities will require pre-approval of projects before the installation is carried out to ensure that the participants properly estimate the incentive amount, thus reducing the risk of disappointing participants who have miscalculated their incentive. The Utilities will provide a standardized tool, most likely a simple spreadsheet, that will compute the incentive amount when baseline and retrofit lighting system characteristics are input. The Utilities created the lighting redesign incentive so that prospective participants can pay for support from external experts. The outcome of the lighting redesign study will flow into the application for the lighting incentive component.

The standardized tool will be designed to be used as a “job aid”. It should be seen as being useful to lighting designers rather than being an annoyance. The inputs and outputs of the standardized tool will provide most of the information required for the lighting incentive application form. Prescriptive LED Incentive There will also be a prescriptive incentive for LED lamps. The Utilities will pay a flat amount of money per unit to owners/managers when LED lighting lamps or fixtures from a prescriptive list of eligible products are purchased. The prescriptive amount will be rolled in the total lighting incentive amount. The prescriptive list of eligible LED products will be consistent with that used in the Residential Program described below, which will allow the task of monitoring the LED market and reviewing the incentive levels to be leveraged for both programs. This also means that contractors will not start buying the LED products from retailers and will not pretend to be installing them in the residential sector. They will carry on doing business with the electrical distributors, their normal supply channel. The standardized custom-incentive calculation tool will integrate the prescriptive LED incentive to make the total incentive calculation easier for applicants and their service providers. Both the custom and the prescriptive LED incentives will be available at any time of the year. We propose reviewing the incentive level once per year, at the end of the year. All market actors will be made aware of this. The incentive can be increased or decreased to modulate uptake and react to market circumstances.

ICF Marbek

28

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory The theory of the lighting redesign and equipment incentives of the General Service Program has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model in Exhibit 14. Exhibit 14: Logic Model of the General Service Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive

Exhibit 15 presents the narratives of the logic model shown in Exhibit 14. Exhibit 15: Explanatory Note on the General Service Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive Theory Link # 00

Narrative The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: Whitehorse bylaws on the obligation to bring all of the buildings up to code if and when deep retrofits are initiated, the price of electricity, the availability and response time of supply-chain actors, new-construction activities, and tolerance for complexity of all supply-chain actors and building owners/managers. The program administrator should monitor these externalities and adapt the implementation approach as necessary.

ICF Marbek

29

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

01

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with electrical distributors, lighting designers, electrical contractors, as well as with HVAC contractors, HVAC designers, control designers and architects through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and engage with supply-chain actors so that they promote them.

05

The Utilities will offer technical support to the supply-chain actors in two different forms: (1) hands-on training on the program tools, forms and procedures; on advanced electricity efficiency lighting design; and on the business aspects of electricity efficiency: energy audits, business cases, energy performance contracting, and electricity efficiency financing. (2) The Utilities will act as a broker to procure technical expertise from highly specialized lighting experts recruited throughout North America upon request from the local actors. In addition, the Utilities will disseminate information on recommended lighting equipment (brand-neutral, to the extent possible) in the form of printed brochures, newsletters or web content.

09

The Utilities propose to support any form of trade organizations or trade events by sponsoring and attending trade events that gather local building owners/managers and/or supply-chain actors. The Utilities intend to strengthen or create platforms that allow local energy conservation practitioners to present their success stories, and share their lessons learned.

10

Supply-side actors will actively seek to develop projects because they were engaged with by the Utilities, because they were trained and are capable of offering electricity-efficiency services, and because they were provided with networking opportunities with potential clients (building owners/managers) at trade events.

12

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with building owners/managers through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings; and through public relations activities like press releases sent to the local newspapers and radio, web content, and joint events with the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and make the owners/managers aware of the benefits so that they participate in the program.

13

The Utilities will offer customized technical support to building owners/managers to help them to initiate projects. The Utilities could include support to plan investment in assets, and to identify in which buildings to develop projects; support to make optimal decisions on implementation and procurement approach, and support before and during the tendering of project design services, particularly if the procurement approach is energy performance contracting (EPC).

14

Building owners/managers agree to initiate electricity efficiency projects because they were informed about the program components by the Utilities, because they were provided with technical support to decide where to start and how to do it, and because they networked with supply-side actors, perhaps at the trade events supported by the Utilities.

15

The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owner/managers to have a lighting redesign study conducted in their building. The purpose of the lighting redesign study will be to design an optimized lighting system in term of visual comfort, ease of maintenance, and electricity savings, considering the existing spaces, windows and fixtures. The incentive will reduce the financial risk of investing in a pre-investment study, and will reduce the initial-cost hurdle of doing business with designers. The building managers will have lighting redesign studies carried out.

16

Electricity-efficient lighting opportunities are identified in the building because the supply-chain actors were seeking to develop new lighting projects, because building owners/managers agreed to initiate an electricity efficiency project and because the financial risk of carrying out a redesign study was alleviated.

17

The Utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have their lighting systems retrofitted. This incentive will include a custom incentive layer and a prescriptive LED incentive layer. The custom incentive allows for flexibility in lighting technologies as well as the use of occupancy control, dimming and day lighting, etc. It pushes distributors, contractors and designers to be innovative. The purpose of the prescriptive LED incentive layer is to increase the level of incentive when LED technologies are used because the initial-cost hurdle is higher for LED technologies than for other technologies; and because LED lighting is a technology for which the Utilities would like to accelerate market penetration.

18

Electricity-efficient lighting retrofit projects are implemented because electricity-efficient lighting opportunities were identified and because the equipment and installation initial-cost financial hurdle was alleviated.

19

The electricity-efficient lighting retrofit projects will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

21

Electricity-efficient new buildings constructions are implemented because the supply-chain actors were seeking to work on electricity-efficient new construction projects, and because the initial-cost hurdle of the construction of electricity-efficient buildings was alleviated.

22

The electricity-efficient new buildings will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

27

Building owners/managers will be satisfied by the projects that they implemented. They will tell other people in the building industry; perhaps at the trade events supported by the utilities. This will generate word-of-mouth advertisement.

29

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause building owners/managers and supply-chain actors to implement more projects.

ICF Marbek

30

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link # 31

Narrative It is assumed that owners/managers will perceive new non-energy benefits; and/or the maintenance of benefits they used to have with baseline systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to make sure that participants perceive that their new systems are more comfortable, are less costly to maintain, have higher tenant satisfaction and retention, generate fewer complaints, and have increased property value.

Projected Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 16 to Exhibit 19 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 16: Participation Projections – Lighting Redesign and Custom Lighting Incentive for NonGovernment Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

9,181 ft2

50,876 ft2

83,390 ft2

83,390 ft2

41,695 ft2

268,531 ft2

ECM91

Lighting Redesign Study

ECM80

Typical Lighting Project in

0 ft2

11,738 ft2

31,786 ft2

36,327 ft2

36,327 ft2

116,179 ft2

ECM81

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Food Retail

0 ft2

2,702 ft2

7,139 ft2

8,159 ft2

8,159 ft2

26,160 ft2

ECM82

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Non Food Retail

0 ft2

15,116 ft2

39,707 ft2

45,379 ft2

45,379 ft2

145,581 ft2

ECM83

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Hotel/Motel

0 ft2

14,437 ft2

33,687 ft2

38,499 ft2

38,499 ft2

125,122 ft2

ECM86

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Restaurant

0 ft2

3,982 ft2

9,291 ft2

10,618 ft2

10,618 ft2

34,510 ft2

ECM87

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation

0 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

ECM88

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse

0 ft2

11,460 ft2

26,739 ft2

30,559 ft2

30,559 ft2

99,316 ft2

ICF Marbek

31

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 17: Participation Projections – Prescriptive LED Incentive for Non-Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

ECM92

Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb

0 units

555 units 1,295 units 1,480 units 1,480 units

4,810 units

ECM93

Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb

0 units 1,184 units 2,763 units 3,157 units 3,157 units

10,261 units

ECM94

Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs

0 units

925 units 2,158 units 2,467 units 2,467 units

8,016 units

ECM95

Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs

0 units

740 units 1,727 units 1,973 units 1,973 units

6,413 units

ECM96

Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs

0 units

538 units 1,256 units 1,435 units 1,435 units

4,664 units

ECM97

Commercial Spot or task lighting

0 units

370 units

3,206 units

863 units

987 units

987 units

Exhibit 18: Participation Projections – Lighting Redesign and Custom Lighting Incentive for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

11,394 ft2

59,232 ft2

95,676 ft2

95,676 ft2

47,838 ft2

309,815 ft2

ECM912

Gov. Lighting Redesign Study

ECM802

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in

0 ft2

11,738 ft2

31,786 ft2

36,327 ft2

36,327 ft2

116,179 ft2

ECM842

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Health

0 ft2

4,421 ft2

10,316 ft2

11,789 ft2

11,789 ft2

38,315 ft2

ECM852

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Education

0 ft2

32,136 ft2

74,984 ft2

85,696 ft2

85,696 ft2

278,512 ft2

ECM872

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation

0 ft2

5,798 ft2

13,528 ft2

15,461 ft2

15,461 ft2

50,247 ft2

ECM882

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse

0 ft2

3,820 ft2

8,913 ft2

10,186 ft2

10,186 ft2

33,105 ft2

ICF Marbek

32

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 19: Participation Projections – Prescriptive LED Incentive for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

697 units

797 units

ECM922

Gov. Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb

0 units

299 units

797 units

2,590 units

ECM932

Gov. Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb

0 units

638 units 1,488 units 1,700 units 1,700 units

5,525 units

ECM942

Gov. Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs

0 units

498 units 1,162 units 1,328 units 1,328 units

4,316 units

ECM952

Gov. Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs

0 units

398 units

930 units 1,063 units 1,063 units

3,453 units

ECM962

Gov. Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs

0 units

290 units

676 units

773 units

773 units

2,511 units

ECM972

Gov. Commercial Spot or task lighting

0 units

199 units

465 units

531 units

531 units

1,727 units

Budget The budgets presented in Exhibit 20 and Exhibit 21 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 20: Budget – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings

$1,000s Incentive:

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$4

$96

$213

$239

$222

$773

Non-Incentive:

$72

$56

$46

$50

$91

$314

Total:

$76

$152

$259

$289

$312

$1,087

Exhibit 21: Budget – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$6

$135

$294

$327

$299

$1,062

Non-Incentive:

$81

$77

$66

$72

$127

$425

Total:

$88

$213

$360

$400

$427

$1,487

Incentive:

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 22 and in Exhibit 23 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation

ICF Marbek

33

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

experience. Savings targets are not applicable to the lighting redesign study layer, as no savings will be attributed to this incentive layer. Exhibit 22: Savings Targets – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Lifetime MWh:

0

2,476

6,240

7,132

7,132

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

0

333

1,140

2,062

2,985

2,985

2,985

2,985

2,985

2,985

2,985

2,968

2,922

2,833

2,689

Coincident kW:

0

79

269

486

703

703

703

703

703

703

703

697

682

658

622

Exhibit 23: Savings Targets – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Lifetime MWh:

0

4,314

10,711

12,241

12,241

0

0

0

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Annual MWh:

0

507

1,731

3,128

4,526

4,526

4,526

4,526

4,526

4,526

4,526

4,510

Coincident kW:

0

127

432

781

1,129

1,129

1,129

1,129

1,129

1,129

1,129

1,124

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4,463

4,375

4,231

1,108

1,084

1,049

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown in Exhibit 24 and in Exhibit 25 were computed based on the assumptions presented above: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience; consequently, actual results may differ than those presented below. Savings targets are not applicable to the lighting redesign study layer, as no savings will be attributed to this incentive layer. Exhibit 24: Cost Effectiveness – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive excluding Government Buildings

Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

ICF Marbek

Total Resource Cost TRC

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

1.2

3.1

2.5

0.9

$411

$1,947

$1,759

-$211

$.201/kWh

$.075/kWh

N/A

N/A

34

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 25: Cost Effectiveness – Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive including Government Buildings Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

1.2

3.8

2.4

0.9

$709

$3,454

$2,845

-$408

$.202/kWh

$.063/kWh

N/A

N/A

3.3.2 High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive Objective The objective of this program element is to achieve electricity and demand savings by increasing the number of refrigeration retrofit projects and the savings from each project. This will be facilitated by identifying the opportunities, assisting participating owners and managers, and reducing the initial-cost hurdle. This program element will encourage the early replacement of refrigeration equipment and systems by offering technical assistance and a relatively large incentive to reduce the customer’s simple payback.

Target Market The primary target market includes grocery stores as well as hockey and curling arenas in the Yukon, as these are the main users of refrigeration equipment. Convenience stores, smaller grocery stores, and restaurants may also be targeted during the second half of the program period.

Description The utilities will pay an incentive to building owners/managers to have their refrigeration equipment retrofitted and/or to install refrigeration controls. The incentive will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour rate (based on annual savings). This approach will mainly account for savings generated by conservation measures to be identified and sized by energy engineers at each site. The conservation measures could include simple ENERGY STAR equipment purchases, more complicated refrigeration control implementation, or deep-retrofit projects. In addition to the incentive, the Utilities will provide extensive refrigeration-specific technical assistance to identify the opportunities, to develop the projects, to manage the construction works, and to measure and monitor the performance of the projects. It is expected that this program element will target hockey and curling arenas and grocery stores in particular. Given the relatively small number of potential participants, energy engineers employed by the Utilities will build tailor-made technical assistance packages for each participant. These packages may include an initial Walk-Through Audit, an Investment-Grade Audit, procurement support, project management and/or project performance measurement and verification. The technical assistance budget will be commensurate with the estimated impact potential. ICF Marbek

35

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Participation Process The participation process for the refrigeration incentive program component is shown in Exhibit 26. As shown:  





Extensive technical assistance will be provided by the Utilities at all stages of the projects. The technical assistance budget will be commensurate with the estimated impact potential. Relatively few projects are anticipated (5 to 10); therefore transactional infrastructure will be rudimentary (e.g., no forms, no program database). Consequently, the Utilities will take care of all the documentation and paperwork on a project-by-project basis. Project and participant data will be collected informally, through conversations, email exchanges, site visits, etc. Qualified energy engineers will estimate savings using best practice methodology. These estimates will then be validated by the Program Administration team. The same method will be used to calculate the total incentive amount. The incentive amount will be determined before the investment decision. To reduce the risk to the participant, the incentive will not be changed after the implementation unless major changes in the design occur during implementation. The outputs of the performance measurement and verification will not result in changes in the incentive amount. The Utilities will have the participant commit to and renew the commitment to implement the works under certain conditions agreed on at the project’s outset. The details of this “commitment” will be worked out at the launch preparation stage. On a preliminary basis, the Utilities envision a participation agreement where the participants would commit to reimburse part of the cost of the technical assistance if they do not proceed with the implementation of a cost-effective project.

The tasks and responsibilities of the parties involved (i.e., the Utilities, the participant and the suppliers) will be clearly defined based on the steps shown previously in Exhibit 26.

ICF Marbek

36

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 26: Participation Process for the High Efficiency Refrigeration Program Element

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program over five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Y1) and finishes in the last quarter of Year 5, the main milestones of this component are:    

Q1 of Y1: Program preparation, including engagement and communication planning Q2 of Y1: Selection of technical assistance providers Q3 of Y1: Prospective participants are engaged Q4 of Y1: Technical Assistance starts to be delivered

ICF Marbek

37

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

        

Q1 to Q4 of Y2: Technical Assistance continues, Project Development, Start of the Implementation Q1 to Q4 of Y3: First batch of projects are completed, savings start being realized Q3 of Y3: New batch of prospective participants are engaged Q4 of Y3: Technical Assistance Starts to be Delivered to the second batch of participants Q1 to Q4 of Y4: Technical Assistance goes on, Project Development, Start of the Implementation Q1 to Q4 of Y5: First batch of projects are completed, savings start being realized Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y8: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

Eligible Measures The proposed incentive levels and archetype refrigeration projects are presented in Exhibit 27 and Exhibit 28. Exhibit 27: Archetype High Efficiency Refrigeration Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for NonGovernment Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM98

Typical Low-Cost No-Cost Refrigeration Project - Food R t il Deep Retrofit Typical

ECM99

Gross Annual Gross Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 6.55 kWh/ft2 .00074 kW/ft2 95% 13.48 kWh/ft2 .00153 kW/ft2

95%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$1.73/ft2

10.0 yr

$1.31/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 30,000 ft2

$5.87/ft2

10.0 yr

$2.70/ft2

30,000 ft2

Level of Incentive

Refrigeration Project - Food R t il

Exhibit 28: Archetype High Efficiency Refrigeration Projects – Custom Incentive Layer for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM1002

Typical Refrigeration Project Ice Rink

Gross Annual Gross Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 2.49 kWh/ft2 .00034 kW/ft2 95%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$0.72/ft2

20.0 yr

Level of Incentive $0.40/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 25,000 ft2

The High Efficiency Refrigeration program element will focus primarily on custom refrigeration equipment and controls for ice rinks, curling rinks and grocery stores. However, the Utilities would like to retain the right to offer a prescriptive ENERGY STAR refrigeration rebate aimed at small commercial projects in the future. The Utilities reserve the right to revise eligible measures and incentive levels as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money should fraud errors or omissions be uncovered.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will disseminate information, train and receive feedback from the building owner/managers and the building industry actors through multiple means as described in

ICF Marbek

38

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Section 3.4. Given the relatively small number of potential participants, the Utilities will contact these parties directly, while offering a customized package of technical assistance.

Incentive Strategy The custom incentive for the equipment and installation will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour rate (based on expected annual savings). This type of approach has the following benefits:   

Provides flexibility in choice of refrigeration technologies and also encourages the energy engineers to be innovative. Allows for greater accuracy in tracking impact because the baseline information is collected and fewer assumptions are made. Provides customized technical assistance to maximize potential savings, and makes the computation of the incentive amount easy for the participants.

A qualified energy engineer will perform the incentive calculations. A second engineer will verify them to ensure accuracy. Performance Measurement and Verification (M&V) will not be carried out for the purpose of establishing the incentive level. The reasons for offering M&V as technical assistance to the participant are:    

Savings can be clearly demonstrated and communicated to the participant; and then to prospective participants. Project-level M&V results can be fed in the program-level evaluation and thus make program-level evaluation more accurate. Remedies may be identified to rectify situations in which project performance is disappointing. The activities surrounding M&V will educate the building owners/managers about energy monitoring and energy management best practices.

Savings will be calculated using a whole-building approach and be based on the monthly measurements made by the utility main building meter as part of the normal billing activities. The routine adjustment model will be defined prior to implementation. This methodological approach is referred to as the Option-C approach in the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP). The IPMVP is the most widely-used bestpractice manual governing the project-level M&V practice. The project-level M&V activities carried out by the Utilities will be done in coherence with it.

ICF Marbek

39

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory The theory of the High Efficiency Refrigeration Element within the General Service Program has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model and is shown in Exhibit 29. Exhibit 29: Logic Model of the General Service High Efficiency Refrigeration Element

Exhibit 30 presents the narratives for the logic model shown in Exhibit 29. Exhibit 30: Explanatory Note on the General Service High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive Theory Link #

Narrative

00

The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: grocery store ownership changes, slow decision-making on the part of City Council regarding whether or not to retrofit arenas, a lack of funding for building owners/managers (e.g., municipalities) to implement a project even after it is offset by an incentive, the price of electricity, the availability and response time of supply-chain actors, and the willingness to do a full cost replacement.

12

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with building owners/managers through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings, and through public relations activities like press releases sent to the local newspapers and radio stations, web content and joint events with the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and make the owners/managers aware of the benefits so that they participate in the program.

ICF Marbek

40

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

14

Building owners/managers agree to initiate electricity efficiency projects because they were informed about the program components by the Utilities.

43

Building owners/managers are offered the free services of energy engineers representing the Utilities to assess their refrigeration system to identify efficiency opportunities. They participate because their risk exposure and level of effort are minimized.

44

The Utilities provide technical assistance to the building owners/managers in the form of an assessment of the refrigeration system to identify energy efficiency opportunities. As a result, high efficiency refrigeration opportunities are identified. It is assumed that the Utilities are offering services NOT being offered for profit by other market actors because the target market niche is too small to be lucrative. It is not displacing or blocking free-market mechanisms (ie. not blocking an existing mechanism or mechanism in the making).

45

After the high efficiency refrigeration opportunities are identified, the participant is offered more support to develop the project. The participant is asked to make a commitment. If the resulting project is a cost-effective investment, the participant agrees to carry on and implement the project. Otherwise, the participant will have to pay part of the cost of the technical assistance. The participant accepts because the level of risk he/she is asked to take is fair.

46

The Utilities provide technical assistance to develop the high efficiency refrigeration project in the form of a feasibility study and/or an investment-grade audit. If the participant implements the proposed design, the feasibility study will be free of charge.

47

The participants are presented with investment- and implementation-ready high efficiency refrigeration projects.

48

The Utilities will pay an incentive to participants who implement the high efficiency refrigeration projects that are identified. The incentive will alleviate the initial-cost hurdle of the high-efficiency refrigeration retrofit projects.

50

Because high-efficiency projects will have been subsequently identified and then developed by the Utilities, and because the Utilities will alleviate the initial-cost hurdle, high-efficiency refrigeration retrofit projects will be implemented.

52

The high-efficiency refrigeration retrofit projects will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

27

Building owners/managers will be satisfied by the projects that they implemented. They will tell other people in the building industry, perhaps at the trade events supported by the utilities. This will generate word-of-mouth advertisement.

29

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause building owners/managers and supply-chain actors to implement more projects.

31

It is assumed that owners/managers will perceive new non-energy benefits and/or maintain the benefits they used to have with baseline systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to ensure that participants perceive that their new systems are more comfortable, are less costly to maintain, have higher tenant satisfaction and retention, generate fewer complaints, and increase property value.

Projected Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 31 and Exhibit 32 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience.

ICF Marbek

41

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 31: Participation Projections – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive for Non-Government Buildings ID ECM98 ECM99

Measure Short Name Typical Low-Cost No-Cost Refrigeration Project - Food Typical Deep Retrofit

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

0 ft2

0 ft2

30,582 ft2

0 ft2

30,582 ft2

61,163 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

30,252 ft2

0 ft2

30,252 ft2

60,505 ft2

Exhibit 32: Participation Projections – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM1002 Typical Refrigeration Project Ice Rink

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

0 ft2

0 ft2

24,760 ft2

0 ft2

24,760 ft2

49,520 ft2

Budget The budgets presented in Exhibit 33 and Exhibit 34 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 33: Budget – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings

$1,000s Incentive:

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$0

$122

$0

$122

$243

Non-Incentive:

$34

$69

$17

$55

$43

$218

Total:

$34

$69

$139

$55

$165

$461

Exhibit 34: Budget – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$0

$132

$0

$132

$263

Non-Incentive:

$36

$100

$19

$86

$49

$290

Total:

$36

$100

$151

$86

$180

$553

Incentive:

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 35 and Exhibit 36 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience.

ICF Marbek

42

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 35: Savings Targets – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Lifetime MWh:

0

0

Annual MWh:

0

0

Coincident kW:

0

0

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

6,301

0

6,301

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

630

630

1,260

1,260

1,260

1,260

1,260

1,260

1,260

1,260

630

630

0

72

72

143

143

143

143

143

143

143

143

72

72

0

Exhibit 36: Savings Targets – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Lifetime MWh:

0

0

Annual MWh:

0

0

Coincident kW:

0

0

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

7,580

0

7,580

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

694

694

1,388

1,388

1,388

1,388

1,388

1,388

1,388

1,388

758

758

128

80

80

161

161

161

161

161

161

161

161

89

89

17

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown below in Exhibit 37 and Exhibit 38 were computed based on the assumptions presented above, namely: level of incentive, budget, and participant projections. These results are used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Consequently, actual results may differ from those presented in Exhibit 37 and in Exhibit 38. Exhibit 37: Cost Effectiveness – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive excluding Government Buildings

Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

ICF Marbek

Total Resource Cost TRC

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

3.2

4.5

4.2

1.0

$1,183

$1,341

$1,197

$36

$.072/kWh

$.051/kWh

N/A

N/A

43

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 38: Cost Effectiveness – High Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive including Government Buildings Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

3.2

4.3

4.6

1.0

$1,374

$1,543

$1,458

-$22

$.073/kWh

$.053/kWh

N/A

N/A

3.3.3 ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Objective The objective of this program element is to achieve electricity and demand savings by increasing the volume of ENERGY STAR computers and computer equipment purchased and installed by reducing the initial-cost hurdle.

Target Market The primary target market is existing office buildings in the Yukon, including Whitehorse and the smaller communities. As the territorial government already requires that new computers be ENERGY STAR qualified, the non-governmental sector is of primary interest. However, eligibility of government and institutional customers will be determined with direction from regulators.

Description The Utilities will pay an incentive to companies and organizations to have their computer equipment replaced with ENERGY STAR computer equipment. A prescriptive incentive approach will be as follows: the Utilities will pay a flat amount of money per unit to owners/managers when computers and computer equipment from a prescriptive list of eligible products are purchased. Equipment eligibility is tracked using a prescriptive list, so a pre-approval step is not necessary. The participation process is therefore very straightforward: the participant will submit a simple application form and provide backup documentation (e.g. invoices) to receive the incentive payment.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program over five years (20 quarters) before carrying out a new program design, filing and approval process. The Utilities anticipate offering the ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive for a shorter period of time; perhaps up to three years. However, the Utilities retain the right to start and terminate this program element based on market conditions, and EM&V results. The main milestones of this component are:  

Q1 of Y1: Program preparation, including engagement and communication planning Q3 of Y1: Program launch, including the first incentive advertisement campaign

ICF Marbek

44

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

   

Q3 of Y1 to Q4 of Y3: Program Operation Q4 of Y3: Program is terminated Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB.

Eligible Measures The proposed incentive level and archetype projects for the ENERGY STAR computer incentive are presented in Exhibit 39 and Exhibit 40. Exhibit 39: Prescriptive List of ENERGY STAR Computer Conservation Measures for NonGovernment Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM101

ES Desktop Computer and Monitor

ECM102

ES Laptop Computer

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 148.0 kWh/unit 0.027 kW/unit 95% 41.0 kWh/unit 0.007 kW/unit

95%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

Level of Incentive

$0.00/unit

4.0 yr

$30.00/unit

$0.00/unit

4.0 yr

$10.00/unit

Exhibit 40: Prescriptive List of ENERGY STAR Computer Conservation Measures for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM1012

Gov. ES Desktop Computer and Monitor

ECM1022

Gov. ES Laptop Computer

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 148.0 kWh/unit 0.027 kW/unit 55% 41.0 kWh/unit 0.007 kW/unit

55%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

Level of Incentive

$0.00/unit

4.0 yr

$18.00/unit

$0.00/unit

4.0 yr

$6.00/unit

Prospective performance and safety qualification agents include, but are not limited to: the Office of Energy Efficiency’s ENERGY STAR Program, the Canadian Standards Association, and the Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. The Utilities reserve the right to revise eligible measures and incentive levels as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money should fraud errors or omissions be identified.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will disseminate information, train and receive feedback from prospective participants through multiple means as described in Section 3.4.

Incentive Strategy The Utilities will pay a flat dollar amount per unit to companies and organizations when computers and computer equipment are purchased and installed from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The prescriptive list of eligible computer products will consist of ENERGY STAR qualified products. ICF Marbek

45

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The incentive will be available year-round. We propose reviewing the incentive level once per year, at the end of the year. All market actors will be made aware of the annual review. The incentive can be increased or decreased to modulate uptake and react to market circumstances. The Utilities reserve the right to modify the incentive strategy based on initial results. For example, the Utilities may decide to direct the incentive toward the information technology suppliers rather than the shoppers. The rationale for this strategy change would be that the incentive levels, computed based on the cost-effectiveness tests, may prove to be insufficient to significantly influence shoppers. However, the incentive levels are sufficient to be a significant driver for the information technology suppliers to stock Energy Star Computers and to promote them to their customers. This is a market transformation approach that has been used successfully in other jurisdictions.

Program Theory The theory of the ENERGY STAR computer element within the General Service Program is graphically depicted in the form of a logic model and is shown in Exhibit 41. Exhibit 41: Logic Model of the General Service ENERGY STAR Computer Element

ICF Marbek

46

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 42 presents the narratives for the logic model shown in Exhibit 41. Exhibit 42: Explanatory Note on the General Service ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Theory Link #

Narrative

00

The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: the Gov’t of Yukon’s requirement that all new equipment meets ENERGY STAR standards (free ridership), the price of electricity, the availability and response time of supplychain actors, and the willingness to do full cost replacements.

12

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with building owners/managers through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and make the owners/managers aware of the benefits so that they participate in the program. Some building owners/managers also make IT equipment purchase decisions.

32

The Utilities carry out many tactics to inform computer buyers at businesses and organizations based in the Yukon. As a result, the computer buyers will learn about the incentive offering.

35

The Utilities will pay an incentive to computer buyers in exchange for the purchase of an ENERGY STAR Computer. The incentive will alleviate the initial-cost hurdle of the ENERGY STAR Computer and will be a convincing selling point.

38

Because computer buyers will know about the offering and because they are offered a rebate designed to influence them, they will buy ENERGY STAR computers.

40

ENERGY STAR computers are purchased instead of standard computers.

42

The ENERGY STAR computers will yield electricity and demand savings during their 4-year lifetime.

27

Participants will be satisfied with the ENERGY STAR computer that they purchased. They will relay their experiences to other computer buyers in the Yukon, generating word-of-mouth advertisement.

29

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause computer buyers to buy more ENERGY STAR computers.

31

It is assumed that the staff using ENERGY STAR computers will have the same user-experience as with baseline systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to make sure that participants perceive that their new systems turn on and off as fast as nonENERGY STAR computers, and that their processors are as fast, etc.

Projected Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 43 and Exhibit 44 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience.

ICF Marbek

47

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 43: Participation Projections – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive for Non-Government Buildings ID ECM101 ECM102

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

ES Desktop Computer and Monitor ES Laptop Computer

45 ft2

283 ft2

461 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

788 ft2

30 ft2

188 ft2

307 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

525 ft2

Exhibit 44: Participation Projections – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive for Government Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM1012 Gov. ES Desktop Computer and Monitor ECM1022 Gov. ES Laptop Computer

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

178 ft2

1,130 ft2

1,844 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

3,153 ft2

119 ft2

754 ft2

1,229 ft2

0 ft2

0 ft2

2,102 ft2

Budget The budgets presented in Exhibit 45 and Exhibit 46 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 45: Budget – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive without Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$2

$10

$17

$0

$0

$29

Non-Incentive:

$26

$12

$15

$2

$5

$61

Total:

$28

$22

$32

$2

$5

$90

Exhibit 46: Budget – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive with Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$6

$35

$57

$0

$0

$98

Non-Incentive:

$36

$52

$74

$6

$17

$185

Total:

$41

$88

$131

$6

$17

$284

Incentive:

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 47 and Exhibit 48 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience.

ICF Marbek

48

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 47: Savings Targets – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Excluding Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Lifetime MWh:

32

205

335

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

8

59

143

143

135

84

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Coincident kW:

1

11

26

26

24

15

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Exhibit 48: Savings Targets – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive Including Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Lifetime MWh:

107

681

1,111

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

27

197

475

475

448

278

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

5

35

85

85

80

50

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Coincident kW:

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown in Exhibit 49 and Exhibit 50 were computed based on the assumptions presented above, namely: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Consequently, actual results may differ from those presented below. Exhibit 49: Cost Effectiveness – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive excluding Government Buildings Total Resource Cost TRC

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

Benefit/Cost Ratio

1.8

1.2

*

0.6

Net Present Value (1,000s)

$44

$18

$106

-$58

$.122/kWh

$.178/kWh

N/A

N/A

Levelized Cost:

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

ICF Marbek

49

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 50: Cost Effectiveness – ENERGY STAR Computer Incentive including Government Buildings Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

2.0

1.3

*

0.6

$166

$78

$560

-$213

$.108/kWh

$.166/kWh

N/A

N/A

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

3.3.4 Building New Construction Incentive Objective This program element will achieve electricity and demand savings by improving the electrical performance of new buildings.

Target Market The primary target market is new buildings in the Yukon including Whitehorse and the communities. The eligibility of government and institutional customers will be determined with direction from the regulator.

Description The Utilities will pay an incentive to new building owners/managers for electricity-efficient new building construction. The incentive will have two paths: a prescriptive path for small buildings and a custom path for large buildings. On a preliminary basis, the Utilities envision that there will be a minimum size eligibility requirement for these paths. Prescriptive Path of the Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive Under the prescriptive path, the incentive will be determined using a dollar-per-square foot rate if the building complies with a certain standard. The standard will be designed to be slightly more stringent than the Model National Energy Building Code minus 25% (MNEBC -25%) and the City of Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw. The former includes more prescriptive requirements and covers more building systems, and the latter has more stringent insulation and infiltration requirements. The Utilities are envisioning two different approaches to proving compliance with standard under the prescriptive path. The final decision on this will be made at the program preparation stage.  

A list of prescriptive requirements similar to but superior to the City of Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw. Meeting a minimum performance threshold when using the NRCan EE4 Screening Tool. The screening tool is a simple building energy model interface that is very accessible and

ICF Marbek

50

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

that was tested for the Yukon climate by the Yukon Energy Solutions Centre.5 Therefore, the Utilities believe that there will be a good level of acceptance and adoption of the tool. Custom Path of the Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive The custom incentive will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate for each kilowatt-hour of savings that are realized above a minimum level. Under the custom path, savings will be determined through building energy modeling. The modeling requirements will be the same as for the Canadian Green Building Council’s LEED building certification6. The LEED building endorsement label already has some penetration in the Yukon, therefore we believe that tying the program requirements to that of LEED will ease the acceptance of the program by the local building industry players and will reduce the level of effort required to file an application, while maintaining a high standard of quality.

Participation Process The participation process for the building new construction program component is shown in Exhibit 51. As shown: 

  



There will be a “pre-approval” step in order to check eligibility criteria and estimate the incentive amount for a single building or set of buildings. The construction work will not start before the project is pre-approved. The Utilities will track application-processing time and will make sure it meets application turnaround targets. After completion of the installation work, the participant will submit a completion form and provide backup documentation, including the as-built project documentation and as-built building energy model, to receive his/her incentive payment. If and when any application or form is rejected by the Utilities, the applicant will be informed and provided with information on what is missing and/or what to change. Applicants will be able to talk to their account manager to get support. A sample of projects will be selected for site verification. The verification will check a significant portion of the information that was provided in the application form, completion form and in the backup documentation. Incentives may be recovered if errors, omission or fraud are uncovered. The site verification selection will be made based on a sampling plan that will be prepared during the implementation planning. As many of the projects as practical will be subjected to a site visit and as-built drawings will also be requested when appropriate. In general, larger projects will be more likely to be visited; but no projects will be off limit.

The task and responsibilities of the parties involved (i.e. the Utilities, the participant and the suppliers) will be clearly laid out and defined on the basis of Exhibit 51.

5

Hepting, Curt. Verification Analysis of Natural Resources Canada’s Screening Tool Follow Up Study, Energy Solutions Centre, 31 March 2010. Available at http://www.energy.gov.yk.ca/pdf/screening_tool_followup_mar2010.pdf. 6 LEED certification will not be an eligibility criterion. However, the modeling requirements for this program will be consistent with those for the LEED New Construction Energy and Atmosphere Pre-Requisite 2 and Credit 1. ICF Marbek

51

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 51: Participation Process for the New Construction Element Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive The Utilities

Prospective Participant/ Participant

Design Team & General Contractor

Engagement and Communication Door-to-door Marketing Fill Out Application Form, Provide Project Information and Building Model & Sign Participation Agreement Desk Review of Project & Pre-Approval

Accepted

Desk Verification of Project & Final Approval

Building Design

Rejected

Give Go Ahead to General Contractor to Implement Work

Construction Work & Invoice for Equipment & Services

Fill Out Completion Form & Send Back-Up Documents incl. AsBuilt Project Information and Building Model Rejected

Accepted Send the Incentive to Participant

Spot-Check Site Verification?

No

Yes Verification Site Visit

Long-term Energy and Demand Savings

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a period of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Q1 of Y1), finishes in the last quarter of Y5, the main milestones of this component are:        

Q1 of Y1: Program preparation, including engagement and communication planning Q2 of Y1: Program launch, including the first incentive advertisement campaign Q3 of Y1: Incentive level for the next year is planned and then disseminated Q1 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the incentive Y2, Y3, Y4, and Y5: Repeat the same cycle as described above Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

ICF Marbek

52

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Eligible Measures The proposed incentive level as well as archetype projects are presented in Exhibit 52 and in Exhibit 53. Exhibit 52: Archetype Electricity-Efficient Non-Government New Construction Projects ID

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings Typical High-Performance New 5.93 kWh/ft2 .00135 kW/ft2 95% Building - 25% Better Measure Short Name

ECM89

ECM90

Typical High-Performance New Building - 40% Better

9.49 kWh/ft2 .00217 kW/ft2

95%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$2.00/ft2

20.0 yr

$1.50/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 11,759 ft2

$6.00/ft2

20.0 yr

$4.00/ft2

11,759 ft2

Level of Incentive

Exhibit 53: Archetype Electricity-Efficient Government New Construction Projects ID

Measure Short Name

ECM892

Gov. Typical HighPerformance New Building 25% Better Gov. Typical HighPerformance New Building 40% Better

ECM902

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 5.93 kWh/ft2 .00135 kW/ft2 95%

9.49 kWh/ft2 .00217 kW/ft2

95%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

$2.00/ft2

20.0 yr

$0.90/ft2

Size of Archetype Building 26,209 ft2

$6.00/ft2

20.0 yr

$2.40/ft2

26,209 ft2

Level of Incentive

The dollars per square foot rates are used for planning purposes. As per the incentive strategy, participants will be offered dollars per kWh of annual savings. The $/ft2 will be converted into a $/kWh at the program launch preparation stage. The program performance will be modeled using the archetype projects presented in Exhibit 52 and in Exhibit 53. However, during program implementation, each transaction will be treated as a custom project, with a specific level of electricity and demand savings, and a specific total incentive amount. Measure lifetime is assumed to be 15 years and net-to-gross ratio is assumed to be 95% in all cases. The Utilities reserve the right to revise incentive level as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money should fraud errors or omissions be identified.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will disseminate information, train and receive feedback from the building owner/managers, and the building industry actors through multiple means as described in Section 3.4. To promote uptake of the electricity-efficient new construction incentive component, the Utilities will focus primarily on the supply-chain and the building owners/managers channels.

ICF Marbek

53

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Incentive Strategy Prescriptive Path of the Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive Under the prescriptive path, the incentive will be determined using a dollar-per-square foot rate if the building complies with a certain standard. The standard will be designed to be slightly more stringent than the Model National Energy Building Code minus 25% (MNEBC -25%) and the City of Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw. The former includes more prescriptions and covers more building systems, and the latter has insulation and air tightens requirements that are more stringent. The incentive level will be refined during the planning and preparation stage by the Utilities at the program set-up stage. The incentive level will be consistent with the incentive level achieved through the custom path although slightly lower and without the possibility to increase the incentive by realizing more savings. Custom Path of the Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive The custom incentive will be determined using a dollar per kilowatt-hour of annual savings rate for each kilowatt-hour of savings that are realized above a minimum level. Savings will be determined through building energy modeling. The modeling requirements will be the same as those for the Canadian Green Building Council’s LEED building certification7. The baseline used will be the same (MNEBC -25%), which means that buildings that comply with the Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw should already generate savings when compared with the baseline. In order to correct for this, the Utilities will establish a certain minimum number of LEED Energy and Atmosphere Credit 1 points under which no incentive will be awarded. The Utilities envision creating “brackets” based on the LEED energy-efficiency performance point system; and modulating the $/kWh rate that is used to compute the incentive for each bracket. For example, the rate used to establish the amount of incentive for buildings achieving 13 to 15 EA CR 1 points would be higher than the rate used for buildings achieving 10 to 12 EA CR 1 points . Participants who invest in costly yet highly efficient and innovative systems such as cold climate heat pumps (CCHP) or ground source heat pumps (GSHP) will therefore get a larger incentive.

7

LEED certification will not be an eligibility criterion. However, the modeling requirements for this program will be consistent with those for the LEED New Construction Energy and Atmosphere Pre-Requisite 2 and Credit 1. ICF Marbek

54

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory The theory of the lighting redesign and equipment incentives of the General Service Program has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model in Exhibit 54. Exhibit 54: Logic Model of the General Service New Construction Incentive

Exhibit 55 presents the narratives of the logic model shown in Exhibit 54. Exhibit 55: Explanatory Note on the General Service New-Construction Incentives Theory Link #

Narrative

00

The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: Whitehorse bylaws on the obligation to bring all of the buildings up to code if and when deep retrofits are initiated, the price of electricity, the availability and response time of supply-chain actors, new-construction activities, and tolerance for complexity of all supply-chain actors and building owners/managers. The program administrator should monitor these externalities and adapt the implementation approach as necessary.

01

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with electrical distributors, lighting designers, electrical contractors, as well as with HVAC contractors, HVAC designers, control designers and architects through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and engage with supply-chain actors so that they promote them.

ICF Marbek

55

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

05

The Utilities will offer technical support to the supply-chain actors in two different forms: (1) hands-on training on the program tools, forms and procedures; on advanced electricity efficiency lighting design; and on the business aspects of electricity efficiency: energy audits, business cases, energy performance contracting, and electricity efficiency financing. (2) The Utilities will act as a broker to procure technical expertise from highly specialized lighting experts recruited throughout North America upon request from the local actors. In addition, the Utilities will disseminate information on recommended lighting equipment (brand-neutral, to the extent possible) in the form of printed brochures, newsletters or web content.

09

The Utilities propose to support any form of trade organizations or trade events by sponsoring and attending trade events that gather local building owners/managers and/or supply-chain actors. The Utilities intend to strengthen or create platforms that allow local energy conservation practitioners to present their success stories, and share their lessons learned.

10

Supply-side actors will actively seek to develop projects because they were engaged with by the Utilities, because they were trained and are capable of offering electricity-efficiency services, and because they were provided with networking opportunities with potential clients (building owners/managers) at trade events.

12

The Utilities will carry out direct engagement with building owners/managers through emails, phone calls and in-person meetings; and through public relations activities like press releases sent to the local newspapers and radio, web content, and joint events with the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce. The Utilities will present their incentive offerings and make the owners/managers aware of the benefits so that they participate in the program.

13

The Utilities will offer customized technical support to building owners/managers to help them to initiate projects. The Utilities could include support to plan investment in assets, and to identify in which buildings to develop projects; support to make optimal decisions on implementation and procurement approach, and support before and during the tendering of project design services, particularly if the procurement approach is energy performance contracting (EPC).

14

Building owners/managers agree to initiate electricity efficiency projects because they were informed about the program components by the Utilities, because they were provided with technical support to decide where to start and how to do it, and because they networked with supply-side actors, perhaps at the trade events supported by the Utilities.

20

The Utilities will pay an incentive to new building owners/managers for electricity-efficient new buildings construction. The incentive will alleviate the initial-cost hurdle of the construction of electricity-efficient buildings. The incentive will be performance-based and be paid for buildings that are more electricity efficiency than the combination of the 2011 National Energy Code of Canada for Building and the City of Whitehorse’s Building and Plumbing Bylaw.

21

Electricity-efficient new buildings constructions are implemented because the supply-chain actors were seeking to work on electricity-efficient new construction projects, and because the initial-cost hurdle of the construction of electricity-efficient buildings was alleviated.

22

The electricity-efficient new buildings will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

27

Building owners/managers will be satisfied by the projects that they implemented. They will tell other people in the building industry; perhaps at the trade events supported by the utilities. This will generate word-of-mouth advertisement.

29

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause building owners/managers and supply-chain actors to implement more projects.

31

It is assumed that owners/managers will perceive new non-energy benefits; and/or the maintenance of benefits they used to have with baseline systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to make sure that participants perceive that their new systems are more comfortable, are less costly to maintain, have higher tenant satisfaction and retention, generate fewer complaints, and have increased property value.

ICF Marbek

56

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Projected Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 56 and in Exhibit 57 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 56: Participation Projections – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive for NonGovernment Buildings ID

Measure Short Name

ECM89 ECM90

Typical High-Performance New Building - 25% Better Typical High-Performance New

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

0 ft2

1,992 ft2

8,966 ft2

13,947 ft2

15,939 ft2

40,844 ft2

0 ft2

311 ft2

1,401 ft2

2,179 ft2

2,490 ft2

6,382 ft2

Exhibit 57: Participation Projections – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive for Government Buildings ID ECM892 ECM902

Measure Short Name Gov. Typical High-Performance New Building - 25% Better Gov. Typical High-Performance

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

0 ft2

1,073 ft2

4,828 ft2

7,510 ft2

8,583 ft2

21,993 ft2

0 ft2

168 ft2

754 ft2

1,173 ft2

1,341 ft2

3,436 ft2

Budget The budgets presented in Exhibit 58 and in Exhibit 59 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 58: Budget – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$4

$19

$30

$34

$87

Non-Incentive:

$27

$7

$5

$31

$13

$83

Total:

$27

$12

$24

$61

$47

$170

Incentive:

Exhibit 59: Budget – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

ICF Marbek

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$6

$25

$39

$45

$115

Non-Incentive:

$28

$9

$6

$33

$16

$93

Total:

$28

$15

$32

$72

$61

$208 57

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 60 and in Exhibit 61 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 60: Savings Targets – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Lifetime MWh:

0

306

1,377

2,142

2,448

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

0

15

84

191

314

314

314

314

314

314

314

314

314

314

314

Coincident kW:

0

3

19

44

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

72

Exhibit 61: Savings Targets – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Lifetime MWh:

0

471

2,118

3,295

3,766

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

0

24

129

294

483

483

483

483

483

483

483

483

483

483

483

Coincident kW:

0

5

30

67

110

110

110

110

110

110

110

110

110

110

110

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results in Exhibit 62 and in Exhibit 63 were computed based on the assumptions presented above: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, and since the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience; consequently, actual results may differ from those presented below. Exhibit 62: Cost Effectiveness – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive excluding Government Buildings

Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

ICF Marbek

Total Resource Cost TRC

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

4.2

4.8

6.3

1.0

$520

$542

$518

$25

$.059/kWh

$.051/kWh

N/A

N/A

58

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 63: Cost Effectiveness – Electricity-Efficient New Construction Incentive including Government Buildings Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

3.4

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

4.7

6.1

6.7

1.0

$832

$881

$848

$21

$.051/kWh

$.040/kWh

N/A

N/A

Engagement, Training and Communication

Engagement, training and communication will generate uptake among building owner/managers and occupants in the Yukon for all of the General Service Program, and thereby enable longterm electricity and demand savings. Communication, training, and engagement are key components of DSM programs, and it is a good practice to resource these activities properly. Proper communications, training, and engagement are essential to stimulate program uptake and therefore DSM incentive performance. Communication, training and engagement also contribute to the incentive to establish a real causal effect between the DSM program and the accelerated adoption of electricity-efficient technologies and services. In other words: without communications, education and engagement, incentive claims (if any) are very likely to be made by the few building owners/managers who would have invested in electricity efficiency anyway – the socalled “freeriders”.

Target Market The target market includes all of the building owners/managers and occupants in the Yukon, including those in Whitehorse and in other communities. In order to serve the purpose of the GSP, the engagement, training and communication activities and tactics will focus primarily on:     

Yukon lighting equipment and service supply-chain actors: primarily electrical distributors and lighting designers, but also electrical contractors Yukon HVAC equipment and service supply-chain actors: primarily HVAC designers, control contractors and HVAC contractors Yukon New Building developers, general contractors and architects Building owners/managers, including primarily non-governmental owners/managers, but also governmental owner/managers. The same market actors are involved in both retrofit and new construction. Building occupants (renters), including the people who make decisions related to equipment purchases as well as work space renovation and interior design investment.

Description The Utilities will disseminate information and receive feedback from the building industry and building occupants through five main channels: the lighting supply chain, the HVAC supply chain, the new construction developers, the building owners/managers and the building ICF Marbek

59

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

occupants. The number of actors in Yukon in the first four channels is fairly small, and thus the proposed approach is primarily based on direct engagement and account management. The number of actors in the fifth channel is larger and, therefore, the Utilities plan on utilizing communication tactics such as bill inserts, email blast, and joint marketing with information technology equipment and service suppliers. Lighting Supply Chain Channel Reaching out to the lighting supply chain channel is particularly important because lighting is the electricity end use with the largest share of achievable potential in buildings. Consequently, the main components aimed at the existing building sector focus on lighting. The Utilities intend to use the following tactics to reach out to the lighting supply chain channel:  









Direct engagement with electrical distributors and lighting designers: emails, phone calls and in-person meetings Engagement with hard-to-reach electrical contractors through the following tactics:  Collaboration with electrical distributors: for instance, early morning breakfast training sessions on program offerings in the showroom of electrical distributors.  Through the health and safety training from the Utilities for electrical contractors. Technical support in the form of hands-on training, in particular at the beginning of the program:  On the use of the standardized incentive calculation tool, and the program forms and procedures.  On advanced electricity efficiency lighting design.  On the business aspect of electricity efficiency: energy audits, business cases, energy performance contracting, and energy efficiency financing. Customized technical support: Upon request from the local actors, the Utilities will act as a broker to procure technical expertise from highly specialized lighting experts recruited from throughout North America. The local actors will be able to consult with these experts to work on specific projects and improve their design skills and professional competencies. Dissemination of information on recommended lighting equipment (brand-neutral, to the extent possible) in the form of printed brochures, newsletters or web content. The Utilities will provide information on relevant equipment electricity efficiency labels, equipment qualification agents, and the sort of equipment that they qualify. For example, the types of equipment could be: high-performance T8 fluorescents & ballast, qualified LED products, and high-performance fixture retrofit kits. Relevant agents and labels include: the Office of Energy Efficiency’s EnergyStar Program, the DesignLights Consortium or, the Consortium for Energy Efficiency. With permission, the Utilities will leverage publicly-available educational materials created by other DSM program administrators such as BC Hydro, SaskPower or Manitoba Hydro.

HVAC and New-Construction Supply Chain Channels The Utilities will reach out to the supply-chain channels, in particular, to increase the uptake of the new-construction program and to promote comprehensive projects in buildings. The Utilities intend to use the following tactics to reach out to the HVAC and New-Construction supply-chain channel:  

Direct engagement with HVAC designers, HVAC contractors, control contractors, general contractors and architects Engagement with hard-to-reach contractors through the following tactics:  Collaboration with distributors: for instance, short early morning breakfast training sessions on program offerings.  Through the health and safety training of the Utilities to electrical contractors

ICF Marbek

60

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio





Technical support in the form of hands-on training, in particular at the beginning of the program:  On building modeling requirements, and on the program forms and procedures.  On business aspects of electricity efficiency: energy audits, business cases, energy performance contracting, and energy efficiency financing Customized technical support: Upon request from the local actors, the Utilities will act as a broker to procure technical expertise from highly specialized HVAC experts recruited throughout North America. The local actors will be able to consult with these experts to work on specific projects and improve their design skills.

Building Owners/Managers Channel The Utilities will offer personalized support and key-account management to building owners/managers who are among the largest customers in the Yukon. The owners/managers are the prospective participants in all program components; thus, engaging them is critical to the success of the program. The Utilities intend to use the following tactics to engage them:    

Customized support to plan investment in assets, and to identify which buildings to develop projects in Customized support to optimize decisions on implementation and procurement approaches Support before and during the tendering of project design services, particularly if the procurement approach is energy performance contracting (EPC) Public relation activities including press releases to the local newspapers and radio stations, web content, and joint events with applicable trade, commerce, non-profit and community organizations.

The Utilities will adapt their technical support offering to both non-government and government owner/managers. The Utilities will use their direct-engagement activities to disseminate info about the Energy Solutions Centre list of providers to increase value for the owners/managers and create synergy between stakeholders. The Utilities acknowledge the benefit of comprehensive electricity efficiency retrofit projects in buildings. The Utilities will encourage such projects when relevant and seek collaboration with the ESC on projects that involve heating oil. Participation in the lighting redesign incentive and the lighting incentive can easily be integrated in a comprehensive project. Trade Events Currently, there are very few trade associations and trade events that gather personnel from the energy efficiency and building industries in the Yukon. In Southern jurisdictions, the industries gather around chapters of associations such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA), or the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES). None of these organizations have chapters in the Yukon. The Utilities propose to address this hurdle by supporting some form of trade organizations or trade events by sponsoring and attending trade events that gather local building owners/managers and/or supply-chain actors. Initially, the utilities will support existing trade events that have to do with lighting design or advanced HVAC design. With time and if early initiatives are successful, the Utilities will explore the possibility of financing and organizing an annual stand-alone trade event in Whitehorse. The Utilities intend to strengthen or create platforms that allow local energy conservation practitioners to present their success stories and share their lessons learned. Practitioners ICF Marbek

61

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

should be able to network within the Yukon and also with manufacturer reps and agents from outside the Yukon. The Utilities will also use the trade events to advertise all of their programs. To support the events, the Utilities envision using one or several of the following tactics:     

Small grants to support the logistics of the events Attendance and presentation of content at the events – case studies, information on program offerings, etc. Dissemination of information about the events through other media used by the Utilities (email blast, newsletter, website content, direct engagement, etc.) Support for well-known experts in the lighting or HVAC field to come to the Yukon (perhaps representatives from the IES or from ASHRAE) in the form of an allocation to pay for transportation and accommodations Engagement with manufacturer reps or agents in Northern BC and Northern Alberta with the intention of convincing them to attend the events. (For example, the Utilities could invite reps from OSRAM/Sylvania, GE, Philips, Canlite, Lithonia, Cooper, Mitsubishi, Honeywell, Siemens, Johnson Controls, Lennox, etc.).

Building Occupants The Utilities need to reach out to building occupants (renters) to promote the ENERGY STAR Computer Rebate. In particular, the Utilities need to inform the people involved in the purchase of information technology equipment. In order to achieve this, Utilities plan on utilizing communication tactics such as:    

Bill inserts Email blasts Joint marketing with information technology equipment and service suppliers Documentation related to the program (e.g., brochure) passed on to occupants by the building owners/managers.

It is assumed that some participating building owners/managers will also make purchase decisions related to information technology equipment.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a period of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Q1 of Y1), and finishes in the last quarter of Y5, the main milestones of this component are:        

Q1 of Y1: Lay out engagement, training and communication strategy for the year Q2, Q3 and Q4 of Y1: Ramp up the communication and direct engagement activities Q3 and Q4 of Y1: Training offerings Q1 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the engagement, education and communication component Y2, Y3, Y4, and Y5: Repeat the same cycle as described above Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances.

ICF Marbek

62

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Budget The budgets presented in Exhibit 62 and Exhibit 63 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 64: Budget – Engagement, Training and Communication excluding Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Non-Incentive:

$169

$253

$225

$176

$221

$1,043

Total:

$169

$253

$225

$176

$221

$1,043

Exhibit 65: Budget – Engagement, Training and Communication including Government Buildings

$1,000s Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Non-Incentive:

$202

$290

$255

$200

$252

$1,199

Total:

$202

$290

$255

$200

$252

$1,199

Incentive:

ICF Marbek

63

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

4 Proposed Residential Program This section presents a description of the proposed Residential Program as well as a detailed description of each of the proposed program elements. The proposed program offerings set out in this section have been developed based on the results of market information collected during the research phase of this program design study. The remainder of this section is organized and presented as follows:   

Market Research Results Program Overview Description of Program Elements

The Utilities made the working assumption that all residential ratepayers would be eligible to participate in the Residential Program.

4.1

Market Research Results

This section presents a summary of the information gathered during the market characterization phase. The market characterization was primarily focused on retailers and shoppers for lighting equipment and domestic appliances; and on housing developers. Lighting products and domestic appliances were selected because of the predominance of rebates as the preferred tool to increase the penetration of electricity efficiency among these items. Rebates were perceived as being an essential component of a program implemented with retail channel partners. The detailed reports of the characterization studies can be found in Appendix C. The main conclusions of these studies, which form the basis for the proposed program design, are presented below

Existing Residential Energy Conservation Programs The main findings with regard to existing residential energy conservation programs in the Yukon are: 



The Yukon residential sector currently has a number of conservation program elements. As illustrated in Exhibit 66, they include: the Good Energy Program and the Refrigerators and Freezer Retirement Program by the ESC, the Green and SuperGreen home, the engagement and training for housing developers, and the House Repair programs by Yukon Housing. These initiatives provide value to the Yukon; however, they do restrict the DSM playing field for the Utilities in the residential sector if overlaps are to be avoided. Retailers and shoppers like the ESC Good Energy Rebate program for domestic appliances. ENERGY STAR appliances penetration is high, likely because of the program. There seems to be very little space left for the Utilities in this portion of the retail distribution channel.

ICF Marbek

64

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Characteristics of the Retail Distribution Channel Highlights of key characteristics of the Yukon retail distribution channel that are most relevant to this program include:        





Lighting equipment is mostly sold through big-box retail stores and home renovation stores, and, to a lesser extent by appliance stores. There is no specialized residential lighting store/distributor in the Yukon. Big-box retail stores, home renovation stores and appliance store managers are keen to participate in joint initiatives with the Utilities. Store managers already use information from other DSM programs (BC Hydro, etc.) Store managers are dealing with a human resource shortage. If the Utilities partner with stores, they will need to minimize additional demands on store staff. “Green” corporate positioning (messages and banners) is already in stores. However, we observed no messaging or merchandizing strategies targeting specific products or efficiency measures. The Utilities could be seen by shoppers as a credible independent party that could endorse certain products or provide information. Information provided by stores without the Utilities’ brand might be received with natural scepticism by consumers. An independent lighting supplier selling LED products could be engaged and offered the same support as big-box stores and home renovation stores. Sales of lighting products to businesses and government buildings by retailers are significant. Both the Residential Program and the GSP program will need to have coherent offerings and tactics. The education materials created for the Residential Program could be used for the GSP program and vice versa. Yukon retailers select and order products from national or regional warehouses as if they were located in large southern Canadian cities like Toronto or Vancouver. On the other hand, it seems to be common knowledge among Yukoners that fewer products are offered in the stores and that there is a one- to five-year lag time between new products appearing on the shelves in the South and the same products arriving on the shelves in the Yukon. The reasons for this could be lower demand, less space (thus fewer stock-keeping units), simple oversight, or limited interaction with other store managers or exposure to other stores. If store managers foresee an increase in demand or if the Utilities are able to partner and work with them that it is likely to occur, many managers would agree to stock newer electricity efficiency products faster than they would in the absence of a program.

Shoppers’ Purchase Barriers and Drivers The following observations provide insight into shoppers’ purchase decision making process:     

Even if shoppers are sceptical of the information received, the primary source of information used to make purchase decisions is from the store where the purchase is made. The second and third preferred sources of information for shoppers are friends and relatives, and websites displaying user-generated content. The Utilities’ research on the effectiveness of social media indicated that social media is not as effective in the Yukon as they are in other jurisdictions. Supply-chain actors all agreed that the main purchase drivers for lighting equipment and domestic appliances is price point; and thus that the main purchase barrier is the high initial cost barrier. End-users report that environmental considerations and monetary savings on energy bills are their top purchase drivers – far in front of lower/lowest price. Although these answers may be tainted with the social-desirability bias, environmental considerations and monetary savings on energy bills are drivers that should nevertheless be emphasized.

ICF Marbek

65

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

 



Shoppers were concerned that no proper waste handling facilities exist in the Yukon for compact fluorescent lamps given the hazardous mercury content of the lamps. This is a valid concern and the Utilities are sensitive to it. In the lighting section of a Yukon store, we observed significant shelf space dedicated to CFL lamps; in most cases more than the shelf space dedicated to incandescent or halogen equivalents. Energy-Star CFLs and CFL PAR lamps have significantly less shelf space, but were sold in all stores that we visited. It could be concluded that CFLs are on their way to saturation without a push from any form of DSM program. LED lamps consistently represented less than 10% of the shelf space in the stores we visited. Market penetration is limited; the cost barrier is significant. Globally, solid state lighting products are currently experiencing rapid price decline, together with continued improvements in performance efficacy and functionality. Average year-over-year price reductions are expected to be approximately 13% for commercial solid state lighting lamps and fixtures between 2011 and 2021, yielding a price reduction of approximately 75% over the 10 year period8. We believe that the implementation of effective DSM programs can provide substantial incremental lighting electricity savings.

Landlords and Tenants The relationship between landlords and tenants was examined. The key findings were: 

 

The split-incentive barrier between landlords and tenants is real and significant in the Yukon. The landlords and retail managers that were interviewed indicated that landlords consistently buy the cheapest domestic appliances and lighting equipment. They do not buy new equipment until the very end of the appliance or equipment lifetime. Although tenants often have the right to replace appliances and lighting, and would benefit from it because they pay the electricity bills, the reality is that they rarely do. Many apartment blocks in the Yukon were built in the 70s and they were paid for a long time ago. The owners do not need electricity efficiency to remain price competitive. The Good Energy Rebates, for instance, seemed insufficient to tackle this barrier.

For now, the approach suggested is to steer away from this hard-to-reach segment because of the heavy split-incentive barrier. The one mechanism that might work is a refrigerator/freezer retirement program, where landlords would get an incentive to retire their old refrigerator and another incentive to buy a new one. (ENERGY STAR refrigerators do not have a perceptible price increment.) The Energy Solutions Centre is currently running such a program, so the Utilities are not proposing a similar program.

Residential New Construction The researchers and program designers explored the new housing construction market. The key findings were: 

 

The developers confirmed that standard construction practices in Whitehorse, in terms of insulation and air tightness, are fairly high because of the City of Whitehorse Building and Plumbing Bylaw. It is challenging to build an affordable home in the Yukon under these circumstances. Developers confirmed that electrical baseboard heating is often installed instead of central heating systems to reduce the cost of the houses and condo units. When baseboard heating is installed in a new house in place of a central heating system, it makes it very challenging in the future to improve the efficiency of the heating system by

8

ICF Marbek, Profile of the Canadian Solid State Lighting (SSL) Industry. Prepared for the Office of Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada; August 2012.

ICF Marbek

66

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio



 

 

installing a CCHP or GSHP, for example. It becomes a lost opportunity for the lifetime of this house. SuperGreen houses, for example, are expected to last a hundred years. Developers and real estate agents indicated that there is a category of new home buyers interested in buying environmentally-friendly houses. Words such as SuperGreen, electricity efficiency, energy conservation and ENERGY STAR are commonly used in sales pitches and collateral materials. Developers told us that most appliances provided with the units are ENERGY STAR as they are readily available and the extra cost is not prohibitive. Developers told us that the lighting equipment being put in new houses is not the most efficient available because of the need to lower cost. Halogen and incandescent screw-in bulbs are most common. However, it should be highlighted that efficient lighting equipment in a home heated with electric baseboards in the Yukon will yield reduced savings because of the interactive relationship between heating and lighting. Commercial HVAC contractors confirmed that the penetration of the CCHP of GSHP is currently very low, although they also indicated that they are familiar with these technologies. Between CCHP and GSHP, CCHP is more likely to go down in price in the years to come because the installation is almost as simple as conventional air-to-air heat pumps and does not require digging site wells. This could be the most accessible high performance heating technology in the medium term. However, there have been a few bad installations of CCHPs in the Yukon and the public perception of this technology is mixed; consequently, additional technology demonstration and performance verification is required.

Barrier Analysis Barriers which emerged as themes during the market research activities include, in order of priority:     

The high cost of some lighting equipment, LED in particular The lack of information, or confused information and beliefs of end-users with regard to electricity efficiency equipment in stores The missing lighting products on the shelves of retailers in the Yukon, LED in particular Few CCHP and GSHP projects in the Yukon, a few poor installations and the resulting lack of information resulting from the situation The high cost of central heating, CCHP or GSHP systems in new housing construction.

ICF Marbek

67

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

4.2

Residential Program: An Overview

The Residential Program and its elements are presented on the left side of Exhibit 66. Other residential energy conservation programs offered in the Yukon are presented on the right side of Exhibit 66. As shown in this exhibit, the Residential Program avoids overlaps and exploits potential for synergy. Exhibit 66: Portfolio View of the Utilities’, Energy Solutions Centre, and Yukon Housing Residential Programs

Outside the scope of this filing yet accounted for in the portfolio design of the Utilities

The Utilities

Energy Solutions Centre

Yukon Housing Corporation

Programs

Residential Program

Residential Program Portfolio

Residential Program Portfolio

Program Elements

Engagement, Education and Communication

Program Administrator

LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Low-cost EE Products GSHP & CCHP Initiative

Good Energy Rebate Program: Appliances, Furnaces & Stoves, HRVs, Drain Water, SWH

Refrigerators & Freezers Retirement Program

New Construction Building Envelope: Green and SuperGreen Labels New Construction: Training for Developers & Contractors Home Repair Program: Lowinterest Loans

Where: EE is “electricity efficiency” or “electricity efficient,” HRV is heat recovery ventilation, SWH is solar water heating, LED is light-emitting diode, GSHP is ground-source heat pump, and CCHP is cold-climate heat pump

The Residential Program will integrate resource acquisition and market transformation tactics, offerings and activities which mean that it will aim at both the end-users and the supply-chain actors. The Utilities will increase the demand and the supply of electricity efficiency products and equipment.

ICF Marbek

68

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The Residential Program consists of three program elements, as presented below: LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates: The Utilities will pay a flat amount of money per unit to shoppers after they purchase LED lighting lamps or fixtures selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The Utilities will also provide a flat rebate per unit to shoppers and housing developers after they purchase a timer for an automotive heater, car warmer and/or battery blanket selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. Low-cost Energy Efficient Products: The Utilities will prepare and disseminate information on products that generate electricity savings but do not have a perceptible price increment as compared with the baseline equipment. The Utilities will disseminate information through point of purchase displays and brochures in retail stores, and through community engagement. Certain low-cost items will be provided by the Utilities to community volunteers to test and showcase: for example certain LED lamps, low-flow showerheads, faucet aerators, etc. The Utilities will give out a limited number of these items free of charge; volunteers will try them out, fill out a scorecard and send it back. The results will be fed back first to the store managers, and then to the consumers through point of purchase displays and brochures and through community engagement. CCHP and GSHP Initiative: The Utilities will pilot cold climate heat pumps (CCHPs) and ground-source heat pumps (GSHPs). The pilot systems will be subsidized, not provided free of charge, and the results will be disseminated through different channels, such as HVAC contractors, electrical contractors, housing developers and municipalities. After the completion of these pilot projects, the Utilities will provide a flat amount of money to buyers of new houses or condominium units if they buy a home with a cold climate heat pump (CCHP) or a ground-source heat pump (GSHP) system, or to owners of homes with electric central air heating systems to retrofit their home with a CCHP or a GSHP. Public Engagement, Education and Communication: The Utilities will disseminate information and receive feedback from residents of Whitehorse and the communities through multiple means:         

Partnership and direct engagement with retail store managers. Point-of-purchase displays and brochures. Partnership with applicable non-profit and community organizations. Outreach and participation in community events. Identification and enrolment of community electricity efficiency (EE) “ambassadors”. EE workshops taking place in EE ambassadors’ homes. Direct engagement with HVAC contractors, electrical contractors and house developers. Dissemination of information, in particular about the seasonal LED rebates, in local newspapers, radio stations, cooperative advertisements, and bill inserts. Information on rebates and electricity efficiency products on the Utilities’ website.

Many of the engagement initiatives carried out by the Utilities will also be used to disseminate information about the Yukon Housing conservation programs and the ESC energy conservation programs to increase value for the audience and create synergy between stakeholders.

ICF Marbek

69

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

4.3

Description of Program Elements

As noted above, the Residential program offers three distinct program elements in addition to engagement, education and communication tactics. This section provides a description of each program element; in each case the discussion is organized and presented as follows:           

Objective Target market Description Duration and milestones Eligible measures Marketing and communications strategy Incentive strategy Program theory Projected participation Budget Cost effectiveness

4.3.1 LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Objective This program element will achieve electricity and demand savings through accelerating the penetration of LED products and timers (indoor or outdoor) for automotive heaters, car warmers and battery blankets in the Yukon through the use of a financial rebate to encourage increased consumer participation.

Target Market The primary target market is the owners of detached house, town/row houses, condominium units and mobiles homes located in the Yukon who are shopping in Yukon retail stores. LED Lighting Rebate The eligibility criteria will be designed to include developers and contractors because it was found that the high cost of LED fixtures and lamps is also a significant hurdle for them. The eligibility criteria will be designed NOT to exclude: online shoppers, landlords and renters. These are in the target market. Building owners/managers buying LED lighting products at retail stores will be able to participate in Business Electricity Solutions Programs. The participation process will be consistent with that of the Residential Program. Automotive Heater Timer Rebate The primary target market is:  

Outdoor Timer Prospective Buyers and Users: Owners of detached houses, town/row houses, condominium units and mobile homes located in the Yukon who shop in Yukon retail stores Indoor Timer Prospective Installers: Housing developers and contractors who can install an interior timer in new detached houses, town/row houses, and condominium units and mobiles homes located in the Yukon

ICF Marbek

70

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The eligibility criteria will be designed to include online shoppers, landlords and renters. Owners or renters of existing dwellings will be eligible for the indoor-timer incentive even though it is expected that this measure will be more costly and thus less attractive to them.

Description The Utilities will provide a flat incentive per unit to shoppers and housing developers after they purchase LED lighting lamps or fixtures or a timer for an automotive heater, car warmer and/or battery blanket selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The Utilities will explore three possible rebate delivery mechanisms: (1) instant rebate at the point of purchase, (2) mail-in rebate, or (3) both. Instant-rebates are generally preferred by participants and will, therefore, be pursued first. However, the Utilities retain the option to complete a mail in rebate if market or regulatory conditions preclude from using instant rebates. The Utilities retain the right to modulate the rebate though the same fiscal year to be able to react to market conditions and use marketing tactics to drive up the demand. In addition, the Utilities retain the right to update the incentive levels, the list of eligible products and the LED incentive budget on an annual basis. Automotive heater timers gained a bad reputation in the Yukon because they reportedly failed. In order to address this, the Utilities envision applying the following tactics:  

The Utilities will start by promoting indoor automotive heater timers with the housing developers. Indoor timers are not subjected to cold weather and are therefore more reliable. The Utilities know that outdoor car automotive heater timers are being promoted by utilities in Alaska. The Utilities intend to research the automotive heater timers that the Alaskan utilities are promoting, to test them in the Yukon. The Utilities will start promoting these automotive heater timers once the reliability issue is resolved.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a duration of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Q1 of Y1) and finishes in the last quarter of Y5, the main milestones of this component are:           

Q1 of Y1: Program preparation Q2 of Y1: Program launch, including first rebate advertisement campaign August Y1 to July Y2: First set of LED and automotive heater timer rebate offerings Q3 and Q4 of Y1: LED and automotive heater timer rebate advertisement campaign Q2 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the Y1 rebate campaign Q2 of Y2, Y3, Y4 and Y5: Update of incentive list and incentive levels Q3 and Q4 of Y2, Y3, Y4 and Y5: Advertisement Campaign Q2 of Y3, Y4, and Y5: Report on the impacts of the rebate campaigns Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

ICF Marbek

71

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Eligible Measures The first list of prescriptive measures will include the items presented in Exhibit 67. Exhibit 67: Prescriptive List of Residential LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Energy Conservation Measures ID

Measure Short Name

ECM151

Automotive Heater Timer

ECM24

12W LED A19 Bulb

ECM60

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 130 kWh/unit 0.046 kW/unit 100%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

Level of Incentive

$37.50/unit

10.0 yr

$20.00/unit

48 kWh/unit

0.017 kW/unit

110%

$44.00/unit

20.0 yr

$18.00/unit

8W LED A19 Bulb

32.0 kWh/unit

0.011 kW/unit

110%

$30.00/unit

20.0 yr

$12.00/unit

ECM61

LED MR16 Bulbs

15.0 kWh/unit

0.005 kW/unit

110%

$20.00/unit

20.0 yr

$10.00/unit

ECM62

LED PAR30 Bulbs

40.0 kWh/unit

0.014 kW/unit

110%

$51.00/unit

20.0 yr

$20.00/unit

ECM63

LED PAR38 Bulbs

55.0 kWh/unit

0.020 kW/unit

110%

$43.00/unit

20.0 yr

$20.00/unit

ECM44

Spot or Task Lighting

40.0 kWh/unit

0.014 kW/unit

80%

$25.00/unit

10.0 yr

$10.00/unit

Specific details on the minimal technical specifications for each of the items in Exhibit 67 will be worked out during the program preparation phase. The Utilities intend to use external equipment qualification resources. Prospective performance and safety qualification resources for LED lighting include but are not limited to: the Office of Energy Efficiency’s ENERGY STAR Program, the US Department of Energy’s Solid State Lighting program, the Consortium for Energy Efficiency, the DesignLights Consortium, the Canadian Standards Association, and the Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. Resources for automotive heater timers include but are not limited to: the Canadian Standards Association, and the Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. The Utilities reserve the right to revise eligible measures as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. The Utilities propose to review the lighting incentive level on an annual basis. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money should fraud or omissions be identified.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The rebates will be extensively advertised through a media campaign starting in August of each year. Media channels will include local radio stations, local newspapers, co-operative advertisement with retailers and in stores, email blasts, and electricity bill inserts. Shoppers and retail store salespeople will be provided with information about the benefits of LED lighting products, automotive heater timers, and the rebates through brochures and displays at the point of purchase. The Utilities will also use direct community engagement and a network of community ambassadors to stream information about the LED rebate to their communities. This approach is discussed further in Section 4.3.2. ICF Marbek

72

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Incentive Strategy The Utilities propose a “prescriptive” approach for this incentive: a fixed amount per unit sold by brick-and-mortar or online retailers. The Utilities will explore three possible rebate delivery mechanisms: (1) instant rebate at the point of purchase, (2) mail-in rebate, or (3) both. Instant-rebates are generally preferred by participants and will, therefore, be pursued first. However, the Utilities want to retain the option to complete a mail in rebate if retail outlets are not able to manage instant rebates; or, if the EM&V approach requires information on participants that can only be collected through a short mail-in application form. The Utilities retain the right to modulate the rebates through the same fiscal year to be able to react to market conditions and use marketing tactics to drive up the demand. For example, the Utilities could have a constant year-round rebate level, and double the rebate for a short period of time during the last quarter of the year when the sales of residential lighting equipment or automotive heater timers peak. The rebate “doubling approach” will create a sense of urgency and is expected to increase the uptake significantly. In addition, the Utilities retain the right to update the incentive levels, the list of eligible products and the LED/automotive heater timer incentive budget on an annual basis to reflect changing prices of products; new products introduced; and perhaps “older” products reaching saturation. The list will be updated during the second quarter of the year when the sales are low because the warm season and increasingly longer daylight period.

ICF Marbek

73

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory As presented previously, the program theory explains how the program's actions are expected to achieve the intended outcomes. Evaluators will also use the program theory during program evaluation. The theory of the LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates within the Residential Program has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model and is shown in Exhibit 68. Exhibit 68: Logic Model of the Residential LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates

Price of products (LED in particular), menu of products offered by the central warehouse of retailers, price of electricity, availability of retail store staff, availability and response time of innovators

Exhibit 69 presents the narratives of the logic model shown in Exhibit 68. Exhibit 69: Explanatory Note on the Residential LED Lighting & Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Theory Link # 00

Narrative The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: price of products (LED technologies, in particular), menu of products offered by the central warehouse of retailers, price of electricity, availability of retail store staff, availability and response time of innovators The program administrator should monitor these externalities and adapt the implementation approach based on them.

ICF Marbek

74

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

06

The consumer responses provided on the scorecards will be aggregated, analyzed and provided to the store managers. The Utilities will be able to endorse certain EE products because customer satisfaction will be good. The results will be presented to the retail store managers, and feed the communication and POP materials. It is expected that store managers will react by stocking more of these products and allocate more shelf space.

08

The Utilities will support EE workshops in the homes of EE ambassadors or nearby community venues with approximately ten friends and relatives. The Utilities will send facilitator(s), provide communication materials and low-cost EE products to give away, and perhaps provide food and beverages. The Utilities’ skilled facilitator(s) will have a few key messages regarding low-cost EE products, LED lighting products, automotive heater timers and innovative heating systems. The facilitator will encourage the participants to share tips and information on electricity conservation. The facilitator will seek to eliminate potential sources of confusion and false beliefs in the communities by presenting hard facts.

11

The Utilities will establish partnerships with Yukon retail store managers and establish two-way communication. The Utilities will suggest new products to stock; perhaps by providing the results of the low-cost EE product piloting, by revealing in advance what products will be eligible for the LED lighting rebate and automotive heater timer rebate, or by indicating what POP materials will be created and offered to the shops.

13

The Utilities will design and procure educational Point Of Purchase (POP) materials for Yukon retail managers to display in their stores. These materials might include (but not be limited to): brochures, presentation boxes, posters, and displays stands.

14

Yukon shoppers will be informed on EE products through the community direct engagement, and through the POP materials. This will cause them to buy and install these products.

21

The Utilities will provide a flat amount of money per unit to Yukon shoppers after they purchase LED lighting lamps or fixtures selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The initial-cost hurdle will be alleviated which will contribute to the items being purchased and installed.

22

The “rebate” period will be extensively advertised through a media campaign starting in June of each year through local radio, local newspapers, coop advertisement with retailers and in stores, email blast, and electricity bill inserts. Consequently, shoppers will know when the rebates are going to be available. The marketing tactics used will create a sense of urgency and push Yukon shoppers to make the right purchase decision; it is expected to boost overall program uptake as compared a continuously available.

23

Participating Yukon shoppers (ie. participants) will buy and install LED lighting products or automotive heater timers and receive a rebate because these products will be available in the stores, because they were made aware of the benefits of these products, because they know when the rebate is available, and because the initial cost hurdle was alleviated by the rebate.

24

The LED lighting product installs and automotive heater timer installs will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

25

The Utilities will provide a flat amount of money per unit to Yukon shoppers for the purchase of automotive heater timers (indoor or outdoor) from selected from a prescriptive list of eligible products. The initial-cost hurdle will be alleviated and/or the rebate will make the purchase of an automotive heater timer much more enticing. This will contribute to the purchase and installation of these items.

26

Shoppers who bought low-cost EE products, LED lighting products or automotive heater timers will be satisfied by the products that they bought. They will tell their friends and relatives. This will generate word-of-mouth advertisement.

27

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause Yukon residents to buy and install EE products.

28

It is assumed that shoppers will perceive new non-energy benefits; and/or the maintenance of benefits they used to have with systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to make sure that participants will perceive that their new LED products last longer, are less sensitive to power quality issues, are more reliable, cast better light (color rendering, intensity, and visual acuity), and easier and less hazardous to dispose of than CFLs. The Utilities will seek to make sure that participants will perceive that automotive heater timers are reliable and that the use of a timer does not have negative impact on their car.

ICF Marbek

75

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Projected Participation The following projections have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 70: Participation Projections – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

ECM151

Automotive Heater Timer

0 units

68 units

109 units

109 units

109 units

395 units

ECM24

12W LED A19 Bulb

349 units 1,455 units 1,455 units 1,455 units 1,455 units

6,167 units

ECM60

8W LED A19 Bulb

349 units 1,455 units 1,455 units 1,455 units 1,455 units

6,167 units

ECM61

LED MR16 Bulbs

55 units

259 units

259 units

259 units

259 units

1,089 units

ECM62

LED PAR30 Bulbs

14 units

79 units

79 units

79 units

79 units

328 units

ECM63

LED PAR38 Bulbs

10 units

59 units

59 units

59 units

59 units

246 units

ECM44

Spot or Task Lighting

9 units

41 units

41 units

41 units

41 units

172 units

Budget The budget presented in Exhibit 71 has been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 71: Budget – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates

$1,000s

ICF Marbek

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

Incentive:

$12

$51

$52

$52

$52

$217

Non-Incentive:

$82

$84

$55

$59

$107

$387

Total:

$94

$135

$106

$111

$159

$604

76

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 72 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 72: Savings Targets – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates

Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Lifetime MWh:

718

3,149

3,207

3,207

3,207

0

0

0

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

36

199

368

537

705

705

705

705

705

705

705

694

677

660

643

Coincident kW:

13

71

131

191

252

252

252

252

252

252

252

248

242

236

230

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown in Exhibit 73 were computed based on the assumptions presented above: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, and since the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience; consequently, actual results may differ from those presented below. Exhibit 73: Cost Effectiveness – LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

1.9

3.0

2.5

1.0

$743

$1,047

$649

$52

$.128/kWh

$.081/kWh

N/A

N/A

4.3.2 Low-Cost Electricity Efficient Products Objective This program element will achieve electricity and demand savings by increasing the sales of selected low-cost electricity efficiency products in the Yukon. This will be achieved through demonstrations and the dissemination of credible and locally-applicable information to shoppers and the general public on the electricity savings and the non-energy benefits that can be achieved by using these products. This element will generate some direct savings, such as the savings corresponding to the products or systems that will be given out free of charge or heavily subsidized. However, this component should be evaluated based on the potential for replication through other program components rather than on its direct savings.

ICF Marbek

77

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Target Market This program component targets residential innovators who reside in the Yukon, and who will agree to use low-cost electricity efficient (EE) products in their home in exchange for filling out and sending back a scorecard. (See the definition of low-cost EE products as part of the Program Component Description) The “residential innovators” are volunteers that will be recruited through direct community engagement. These individuals will be selected based on their interest in electricity conservation and perhaps environmental conservation; as well as their leadership and influence among their peers. The Utilities intend to develop relationships with these individuals and, eventually, involve them in a network of electricity efficiency ambassadors. It is expected that distributing low-cost EE products free of charge will be a draw to initiate and build the relationship with prospective EE ambassadors, and possibly an attraction for friends and relatives of the ambassadors to attend the workshops on energy conservation. The education program component also targets anyone who purchases and uses low-cost EE products in the Yukon.

Description The Utilities will prepare and disseminate information on specific products that generate electricity savings if they are purchased and installed, and that do not have a perceptible price increment as compared with the baseline equipment. The Utilities will disseminate information through point of purchase displays and brochures in the retail stores, and through community engagement. The low-cost EE products that the Utilities intend to target could include (but is not limited to): ENERGY STAR TVs, ENERGY STAR printers and fax, ultra-low flow showerheads, power bars, programmable thermostats, Domestic Hot Water (DHW) recirculation system, three-element water heater system (mostly a peak-shaving measure), DHW tank insulation, and DHW pipe insulation. All of these products were selected because they are available or might be available in stores in the Yukon (rather than, for example, through a contractor or at a specialized store); they are easy to install on a do-it-yourself mode; and they are considered to be low-cost. 9 By “low-cost,” the Utilities means that the incremental or even the full cost of these products are imperceptible, ignored by the consumers considering the benefits, and/or does not constitute the most significant purchase barrier. The Utilities postulate that there is no need to offer an incentive for these products. Education and information should be sufficient to boost the sales and installation of these products. It should be noted that all of these products were assigned a certain “cost” for the purpose of computing the benefit/cost ratio. The Utilities will prepare educational materials that will highlight the monetary savings and the environmental gains that are possible to achieve with these products. The educational material will take the form of information brochures, point of purchase materials (eg. posters, presentation box, stands, displays, etc.), and static or interactive web content. It is assumed that as a result of the education and information activities, the sales of the targeted products will increase, which will yield incremental savings.

9

Only the three-element water heaters do not pertain to the do-it-yourself category, thus the approach to testing this line of products might have to be different. A contractor will need to be involved. ICF Marbek

78

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The Utilities will also create point-of-purchase displays and brochures for equipment that is not considered to be “low-cost” i.e., LED lighting and automotive heater timers. The educational material will support uptake of the program element related to these two types of equipment. In addition, the Utilities will have low-cost EE products tested by volunteers and/or electricity efficiency ambassadors in the communities. The Utilities will give out a limited number of these items at no cost; the ambassadors will try them, fill out a simple scorecard and send the scorecard back. The Utilities will collect the scorecards, aggregate and analyze the results, and apply the conclusions about consumer satisfaction in other program components such as the LED rebate component and the low-cost EE product education component. The results will be fed back to the store managers, then to the consumers through point of purchase materials and community engagement activities. The Utilities will identify low-cost products of interest through jurisdictional scans. Two examples are provided below: 



The Utilities know that car automotive heater timers are being promoted by utilities in Alaska. Automotive heater timers gained a bad reputation in the Yukon because they reportedly failed. The Utilities intend to research the automotive heater timers that the Alaskan utilities are promoting and to test them in the Yukon. One important issue with low-flow or ultra-low flow showerheads is persistence. Many models do not provide a sensation in the shower that is sufficiently pleasing for the user to keep them. Many users are annoyed and reinstall the old full-flow showerheads. The Utilities have learned that many models have been tested by natural gas utilities in Ontario; and some with higher customer satisfaction than others have been identified. The Utilities intends to communicate with the program administrators, obtain information about the high customer satisfaction models and test them out in the Yukon.

In addition to conducting jurisdictional scans, the Utilities will also be open to suggestions from store managers. Store managers will be able to suggest low-cost EE products or models for the Utilities to test. The Utilities will take the suggestions into consideration and, if the suggestions make sense (i.e., if the products effectively save electricity), the Utilities will proceed to piloting them. However, the Utilities will not rely on suggestions from store managers because they might be too busy or only slightly interested at the early stages of the program. Instead, the opportunity for managers to make suggestions is a measure that is taken to address potential frustrations from managers who see competing models being promoted.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a duration of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Q1 of Y1) and finishes in the last quarter of Y5, the main milestones of this component are:   

Q1 of Y1: Lay out communication and marketing strategy for the year, including the low-cost EE products to focus on during Y1 Q2 of Y1: Produce collateral materials and web content on the products of interest, initiate tests on certain products of interest, and collect sales data baseline Q2 of Y1: Initiate community direct engagement activities. The distribution of low-cost EE products should start with the beginning of the direct engagement activities.

ICF Marbek

79

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

           

Q3 of Y1: Both home buyers, home owners, contractors and developers willing to test 3element water heaters should be identified.10 Q4 of Y1: The 3-element water heaters should be installed. Q1 to Q4 of Y2: Post-retrofit period of the 3-element heaters. Satisfaction surveys are carried out. Q1 of Y3: Report on the 3-element water heaters pilots. Q3 and Q4 of Y1: Ramp up the communication and direct engagement activities Q3 of Y1 to Q2 of Y2: Collect and aggregate scorecards. Q1 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the education component Q3 of Y2: Report on customer satisfaction of low-cost EE products tested in Y1. Repeat the cycle during Y2, Y3, Y4 and Y5 Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

10

The incremental cost of 3-element water heaters is very low (approximately $200) and the impact on comfort is reported to be imperceptible. Thus, finding home owners and developers that are willing to test them should not be challenging.

ICF Marbek

80

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Eligible Measures The preliminary list of low-cost EE products that the Utilities intend to promote includes the items presented in Exhibit 74. Exhibit 74: List of Energy Conservation Measures Based on Low-cost EE Products Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 48 kWh/unit 0.017 kW/unit 100%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

Level of Incentive

$44.00/unit

20.0 yr

$44.00/unit

100%

$31.00/unit

20.0 yr

$31.00/unit

0.005 kW/unit

100%

$25.00/unit

20.0 yr

$25.00/unit

40.0 kWh/unit

0.014 kW/unit

100%

$64.00/unit

20.0 yr

$64.00/unit

Pilot LED PAR38 Bulbs

55.0 kWh/unit

0.020 kW/unit

100%

$53.00/unit

20.0 yr

$53.00/unit

ECM442

Pilot Spot or Task Lighting

40.0 kWh/unit

0.014 kW/unit

100%

$25.00/unit

10.0 yr

$25.00/unit

ECM092

Pilot Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

325.0 kWh/unit

0.116 kW/unit

100%

$16.01/unit

10.0 yr

$16.01/unit

ECM112

Pilot Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs

67.8 kWh/unit

0.024 kW/unit

100%

$50.00/unit

10.0 yr

$50.00/unit

ECM182

Pilot DHW Tank Insulation

62.0 kWh/unit

0.022 kW/unit

100%

$37.58/unit

14.0 yr

$37.58/unit

ECM202

Pilot DHW Pipe Insulation

34.0 kWh/unit

0.012 kW/unit

100%

$0.79/unit

15.0 yr

$0.79/unit

ECM482

Pilot Motion Detectors - Indoor and Outdoor

66.0 kWh/unit

0.024 kW/unit

100%

$22.94/unit

10.0 yr

$22.94/unit

ECM152

Pilot Auto Heater Timers

129.8 kWh/unit

0.046 kW/unit

100%

$37.50/unit

10.0 yr

$37.50/unit

ECM142

Pilot Prog. Thermostats (Central)

827.0 kWh/unit

0.295 kW/unit

100%

$62.50/unit

11.0 yr

$62.50/unit

ECM212

Pilot Prog. Thermostats

826.0 kWh/unit

0.295 kW/unit

100%

$285.43/unit

11.0 yr

$285.43/unit

ECM062

Pilot E-Star TVs

69.0 kWh/unit

0.025 kW/unit

100%

$1,125.00/unit

10.0 yr

$1,125.00/unit

ECM082

Pilot ESTAR Printers and Fax

31.7 kWh/unit

0.011 kW/unit

100%

$200.00/unit

6.0 yr

$200/unit

ECM091

Ed. Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

325.0 kWh/unit

0.116 kW/unit

100%

$8.62/unit

10.0 yr

$0/unit

ECM111

Ed. Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs

68 kWh/unit

0.024 kW/unit

100%

$25.00/unit

10.0 yr

$0/unit

ECM181

Ed. DHW Tank Insulation

62 kWh/unit

0.022 kW/unit

100%

$37.58/unit

14.0 yr

$0/unit

ECM201

Ed. DHW Pipe Insulation

34.0 kWh/unit

0.012 kW/unit

100%

$0.79/unit

15.0 yr

$0.00/unit

ID

Measure Short Name

ECM242

Pilot 12W LED A19 Bulb

ECM602

Pilot 8W LED A19 Bulb

32 kWh/unit

0.011 kW/unit

ECM612

Pilot LED MR16 Bulbs

15.0 kWh/unit

ECM622

Pilot LED PAR30 Bulbs

ECM632

ICF Marbek

81

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The Utilities reserve the right to revise measures to be promoted as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, piloting results, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. The pilot conservation measures and projects that the Utilities intend to support include the items presented in Exhibit 74.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will leverage the partnerships that will be developed with retail store managers to:    

Work with them to add low-cost EE items on their shelves if they aren’t already Identify certain models that yield higher customer satisfaction and thus provide an incentive to increase the shelf space for these models Have the retailers install the point-of-purchase materials Have the retailers share sales data (on a confidential basis) to monitor the impact of the program

The Utilities will leverage the community direct engagement activities (i.e., booths at local sporting or community events, booths at local retail stores, home electricity conservation shows, etc.), the partnership with the applicable non-profit and community organizations, and the network of electricity efficiency ambassadors to:       

Provide information to the communities on the low-cost EE products in a direct fashion Disseminate the educational and informational materials on low-cost EE products Test certain low-cost products and gather customer satisfaction feedback Extend the advertisement on the low-cost EE products through word-of-mouth marketing Distribute low-cost EE products and scorecards at community events Send additional free products when residents previously provided with free products fill out and send back scorecards to the Utilities, If and when a stronger relationship is established with a few people, referred to as electricity efficiency ambassadors, set up workshops at their homes in the communities to distribute more low-cost EE products as well as information on electricity efficiency behaviors and products.

Incentive Strategy The Utilities believe that there is no need to offer an incentive for the low-cost EE products. The Utilities will distribute many EE products free of charge (eg. low-flow showerhead, faucet aerators, DHW tank insulation, DHW pipe insulation, etc.); hence the incentive will be equivalent to the full cost of the measure. Certain higher-priced items (e.g., EnergyStar TVs, EnergyStar printers, programmable thermostats, powerbars, etc) could be given away to winners drawn at random as part of an energy conservation contest. The incentive will still be equivalent to the full cost of the measure; however fewer of these items will be given away.

ICF Marbek

82

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory The theory of the Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products within the Residential Program has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model and is shown in Exhibit 68. Exhibit 75: Logic Model of the Residential Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products

Exhibit 76 presents the narratives of the logic model shown in Exhibit 75. Exhibit 76: Explanatory Note on Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products Theory Link # 00

Narrative The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: price of products (LED technologies, in particular), menu of products offered by the central warehouse of retailers, price of electricity, availability of retail store staff, availability and response time of innovators The program administrator should monitor these externalities and adapt the implementation approach based on them.

ICF Marbek

83

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

01

The Utilities will advertise their intention of building a network of EE ambassadors through the local press, and applicable non-profit and community organizations. It is expected that this tactic will ease the development of the network.

02

The Utilities will carry out outreach activities in community events (eg. sport events, cultural events, town hall meetings, etc.), engage with organization and people who have a natural interest in electricity conservation; hook individuals with a continuous stream of free low-cost EE products or contests; do personalized follow-ups; offer to new home buyers to pilot CCHPs, or GSHPs; and promote the idea of supporting an EE workshop at their home or a at local venue.

03

The Utilities will build new relationships and a network of EE ambassadors that the Utilities will be able to use to extend its communication and community direct engagement footprint.

04

The Utilities will have low-cost EE products tested through volunteers and/or electricity efficiency ambassadors in the communities. The Utilities will give out a limited number of these items free of charge; the ambassadors will try them out, fill out a simple scorecard and send the scorecard back. The Utilities will collect all of the scorecards, aggregate and analyze the results, and use the results on consumer satisfaction in other program components such as the LED rebate component, the automotive heater timer rebate component and the low-cost EE product education component.

05

It is expected that the volunteers and EE ambassadors will like the low-cost EE products and will tell their friends and relatives. This will feed the word of mouth feedback loop.

06

The consumer responses provided on the scorecards will be aggregated, analyzed and provided to the store managers. The Utilities will be able to endorse certain EE products because customer satisfaction will be good. The results will be presented to the retail store managers, and feed the communication and POP materials. It is expected that store managers will react by stocking more of these products and allocate more shelf space.

08

The Utilities will support EE workshops in the homes of EE ambassadors or nearby community venues with approximately ten friends and relatives. The Utilities will send facilitator(s), provide communication materials and low-cost EE products to give away, and perhaps provide food and beverages. The Utilities’ skilled facilitator(s) will have a few key messages regarding low-cost EE products, LED lighting products, automotive heater timers and innovative heating systems. The facilitator will encourage the participants to share tips and information on electricity conservation. The facilitator will seek to eliminate potential sources of confusion and false beliefs in the communities by presenting hard facts.

10

The information and tips provided to residents of the Yukon as part of the Utilities direct community engagement activities will influence their behavior and cause them to use less electricity and reduce their peak demand. However, quantifying “behavior-based” electricity and demand savings is challenging and perhaps cost-prohibitive for a small jurisdiction like the Yukon. Moreover, the persistence of “behavior-based” conservation measures is notoriously bad. It is commonly believed to be less than one year by DSM experts. Consequently, the short-term benefits of behavior-based conservation measures will not be quantified. They are considered to be outcomes that are “nice-to-have” yet not necessary to make the program viable.

14

Yukon shoppers will be informed on EE products through the community direct engagement, and through the POP materials. This will cause them to buy and install these products.

19

Yukon shoppers will buy and install low-cost EE products (even in the absence of rebate) because these products will be available in the stores, and because they were made aware of the benefits of these products. The low-cost EE products might have a certain price increment; however it is assumed that the price increment (if any) is too small to constitute the most important purchase barrier.

20

The low-cost EE product installs will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

26

Shoppers who bought low-cost EE products, LED lighting products or automotive heater timers will be satisfied by the products that they bought. They will tell their friends and relatives. This will generate word-of-mouth advertisement.

27

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause Yukon residents to buy and install EE products.

28

It is assumed that shoppers will perceive new non-energy benefits; and/or the maintenance of benefits they used to have with systems. For example, the Utilities will seek to make sure that participants will perceive that their new LED products last longer, are less sensitive to power quality issues, are more reliable, cast better light (color rendering, intensity, and visual acuity), and easier and less hazardous to dispose of than CFLs. The Utilities will seek to make sure that participants will perceive that automotive heater timers are reliable and that the use of a timer does not have negative impact on their car.

ICF Marbek

84

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Projected Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 77 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience.

ICF Marbek

85

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Exhibit 77: Participation Projections –Low-cost Energy Efficient Products11 ID

11

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

ECM242

Pilot 12W LED A19 Bulb

60 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

300 units

ECM602

Pilot 8W LED A19 Bulb

60 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

300 units

ECM612

Pilot LED MR16 Bulbs

40 units

40 units

40 units

40 units

40 units

200 units

ECM622

Pilot LED PAR30 Bulbs

30 units

30 units

30 units

30 units

30 units

150 units

ECM632

Pilot LED PAR38 Bulbs

20 units

20 units

20 units

20 units

20 units

100 units

ECM442

Pilot Spot or Task Lighting

6 units

6 units

6 units

6 units

6 units

30 units

ECM092

Pilot Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

30 units

40 units

30 units

20 units

20 units

140 units

ECM112

Pilot Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs

60 units

60 units

40 units

40 units

30 units

230 units

ECM182

Pilot DHW Tank Insulation

40 units

60 units

60 units

40 units

40 units

240 units

ECM202

Pilot DHW Pipe Insulation

40 units

60 units

60 units

40 units

40 units

240 units

ECM482

Pilot Motion Detectors - Indoor and Outdoor

60 units

60 units

40 units

40 units

30 units

230 units

ECM152

Pilot Auto Heater Timers

30 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

60 units

270 units

ECM142

Pilot Prog. Thermostats (Central)

10 units

20 units

15 units

10 units

10 units

65 units

ECM212

Pilot Prog. Thermostats

50 units

90 units

80 units

60 units

40 units

320 units

ECM062

Pilot E-Star TVs

2 units

2 units

2 units

2 units

2 units

10 units

ECM082

Pilot ESTAR Printers and Fax

4 units

4 units

4 units

4 units

4 units

20 units

ECM091

Ed. Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

45 units

92 units

102 units

112 units

112 units

464 units

ECM111

Ed. Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs

117 units

505 units

525 units

525 units

535 units

2,207 units

ECM181

Ed. DHW Tank Insulation

102 units

192 units

192 units

212 units

212 units

909 units

ECM201

Ed. DHW Pipe Insulation

162 units

300 units

300 units

320 units

320 units

1,401 units

Some conditions may apply. See the Incentive Strategy for details.

ICF Marbek

86

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Budget The budget presented in Exhibit 78 has been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 78: Budget – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$34

$48

$43

$36

$30

$192

Non-Incentive:

$165

$179

$145

$153

$169

$811

Total:

$199

$227

$188

$189

$199

$1,003

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 79 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 79: Savings Targets – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Lifetime MWh:

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

1,849

3,969

3,672

3,540

3,342

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

169

543

896

1,236

1,558

1,558

1,542

1,509

1,466

1,422

1,313

1,092

782

512

244

60

194

319

441

556

556

550

538

523

507

469

390

279

183

87

Annual MWh: Coincident kW:

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown in Exhibit 80 were computed based on the assumptions presented above: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, and since the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience; consequently, actual results may differ from those presented below. Exhibit 80: Cost Effectiveness – Low-cost Energy Efficient Products Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

ICF Marbek

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

1.8

2.7

2.8

1.0

$1,031

$1,453

$1,057

-$26

$.128/kWh

$.086/kWh

N/A

N/A

87

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

4.3.3 CCHP and GSHP Initiative Objective The pilot phase of this program element will demonstrate and obtain credible information on the electricity savings and the non-energy benefits that can be achieved through innovative house heating and domestic hot water (DHW) systems such as cold climate heat pump (CCHP), and ground-source heat pump (GSHP). Following the pilot phase, this program element will achieve electricity and demand savings through accelerating the penetration of cold-climate heat pumps (CCHPs) and the groundsource heat pumps (GSHPs) in the Yukon as a result of reducing the initial cost hurdle.

Target Market The pilot phase of this program component targets:  

New-home buyers who are early adopters and are interested in building a home with an innovative heating system (referred to as “leading” home buyers) Yukoners who own homes that are heated with electric central-air or hydronic systems, who are early adopters and are interested in retrofitting their homes with an innovative heating system (also referred to as “leading” home owners)

Similar to the “residential innovators” identified for the low-cost EE products program element, “leading” home buyers and home owners are volunteers that will be recruited through direct community engagement. These individuals will be selected based on their interest in electricity conservation and perhaps environmental conservation, as well as their leadership and influence among their peers. The Utilities intend to develop relationships with these individuals and, eventually, involve them in a network of electricity efficiency ambassadors. The pilot install of either a CCHP or a GSHP will be heavily (but not fully) subsidized by the Utilities, which will make the proposal very attractive. The pilot incentives will be allocated on a first-come, firstserve basis. They will be announced officially in local media. The pilot incentives will be offered in Year 2 and Year 3 while the mass-market incentive will be offered more than one year later, in Year 4 and Year 5. The results of the CCHP and GSHP pilot projects will be used to improve the design of the CCHP and GSHP incentive, to advertise the incentive and to provide better advice to the participants with respect to the incentive. While the support for a limited number of pilot projects was available on a first-come, first-served basis; the CCHP and GSHP incentive will be available to anyone who complies with the eligibility criteria without restrictions. The Utilities will primarily target new homes due to the significant price increment for the CCHP and GSHP systems. It is assumed that the new-home segment will be where program uptake will be the easiest to generate. However, eligibility criteria will not preclude owners of existing homes to participate in the program if the existing homes have an electric central-air or hydronic heating system.

Description The Utilities will select specific technologies of interest (e.g., CCHPs and GSHPs) to be installed in a few “pilot” homes in the Yukon. The Utilities will recruit leading home buyers or home owners through community direct engagement activities and its network of electricity efficiency ambassadors. The Utilities will also engage with HVAC contractors and housing developers to find market actors who are interested ICF Marbek

88

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

in installing the innovative systems. The Utilities will match leading home buyers with innovative developers; and leading home owners with innovative HVAC contractors. The Utilities will provide a pilot incentive to developers that will significantly decrease the incremental cost of the technologies of interest. The pilot incentives will be allocated on a firstcome, first-first-served basis. They will be announced officially in local media. The will be offered in Year 1 and Year 2, while the mass-market incentive will be offered more than one year later in Year 3 and Year 4. The Utilities will plan and execute the performance measurement and verification of the pilot houses to collect credible, validated, and high-quality data. The participating households will also be surveyed about their satisfaction with the technologies. The results of the pilot studies will be disseminated through different channels, e.g. through HVAC contractors, electrical contractors, housing developers and municipalities. The results will validate the design, inform the implementation approach, and feed the communication and marketing strategy of a full-fledged incentive program component. For the mass-market incentive, the Utilities will provide a flat amount of money, adjusted by the capacity of the CCHP or the GSHP (e.g. per unit of heating capacity), installed and attributed to buyers of new houses or condominium units heated with a CCHP or a GSHP system. The incentive level of CCHP and GSHP will differ. The Utilities will use the information and case studies generated by the piloting of CCHP and the GSHP to tune the incentive level and to advertise the incentive offering. The incentive will be available throughout the year. The participation process will resemble the following:       

The Utilities match home buyer(s) and developers, or innovative home owners and contractors The new home must comply with the Yukon Housing SuperGreen standard and have a central-heat air ducts or hot water piping The developer will install the CCHP or the GSHP system The sale of the house will be completed The home owner will file an incentive application The Utilities will review the application and, if the participating home owner complied with all of the criteria, then The Utilities will send the incentive to the participant.

For GSHP systems, the Utilities may ask (1) the installer to be certified by the Canadian GeoExchange Coalition, and (2) the newly installed system to be certified by the Canadian GeoExchange Coalition. Certified installers may not be available in the Yukon at the moment; however, the Utilities will provide time for installers in the Yukon to prepare.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a period of approximately five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process. Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Year 1 (Q1 of Y1) and finishes in the last quarter of Y5 and that the report on the CCHP and GSHP pilot projects are issued on the first quarter of Y4, the main milestones of this component are:  

Q1 of Y1: Validate the levels of incentives to be offered for the CCHP and GSHP systems. Q2 of Y1: Initiate community direct engagement activities and direct engagement with housing developers. The identification of home owners and developers should start along with the direct engagement activities.

ICF Marbek

89

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

           

Q1 of Y2: Both home buyers, home owners, contractors and developers willing to test the CCHP and the GSHP are identified. The M&V plan for the CCHP and the GSHP installations should be finalized. Q3 of Y2: The pilot CCHP and the GSHP system should be operating. Q1 to Q4 of Y3: Post-retrofit period of the CCHP and the GSHP systems. Satisfaction surveys are carried out. Q1 of Y4: Report on the CCHP and the GSHP system pilots. Q1 of Y4: Program preparation Q2 of Y4: Program launch: first direct engagement and communication campaign about the CCHP and GSHP incentives Q4 of Y4: Report on the impacts of the Y4 participation. Q1 of Y5: Update of incentive levels and collateral materials. Q4 of Y5: Report on the impacts of the CCHP and GSHP incentive. Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

Eligible Measures The preliminary list of technologies that the Utilities intend to promote includes the items presented in Exhibit 81. Exhibit 81: Inputs and Assumptions of Residential New-Construction CCHP and GSHP Initiative ID

Measure Short Name

ECM032

Pilot Cold Temp Heat Pumps

ECM372

Pilot Ground Heat Pumps Closed

ECM03 ECM37

Gross Gross Annual Net-to-Gross Consumption Coincident Ratio Savings Peak Savings 6,780 kWh/unit 2.421 kW/unit 100%

Measure Cost

Measure Lifetime

Level of Incentive

$8,498.44/unit

20.0 yr

$5,000.00/unit

8,605 kWh/unit

3.070 kW/unit

100% $34,245.24/unit

20.0 yr

$9,000.00/unit

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

6,780.0 kWh/unit

2.421 kW/unit

100%

$8,498.44/unit

20.0 yr

$2,500.00/unit

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

8,605.0 kWh/unit

3.070 kW/unit

100% $34,245.24/unit

20.0 yr

$3,500.00/unit

The Utilities reserve the right to revise measures to be promoted as needed in accordance with current market conditions, technology development, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. In addition, the Utilities reserve the right to recover the incentive money and/or products that were handed out for free or as pilot incentives should fraud errors or omissions be uncovered.

Marketing & Communications Strategy The Utilities will leverage the direct community engagement activities, the partnership with applicable non-profit and community organizations, and the network of electricity efficiency ambassadors (see description in section 4.3.2) to find individuals among electricity ambassadors, and their friends & relatives, who are planning to buy new houses and are interested in piloting CCHPs and GSHPs. Following the pilot phase, similar a similar approach will be used to find individuals about to buy new houses and are interested in buying a house with a CCHP or a GSHP system. ICF Marbek

90

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

The Utilities will engage directly with HVAC contractors and housing developers in the Yukon. The Utilities will help match developers and prospective new home buyers who are both interested in CCHP or GSHP system, and residential HVAC contractors with innovative home owners. There are only a few of these individuals, so it is realistic to speak with all of them.

Incentive Strategy During the pilot phase, Utilities will provide an incentive to developers or to HVAC contractors that will significantly reduce the total incremental cost of the technologies, in the case of heat pumps, this will include not only the cost of the heat pump and the bore wells (if applicable), but also the cost of the central air ductwork. However, although the Utilities’ offer to the developers and contractors will cover a significant percentage of the measure cost, it will nevertheless be a flat amount so that developers and contractors do not inflate the incremental cost. The Utilities envision a quasi-prescriptive incentive based on the capacity of the water tank or the capacity of the heat pump. There will be a limited amount of incentive available. The incentive will be attributed on a firstcome, first-served basis to participating developer(s) or contractor(s) who comply with the eligibility criteria. When ready, the pilot incentive will be announced through local media. For the mass-market incentive program, the Utilities will provide an incentive to the developers or contractors to alleviate the initial cost hurdle of the CCHP and GSHP technologies (including the cost of the heat pump the borewells, and the central air ductwork). The incentive will be a flat amount so that developers or contractors do not inflate the incremental cost. The Utilities envision a quasi-prescriptive incentive based on the capacity of the heat pump (tons of refrigeration). In the case of a multi-family building, if one system supplies the entire building with heat, each condominium buyer or owner will have to file an application. The eligible tons of refrigeration for a given buyer will be established by prorating the capacity of the central equipment using the square footage of the unit.

ICF Marbek

91

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Program Theory The theory of the Residential CCHP and GSHP Initiative has been graphically depicted in the form of a logic model and is shown in Exhibit 82. Exhibit 82: Logic Model of the Residential CCHP and GSHP Initiative Financial Resources

Resources

Activities

Outputs

(e.g. account data, credibility, billing system)

Direct Support EE Heavy incentive Direct engagement w/ engagement at workshops in to developers/ HVAC contractors & community ambassadors’ contractors for newspapers, bill inserts, housing developers radio & web events houses pilot houses 02

08

Yukoners know that Community Yukoners are the Utilities are members get informed on EE searching leading information on from home buyers/owners EE ambassadors 34

34

34

39

40

48

50

Contractors & developers know innovative heating system

Incremental cost of pilot systems is knocked down

Market know about successful installs

Participants receive an incentive

39

48

40 46

Short-term Outcomes

Leading home buyers/owners accept the risk of buying/retrofitting a home with an innovative heating system 42

Intermediate Outcomes

Leading contractors & Initial cost hurdle developers build or retrofit of pilot systems houses w/ innovative is heavily heating system alleviated 42

42

58

Contractors/developers interested in doing more innovative system intalls More buyers/owners are interested in houses with innovative systems

54

Long-term energy & demand savings

Initial cost hurdle is alleviated

52

Word of mouth

44

Non-energy benefits

50

57

Leading home buyers buy pilot houses w/ innovative heating system

Long-term Outcomes

00

Incentive to home Engagement & buyers/owners for communication innovative heating campaign systems

Local media campaign:

01

Externalities

Utility Resources

Human Resources

52

Participants buy/ retrofit houses w/ innovative heating systems 56

56

Customer satisfaction

Exhibit 83 presents the narratives of the logic model shown in Exhibit 82. Exhibit 83: Explanatory Note on the Residential CCHP and GSHP Initiative Link #

Narrative

00

The program effectiveness and impact will be influenced by the following externalities: Yukon Housing, in particular the Green and SuperGreen labels, the training and engagement with developers and contractors, and the promotion of electric baseboard heating; Municipality of Whitehorse decisions on residential building code (whether SuperGreen will become code); territorial decisions on residential building code; price of electricity; availability of developers and HVAC contractors and level of interest of leading buyers. The program administrator should monitor these externalities and adapt the implementation approach accordingly.

01

The Utilities will advertise their intention to build a network of EE ambassadors through the local press and applicable non-profit and community organizations. It is expected that this tactic will ease the development of the network.

ICF Marbek

92

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link #

Narrative

02

The Utilities will carry out outreach activities in community events (e.g., sport events, cultural events, town hall meetings, etc.), engage with organization and people who have a natural interest in electricity conservation; hook individuals with a continuous stream of free low-cost EE products or contests; do personalized follow-ups; offer to new home buyers to pilot CCHPs or GSHPs; and promote the idea of supporting a EE workshop at their home or a at local venue.

08

The Utilities will support EE workshops in the homes of EE ambassadors or nearby community venues with approximately ten friends and relatives. The Utilities will send facilitator(s), provide communication materials and low-cost EE products to give away, and perhaps provide food and beverages. The Utilities’ skilled facilitator(s) will have a few key messages regarding low-cost EE products, LED lighting products, and innovative heating systems. The facilitator will encourage the participants to share tips and information on electricity conservation. The facilitator will seek to eliminate potential sources of confusion and false beliefs in the communities by presenting hard facts.

34

Through community direct engagement tactics as detailed in links #01, #02 & #03, the Utilities will find leading home buyers or leading home owners who will accept the risk of buying a home with an innovative heating system.

39

The Utilities will engage directly with all of the HVAC contractors and housing developers in the Yukon. Because there only a few, it is realistic to speak with all of them. The Utilities will find leading developers and HVAC contractors who are willing take on the risk of building houses with innovative heating systems; or to retrofit existing homes with CCHP and GSHP systems. Their risk exposure will be reduced because the Utilities will help them find clients.

40

The Utilities will provide an incentive to the developers and contractors that will significantly reduce the total incremental cost of the technologies: not only the cost of the heat pump and the borewells, but also the cost of the central air ductwork. The initial-cost hurdle of pilot houses will be heavily alleviated.

42

Developers will build pilot houses with innovative heating systems; and new home buyers will buy them because the Utilities will have found the buyers, matched them with the developers/contractors, and heavily subsidized the projects to address the initialcost hurdle. Alternatively, innovative contractors will retrofit existing homes with innovative heating systems. The home owners will be willing to have their house pilot the system because the Utilities will have found leading home owners, matched them with innovative contractors, and heavily subsidized the projects to address the initial-cost hurdle.

44

The pilot houses with innovative heating systems will yield long-term electricity and demand savings. This electricity and demand savings will be verified and documented through state-of-the art project performance measurement and verification (M&V) activities.

46

The results of the pilot projects and of the M&V activities will feed the program planning; and will feed the engagement and communication campaign of the CCHP and GSHP incentive program component.

48

The Utilities deliver an engagement and communication campaign primarily through already-established channels: community direct engagement; and HVAC contractors and developers engagement. In addition, the Utilities will launch a local media campaign through local newspapers, local radios, brochures to be passed to prospective buyers by developers and contractors, email blasts, bill inserts and web content development. The Utilities will publicize the results of the pilot projects so that the market knows that the installations were successful and that CCHP and GSHP are viable technologies in the Yukon. As a result, developers and contractors will be interested in doing more CCHP and GSHP system installations, more home buyers will be interested in houses with these heating systems; and more home owners will be interested in retrofitting their houses with CCHP and GSHP systems.

50

The Utilities will provide a flat amount of money adjusted based on the capacity of the CCHP or the GSHP (per tons of refrigeration) installed and attributed to buyers of new houses or condominium units heated with a CCHP or a GSHP system; or to home owners willing to retrofit their houses with a CCHP or a GSHP system. The incentive level of CCHP and GSHP will differ. The incentive will alleviate the initial cost hurdle of CCHP and GSHP systems.

52

Because the supply and the demand will be stimulated, and because the initial-cost hurdle is alleviated, the participating home buyers or home owners (the participants) will buy houses with CCHP or GSHP systems.

54

The houses of participants in the CCHP and GSHP incentive program component will yield long-term electricity and demand savings.

56

Participants will be satisfied by the products that they bought. They will tell their friends and relatives. This will generate word-ofmouth advertisement.

57

With time, word-of-mouth will become an important information channel that will cause Yukon residents to buy new houses with CCHP or GSHP systems; or to retrofit their houses with CCHP or GSHP systems.

ICF Marbek

93

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio Link # 58

Narrative It is assumed that the participants (pilot projects and incentive) will perceive new non-energy benefits; and/or the maintenance of benefits they used to have with baseline systems. The Utilities will seek to see the participants perceive that the comfort provided by CCHPs, and GSHPs is equivalent to what would be provided by baseboards heating.

Project Participation The projections shown in Exhibit 84 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 84: Participation Projections – CCHP and GSHP Initiatives12 ID

Measure Short Name

Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

ECM032

Pilot Cold Temp Heat Pumps

1 units

0 units

0 units

1 units

0 units

2 units

ECM372

Pilot Ground Heat Pumps Closed

0 units

1 units

1 units

0 units

0 units

2 units

ECM03

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

0 units

0 units

0 units

6 units

6 units

12 units

ECM37

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

0 units

0 units

0 units

1 units

1 units

2 units

Budget The budget presented in Exhibit 85 has been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market. Exhibit 85: Budget – CCHP and GSHP Initiative

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

12

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$5

$9

$9

$24

$19

$65

Non-Incentive:

$18

$34

$28

$39

$24

$144

Total:

$23

$43

$37

$63

$43

$209

Some conditions may apply. See the Incentive Strategy for details.

ICF Marbek

94

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Savings Target The savings targets shown in Exhibit 86 have been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserves the right to adjust savings targets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 86: CCHP and GSHP Initiative Net Savings with T&D Losses || |-------------------------------- Ramp Down as Measure Lifetime Expires ------------------------------------>| Year 1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Lifetime MWh:

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

148

188

188

1,223

1,075

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Annual MWh:

7

17

26

87

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

141

Coincident kW:

3

6

9

31

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

Cost Effectiveness The cost-effectiveness test results shown in Exhibit 87 were computed based on the assumptions presented above: level of incentive, budget, and projections. They are used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust the assumptions as necessary in accordance with market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Exhibit 87: Cost Effectiveness – CCHP and GSHP Initiative Total Resource Cost TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio Net Present Value (1,000s) Levelized Cost:

4.4

Program Administrator Cost PAC

Participant Cost PC

RateImpact Measure RIM

0.9

1.7

1.2

0.8

-$25

$131

$40

-$65

$.263/kWh

$.140/kWh

N/A

N/A

Engagement, Education and Communication

Engagement, education and Communication will generate uptake for the Residential Program in Whitehorse and in the communities, which will increase long-term electricity and demand savings. It will achieve short-term electricity and demand savings by educating Yukon residents about behaviors at home that influence their electricity consumption and demand.13 Communication, education, and engagement are key components of DSM programs, and it is a good practice to resource these activities properly. Proper communications, education, and engagement are essential to stimulate program uptake and therefore DSM rebates 13

The short-term electricity consumption and demand savings generated by the engagement, education and communication program element will not be claimed because of the challenges and costs related with the demonstration of such savings. The program must be cost-effective without having to claim these savings. ICF Marbek

95

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

performance. Communication, education and engagement also contribute to the rebates to establish a real causal effect between the DSM program and the accelerated adoption of electricity-efficient technologies and services. In other words: without communications, education and engagement, rebate claims (if any) are very likely to be made by the few consumers who would have selected the electricity-efficient technologies and services anyway – the so-called “freeriders”.

Target Market The target market comprises all Yukon residents, including residents of Whitehorse and residents of the communities. In order to serve the purpose of the Residential Program, the public engagement, education and communication activities and tactics will focus primarily on:      

Shoppers Yukon residents who attend community events and/or are involved in applicable non-profit and community organizations Yukon residents who agree to assume a leadership role and become electricity efficiency ambassadors New Yukon home buyers EE ambassadors housing developers

EE ambassadors will be people who showed interest in the first place by sending back the scorecards). The Utilities staff will do personalized follow-ups (emails, phone calls, perhaps some in-person meetings); offer new home buyers opportunities to pilot a CCHP or GSHP system; and promote the idea of supporting a EE workshop at their home or a at local venue. The EE workshops will be highly participative and engaging. It is expected that the EE ambassadors will gather a group of approximately ten people among their friends and relatives. The Utilities will send facilitator(s), provide communication materials and low-cost EE products to give away, and perhaps provide food and beverages. The Utilities’ skilled facilitator(s) will have a few key messages regarding low-cost EE products, LED lighting products, and innovative heating and DHW systems. The facilitator will encourage participants to share tips and information on electricity conservation. The facilitator will also seek to eliminate potential sources of confusion and false beliefs in the communities by presenting information on topics such as for instance CFL mercury content and disposal facilities in the Yukon, and the relevance of opening windows in the winter to improve indoor air quality. New-Housing Construction Channel The Utilities intend to use the following tactics to reach out to Yukon residents:  

Direct engagement with HVAC contractors, electrical contractors and house developers. Display information on rebates and electricity efficiency products on the Utilities’ website.

The Utilities will use all of its direct-engagement activities to disseminate information about the Yukon Housing conservation programs and the ESC energy conservation programs to increase value for the audience and create synergy among stakeholders.

Duration & Milestones The Utilities propose to launch and operate the program for a duration of five years (20 quarters) before going through a new program design, filing and approval process.

ICF Marbek

96

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Assuming that this program begins in the first quarter of Y1 and finishes in the last quarter of Y5, the main milestones of this component are:         

Q1 of Y1: Lay out communication and marketing strategy for the year. Q2 of Y1: Produce communication materials Q3 and Q4 of Y1: Ramp up the communication and direct engagement activities Q1 of Y2: Report on the impacts of the engagement, education and communication component Repeat the cycle during Y2, Y3, Y4 and Y5 Q3 of Y2: First “EE workshop” in the home of an EE ambassador. Q3 of Y5: Draft impact evaluation report is filed with the YUB Q4 of Y5: New program portfolio design is filed with the YUB Q1 of Y6: Program component is either terminated or updated to fit new market circumstances

Budget The budget presented in Exhibit 88 has been used for planning purposes. However, the Utilities reserve the right to adjust program budgets as necessary in accordance with current market conditions, EM&V results, and program implementation experience. Initial budget levels are set based on conservative estimates of participation given the current market and uncertainty. Exhibit 88: Budget – Engagement, Education and Communication

$1,000s Year 1 Incentive:

ICF Marbek

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Total

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Non-Incentive:

$113

$130

$134

$138

$142

$657

Total:

$113

$130

$134

$138

$142

$657

97

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

5 Summary The information presented in this Yukon Electricity DSM Program Portfolio provides:  

A comprehensive suite of DSM programs that will increase electricity efficiency within the Yukon’s Residential and General Service (commercial) sectors. A full reporting of the rationale and cost-effectiveness of those programs at the level of individual program element, sector program, and total portfolio under two scenarios one that includes and one that excludes the participation of government customers.

The proposed electricity DSM program portfolio will capture a significant share of the costeffective opportunities for Yukon electricity efficiency that were identified in the recently completed study entitled Yukon Electricity Conservation and Demand Management Potential Review (CPR 2011). The proposed programs were designed to: minimize program design complexity in the interests of speeding up time-to-market; provide program implementers with the flexibility needed to respond to customer needs and program monitoring results; and, transform the electricity market by setting the foundation for a more electricity-conscious Yukon. Overall, the proposed programs provide positive net benefits to the Yukon and to program participants under both scenarios i.e., with and without the participation of government customers. Results are moderately more positive under the scenario that includes the participation of government customers; this scenario also lowers program risk because a broader market of eligible participants means more flexibility for program implementers. With government participation over the 5-year program period the Residential and General Service Programs will generate a total of 98.9 GWh of measure-lifetime net savings, 9.3 GWh of annual net savings, and 2.3 MW of coincident peak demand savings. The General Service Program will generate 67% of the measure-lifetime net savings and the Residential Program will generate the remaining 33%. In the scenario that includes government participation, the results of the cost-effectiveness tests for the proposed DSM program portfolio are:    

A Total Resource Cost Benefit/Cost ratio of 1.4 i.e., the portfolio will yield economic benefits to the Yukon and contribute to decreased electricity costs in the long term. A Program Administrator Cost ratio of 2.3 i.e., the program portfolio will yield “negative kWh” that are less expensive than kWh obtained from planned new generation, transmission and distribution capacity. A Participant Cost ratio of 2.9 i.e., the portfolio will generate net benefits to Yukon electricity customers who participate in the programs. A blended Rate-Impact Measure ratio of 0.8 i.e., the portfolio will result in a modest reduction of revenue to the Utilities unless the electricity rates are adjusted upward. The blended RIM ratio assumes utility cooperation and, therefore, presents the RIM results as a blended value. When calculated separately, the RIM test shows a net benefit to YEC and a net loss to YECL.

If the proposed electricity DSM program portfolio is approved by the Yukon Utilities Board, the next step in this process will be the development of a program implementation plan, including the definition of the program operational and transactional infrastructure, followed by program launch.

ICF Marbek

98

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Appendix A Program Focus Paper

ICF Marbek

A-1

DSM Program Design Services Program Focus - Team Discussion Paper

February 21, 2012

Submitted to: Yukon Energy Corporation (YEC) Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL)

Submitted by: ICF Consulting Canada, Inc. (ICF Marbek) 222 Somerset Street West Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2G3

ICF Marbek

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1

This Paper ................................................................................................................ 1

2 Approach .................................................................................................................. 1 3 Results ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.1

Residential Sector .................................................................................................... 3 3.1.1

Priority Opportunity Areas

3

3.1.2

Highlights - Qualitative Scan

5

3.1.3

Conclusion- Residential Sector

6

3.2

Commercial Sector ................................................................................................... 7 3.2.1

Priority Opportunity Areas

7

3.2.2

Highlights - Qualitative Scan

9

3.2.3

Conclusion-Commercial Sector

3.3

10

Combined Results ...................................................................................................10 3.3.1

Other Considerations

11

4 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................... 12 4.1

ICF Marbek

Implications for the Market Characterization Phase .................................................12

1

INTRODUCTION

The first task in this current Yukon DSM Program design project is to determine where initial program efforts should be directed. Selection of these initial program focuses will, in turn, guide the subsequent market characterization and program design efforts. More specifically, the first task is to determine which electricity saving opportunities should be pursued first. To help guide the initial screening process, a notional target of a 5 GWh/year reduction by 2015, or as early as possible, was provided by the client. For reference, this represents approximately 1.6% of the total Yukon electricity sales to the residential and commercial sectors in 2010 and about 1.4% of the total forecast sales in 2015. This target will necessarily be reviewed once the program planning process gets into further detail. However, as noted below, the 5 GWh/yr. target provides a useful reference point for the current planning process.

1.1

THIS PAPER

This internal discussion paper provides a framework to guide team discussions and conclusions related to the selection of the initial DSM opportunities to be pursued in this first set of Yukon DSM opportunities. More specifically, it provides:




The approach




The results of our preliminary analysis of Yukon DSM opportunities




A set of recommended DSM opportunity areas.

2

APPROACH

The approach for this first task builds directly on the results of the recently completed Yukon CPR 2011. More specifically, the CPR results, at the level of individual measure or technology, were assessed as outlined in the following steps. Step 1: The Economic Potential and Achievable Potential results for the residential and commercial sectors were sorted on the basis of the following criteria:




Measures providing the largest electricity savings potential by 2015 and by 2020




Measures providing electricity savings at the lowest CCE




Measures providing electricity savings with the shortest customer payback

Step 2: Based on the results of Step 1, individual measures were assigned priority, with highest priority assigned to those measures that provided the largest savings potential in the period at lowest CCE. Step 3: Priority measures from Step 2 were grouped into “opportunity areas” e.g., multiple individual commercial lighting measures were combined into a single aggregate

ICF Marbek

1

“commercial lighting” opportunity. As applicable, complementary measures with smaller savings potential and/or higher CCEs were added to the applicable opportunity area. The composition of the package of measures contained in the selected opportunity areas also considered factors such as: commonality of market delivery channels, information flows, typical purchase decision making processes etc. Step 4: The qualitative notes from the CPR achievable potential workshops were reviewed to determine if participants had noted any compelling technology or market considerations, either positive or negative, that would potentially affect the priorities established in Step 3. Customer payback periods, as generated in Step 1, were also considered at this time. The assigned priority for each “opportunity area” was adjusted, as applicable. Step 5: A brief scan of DSM program experience in other jurisdictions was conducted with the objective of identifying potential program delivery experience that would potentially affect the priorities established in Step 3. The assigned priority for each “opportunity area” was adjusted, as applicable. Step 6: The estimated upper and lower achievable potential electricity savings for the resulting combined residential and commercial sector opportunity areas was calculated, together with an approximate weighted average CCE for each opportunity area. The results were compared with the notional 5 GWh/year savings target. Step 7: Based on the available time and budget, a select number of opportunity areas was recommended for this initial set of DSM programs.

ICF Marbek

2

3

RESULTS

This section presents the results of the analysis of the Yukon’s residential and commercial sector opportunities, in accordance with the steps outlined above.

3.1

RESIDENTIAL SECTOR

3.1.1 PRIORITY OPPORTUNITY AREAS Exhibit 1 provides a summary of the results of the residential sector analysis of Steps 1, 2 and 3. Additional background tables are provided in Appendix A. The first opportunity shown in the exhibit is a program offered through retail channels, to promote relatively low-cost, easy-to-install measures that reduce consumption for residential lighting, DHW, and space heating. The second opportunity is a move to the EGH85 level of energy performance for new home construction. This is structured mainly as a negotiation with government and other players to work towards a new building code requirement. Without a new code, results are likely to be very modest. If a new code is adopted, however, the resulting savings could exceed 3 GWh/yr by 2020.

ICF Marbek

3

Exhibit 1 Residential DSM Opportunity Ranking

Opportunity Area

Retailer Program

New Construction Grand Total

ICF Marbek

Measures Included

Lighting, incl. all CFLs and LEDs DHW, incl. showerheads and pipe insulation Programmable thermostats, both central & baseboard High-Perf. New Homes

Applicability

All Residential

New

Economic Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

8,539

7,854

Savings Potential Upper Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

2,009

Lower Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

1,929

1,375

Weighted Average Payback (years)

1,259

3.0

2.2

9.6

13.9

1,694

3,558

1,156

3,396

675

2,838

10,234

11,412

3,165

5,325

2,051

4,097

4

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

3.1.2 HIGHLIGHTS - QUALITATIVE SCAN The qualititative results from the Yukon CPR 2011 achievable potential workshops were reviewed for each of the opportunity areas noted above. A brief scan of the experience in other jurisdictions with similar types of DSM opportunites was also reviewed. Selected highlights are summarized below. Retailer Program




Achievable workshop participants expressed concern about the light quality from both CFL and LED lighting products. The utility role should probably include addressing these concerns, possibly with a product qualification process based on performance standards that include both energy and other aspects of the products. This issue is also pertinent to the low-flow showerheads (e.g., quality of the shower) and programmable thermostats (e.g., ease of use).




LED products were seen as likely to supersede CFLs relatively soon. The program should probably be neutral about the specific technology, so that it can smoothly transition from offering support for CFLs initially to offering support to LEDs in the long run.




Savings from lighting measures will be reduced in electrically heated houses, because the heating system will have to compensate for the reduced heat loss from inefficient lighting. (Consumption of other the heating fuels will increase in non-electrically heated houses.)




A 2006 US DOE report1 provides an overview of the experience of government and utility programs to support CFLs, from the 1970s until about 2005. The report also discusses the implications for programs supporting LEDs. The lessons learned are potentially applicable to programs supporting any relatively low-cost technologies aimed at residential customers, sold mainly through retail channels, and likely to be installed by the customers. They include:







Recognize limitations of new products and aim the introduction at niches where they will most likely be successful. Be aggressive about dealing with any performance issues.




Be specific about benefits and back up claims with guarantees. Use in-store displays and demonstrations so customers can see how the products work.




Do not bypass retail channels with direct giveaways. Work with retail partners and offer training, incentives, and recognition to the retailers.




Use mass media and other channels to promote the program and the products.




Study the market structure to best understand how to introduce new technologies.




Join forces with other national programs, such as ENERGY STAR®.

Both Union Gas and Enbridge Gas have run programs in Ontario to distribute 1.25 GPM (4.75 l/min) showerheads as part of free conservation kits. Hundreds of thousands of these

1 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, “Compact Fluorescent Lighting in America: Lessons Learned on the Way to Market”, US Department of Energy, June 2006.

ICF Marbek

5

showerheads have been installed as a result, with very high rates of acceptance. Union staff estimated that approximately 20-25% of customers would resist the introduction of these showerheads, largely because they want to keep existing showerheads with special features (wand or Waterpic type showerheads, for example). The Ontario utilities were careful to select showerheads that would provide a good quality shower, even with the very low flow rate.2 A program in the Yukon should include a qualification process to ensure that only high-quality products are promoted.




With programmable thermostats, there is an interaction between ease of use and the need for assistance or training with programming. If thermostats that are difficult to use are promoted, the program will have to spend more on training and assistance to obtain savings. Studies at the twin house facility at the National Research Council have shown approximately 10-13% savings from temperature setback strategies,3 but ICF Marbek has typically assumed only about 6% savings, because homeowner behavior plays such a large role in how both programmable and traditional thermostats are used.




Retail channels in the remote communities are different and will require a tailored approach.




The program could be expanded later to include ENERGY STAR appliances and electronics.

High-Performance New Homes




The most valuable lessons for the proposed increase to the EGH85 level of energy performance will come from the Whitehorse experience introducing a code requirement of EGH80 performance.




A new performance standard would apply to all new houses, regardless of heating source. Discussion with the City of Whitehorse and the Government of the Yukon will be essential.




The previous standard has resulted in an increase in the share of electric heat in new houses, because builders have compensated for the increased building envelope construction costs by reducing what they spend on the heating system. Program planners will need to develop strategies to address the risk that a change to EGH85 will increase this trend.




Labelling, pilot projects, testimonials, free home energy rating services, and green mortgages were all discussed as approaches to encourage a market move towards EGH85, but the workshop attendees were broadly agreed that only a standard would push the market to that level of performance on a large scale.

3.1.3 CONCLUSION- RESIDENTIAL SECTOR The main focus of residential activity should be a program targeting relatively low-cost, wellestablished technologies, marketed through retail channels for installation mainly by the

Observations from Enbridge Gas and Union Gas personnel as part of achievable potential workshops in 2008. Marianne M. Manning , Mike C. Swinton, Frank Szadkowski, John Gusdorf and Ken Ruest, “The Effects of Thermostat Setback and Set-up on Seasonal Energy Consumption, Surface Temperatures and Recovery Times at the CCHT Twin House Facility,” ASHRAE Transactions, 2007. 2 3

ICF Marbek

6

customers themselves. This would include lighting (both CFL and LED), DHW (showerheads, faucet aerators and pipe insulation), and programmable thermostats. If successful, it could be expanded later to include other products. The second opportunity is largely a negotiation with government and other players, to move towards a higher performance standard for new home construction. If a new standard is adopted, this opportunity would provide very large savings.

3.2

COMMERCIAL SECTOR

This section presents the results of the analysis of the Yukon’s residential and commercial sector opportunities, in accordance with the steps outlined above.

3.2.1 PRIORITY OPPORTUNITY AREAS Exhibit 2 provides a summary of the results of the commercial sector analysis of Steps 1, 2 and 3. Additional backgroung tables are provided in Appendix B. The first opportunity shown in the exhibit is a lighting program, notionally to be targeted at “midstream” market actors such as lighting/electrical distributors. This program would promote efficient lamps and fixtures, but would likely exclude more complicated measures such as lighting controls and re-design for the time being. The second opportunity is a promotion of the basket of measures commonly captured during the recomissioning process, although such a program need not promote recomissioning per se. It could potentially be limited to larger commercial customers and may encompass several activities that promote building optomization, including support for energy audits, the provision of high level energy efficiency advice or facilitating relationships between customers and Energy Service Companies (ESCOs).

ICF Marbek

7

Exhibit 2 Commercial DSM Opportunity Ranking

Opportunity Area

Measures Included

Applicability

Lighting

CFL lamps, White LED, HP T8 fixtures, Pulse-start MH / T5HO, outdoor lamps/fixtures Excludes: Controls, Redesign

Building Optimization

Large Building Recommissioning. Likely to Commercial capture related opportunities Customers

Grand Total

ICF Marbek

All Commercial

Economic Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Savings Potential Upper Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Lower Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Approx. Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

Approx. Weighted Average Payback (years)

19,417

18,061

4,451

7,978

3,856

6,799

4.3

1.1

8,499

8,490

544

2,041

275

1,046

5.2

1.0

27,916

26,552

4,995

10,020

4,130

7,846

8

3.2.2 HIGHLIGHTS - QUALITATIVE SCAN The qualititative results from the Yukon CPR 2011 achievable potential workshops were reviewed for each of the opportunity areas noted above. A brief scan of the experience in other jurisdiction with similar types of DSM opportunites was also reviewed. Selected highlights are summarized below. Lighting




Achievable workshop participants noted a number of barriers to the uptake of more efficient lighting technologies. Among these:




Lack of access to capital to fund retrofit activities.




Stockpiling of less efficient lamps. This is especially true of inefficient linear fluorescent lamps (both T12 and standard T8). Government customers were seen to be especially likely to have existing stockpiles.




Educational & Informational barriers, among both end users (including purchasers and maintenance staff) and midstream market actors (suppliers, retailers, maintenance staff




Principal-agent barriers, in which tenants who pay electricity bills are not responsible for capital projects in the buildings they occupy.




Some concern was raised regarding light levels and light quality of more efficient lamps. As in the residential sector, the utility may play the role of determining product standards for program qualification.




Savings from lighting measures will be reduced in electrically heated buildings, because the heating system will have to compensate for the reduced heat loss from inefficient lighting. (Consumption of other the heating fuels will increase in non-electrically heated buildings.)




It is expected that small many small commercial customers (including many diesel grid customers) will have purchasing processes for lighting equipment that are significantly different from larger commercial customers. These customers may be best suited to a point of sale program as described in section 3.1.




The program could be expanded later to include lighting controls and/or advanced lighting design.




Lighting programs are the most common commercial demand side management activity among Canadian electric utilities. A variety of strategies have been employed. For example:




In Ontario, the Ontario Power Authority provides incentives (via local electricity distribution companies) directly to end users through the lighting portion of their SaveONEnergy RETROFIT program. Prescriptive per-lamp or per-fixture incentives are provided in a number of qualifying lighting equipment categories to customers who provide substantiation documents including proof of payment and installation. Similar models are used by other Canadian utilities, including BC Hydro and Manitoba Hydro.




In New Brunswick, Efficiency NB recently completed a successful commercial lighting program in which the organization entered into a contractual relationship with the province’s lighting distributors. Under the terms of this relationship distributors were paid an incentive for each qualifying high-performance T8 unit sold. In exchange, the

ICF Marbek

9

distributors were required to track and report sales information. This program achieved very high penetration of HPT8 fixtures within the New Brunswick market from a 2007 baseline of virtually zero. Building Optimization







Recommissioning was discussed during the CPR achievable workshops. Participants noted a number of barriers to the increased uptake of recommissioning services. Among these:




Informational barriers, especially on the part of building owners and managers who do not always trust that they will benefit from recommissioning activities.




Market barriers, including low local capacity to complete recommissioning or similar work; a lack of skilled building operators, which could diminish savings persistence; and the fact that electrical contractors commonly install HVAC controls despite limited knowledge of HVAC systems among this group.

Several Canadian utilities run programs which aim to improve commercial building energy use by taking a holistic approach. For example:




BC Hydro’s “Continuous Building Optimization” program targets commercial buildings over 50,000 ft2 which already have building energy management systems. The program provides a suite of services, including energy audits, advice, monitoring and building operator training.




SaskPower runs an Energy Performance Contracting program, in which their partner, Honeywell, performs energy audits, secures financing, implements energy efficiency measures and measures & verifies results. Honeywell is paid a portion of the value of the energy savings achieved.




Manitoba Hydro runs a commercial building optimization program which provides incentives for scoping studies, energy audits, measure implementation as well as additional incentive for savings persistence.

3.2.3 CONCLUSION-COMMERCIAL SECTOR Pending confirmation in the market research phase, it appears that the combination of a commercial lighting program and a building optimization program will provide an opportunity to realize a large portion of the achievable savings identified during the CPR, while addressing financial, informational and market barriers. The variety of building optimization and (especially) lighting programs which exist across the country should provide guidance regarding operational program design characteristics. As a result, the main commercial research questions will aim to characterize the unique market structure and actors in Yukon. Focuses are likely to include individual attention to the small number of property managers (private and public sector) who control the majority of commercial buidlings in the territory, and understanding of the implications of distribution channels that are partly based outside the Yukon, in centres such as Edmonton or Vancouver.

3.3

COMBINED RESULTS

Exhibit 3 provides a summary of the combined results of both the residential sector and commercial sector analyses.

ICF Marbek

10

Exhibit 3 Combined Residential and Commercial Results

Opportunity Area

Residential Programs Commercial Programs Grand Total

Measures Included

Retailer Program and High-Perf. New Homes Lighting and Recommissioning

Economic Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Savings Potential Upper Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Lower Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

10,234

11,412

3,165

5,325

2,051

27,916

26,552

4,995

10,020

38,149

37,964

8,160

15,345

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

Weighted Average Payback (years)

4,097

7.2

9.7

4,130

7,846

4.5

1.1

6,181

11,942

5.4

4.1

The upper achievable savings of over 15 GWh/yr. in 2020 represent nearly 4% of the forecast reference case consumption of approximately 388 GWh/yr. in that year. It is more than three times the suggested target of 5 GWh/yr. Several factors suggest that the commercial sector programs are likely to provide larger, faster, and more cost-effective results than the residential sector programs:




On average, the commercial measures have lower CCE and faster payback than the residential measures.




The new home measure in residential is somewhat “high risk” in that results are likely to be very modest without a new standard. Code changes will require extensive negotiations with government and other parties. Care will also be required to avoid a further increase in the electric heating share in new homes.




Some of the residential lighting savings will be lost due to the heating penalty in electrically heated homes. In non-electrically heated homes, some of the cost savings will be lost due to increased fuel consumption.

Conversely, commercial sector program savings potential estimates present an optimistic case for two reasons:




There is some overlap between the savings captured in the lighting and building optimization (which includes some lighting savings) program areas.




The building optimization savings potential figures consider all commercial buildings. Detailed market research may indicate that such a program would be most efficient if targeted at a specific subset of commercial buildings (ie. buildings larger than a defined threshold).

3.3.1 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS There are some potential synergies between the proposed residential and commercial programs. The retailer program in residential and the lighting program in commercial combine to cover most of the relevant lighting technologies used in both sectors in the Yukon. The residential program does not address fluorescent strip lighting in apartment building hallways, but it is likely that the owners of those buildings will be able to access the commercial lighting program for assistance with upgrading that lighting. Similarly, it is likely that some owners of small commercial buildings will access the residential lighting program if they purchase compact fluorescent lamps at retail outlets.

ICF Marbek

11

4

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The top focuses for market research are the following three programs:




Commercial lighting




Commercial building optimization




Residential retail channel program, including lighting (CFL, LED), DHW (showerheads, faucet aerators, pipe insulation), and programmable thermostats

The high-performance new home initiative is primarily a matter of discussion with other stakeholders and is therefore a lower priority for market research. Alternately, it could be the focus of selected demonstration projects.

4.1

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MARKET CHARACTERIZATION PHASE

The findings of this paper have the following implications for the market characterization work that follows:




The market characterization of the residential sector, retail channel program will require focused interaction with a relatively small number of retailers. This process will help identify the primary distribution channels that need to be explored; in some cases those channels may be mainly outside the Yukon.




The larger effort on the residential programs will focus on understanding the attitudes and purchasing habits (including on-line) of the end users – the residential occupants and owners.




The market characterization of the commercial sector programs will require targeted interviews with a limited number of property managers in the Yukon. In addition to the three levels of government, there are approximately three private property managers who represent most of the other commercial building space.




Understanding the procurement patterns of these property managers will lead to exploration of the distribution channels they use, which in some cases may operate mainly outside the Yukon. The number of distributors is also likely to be relatively small, whether inside or outside the Yukon, and targeted interviews will again be an appropriate approach.

ICF Marbek

12

Appendix A

– RESIDENTIAL SECTOR

Residential Measure Assessment Step 1

Exhibit A 4 shows the potential for the measures evaluated for the residential sector, along with their CCE and simple payback. As part of step 1, the measures were sorted in order of decreasing economic, upper achievable, and lower achievable potential for both milestone years 2015 and 2020, as well as by increasing CCE and increasing simple payback. These eight ways of sorting resulted in eight different sort orders. Upper achievable potential in the year 2020 was judged the most appropriate to use in ranking potential savings, for the following reasons:




Economic potential does not take into account market-specific issues and is therefore usually unrealistically high,




The lower achievable potential participation rate chosen in the achievable workshop were judged to be quite conservative, particularly in the early milestone years, and




The year 2015 is only three years from now: 2020 provides more time for programs to ramp up.

Exhibit A 1 is therefore sorted in descending order of 2020 upper achievable potential. The ten measures with the lowest CCE are highlighted in the exhibit. Exhibit A 2 and Exhibit A 3 present the same measures sorted by increasing CCE and by increasing simple payback, respectively.

ICF Marbek

13

Exhibit A 1 Residential Measures in Descending Order of 2020 Upper Achievable Potential Savings End Use

Measure

2015

Simple Payback (years)

Space Heating

High-Perf. New Homes

1,156

3,396

9.6

Clothes Dryer/DHW/Washer

ESTAR Clothes Washers

1,475

2,757

15.5

16.8

Space Heating

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

278

1,203

18.2

20.6

Indoor lighting

CFLs - Indoor

515

1,054

1.1

0.7

Space Heating

Zone Heating

132

628

15.0

10.9

Television

ESTAR TVs

143

518

24.1

17.9

Ventilation & circulation

Furnace Motors

296

489

21.0

15.4

Computer and peripherals

ESTAR Printers and Fax

200

372

15.9

7.8

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Showerheads

215

368

0.8

0.6

Refrigerator

ESTAR Refrigerators

120

362

6.2

6.0

Computer and peripherals

Power Bars (PCs)

131

349

8.4

6.2

Space Heating

Ductless Mini-Splits

79

346

13.3

16.1

Space Heating

LEED Apartments

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats (Central)

13.9

30

308

10.2

15.3

141

260

0.9

0.8

Block heaters & car warmers Block Heater Timers

96

252

4.7

4.1

DWH/Dishwasher

ESTAR Dishwashers

73

204

12.6

10.0

Television/Set top boxes

Power Bars (TVs)

61

169

14.1

9.2

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Tank Insulation

78

157

7.4

6.6

Indoor lighting

PAR CFLs

66

133

8.9

4.4

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Pipe Insulation

61

123

0.2

0.2

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats

58

114

4.2

3.7

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Recirculation

23

105

14.2

14.1

Space Heating

Outdoor Temp Reset

22

105

8.9

6.5

Indoor lighting

LED Lamps

26

99

11.4

15.3

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Piping Optimization

20

92

21.1

29.6

Freezer

ESTAR Freezers

30

92

13.2

16.4

Spa heaters and pumps

Heat Pump Spa Heaters

58

87

5.7

3.9

Space Heating

Wall Insulation

22

85

21.0

32.1

Indoor lighting

Dimmable CFLs

37

75

6.7

3.3

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Pump Timers

43

71

1.0

0.7

Space Heating

Attic Insulation

13

49

8.4

13.1

Outdoor lighting

CFLs - Outdoor

29

45

1.7

0.5

Spa heaters and pumps

Spa Pumps

21

35

23.1

18.4

Space Heating

Sealing & Insul. - Old Homes

8

33

11.0

16.4

Outdoor lighting

Pulse start metal halide sentinel lights

8

32

3.8

1.5

12

31

2.0

1.8

Block heaters & car warmers Car Warmer Timers Space Heating

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

6

31

33.4

43.3

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Wastewater Heat Recovery

5

26

17.6

20.6

Space Heating

Solar Pre-heat Makeup Air

5

26

28.6

28.0

9

24

22.7

19.8

17

23

7.9

2.8

Block heaters & car warmers Battery Blanket Timers Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Outdoor

Indoor lighting

T8 Fixtures

4

23

14.8

15.3

Space Heating

Air Sealing

5

21

11.9

19.9

Indoor lighting

Spot or Task Lighting

9

18

8.3

6.2

Space Heating

Basement Insulation

6

17

9.2

15.1

Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Indoor

12

16

29.3

12.3

Spa heaters and pumps

Solar Spa Pre-heat

7

12

5.2

6.5

Indoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Indoor

5

11

5.1

3.8

Space Heating

HRVs

1

7

24.8

28.3

Space Heating

Slab Insulation

2

6

24.2

39.7

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Covers

4

6

2.0

1.4

Outdoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Outdoor

3

6

4.8

3.6

Space Heating

Triple-glazed Windows

1

6

21.5

14.7

Space Heating

Optimizing Glazing for Passive

0

2

26.0

39.1

Space Heating

Quadruple-glazed Windows

0

1

26.0

27.7

Space Heating

Crawl Space Insulation

0

0

20.7

36.0

Computer/Television/Electr.

Future Elec Improvement

8.1

Grand Total

ICF Marbek

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

2020

-

-

11.5

5,877

14,877

12.5

14

Exhibit A 2 Residential Measures in Ascending Order of CCE End Use

Measure

2015

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

2020

Simple Payback (years)

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Pipe Insulation

61

123

0.2

0.2

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Showerheads

215

368

0.8

0.6

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats (Central)

141

260

0.9

0.8

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Pump Timers

43

71

1.0

0.7

Indoor lighting

CFLs - Indoor

515

1,054

1.1

0.7

Outdoor lighting

CFLs - Outdoor

29

45

1.7

0.5

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Covers

1.4

Block heaters & car warmers Car Warmer Timers Outdoor lighting

Pulse start metal halide sentinel lights

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats

Block heaters & car warmers Block Heater Timers

4

6

2.0

12

31

2.0

1.8

8

32

3.8

1.5

58

114

4.2

3.7

96

252

4.7

4.1

Outdoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Outdoor

3

6

4.8

3.6

Indoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Indoor

5

11

5.1

3.8

Spa heaters and pumps

Solar Spa Pre-heat

7

12

5.2

6.5

Spa heaters and pumps

Heat Pump Spa Heaters

58

87

5.7

3.9

Refrigerator

ESTAR Refrigerators

120

362

6.2

6.0

Indoor lighting

Dimmable CFLs

37

75

6.7

3.3

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Tank Insulation

78

157

7.4

6.6

Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Outdoor

17

23

7.9

2.8 6.2

Indoor lighting

Spot or Task Lighting

Computer and peripherals

Power Bars (PCs)

Space Heating

9

18

8.3

131

349

8.4

6.2

Attic Insulation

13

49

8.4

13.1

Indoor lighting

PAR CFLs

66

133

8.9

4.4

Space Heating

Outdoor Temp Reset

22

105

8.9

6.5

Space Heating

Basement Insulation

6

17

9.2

15.1

Space Heating

High-Perf. New Homes

1,156

3,396

9.6

13.9

Space Heating

LEED Apartments

30

308

10.2

15.3

Space Heating

Sealing & Insul. - Old Homes

8

33

11.0

16.4

11.4

15.3

Indoor lighting

LED Lamps

Computer/Television/Electr.

Future Elec Improvement

Space Heating

Air Sealing

DWH/Dishwasher Freezer

26

99 -

-

11.5

8.1

11.9

19.9

5

21

ESTAR Dishwashers

73

204

12.6

10.0

ESTAR Freezers

30

92

13.2

16.4

Space Heating

Ductless Mini-Splits

79

346

13.3

16.1

Television/Set top boxes

Power Bars (TVs)

61

169

14.1

9.2

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Recirculation

23

105

14.2

14.1

Indoor lighting

T8 Fixtures

Space Heating

Zone Heating

Clothes Dryer/DHW/Washer

ESTAR Clothes Washers

Computer and peripherals

ESTAR Printers and Fax

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Wastewater Heat Recovery

Space Heating

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

Space Heating

Crawl Space Insulation

Ventilation & circulation Space Heating

4

23

14.8

15.3

132

628

15.0

10.9

1,475

2,757

15.5

16.8

200

372

15.9

7.8

5

26

17.6

20.6

278

1,203

18.2

20.6

0

0

20.7

36.0

Furnace Motors

296

489

21.0

15.4

Wall Insulation

22

85

21.0

32.1

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Piping Optimization

20

92

21.1

29.6

Space Heating

Triple-glazed Windows

1

6

21.5

14.7

Block heaters & car warmers Battery Blanket Timers

9

24

22.7

19.8

Spa heaters and pumps

Spa Pumps

21

35

23.1

18.4

Television

ESTAR TVs

143

518

24.1

17.9

Space Heating

Slab Insulation

2

6

24.2

39.7

Space Heating

HRVs

1

7

24.8

28.3

Space Heating

Optimizing Glazing for Passive

0

2

26.0

39.1

Space Heating

Quadruple-glazed Windows

0

1

26.0

27.7

Space Heating

Solar Pre-heat Makeup Air

5

26

28.6

28.0

Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Indoor

12

16

29.3

12.3

Space Heating

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

6

31

33.4

43.3

5,877

14,877

12.5

Grand Total

ICF Marbek

15

Exhibit A 3 Residential Measures in Ascending Order of Simple Payback End Use

Measure

2015

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

2020

Simple Payback (years)

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Pipe Insulation

61

123

0.2

0.2

Outdoor lighting

CFLs - Outdoor

29

45

1.7

0.5

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Showerheads

215

368

0.8

0.6

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Pump Timers

43

71

1.0

0.7

Indoor lighting

CFLs - Indoor

515

1,054

1.1

0.7

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats (Central)

141

260

0.9

0.8

Spa heaters and pumps

Hot Tub Covers

4

6

2.0

1.4

Outdoor lighting

Pulse start metal halide sentinel lights

8

32

3.8

1.5

Block heaters & car warmers Car Warmer Timers

12

31

2.0

1.8

Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Outdoor

17

23

7.9

2.8

Indoor lighting

Dimmable CFLs

37

75

6.7

3.3

Outdoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Outdoor

3

6

4.8

3.6

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats

58

114

4.2

3.7

Indoor lighting

Motion Detectors - Indoor

5

11

5.1

3.8

Spa heaters and pumps

Heat Pump Spa Heaters

58

87

5.7

3.9

Block heaters & car warmers Block Heater Timers

96

252

4.7

4.1

Indoor lighting

PAR CFLs

66

133

8.9

4.4

Refrigerator

ESTAR Refrigerators

120

362

6.2

6.0

Indoor lighting

Spot or Task Lighting

9

18

8.3

6.2

Computer and peripherals

Power Bars (PCs)

131

349

8.4

6.2

Space Heating

Outdoor Temp Reset

22

105

8.9

6.5

Spa heaters and pumps

Solar Spa Pre-heat

7

12

5.2

6.5

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Tank Insulation

78

157

7.4

6.6

Computer and peripherals

ESTAR Printers and Fax

200

372

15.9

7.8

Computer/Television/Electr.

Future Elec Improvement

-

-

11.5

8.1

Television/Set top boxes

Power Bars (TVs)

61

169

14.1

9.2

DWH/Dishwasher

ESTAR Dishwashers

73

204

12.6

10.0

Space Heating

Zone Heating

132

628

15.0

10.9

Holiday lighting

LED Holiday - Indoor

12

16

29.3

12.3

Space Heating

Attic Insulation

13

49

8.4

13.1

Space Heating

High-Perf. New Homes

1,156

3,396

9.6

13.9

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Recirculation

23

105

14.2

14.1 14.7

Space Heating

Triple-glazed Windows

1

6

21.5

Space Heating

Basement Insulation

6

17

9.2

15.1

Space Heating

LEED Apartments

30

308

10.2

15.3 15.3

Indoor lighting

LED Lamps

26

99

11.4

Indoor lighting

T8 Fixtures

4

23

14.8

15.3

Ventilation & circulation

Furnace Motors

296

489

21.0

15.4

Space Heating

Ductless Mini-Splits

79

346

13.3

16.1

Space Heating

Sealing & Insul. - Old Homes

8

33

11.0

16.4

Freezer

ESTAR Freezers

30

92

13.2

16.4

Clothes Dryer/DHW/Washer

ESTAR Clothes Washers

1,475

2,757

15.5

16.8

Television

ESTAR TVs

143

518

24.1

17.9

Spa heaters and pumps

Spa Pumps

21

35

23.1

18.4

Block heaters & car warmers Battery Blanket Timers

9

24

22.7

19.8

Space Heating

Air Sealing

5

21

11.9

19.9

Space Heating

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

278

1,203

18.2

20.6

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Wastewater Heat Recovery

5

26

17.6

20.6

Space Heating

Quadruple-glazed Windows

0

1

26.0

27.7

Space Heating

Solar Pre-heat Makeup Air

5

26

28.6

28.0

Space Heating

HRVs

1

7

24.8

28.3

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Piping Optimization

20

92

21.1

29.6

Space Heating

Wall Insulation

22

85

21.0

32.1

Space Heating

Crawl Space Insulation

0

0

20.7

36.0

Space Heating

Optimizing Glazing for Passive

0

2

26.0

39.1

Space Heating

Slab Insulation

2

6

24.2

39.7

Space Heating

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

6

31

33.4

43.3

5,877

14,877

12.5

Grand Total

ICF Marbek

16

Step 2

The 2020 upper achievable potential was then combined with CCE to choose the most promising measures. These two values were combined by subtracting CCE from the retail rate (10.2 cents/kWh was used for residential customers) and multiplying the difference by the potential savings. This gives an approximation of the net savings the measure will offer to customers. Measures were sorted in descending order of these net savings to customers. Exhibit A 4 shows the results of this step in the analysis. The exhibit shows that the three measures offering the greatest cost savings to customers are compact fluorescent lamps, lowflow showerheads, and programmable thermostats. These are all low-cost measures with significant savings. The fourth measure, the high-performance new house, offers only modest net savings per kWh, because it has a relatively high upfront cost. Its savings numbers are so large, however, that they overcome the modest net savings per kWh. Step 3

The top three measures in Exhibit A 4 are all relatively low cost measures that are relatively easy for many homeowners to install. They are therefore all possible candidates for a program targeted through retail channels. In Step 3, therefore the first three measures have been combined into one program opportunity, along with several other measures that are likely to be compatible. The indoor compact fluorescent measures would be expanded to also include the other compact fluorescent lamp measures (dimmable CFLs, PAR CFLs, etc.), the LED lighting measure, and LED holiday lights. The showerhead measure would be expanded to include a length of insulation for the hot water lines close to the DHW tank. The programmable thermostat incentive could be expanded to include thermostats suitable for baseboard units as well as the central units. The second program opportunity is the high-performance house. The target of this measure is to reach an EGH rating of 85 or better. Whitehorse building code currently requires an EGH rating of 80. This initiative is likely to consist mainly of collaboration with municipal and other levels of government to craft appropriate policies for advancing the building code requirement. Exhibit 1 in the main body of the report shows the results of Step 3 of the analysis.

ICF Marbek

17

Exhibit A 4 Residential Measures Offering Significant Potential After Step 1 of Analysis

End Use

Measure

Economic Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Savings Potential Upper Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2015, 2020, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Lower Achievable Annual Annual Savings, Savings, 2020, 2015, MWh/yr. MWh/yr.

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh)

Simple Payback (years)

Indoor lighting

CFLs - Indoor

4,561

4,272

515

1,054

412

843

1.1

0.7

Domestic hot water (DHW)

Showerheads

974

834

215

368

167

285

0.8

0.6

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats (Central)

395

372

141

260

53

99

0.9

0.8

Space Heating

High-Perf. New Homes

1,694

3,558

1,156

3,396

675

2,838

9.6

13.9

Refrigerator

ESTAR Refrigerators

394

849

120

362

18

99

6.2

6.0

Block heaters & car warmers Block Heater Timers

895

984

96

252

27

119

4.7

4.1

Domestic hot water (DHW)

DHW Pipe Insulation

277

281

61

123

47

96

0.2

0.2

Space Heating

Prog. Thermostats

217

217

58

114

19

38

4.2

3.7

9,409

11,367

2,362

5,929

1,419

4,416

Grand Total

ICF Marbek

18

Appendix B

COMMERCIAL SECTOR

Commercial Measure Assessment Step 1

Exhibit B 1 shows the potential for the measures evaluated for the commercial sector, along with their CCE and simple payback. As part of step 1, the measures were sorted in order of decreasing economic, upper achievable, and lower achievable potential for both milestone years 2015 and 2020, as well as by increasing CCE and increasing simple payback. These eight ways of sorting resulted in eight different sort orders. As in the Residential sector, upper achievable potential in the year 2020 was judged the most appropriate to use in ranking potential savings, for the following reasons:




Economic potential does not take into account market-specific issues and is therefore usually unrealistically high,




The lower achievable potential participation rate chosen in the achievable workshop were judged to be quite conservative, particularly in the early milestone years, and




The year 2015 is only three years from now: 2020 provides more time for programs to ramp up.

Exhibit B1 is therefore sorted in descending order of 2020 upper achievable potential. The ten measures with the lowest CCE are highlighted in the exhibit. Exhibits B2 and B3 present the same measures sorted by increasing CCE and by increasing simple payback, respectively. The ten measures with the highest 2020 upper achievable savings are highlighted.

ICF Marbek

19

Exhibit B 1 Commercial Measures in Descending Order of 2020 Upper Achievable Potential Savings End Use Architectural Lighting Multiple Multiple Computer & Plug Load Refrigeration General Lighting Refrigeration Outdoor Lighting High Bay Lighting Streetlighting DHW Multiple HVAC Space Heating Outdoor Lighting Computer Multiple Lighting Space Heating HVAC Fans & Pumps Refrigeration Outdoor Lighting Multiple Lighting Space Heating Streetlighting Computer & Plug Load High Bay Lighting Space Heating Architectural Lighting Space Heating HVAC Fans & Pumps Refrigeration General Lighting DHW Space Heating Block Heater HVAC Fans & Pumps DHW DHW Space Heating HVAC Fans & Pumps Cooking Equipment High Bay Lighting Space Heating DHW Refrigeration Outdoor Lighting HVAC Fans & Pumps Grand Total

ICF Marbek

Measure CFL Lamps (Indoor) Building RCx Whole Bldg - 60% ES Computers HE Refrigeration - Full Cost HPT8 (T12 Retrofit) HE Refrigeration - Incr. Cost Lighting Ctrls (Outdoor) Pulse-start MH DHID Streetlighting Low Flow Faucets Programmable Tstat Air to Air HR CFL Lamps (Outdoor) ES Servers Dimming Controls (Daylighting) GSHP ASD (Fans) Brine Pump Ctrl Pulse-start MH (Outdoor) Occupancy Controls Air Sealing LED Streetlighting ES Office Equipment T5HO Arena Lighting HP Glazing White LED Lighting Wall Insulation DC Ventilation ES Fridges, Freezers HP T8 lighting redesign Low Flow Showerheads Roof Insulation Block Htr Ctrls DCKV Low Flow Pre Rinse Spray Valves Tank Insulation SHP Glazing PE Motors HE Cooking Equipment T5HO lighting IR Heating Drainwater HR Ref. Plant Ctrls Induction (Outdoor) HVLS Fans

2015 2,982 544 248 1,468 1,813 791 197 276 222 110 213 213 108 242 284 153 153 65 120 85 84 48 48 127 63 34 54 32 33 26 45 49 23 24 13 24 21 10 9 8 13 16 11 11 6 7 11,122

2020 5,099 2,041 2,015 1,948 1,813 1,419 787 625 532 458 426 419 416 415 379 354 287 259 239 203 191 191 184 166 149 134 129 127 125 114 100 98 90 63 51 47 42 40 37 34 32 29 20 20 15 13 22,377

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh) 3.9 5.2 17.2 4.8 5.0 3.3 6.2 0.4 3.8 10.0 0.2 28.7 5.5 3.9 24.2 24.6 8.8 3.2 1.9 3.8 6.5 3.5 19.0 23.3 24.7 6.5 5.9 7.1 5.4 7.7 7.6 0.5 5.9 3.9 0.7 7.2 3.8 18.0 3.3 11.5 21.7 2.2 4.0 9.4 25.1 2.7

Simple Payback (years) 0.4 1.0 11.5 1.6 6.8 2.7 11.8 0.2 1.5 4.3 0.1 7.3 3.3 0.4 2.2 9.5 6.7 2.0 1.2 1.5 2.5 0.9 22.6 2.7 8.7 7.3 3.4 10.4 2.0 4.3 6.1 0.3 12.9 2.3 0.6 2.8 1.1 20.3 2.5 6.6 6.0 2.1 5.3 7.6 24.9 2.1

20

Exhibit B 2 Commercial Measures in Ascending Order of CCE End Use DHW Outdoor Lighting DHW HVAC Fans & Pumps Refrigeration Space Heating HVAC Fans & Pumps HVAC Fans & Pumps HVAC Fans & Pumps General Lighting Space Heating DHW High Bay Lighting Outdoor Lighting Outdoor Lighting Block Heater Architectural Lighting DHW Computer & Plug Load Refrigeration Multiple HVAC Fans & Pumps Space Heating Architectural Lighting Space Heating Refrigeration Space Heating Multiple Lighting Space Heating DHW General Lighting Refrigeration Space Heating Refrigeration Streetlighting Cooking Equipment Multiple Space Heating Streetlighting High Bay Lighting Computer & Plug Load Computer Multiple Lighting High Bay Lighting Outdoor Lighting Multiple HVAC Grand Total

ICF Marbek

Measure Low Flow Faucets Lighting Ctrls (Outdoor) Low Flow Showerheads DCKV Brine Pump Ctrl IR Heating HVLS Fans ASD (Fans) PE Motors HPT8 (T12 Retrofit) Air Sealing Tank Insulation Pulse-start MH Pulse-start MH (Outdoor) CFL Lamps (Outdoor) Block Htr Ctrls CFL Lamps (Indoor) Drainwater HR ES Computers HE Refrigeration - Full Cost Building RCx DC Ventilation Air to Air HR White LED Lighting Roof Insulation HE Refrigeration - Incr. Cost HP Glazing Occupancy Controls Wall Insulation Low Flow Pre Rinse Spray Valves HP T8 lighting redesign ES Fridges, Freezers GSHP Ref. Plant Ctrls DHID Streetlighting HE Cooking Equipment Whole Bldg - 60% SHP Glazing LED Streetlighting T5HO lighting ES Office Equipment ES Servers Dimming Controls (Daylighting) T5HO Arena Lighting Induction (Outdoor) Programmable Tstat

2015 213 276 49 13 120 16 7 65 9 791 48 21 222 85 242 24 2,982 11 1,468 1,813 544 33 108 54 23 197 34 84 32 24 45 26 153 11 110 8 248 10 48 13 127 284 153 63 6 213 11,122

2020 426 625 98 51 239 29 13 259 37 1,419 191 42 532 203 415 63 5,099 20 1,948 1,813 2,041 125 416 129 90 787 134 191 127 47 100 114 287 20 458 34 2,015 40 184 32 166 379 354 149 15 419 22,377

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh) 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.9 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.5 5.9 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.6 7.7 8.8 9.4 10.0 11.5 17.2 18.0 19.0 21.7 23.3 24.2 24.6 24.7 25.1 28.7

Simple Payback (years) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.5 2.7 0.9 1.1 1.5 1.5 0.4 2.3 0.4 5.3 1.6 6.8 1.0 2.0 3.3 3.4 12.9 11.8 7.3 2.5 10.4 2.8 6.1 4.3 6.7 7.6 4.3 6.6 11.5 20.3 22.6 6.0 2.7 2.2 9.5 8.7 24.9 7.3

21

Exhibit B 3 Commercial Measures in Ascending Order of Simple Payback End Use DHW Outdoor Lighting DHW Architectural Lighting Outdoor Lighting HVAC Fans & Pumps Space Heating Multiple DHW Refrigeration High Bay Lighting Outdoor Lighting Computer & Plug Load HVAC Fans & Pumps HVAC Fans & Pumps Space Heating HVAC Fans & Pumps Computer Block Heater Multiple Lighting HVAC Fans & Pumps Computer & Plug Load General Lighting DHW Space Heating Architectural Lighting Streetlighting Refrigeration DHW High Bay Lighting General Lighting Cooking Equipment Space Heating Refrigeration Multiple HVAC Space Heating Refrigeration High Bay Lighting Multiple Lighting Space Heating Multiple Refrigeration Space Heating Space Heating Streetlighting Outdoor Lighting Grand Total

Measure Low Flow Faucets Lighting Ctrls (Outdoor) Low Flow Showerheads CFL Lamps (Indoor) CFL Lamps (Outdoor) DCKV Air Sealing Building RCx Tank Insulation Brine Pump Ctrl Pulse-start MH Pulse-start MH (Outdoor) ES Computers ASD (Fans) DC Ventilation IR Heating HVLS Fans ES Servers Block Htr Ctrls Occupancy Controls PE Motors ES Office Equipment HPT8 (T12 Retrofit) Low Flow Pre Rinse Spray Valves Air to Air HR White LED Lighting DHID Streetlighting ES Fridges, Freezers Drainwater HR T5HO lighting HP T8 lighting redesign HE Cooking Equipment GSHP HE Refrigeration - Full Cost Programmable Tstat HP Glazing Ref. Plant Ctrls T5HO Arena Lighting Dimming Controls (Daylighting) Wall Insulation Whole Bldg - 60% HE Refrigeration - Incr. Cost Roof Insulation SHP Glazing LED Streetlighting Induction (Outdoor)

2015 213 276 49 2,982 242 13 48 544 21 120 222 85 1,468 65 33 16 7 284 24 84 9 127 791 24 108 54 110 26 11 13 45 8 153 1,813 213 34 11 63 153 32 248 197 23 10 48 6 11,122

2020 426 625 98 5,099 415 51 191 2,041 42 239 532 203 1,948 259 125 29 13 379 63 191 37 166 1,419 47 416 129 458 114 20 32 100 34 287 1,813 419 134 20 149 354 127 2,015 787 90 40 184 15 22,377

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh) 0.2 0.4 0.5 3.9 3.9 0.7 3.5 5.2 3.8 1.9 3.8 3.8 4.8 3.2 5.4 2.2 2.7 24.2 3.9 6.5 3.3 23.3 3.3 7.2 5.5 5.9 10.0 7.7 4.0 21.7 7.6 11.5 8.8 5.0 28.7 6.5 9.4 24.7 24.6 7.1 17.2 6.2 5.9 18.0 19.0 25.1

Simple Payback (years) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.7 2.8 3.3 3.4 4.3 4.3 5.3 6.0 6.1 6.6 6.7 6.8 7.3 7.3 7.6 8.7 9.5 10.4 11.5 11.8 12.9 20.3 22.6 24.9

Step 2

The 2020 upper achievable potential was then combined with customer benefits to identify the most promising measures from the customer’s perspective. This was accomplished by aggregating total customer benefits (avoided electricity purchase) and subtracting measure cost for all installations included in the upper achievable scenario. This gives an approximation of the net savings the measure will offer to customers. Measures were sorted in descending order of

ICF Marbek

22

these net savings to customers. Exhibit B 4 shows measures ranked on this basis, again with the ten measures with the highest 2020 upper achievable savings highlighted. By this metric, CFL Lamps, Building Recommissioning, ENERGY STAR computers, Refrigeration and High Performance T8 lighting are among measures offering the greatest cost savings to customers. Exhibit B 4 Commercial Measures in Descending Order of Net Present Customer Value

End Use Architectural Lighting Multiple Computer & Plug Load Refrigeration General Lighting Outdoor Lighting Refrigeration DHW High Bay Lighting Multiple Space Heating Outdoor Lighting Computer Refrigeration HVAC Fans & Pumps Space Heating Outdoor Lighting Streetlighting Multiple Lighting Multiple HVAC High Bay Lighting Space Heating DHW Multiple Lighting HVAC Fans & Pumps Computer & Plug Load Architectural Lighting Refrigeration Space Heating Block Heater HVAC Fans & Pumps General Lighting DHW Streetlighting HVAC Fans & Pumps DHW Space Heating Space Heating Outdoor Lighting High Bay Lighting DHW HVAC Fans & Pumps Cooking Equipment Refrigeration Space Heating Space Heating Grand Total

ICF Marbek

Measure CFL Lamps (Indoor) Building RCx ES Computers HE Refrigeration - Full Cost HPT8 (T12 Retrofit) Lighting Ctrls (Outdoor) HE Refrigeration - Incr. Cost Low Flow Faucets Pulse-start MH Whole Bldg - 60% Air to Air HR CFL Lamps (Outdoor) ES Servers Brine Pump Ctrl ASD (Fans) Air Sealing Pulse-start MH (Outdoor) DHID Streetlighting Occupancy Controls Programmable Tstat T5HO Arena Lighting GSHP Low Flow Showerheads Dimming Controls (Daylighting) DC Ventilation ES Office Equipment White LED Lighting ES Fridges, Freezers HP Glazing Block Htr Ctrls DCKV HP T8 lighting redesign Tank Insulation LED Streetlighting PE Motors Low Flow Pre Rinse Spray Valves IR Heating Wall Insulation Induction (Outdoor) T5HO lighting Drainwater HR HVLS Fans HE Cooking Equipment Ref. Plant Ctrls Roof Insulation SHP Glazing

2015 2,982 544 1,468 1,813 791 276 197 213 222 248 108 242 284 120 65 48 85 110 84 213 63 153 49 153 33 127 54 26 34 24 13 45 21 48 9 24 16 32 6 13 11 7 8 11 23 10 11,122

2020 5,099 2,041 1,948 1,813 1,419 625 787 426 532 2,015 416 415 379 239 259 191 203 458 191 419 149 287 98 354 125 166 129 114 134 63 51 100 42 184 37 47 29 127 15 32 20 13 34 20 90 40 22,377

Customer value ($)/yr

$310,649 $192,691 $152,828 $144,860 $114,920 $70,737 $50,438 $44,497 $43,652 $37,819 $27,500 $24,999 $23,615 $21,723 $19,894 $18,462 $17,374 $15,775 $13,474 $12,727 $11,064 $10,123 $10,005 $9,913 $9,578 $8,187 $7,672 $5,602 $4,971 $4,818 $4,593 $4,226 $3,820 $3,537 $2,686 $2,645 $2,102 $2,032 $1,518 $1,203 $1,024 $992 $633 $561 -$23 -$808

23

Step 3

Step 3 involved identifying possible program candidates based on steps one and two. Exhibit B5, overleaf, presents the results of Step 3.

ICF Marbek

24

Exhibit B 5 Commercial Measures Offering Significant Potential After Steps 1 and 2 of Analysis Savings Potential Economic End Use Architectural Lighting Multiple Computer & Plug Load Refrigeration General Lighting Outdoor Lighting Refrigeration DHW High Bay Lighting Multiple

ICF Marbek

Measure CFL Lamps (Indoor) Building RCx ES Computers HE Refrigeration - Full Cost HPT8 (T12 Retrofit) Lighting Ctrls (Outdoor) HE Refrigeration - Incr. Cost Low Flow Faucets Pulse-start MH Whole Bldg - 60%

2015 7,115 8,499 2,921 1,846 7,894 2,048 798 1,126 2,010 11,020

Upper Achievable

2020 7,097 8,490 3,395 1,846 6,552 2,048 1,596 1,126 2,010 23,414

2015 2,982 544 1,468 1,813 791 276 197 213 222 248

2020 5,099 2,041 1,948 1,813 1,419 625 787 426 532 2,015

Lower Achievable 2015 2,982 275 1,286 910 416 146 393 107 117 194

25

2020 5,099 1,046 1,586 1,813 747 336 1,180 213 280 1,571

Weighted Average CCE (¢/kWh) 3.9 5.2 4.8 5.0 3.3 0.4 6.2 0.2 3.8 17.2

Simple Payback (years) 0.4 1.0 1.6 6.8 2.7 0.2 11.8 0.1 1.5 11.5

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Appendix B Market Characterization Methodology

ICF Marbek

B-1

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

Market Research Methodology Client:

Yukon Energy Corporation (YEC) Yukon Electrical Company Limited (YECL)

Re:

Market Research Methodology

Project:

Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design

Version:

September 24, 2012 – As delivered

Contents 1.

Sub-sectors Being Researched................................................................................................ 2

2.

General Market Research Approach ........................................................................................ 3

3.

Sampling .................................................................................................................................. 4

4.

Details on the Market Research Activities ................................................................................ 5 MRA01 RR – Retail Store Manager Interviews ..................................................................... 5 MRA02 RR – Mystery Shoppers ........................................................................................... 6 MRA03 RR – Retail Intercepts.............................................................................................. 7 MRA05 RR & CL – Independent Lighting Retailers Interviews .............................................. 8 MRA06 CL – E/L Distributor Interviews................................................................................. 9 MRA07 CL – Manufacturer Agent Interview(s).................................................................... 10 MRA08 CL – Lighting Designers and/or Engineer Interview(s) ........................................... 10 MRA09 CL – Electrical Contractors Interviews ................................................................... 11 MRA10 CL & CHCR – Large Property Managers Interviews .............................................. 11 MRA12 CHCR – HVAC or Control Contractors Interviews .................................................. 12 MRA13 CHCR – HVAC or Control Engineer/Designer Interview(s) .................................... 12 MRA14 RR, CL & CHCR – Interviews with Multiple Key Stakeholders ............................... 13 MRA15 RR – Interviews with New Condo and Townhouse Developers .............................. 14 MRA16 RR – Interviews with Residential Rental Property Managers and Landlords .......... 15

5.

Table of Researchable Issues ................................................................................................ 16

ICF Marbek

1

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

1. Sub-sector Research Focus The following table presents the three sub-sectors that were researched. Further information can be found in the Team Discussion Paper on Program Focus. It should be noted that the sub-sectors presented herein differ slightly from those presented in the discussion paper. This minor change was incorporated to optimize the use of resources and avoid “pre-establishing” the program design. Exhibit 1 Sub-sector Research Focus Sub-sector

Description

Residential Sector RR - Residential Retail

We initially envisioned a program that would directly engage retailers. The program would target typical equipment sold by retailers, both in-store and online. Equipment that could be targeted included lamps and fixtures (maybe including self-ballasted screw-in CFL), domestic appliances such as clothes washers and refrigerators, programmable thermostat, and low-flow showerheads.

Commercial Sector CL - Commercial Lighting

We initially envisioned a program that would directly engage with electrical and lighting distributors. Rebate programs have proven to be quite effective in the commercial lighting sector. The program would increase the penetration of energy efficient equipment.

CHCR - Commercial HVAC & Control Retrofit

We initially envisioned a program in which contractors would proactively develop business with commercial building owners and managers to: 1) identify opportunities in HVAC and controls; 2) convince building and management owners to invest; and, 3) implement either low-cost/no-cost measures, or capitalintensive conservation measures, or both. Retro commissioning and energy auditing are two pathways to achieve items 1 and 2 stated above. We wanted to research the market readiness and interest in such an approach and, in the absence of readiness, the tolerance of the market for direct intervention by YEC & YECL.

ICF Marbek

2

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

3. Sampling Exhibit 3 outlines the proposed sample sizes, the actual sample sizes, and a justification for the gap between proposed and actual. Population estimates were made to establish the targets. Exhibit 3 Sampling Plan Population Estimates

Sample Targets

Sample Actual

10

4

4

Nothing to report.

1,000

20

6

Only six relevant stores in Whitehorse; 3 lighting; 3 appliances.

Retail Intercepts (MRA03)

20,000

30

22

More challenging and time-consuming than expected.

RR – Suppliers (All types. To be narrowed down.)

Phone Interview (MRA04)

50

2

0

Was cancelled. Most of retailers interact with a website rather than with individuals

RR & CL – Independent Lighting Retailers

TBD – Likely F2F Interviews (MRA05)

15

3

1

Only one was found at the time.

RR – Residential developers / contractors

F2F or phone interviews (MRA15)

6

0

3

These interviews were added midcourse during the study.

RR – Landlords

F2F or phone interviews (MRA16)

10

0

4

These interviews were added midcourse during the study.

CL – Electrical and/or Lighting Distributors (E/L Distributors)

F2F Interviews (MRA061) Phone Interviews (MRA062)

3

1

2

2

0

The two distributors with branches in the YT responded. 6 other national distributors w/o a YT branch were contacted but declined to respond.

CL – Manufacturer Agents

Phone Interviews (MRA07)

2

1

1

Nothing to report.

CL – Lighting designers and/or Engineer

F2F Interview (MRA08)

3

1

1

Nothing to report.

CL – Electrical Contractors

Phone Interviews (MRA09)

26

6

5

Response rate was low. All 26 contractors were contacted.

CL & CHCR – Large Property Managers

F2F Interviews (MRA101) Phone Interviews (MRA102)

8

2

4

It was not possible to find a fifth manager that was willing to respond.

3

0

TBD

2

0

Was cancelled because there is no account manager.

1

3

Response rate was slightly lower than expected.

3

0

Market Data Source (Market Actors)

Market Research Activity

RR – Retail Store Managers

F2F Interviews (MRA01)

RR – Retail Store Floor Staff

Mystery Shoppers (MRA02)

RR – Shoppers

Justification

CL & CHCR – YEC & YECL Key Account Managers

F2F Meeting (MRA11)

CHCR – HVAC or Control Contractors

F2F Interviews (MRA121) Phone Interviews (MRA122)

5

CHCR – HVAC or Control Engineer/Designer

F2F Interviews (MRA13)

5

2

2

Nothing to report.

RR, CL & CHCR – Multiple Key Stakeholders

F2F Interviews (MRA14)

N/A

7

6

We were not able to talk to the Contractors Association.

Where F2F means face-to-face, RR means Residential Retail, CL means Commercial Lighting, HVAC means Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning, CHCR means Commercial HVAC and Control Retrofit, E/L means Electrical and/or Lighting, TBD means To Be Determined and MRA means Market Research Activity.

ICF Marbek

4

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

4. Details on the Market Research Activities This section describes the research activities that were designed and undertaken. The discussion presents a description of each research activity, the justification for using the selected strategy, and the approach to recruiting respondents.

MRA01 RR – Retail Store Manager Interviews Short description

Face to face, directed, in-depth interviews with Retail Store Managers (approx. 1h)

Justification of the choice of activity

Population size is small. Their views are very important because we envision working with them as trade allies. Managers will be able to provide meaningful market insights on their sales and the behavior of their customers. Therefore, it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method such as face-to-face interviews.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC and/or YECL did not have contact information. Therefore, it was necessary to send a notification letter and then conduct cold calls to identify potential respondents. Eligible respondents needed to be in charge of the purchase and stocking of selected store(s).

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek

A representative from YEC called the stores directly, inquired about the managers, established the individual’s eligibility, and attempted to schedule a telphone meeting.

All the respondents were sent the interview guides before the interview. ICF Marbek staff led the interviews, with a YEC staff member participating in most interviews.

5

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA02 RR – Mystery Shoppers Short description

30-minute visit to stores such as Canadian Tire, Walmart, Home Hardware, etc. The protocol was: 1) Go to store and make observations on the shelving displays of the selected equipment, most likely lighting equipment and appliances; 2) Make notes on merchandizing activities and promotions; 3) Talk to a member of the floor staff responsible for a specific display (same as for 1), ask a short set of questions, and note the answers.

Justification of the choice of activity

Get unbiased market intelligence through observations rather than relying on the views of the store managers. Reduce the number of questions to the store managers and thus the duration of the interviews by getting the information at the source. Relatively easy to set up.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC and YECL staff identified the stores.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created a mystery shopper protocol that contained the scenarios, the questions and, a template to write notes and observations. There were no recording, transcripts, and photos. ICF Marbek briefed the mystery shoppers and aggregated the notes.

ICF Marbek

6

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA03 RR – Retail Intercepts Short description

15-minute in-store in-person interview with targeted shoppers.

Justification of the choice of activity

We wanted to understand the decision-making process of someone who is buying an incandescent light bulb/or non-ESTAR appliance, on the spot and at the moment when the experience was fresh in their mind. We envisioned that the potential program activities and tactics would include rebate and Point-of-Purchase materials. Therefore information from retail intercepts would be very valuable. A number of the candidate items for inclusion in the retail program are purchased infrequently. That means that general polling would randomly select a lot of people who haven’t thought about these decisions for several years. Retail intercepts would not have to deal with all those “not applicables” because it would catch people right after they made the choice we are interested in.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

The interviews were coordinated with the store manager. The interviewers wore a YEC badge. There was one interviewer on site. The retail intercepts happened on the weekend. A short “notification letter” was prepared to share with the store staff. In the first approach employed, the interviewer identified him/herself to the staff at the cash registry. The staff was advised to buzz the interviewer if certain items were purchased, such as: 1) incandescent, CFL or LED light bulb(s); or, 2) a large appliance (E-STAR or not) such as a refrigerator, freezer, cloth washer, hot water tank, or dishwasher. The interviewer could then solicit the customer. A table and a few chairs provided a venue to conduct the interview. To boost the response rate, the interviewer had small gifts, which were the same coupons that were used by YECL in the Arctic Winter Game. The respondent used the “Price-is-Right” machine in place of a dice to earn a gift. It was found that this approach was ineffective as people rushed out without talking to the interviewer. A second approach was then used that was more effective. In this case, the interviewer intercepted the shoppers directly in the aisle e.g., in the lighting equipment section of the store. People were more willing to respond at that moment.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created a retail intercept guide containing information such as, how to do the following: coordinate with the store manager; brief the staff at the cash registry; set up (chairs and table) and wear visual identification tags (YEC and/or YECL logos); approach customers and distribute gifts, including introduction script, questions and reporting. The results were documented using a questionnaire with ticked boxes.

ICF Marbek

7

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA05 RR & CL – Independent Lighting Retailers Interviews Short description

Justification of the choice of activity

45-minute in-depth partially-directed interview(s). Independent lighting retailers are typically very small businesses (often one person), who import lighting equipment (lamps, fixtures) directly from the manufacturers and sell them directly to residential and commercial clients. They have very little infrastructure and overhead; many operate from their basement. Based on our observations, this group appears to sell premium quality equipment. It was assumed that the population of independent retailers was approximately 5 to 10. For such a small population, we believed that in-depth interviews would be the most effective means to obtain the needed market information. We knew little about these retailers. We suspected they might have a market share that is more significant in the Yukon than in other jurisdictions. We believed that we needed to maintain flexibility for improvisation during the interview. Hence, a partially-directed interview style was employed because: 1) The individuals and their market roles were not clearly known; 2) It was difficult to predict what the most useful discussion topics were going to be.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

The retailers were identified through word-of-mouth and from the contact network of YEC and YECL staff.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek

8

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA06 CL – E/L Distributor Interviews Short description

Electrical equipment distributors and specialized lighting distributors were consulted through 60-minute telephone and in-person, directed interviews. YEC or ICF Marbek staff conducted the interviews.

Justification of the choice of activity

It was known beforehand that the population of distributors in the Yukon would be small (approximately 3-5 firms), and therefore that the sample size would also be small. Also, some distributors operating in the Yukon are located outside the territory; consequently, it was anticipated that many interviews would be conducted by telephone. Since distributors are key actors in the supply chain, it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method. A “directed-interview” format was employed.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC or YECL had information on the two distributors that have a local branch. ICF Marbek looked for other distributors through existing relationships and prior work in this sector.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek

ICF Marbek sent an email to the non-resident distributors to ask them for an appropriate Yukon contact. There was one response; the identified contact was located in the Northwest Territories.

All respondents were sent the interview guides before the interview.

9

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA07 CL – Manufacturer Agent Interview(s) Short description

60-minute in-depth directed interview(s), primarily via telephone by YEC and ICF Marbek staff.

Justification of the choice of activity

Lamp manufacturer agents (or reps) have a valuable perspective on the lighting sector in the Yukon. Therefore, it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method. Because they are located outside of the territory, telephone interviews were employed. The nature and role of these organizations is relatively well known, and thus we used a “directed-interview” format.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

Manufacturer agents or representatives were identified through interviews with distributors and lighting designers. They are based in B.C. and Alberta, not in the Yukon.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek cold-called the individuals and scheduled the interviews from Ottawa.

All respondents were sent the interview guides before the interview.

MRA08 CL – Lighting Designers and/or Engineer Interview(s) Short description

Lighting designers were consulted through in-person directed interviews.

Justification of the choice of activity

It was known beforehand that the population of lighting designers in Yukon would be small (approximately 1 to 5 individuals), and therefore that the sample size would also be small. Since designers are key actors in the supply chain, it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method such as face-to-face interviews.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC staff knew one lighting designer and called them directly to book the appointment.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek

The respondent was sent the interview guide before the interview.

10

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA09 CL – Electrical Contractors Interviews Short description

Electrical contractors were consulted through a 30-minute directed telephone interview.

Justification of the choice of activity

Contractors are important market influencers but are difficult to engage as they are very busy and often out of their office; hence, a telephone interview was preferred. The number of contractors was estimated to be approximately 20 to 50. Therefore we needed a larger sample size but also recognized that many may not be available to participate in the interview.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC staff located electrical contractors through web searches and the Yellow Pages.

Approach to data collection

Significant effort was required to convince the electrical contractors to participate. A formal notification letter was sent by YEC and YECL, followed by a cold-call from YEC staff.

ICF Marbek created a questionnaire based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues. All respondents were sent the questionnaire before the interview.

MRA10 CL & CHCR – Large Property Managers Interviews Short description

Large Property Managers were consulted via a 30 to 60 minute in-depth telephone or in-person interview.

Justification of the choice of activity

Since large Property Managers are important market influencers, we used an indepth and explorative method.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

We identified relevant property managers through existing YEC & YECL relationships. Commercial key accounts were particularly targeted. YEC & YECL key account managers were able to provide the contact information.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

ICF Marbek

Interviews were arranged by YEC personnel.

All respondents were sent the questionnaire before the interview.

11

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA12 CHCR – HVAC or Control Contractors Interviews Short description

We consulted with the HVAC and Control Contractors through a combination of telephone and in-person interviews.

Justification of the choice of activity

HVAC and Control Contractors are important influencers in the supply chain for HVAC and control retrofits, as it was assumed that very few of these retrofits actually involve an extensive design team. Consequently, it was important to employ an indepth and explorative method such as interviews.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

We identified HVAC and control contractors through existing ICF Marbek relationships, including CPR workshop participants. Additional contractors were identified through sources such as the electrical contractors association, the mechanical contractors association, NRCan service provider lists, the Yellow Pages, Google searches, etc.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues.

YEC sent a notification email to the targeted individuals. Then YEC staff followed-up by telephone to set up a meeting.

All respondents were sent the questionnaire before the interview.

MRA13 CHCR – HVAC or Control Engineer/Designer Interview(s) Short description

HVAC and Control Engineers/Designers were consulted through in-person directed interview(s).

Justification of the choice of activity

It was known beforehand that the population of HVAC and Control Engineers/Designers in the Yukon would be small (approximately 1 to 5 individuals) and therefore the attainable sample size would also be small. HVAC designers are important potential program partners because they could undertake direct customer engagement, act as RCx agent or energy auditor and/or develop projects to be financed by a potential Utilities program.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

YEC staff called local engineering firms to identify the designers among their staff.

Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek

A representative of YEC called the individuals to schedule the interviews.

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues. All respondents were sent the interview guide before the interview.

12

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA14 RR, CL & CHCR – Interviews with Multiple Key Stakeholders Short description

60 minute undirected in-person interviews with Stakeholders.

Justification of the choice of activity

Many of the stakeholders represent potential program implementation partners.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment

We wanted to know the role/mission/core business of each of the organizations, as well as their areas of particular strength/interest. Each interview was tailored to the specific organization based on available information. Therefore an “undirected interview” approach was employed. YEC provided the necessary contact information and arranged the meetings. The relevant stakeholders included: •

Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce,

•

Association of Professional Engineers of Yukon Territory (APEY),

•

Yukon College,

•

Yukon Technology Innovation Centre,

•

Consulting Engineers of Yukon, Chamber of Mine,

•

and/or Yukon Contractors Association

Meetings were in-person as much as possible. A representative of YEC made the telephone call to plan the meeting. Many meetings were planned during the week of April 16, 2012, when a representative of ICF Marbek was in Whitehorse. Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek

A short description of the interview’s purpose was sent by email to each participant. A short and flexible meeting agenda was created at the beginning of each meeting.

13

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA15 RR – Interviews with New Condominium and Townhouse Developers Short description

60 minute undirected in-person interviews with developers.

Justification of the choice of activity

Much of the current new home construction in the Whitehorse area is townhouse and condominium developments. These units are generally sold with lighting and appliances already installed. As these developers are making choices on a large volume of lighting and appliances, they represent a large part of the residential retail market. Given the tight real estate market, customers have less influence on these decisions than they could have in a more competitive market. The number of developers is fairly small. They can provide meaningful market insights on their current practices and the behavior of their customers. Therefore it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method such as in-person interviews.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek

YECL provided names of the developers that are setting up accounts. Meetings were in-person as much as possible. A representative of YEC set up the meetings.

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues. All respondents were sent the questionnaire before the interview.

14

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

MRA16 RR – Interviews with Residential Rental Property Managers and Landlords Short description

60 minute undirected in-person interviews with property managers and landlords.

Justification of the choice of activity

Rental units make up a large percentage of the residences in Whitehorse. The decisions regarding types of lighting and appliances are generally made by the property managers or landlords. As these managers and landlords make choices on a large volume of lighting and appliances, they represent a large part of the residential retail market. Given the tight real estate market, renters have less influence on these decisions than they could have in a more competitive market. The number of managers and landlords is fairly small. They can provide meaningful market insights on market barriers and the behavior of their customers. Therefore it was important to use an in-depth and explorative method such as in-person interviews.

Identification of participants, notification and recruitment Approach to data collection

ICF Marbek

YECL provided names of the landlords. Meetings were in-person as much as possible. A representative of YEC set up the meetings.

ICF Marbek created an interview guide based on the high-level research questions and the list of researchable issues. All respondents were sent the questionnaire before the interview.

15

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

5. Table of Researchable Issues Researchable Issues

Characterization Component

MRA01 Retail Managers

MRA02 MRA03 MRA04 MRA05 MRA06 MRA07 MRA08 MRA09 MRA10 Retail Shoppers Retail Indepen- E/L Distri- Manufac- Lighting Electrical Property dent butors turers Staff Suppliers Desi- Contrac- Managers Suppliers gners tors

MRA12 HVAC/ Control Contractors

MRA13 HVAC/ Control Engineers

MRA14 Stakeholders

MRA15 Condo Developers

MRA16 Residential Landlords

X

X

Residential Retail Program Research question #1: RR - Who are the actors, and what's their strenghts and weaknesses with regard to energy efficiency? Demographics Actors RR101 X Purchase: EE equipment or non-EE equipment Actors RR102 X Firmographics Actors RR103 X X X Challenges currently faced by the organisation Actors RR105 X X X Management framework/Org Chart Actors RR107 X Missing Market Actors Actors RR140 X X X Research question #2: RR - How do actors interact with each other in the absence of a program? Major customer segments Structure RR104 X X X Major suppliers Structure X X RR106 Best media outlets to reach your businesses Structure RR108 X X X X X Best media outlets used to reach out to clients Structure RR109 X X X Best source(s) of information on best practices Structure X X X X RR110 Clients' purchase drivers Structure RR111 X X X X X Reasons for making special efforts wrt EE Structure RR115 X X X X Drivers of salesforce Structure RR117 X X Main means to train salesforce Structure X RR130 Organisation's purchase/stocking drivers Structure RR118 X Program activity most likely to partake in Structure RR128 X X X Linear shelf space of EE products vs baseline Structure RR150 X RR151

Promo on retail price of EE products vs baseline

Structure

X

RR152

Merchandising activities of EE products vs baseline

Structure

X

How is a supplier selected? Structure RR163 X Research question #3: RR - Why doesn't energy efficiency have a higher uptake in the absence of a program? Clients' purchase barriers Barriers RR112 X X X Visibility (shelf space) of EE equipment as compared with others Barriers RR113 X X Ease of getting information on EE of product in the store Barriers X X RR114 Reasons for NOT making more efforts wrt EE Barriers RR116 X X X Perception of applicability of the information available Barriers RR119 X X X X Issues with availability of equipment and services Barriers RR120 X X

ICF Marbek

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

16

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

Researchable Issues

RR121 RR122 RR123 RR124 RR125 RR155 RR126 RR127 RR153 RR154 RR160 RR161 RR162

T echnical issues with EE equipment and services How good at promoting EE are - Retailers in general? How good at promoting EE are - Retail store managers? How good at promoting EE are - Suppliers? How good at promoting EE are - Property Managers & landlords? How good at promoting EE are - Contractors? Credibility of YEC wrt EE and DSM Credibility of the YECL wrt EE and DSM Credibility of YG organizations such as ESC and Yukon Housing Out-of-stock status on EE product vs Baseline (yes/no) Extent of the double-agent barrier Overall satisfaction re: existing Yukon program - Good Overall satisfaction re: existing Yukon program - EcoEnergy

Characterization Component

MRA01 Retail Managers

MRA02 MRA03 MRA04 MRA05 MRA06 MRA07 MRA08 MRA09 MRA10 Retail Shoppers Retail Indepen- E/L Distri- Manufac- Lighting Electrical Property dent butors turers Staff Suppliers Desi- Contrac- Managers Suppliers gners tors

Barriers Barriers Barriers Barriers

X

Barriers Barriers Barriers Barriers

X

X

X

X

X

X

Barriers Barriers Barriers Barriers Barriers

X

X

X

X

MRA13 HVAC/ Control Engineers

MRA14 Stakeholders

MRA15 Condo Developers

MRA16 Residential Landlords X

X X

X X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X X X

X

Commercial Lighting Program Research question #1: CL - Who are the actors, and what's their strenghts and weaknesses with regard to energy efficiency? Firmographics Actors CL201 Challenges currently faced by the organisation Actors CL203 Management framework/Org Chart Actors CL205 Find the lighting designers Actors CL206 Missing market actors Actors CL240 Research question #2: CL - How do actors interact with each other in the absence of a program? Major customer segments Structure CL202 Major suppliers Structure CL204 Best media outlets to reach your businesses Structure CL207 Best media outlets used to reach out to clients Structure CL208 X Best source(s) of information on best practices Structure CL209 Clients' purchase drivers Structure CL210 X Reasons for making special efforts wrt EE Structure CL212 Drivers of salesforce Structure CL214 Major means to train salesforce Structure CL240 Organisation's purchase/stocking drivers Structure CL215 Program activity most likely to partake in Structure CL227 CL241 Occurrence of the electrical contractor to decide (or exert Structure heavy influence) on what equipment to install

ICF Marbek

MRA12 HVAC/ Control Contractors

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X X X

X

17

X

X X

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

Researchable Issues

Characterization Component

MRA01 Retail Managers

MRA02 MRA03 MRA04 MRA05 MRA06 MRA07 MRA08 MRA09 MRA10 Retail Shoppers Retail Indepen- E/L Distri- Manufac- Lighting Electrical Property dent Staff Suppliers butors turers Desi- Contrac- Managers Suppliers gners tors

Research question #3: CL - Why doesn't energy efficiency have a higher uptake in the absence of a program? Clients' purchase barriers Barriers CL211 Reasons for NOT making more efforts wrt EE Barriers CL213 Perception of Applicability of the information available Barriers CL216 Issues with availability of equipment and services Barriers CL217 T echnical issues with EE equipment and services Barriers CL218 How good at promoting EE are - Lighting Distributors? Barriers CL219 How good at promoting EE are - Independent Lighting Suppli Barriers CL220 How good at promoting EE are - Lighting Designers? Barriers CL221 How good at promoting EE are - Lighting manufacturers agenBarriers CL222 How good at promoting EE are - Electrical Contractors? Barriers CL223 Current market penetration of certain EE-specific services Barriers CL224 Credibility of YEC wrt EE and DSM Barriers CL225 Credibility of the YECL wrt EE and DSM Barriers CL226 CL242 Occurrence of the electrical contractors to substitute Barriers equipment after the design phase of the project CL250 Credibility of YG organizations such as ESC and Yukon Barriers

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X

X X

X

MRA12 HVAC/ Control Contractors

MRA13 HVAC/ Control Engineers

X

X

X

X

X

X X

Commercial HVAC & Control Retrofit Program Research question #1: CH - Who are the actors, and what's their strenghts and weaknesses with regard to energy efficiency? Firmographics Actors CH301 Challenges currently faced by the organisation Actors CH303 Management framework/Org Chart Actors CH304 Find the HVAC/Control designers Actors CH306 Find the EE experts Actors CH307 Research question #2: CH - How do actors interact with each other in the absence of a program? Major customer segments Structure CH302 Major suppliers Structure CH308 Best media outlets to reach your businesses Structure CH309 Best media outlets used to reach out to clients Structure CH310 Best source(s) of information on best practices Structure CH311 Reasons for making special efforts wrt EE Structure CH313 Clients' purchase drivers Structure CH322 Reasons for investing Structure CH327 Program activity most likely to partake in Structure CH328

ICF Marbek

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

18

MRA14 Stakeholders

MRA15 Condo Developers

MRA16 Residential Landlords

YEC & YECL, Residential and Commercial DSM Program Design Market Research Methodology, September 24, 2012 – As Delivered

Researchable Issues

Characterization Component

MRA01 Retail Managers

MRA02 MRA03 MRA04 MRA05 MRA06 MRA07 MRA08 MRA09 MRA10 Retail Shoppers Retail Indepen- E/L Distri- Manufac- Lighting Electrical Property dent Staff Suppliers butors turers Desi- Contrac- Managers Suppliers gners tors

CH342

X

Occurrence of the contractor to decide (or exert heavy Structure influence) on what equipment to install Research question #3: CH - Why doesn't energy efficiency have a higher uptake in the absence of a program? Reasons for NOT making more efforts wrt EE Barriers CH312 Clients' purchase barriers Barriers CH314 Issues with availability of equipment and services Barriers CH315 T echnical issues with EE equipment and services Barriers CH316 How good at promoting EE are - HVAC/Control Engineers? Barriers CH317 How good at promoting EE are - HVAC/Control Contractors? Barriers CH318 How good at promoting EE are - Equipment Suppliers? Barriers CH340 CH320 Reasons for not entering the EE business or using EE to Barriers boost sales Reasons for not investing (more) Barriers CH323 Extent of the double-agent barrier Barriers CH324 Credibility of YEC wrt EE and DSM Barriers CH325 Credibility of the YECL wrt EE and DSM Barriers CH326 Credibility of YG organizations such as ESC and Yukon Barriers CH350 Perception of Applicability of the information available Barriers CH341 Research question #4: CH - Why is the current market penetration of EE services and equipment and what is the naturally-occuring trend? Current market penetration of certain EE-specific services Baseline CH319 Recent investment in EE? Baseline CH321

MRA12 HVAC/ Control Contractors X

MRA13 HVAC/ Control Engineers X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

MRA14 Stakeholders

X X X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

Other Organizations and Stakeholders Research question #1: RR, CL & CH - Who are the actors, and what's their strenghts and weaknesses with regard to energy efficiency? Mission and vision Actors OO401 Existing conservation, sustainability, GHG reduction goals Actors OO402 Challenges currently faced by the organisation Actors OO403 General interest in EE Actors OO404 Knowledge wrt EE Actors OO405 Management framework/Org Chart Actors OO406 Human resources Actors OO407 Logistical resources (Office?, IT ?) Actors OO408 Size of membership or extend of visibility Actors OO409 Media to the market that are being used Actors OO410 Other resources (training materials?, methods?, data?) Actors OO411

ICF Marbek

X X X X X X X X X X X

19

MRA15 Condo Developers

MRA16 Residential Landlords

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Appendix C Detailed Budgets

ICF Marbek

C-1

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design incl. Gov't - Master Budget Cost Items

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

$

Number of Units - Total # of Buildings - ECM91

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transactions per Building

$

315 $

2,798 $

5,639 $

6,195 $

4,786 $

19,733

In-depth Blueprint & Layout Verification (1/3 verification)

$

105 $

933 $

1,880 $

2,065 $

1,595 $

6,578

Incentive Amount - Redesign Incentive - ECM91

$

3,672 $

20,350 $

33,356 $

33,356 $

16,678 $

107,412

Initial Set-up and Preparation

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per Building

$

- $

4,225 $

10,964 $

12,906 $

13,294 $

41,389

In-Depth Verification & Site Visit (1/3)

$

- $

1,408 $

3,655 $

4,302 $

4,431 $

13,796

Expense Budget Site Visits (1/3)

$

- $

282 $

731 $

860 $

886 $

2,759

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Office - ECM80

$

- $

1,873 $

5,073 $

5,797 $

5,797 $

18,541

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Food Retail - ECM81

$

- $

1,048 $

2,768 $

3,163 $

3,163 $

10,141

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Non Food Retail - ECM82

$

- $

4,402 $

11,562 $

13,213 $

13,213 $

42,390

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Hotel/Motel - ECM83

$

- $

2,120 $

4,946 $

5,652 $

5,652 $

18,370

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Restaurant - ECM86

$

- $

2,117 $

4,939 $

5,645 $

5,645 $

18,347

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation - ECM87

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse - ECM88

$

- $

1,693 $

3,950 $

4,514 $

4,514 $

14,671

Incentive for 12W LED A19 Bulb Installed as Part of Projects - ECM92

$

- $

9,989 $

23,309 $

26,638 $

26,638 $

86,575

Incentive for 8W LED A19 Bulb Installed as Part of Projects - ECM93

$

- $

14,207 $

33,150 $

37,886 $

37,886 $

123,129

Incentive for LED MR16 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM94

$

- $

9,249 $

21,582 $

24,665 $

24,665 $

80,162

Incentive for LED PAR30 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM95

$

- $

14,799 $

34,531 $

39,464 $

39,464 $

128,259

Incentive for LED PAR38 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM96

$

- $

10,763 $

25,114 $

28,701 $

28,701 $

93,280

Incentive for Spot or task lighting Installed as Part of Projects - ECM97

$

- $

3,700 $

8,633 $

9,866 $

9,866 $

32,065

$

49,975 $

105,956 $

235,780 $

264,892 $

246,877 $

903,480

Subtotal

22,942 $

ICF-Marbek

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

C-2

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design incl. Gov't - Master Budget Cost Items Lighting Redesign and Equipment Incentive - Government Number of Units - Total # of Buildings - ECM912

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transactions per Building

$

168 $

1,462 $

2,913 $

3,200 $

2,472 $

10,214

In-depth Blueprint & Layout Verification (1/3 verification)

$

56 $

487 $

971 $

1,067 $

824 $

3,405

Incentive Amount - Redesign Incentive - ECM912

$

2,735 $

14,216 $

22,962 $

22,962 $

11,481 $

74,356

Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per Building

$

- $

2,227 $

5,663 $

6,666 $

6,866 $

21,423

In-Depth Verification & Site Visit (1/3)

$

- $

742 $

1,888 $

2,222 $

2,289 $

7,141

Expense Budget Site Visits (1/3)

$

- $

148 $

378 $

444 $

458 $

1,428

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Office - ECM802

$

- $

1,124 $

3,044 $

3,478 $

3,478 $

11,125

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Health - ECM842

$

- $

520 $

1,213 $

1,386 $

1,386 $

4,506

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Education - ECM852

$

- $

1,778 $

4,148 $

4,741 $

4,741 $

15,409

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation - ECM872

$

- $

497 $

1,161 $

1,326 $

1,326 $

4,310

Incentive for Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse - ECM882

$

- $

339 $

790 $

903 $

903 $

2,934

Incentive for 12W LED A19 Bulb Installed as Part of Projects - ECM922

$

- $

3,227 $

7,530 $

8,606 $

8,606 $

27,970

Incentive for 8W LED A19 Bulb Installed as Part of Projects - ECM932

$

- $

4,590 $

10,710 $

12,240 $

12,240 $

39,780

Incentive for LED MR16 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM942

$

- $

2,988 $

6,973 $

7,969 $

7,969 $

25,899

Incentive for LED PAR30 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM952

$

- $

4,781 $

11,156 $

12,750 $

12,750 $

41,438

Incentive for LED PAR38 Bulbs Installed as Part of Projects - ECM962

$

- $

3,477 $

8,114 $

9,273 $

9,273 $

30,136

Incentive for Spot or task lighting Installed as Part of Projects - ECM972

$

- $

1,195 $

2,789 $

3,188 $

3,188 $

10,359

$

2,959 $

43,799 $

92,402 $

102,422 $

90,250 $

331,832

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

25,069 $

- $

48,010

Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

$

- $

272 $

1,259 $

2,017 $

2,374 $

5,922

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

- $

18 $

84 $

134 $

158 $

395

$ Equipment Incentive. Baseline-25% - ECM89

$

- $

2,989 $

13,449 $

20,920 $

23,909 $

61,266

$ Equipment Incentive. Baseline-40% - ECM90

$

- $

1,245 $

5,604 $

8,717 $

9,962 $

25,527

$

22,942 $

4,524 $

20,395 $

56,857 $

36,403 $

141,120

Subtotal New Construction Incentive Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

Subtotal

ICF-Marbek

C-3

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design incl. Gov't- Master Budget Cost Items New Construction Incentive - Government Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

$

- $

146 $

678 $

1,086 $

1,278 $

3,189

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

- $

10 $

45 $

72 $

85 $

213

$ Equipment Incentive. Baseline-25% - ECM892

$

- $

966 $

4,345 $

6,759 $

7,724 $

19,794

$ Equipment Incentive. Baseline-40% - ECM902

$

- $

402 $

1,810 $

2,816 $

3,218 $

8,247

$

- $

1,524 $

6,878 $

10,733 $

12,307 $

31,442

Subtotal Energy Star Computer Incentive Initial Set-up and Preparation

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

Number of Units - Total # Desktops and Laptops

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per 3 Units

$

1,239 $

8,085 $

13,587 $

- $

- $

22,911

Incentive for ENERGY STAR Desktop Computer and Monitor

$

1,339 $

8,477 $

13,831 $

- $

- $

23,647

Incentive for ENERGY STAR Laptop

$

297 $

1,884 $

3,074 $

- $

- $

5,255

$

25,817 $

18,446 $

30,492 $

- $

- $

74,754

Subtotal Energy Star Computer Incentive - Government Number of Units - Total # Desktops and Laptops

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per 3 Units

$

4,957 $

32,339 $

54,347 $

- $

- $

91,643

Incentive for ENERGY STAR Desktop Computer and Monitor

$

3,212 $

20,345 $

33,195 $

- $

- $

56,753

Incentive for ENERGY STAR Laptop

$

714 $

4,521 $

7,377 $

- $

- $

12,612

$

8,884 $

57,206 $

94,919 $

- $

- $

161,008

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per Building

$

- $

45,654 $

6,759 $

41,547 $

14,264 $

108,224

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

- $

3,652 $

541 $

3,324 $

1,141 $

8,658

$ Equipment Incentive ECM98

$

- $

- $

40,075 $

- $

40,075 $

80,149

$ Equipment Incentive ECM98

$

- $

- $

81,566 $

- $

81,566 $

163,133

$

22,942 $

49,306 $

128,941 $

44,871 $

137,047 $

383,105

Subtotal High-Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

Subtotal

ICF-Marbek

C-4

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design incl. Gov't- Master Budget Cost Items High-Efficiency Refrigeration Incentive - Government Number of Units - Total # of Buildings

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transaction per Building

$

- $

25,503 $

- $

27,056 $

- $

52,559

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

- $

2,040 $

- $

2,164 $

- $

4,205

$ Equipment Incentive ECM100

$

- $

- $

9,904 $

- $

9,904 $

19,808

$

- $

27,543 $

- $

29,221 $

- $

56,764

Subtotal Engagement, Training and Communication Initial Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning

$

13,765 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

13,765

Annual Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning

$

- $

4,591 $

4,729 $

4,871 $

5,017 $

19,209

Direct Engagement Workforce w/ Experienced Personnel

$

65,280 $

80,422 $

70,614 $

61,542 $

63,389 $

341,247

Expense budget - Communication, Trips, Materials

$

24,000 $

32,960 $

33,949 $

34,967 $

36,016 $

161,892

Expense Budget Trade Event

$

- $

25,750 $

26,523 $

27,318 $

28,138 $

107,728

Event Organization Related with the Trade Event

$

- $

22,957 $

23,646 $

24,355 $

25,086 $

96,044

Expense Budget Training

$

16,000 $

16,480 $

16,974 $

- $

- $

49,454

Event Organization - Training

$

8,915 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

- $

- $

27,557

Consulting Services to Deliver Training

$

16,194 $

16,680 $

17,180 $

- $

- $

50,054

$

130,389 $

204,432 $

198,344 $

148,183 $

152,629 $

833,977

$

5,735 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

5,735

Annual Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning

$

- $

1,148 $

1,182 $

1,218 $

1,254 $

4,802

Direct Engagement Workforce w/ Experienced Personnel

$

17,920 $

21,094 $

16,295 $

11,190 $

11,525 $

78,025

Expense budget - Communication, Trips, Materials

$

6,000 $

8,240 $

8,487 $

8,742 $

9,004 $

40,473

$

23,920 $

29,334 $

24,783 $

19,931 $

20,529 $

118,498

Subtotal Engagement, Training and Communication - Government (Marginal) Initial Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning

Subtotal Program Management, Administration and Tracking Program Management

$

64,000 $

69,216 $

67,898 $

69,935 $

72,033 $

343,081

Tracking System Design, Then Servicing

$

16,059 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

16,059

Tracking System Maintenance

$

892 $

1,837 $

1,892 $

1,948 $

2,007 $

8,575

Feed tracking system and reporting

$

6,687 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

45,104

Third-party M&V

$

- $

77,250 $

- $

- $

140,689 $

217,939

$

87,637 $

157,485 $

79,248 $

81,625 $

$

394,965 $

705,294 $

927,996 $

764,824 $

224,762 $ 936,980 $

630,758 3,730,059

Subtotal TOTAL

ICF-Marbek

C-5

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - Master Budget Cost Items

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

LED Lighting and Automotive Heater Timer Rebates Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

$

11,471 $

Number of Units Automotive Heater Timers - ECM151

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transactions - ECM151 (1 unit/transaction)

$

- $

1,407 $

2,309 $

2,378 $

2,449 $

8,543

$ Equipment Incentive. ECM151

$

- $

1,366 $

2,176 $

2,176 $

2,176 $

7,894

Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

Number of Units - 12W LED A19 Bulbs - ECM24

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Number of Units - 8W LED A19 Bulb - ECM60

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Number of Units - LED MR16 Bulbs - ECM61

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Number of Units - LED PAR30 Bulbs - ECM62

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Number of Units - LED PAR38 Bulbs - ECM63

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Number of Units - Spot or Task Lighting - ECM44

$

- $

- $

- $

- $

- $

-

Process Transactions (5 units per transaction)

$

3,136 $

13,787 $

14,201 $

14,627 $

15,065 $

60,816

Phone verification (1/20 spot check)

$

874 $

3,841 $

3,956 $

4,075 $

4,197 $

16,944

Site visit (1/100 verification)

$

699 $

3,073 $

3,165 $

3,260 $

3,358 $

13,555

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

314 $

1,379 $

1,420 $

1,463 $

1,507 $

6,082

Update the incentive list (once per year)

$

- $

2,296 $

2,365 $

2,436 $

2,509 $

9,604

Incentive Amount - 12W LED A19 Bulbs - ECM24

$

6,276 $

26,183 $

26,183 $

26,183 $

26,183 $

111,008

Incentive Amount - 8W LED A19 Bulb - ECM60

$

4,184 $

17,455 $

17,455 $

17,455 $

17,455 $

74,005

Incentive Amount - LED MR16 Bulbs - ECM61

$

547 $

2,586 $

2,586 $

2,586 $

2,586 $

10,891

Incentive Amount - LED PAR30 Bulbs - ECM62

$

272 $

1,574 $

1,574 $

1,574 $

1,574 $

6,567

Incentive Amount - LED PAR38 Bulbs - ECM63

$

198 $

1,181 $

1,181 $

1,181 $

1,181 $

4,921

Incentive Amount - Spot or Task Lighting - ECM44

$

87 $

408 $

408 $

408 $

408 $

1,717

$

50,998 $

76,535 $

78,978 $

79,801 $

80,648 $

366,960

$

17,206 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

17,206

Low-cost EE P. - Procurement and Inventory Management

$

6,687 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

45,104

Low-cost EE P. - Scorecard Crunching, Analysis & Reporting

$

6,687 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

45,104

Expense Budget: Shipping

$

6,000 $

8,240 $

8,487 $

8,742 $

9,004 $

40,473

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot 12W LED A19 Bulbs - ECM242

$

2,640 $

2,640 $

2,640 $

2,640 $

2,640 $

13,200

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot 8W LED A19 Bulb - ECM602

$

1,860 $

1,860 $

1,860 $

1,860 $

1,860 $

9,300

Subtotal Low-Cost Energy Efficient Products Initial Set-up and Preparation

- $

ICF-Marbek

- $

- $

- $

11,471

C-6

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - Master Budget Cost Items

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot LED MR16 Bulbs - ECM612

$

1,000 $

1,000 $

1,000 $

1,000 $

1,000 $

5,000

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot LED PAR30 Bulbs - ECM622

$

1,920 $

1,920 $

1,920 $

1,920 $

1,920 $

9,600

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot LED PAR38 Bulbs - ECM632

$

1,060 $

1,060 $

1,060 $

1,060 $

1,060 $

5,300

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Spot or Task Lighting - ECM442

$

150 $

150 $

150 $

150 $

150 $

750

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Ultra Low-flow Showerheads - ECM092

$

480 $

640 $

480 $

320 $

320 $

2,241

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Power Bars for PCs and TVs - ECM112

$

3,000 $

3,000 $

2,000 $

2,000 $

1,500 $

11,500

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot DHW Tank Insulation - ECM182

$

1,503 $

2,255 $

2,255 $

1,503 $

1,503 $

9,019

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot DHW Pipe Insulation - ECM202

$

32 $

47 $

47 $

32 $

32 $

190

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Motion Detectors - Indoor and Outdoor ECM482 Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Auto Heater Timers - ECM152

$

1,376 $

1,376 $

918 $

918 $

688 $

5,276

$

1,125 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

10,125

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Prog. Thermostats (Central) - ECM142

$

625 $

1,250 $

938 $

625 $

625 $

4,063

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot Prog. Thermostats - ECM212

$

14,271 $

25,689 $

22,834 $

17,126 $

11,417 $

91,338

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot E-Star TVs - ECM062

$

2,250 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

2,250 $

11,250

Cost of Giveaways - Pilot E-Star Printers and Fax - ECM082

$

800 $

800 $

800 $

800 $

800 $

4,000

Research and Creation of Materials - Early Support & Training

$

17,206 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

17,206

Research and Creation of Materials - Bulk of the Work

$

23,040 $

31,642 $

32,591 $

33,569 $

34,576 $

155,417

Research and Creation of Materials - Supervision

$

6,687 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

45,104

Expense Budget Related with Materials

$

30,000 $

41,200 $

42,436 $

43,709 $

- $

157,345

$

147,605 $

156,818 $

155,291 $

151,699 $

103,698 $

715,111

Subtotal

ICF-Marbek

C-7

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - Master Budget Cost Items New-construction CCHP and GSHP Initiative Coordination of the Pilot Projects (3-elem. DHW, CCHP, GSHP)

Cost Y1

Cost Y2

Cost Y3

Cost Y4

Cost Y5

Total Cost per Item

$

8,915 $

18,366 $

18,917 $

- $

- $

46,198

Heavy incentive - Pilot CCHP ECM032

$

5,000 $

- $

- $

5,000 $

- $

10,000

Heavy incentive - Pilot GSHP ECM372

$

- $

9,000 $

9,000 $

- $

- $

18,000

Project-level M&V of Pilot Projects: % of Project Costs

$

- $

3,600 $

3,600 $

- $

- $

7,200

Build Transactional and Operational Infrastructure

$

- $

- $

- $

25,069 $

- $

25,069

Process Transactions CCHP - ECM03

$

- $

- $

- $

5,245 $

5,402 $

10,648

Process Transactions GSHP - ECM37

$

- $

- $

- $

874 $

900 $

1,775

Expense Budget Site Visits

$

- $

- $

- $

1,530 $

1,576 $

3,106

$ Equipment Incentive. CCHP - ECM03

$

- $

- $

- $

15,000 $

15,000 $

30,000

$ Equipment Incentive. GSHP - ECM37

$

- $

- $

- $

3,500 $

3,500 $

7,000

$

13,915 $

30,966 $

31,517 $

56,218 $

26,379 $

158,994

$

22,942 $

- $

- $

- $

- $

22,942

$

53,760 $

73,830 $

76,045 $

78,327 $

80,676 $

362,639

Direct Engagement Workforce w/ Experienced Personnel

$

6,687 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

45,104

Annual Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning

$

- $

5,739 $

5,911 $

6,089 $

6,271 $

24,011

Expense budget - Communication, Trips, Materials

$

30,000 $

41,200 $

42,436 $

43,709 $

45,020 $

202,365

$

90,447 $

129,953 $

133,851 $

137,867 $

142,003 $

634,120

Subtotal Engagement, Education and Communication Initial Marketing, Engagement, Educ. and Comm. Planning Direct Engagement Workforce w/ Junior Personnel

Subtotal Program Management, Administration and Tracking Program Management

$

83,200 $

59,328 $

54,318 $

55,948 $

57,626 $

310,420

Tracking System Design, Then Servicing

$

11,471 $

3,544 $

- $

7,521 $

7,746 $

30,282

Tracking System Maintenance

$

892 $

1,837 $

1,892 $

1,948 $

2,007 $

8,575

Feed tracking system and reporting

$

8,024 $

9,183 $

9,458 $

9,742 $

10,034 $

46,442

Third-party EM&V

$

- $

66,950 $

- $

- $

112,551 $

179,501

$

103,586 $

140,842 $

65,668 $

75,159 $

$

429,492 $

535,113 $

465,305 $

500,743 $

189,964 $ 542,692 $

575,220 2,473,346

Subtotal TOTAL

ICF-Marbek

C-8

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited Demand-Side Management Program Portfolio

Appendix D Incentive Level Justification

ICF Marbek

D-1

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level The purpose of this worksheet is to explain the metholodogy used to calculate the incentive levels for measures in the General Service Program requiring an alternative approach compared to the the one used for the other measures in the Program portfolio.

Redesign Measures ECM91 ECM912

Lighting Resdeign Study

Gov. Lighting Redesign Study

The incentive levels for the resdesign measures were computed using a trial and error method. Because there are no savings associated with these measures, the cost effectiveness results were computed at the program level instead of at the individual measure level.

Lighting Measures ECM80 ECM82 ECM83 ECM86 ECM87

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Office

ECM88 ECM92

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse

ECM93 ECM94

Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb

ECM95 ECM96 ECM97

Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs

ECM802 ECM842 ECM852 ECM872 ECM882 ECM922 ECM932 ECM942 ECM952 ECM962 ECM972

Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Office Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Health Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Education Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation Gov. Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Warehouse Gov. Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb Gov. Commercial 8W LED A19 Bulb Gov. Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs Gov. Commercial LED PAR30 Bulbs Gov. Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs Gov. Commercial Spot or task lighting

Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Non Food Retail Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Hotel/Motel Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Restaurant Typical Lighting Project in Existing Bldg - Recreation Commercial 12W LED A19 Bulb Commercial LED MR16 Bulbs Commercial LED PAR38 Bulbs Commercial Spot or task lighting

The total lighting incentive is made up of a custom portion and a prescriptive portion. The custom incentive provides flexibility in the choice of lighting technologies and also encourages contractors and designers to be innovative. The custom incentive was calculated using a dollar value per annual kilowatt hour of savings. This value was established using a trial and error procedure and evaluation of the cost-effectiveness results on the program-element level. The purpose of the prescriptive incentive is to increase the incentive total if LED lamps are used, since the initial-cost hurdle is higher for LED technologies than for other technoclogies. The prescriptive incentive also aims to accelerate the market penetration of LEDs. The prescriptive lighting incentive levels in the General Service Program are idential to those in the Residential Program. Due to limitations of the model, it was not possible to compute the cost-effectiveness test results for the lighting measures on a measure by measure basis. However, the model did allow for the accurate calculation of the cost-effectiveness test results for these measures on the program level.

ICF Marbek

CONF DENTIAL

D-2

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Typical Low-Cost No-Cost Refrigeration Project - Food Retail Incentive Amount: $1.31/ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $1.73/ft2 6.6 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 7.1 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Demand Savings: .00074 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .00081 kW/ft2 $1.13/ft2 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

90% 90% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM98 6.04 $8.70 $0.0354/kWh 0.4 yr 1.03 $0.32 $0.2209/kWh 4.07 $8.65 $0.0558/kWh 4.61 $8.98 $0.0493/kWh 0.52 -$3.96 $0.1713/kWh 1.56 $3.82 $0.1299/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D-3

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$1.73 $1.31 $1.18 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$9.11 49 kWh

$9.11 49 kWh

$10.42 $1.73 6.04 $8.70 $0.0354/kWh 0.4 yr

$10.42 $1.73 6.04 $8.70 $0.0354/kWh 0.4 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$11.47 $0.00 $8.66 50 kWh

$11.47 $0.00 $8.66 50 kWh

$11.47 $11.15 1.0 $0.32 $0 2209/kWh

$11.47 $9.97 12 $1.50 $0.1976/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$11.47 $0.00 50 kWh

$11.47 $0.00 50 kWh

$11.47 $2.82 4.07 $8.65 $0.0558/kWh

$11.47 $1.64 7.0 $9.83 $0.0325/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$11.47 $0.00 50 kWh

$11.47 $0.00 50 kWh

$11.47 $2.49 4.6 $8.98 $0.0493/kWh

$11.47 $1.31 8.8 $10.16 $0.0260/kWh

D-4

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Typical Deep Retrofit Refrigeration Project - Food Retail Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $2.70/ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $5.87/ft2 13.5 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 14.7 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Demand Savings: .00153 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .00167 kW/ft2 $2.33/ft2 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

90% 90% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM99 3.66 $15.58 $0.0585/kWh 1.4 yr 1.03 $0.66 $0.2209/kWh 2.95 $15.60 $0.0770/kWh 4.61 $18.48 $0.0493/kWh 0.52 -$8.14 $0.1713/kWh 1.56 $7.86 $0.1299/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D-5

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$5.87 $2.70 $2.42 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$18.75 100 kWh

$18.75 100 kWh

$21.45 $5.87 3.66 $15.58 $0.0585/kWh 1.4 yr

$21.45 $5.87 3.66 $15.58 $0.0585/kWh 1.4 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$23.60 $0.00 $17.82 104 kWh

$23.60 $0.00 $17.82 104 kWh

$23.60 $22.93 1.0 $0.66 $0 2209/kWh

$23.60 $20.51 12 $3.09 $0.1976/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$23.60 $0.00 104 kWh

$23.60 $0.00 104 kWh

$23.60 $7.99 2.95 $15.60 $0.0770/kWh

$23.60 $5.57 42 $18.03 $0.0537/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$23.60 $0.00 104 kWh

$23.60 $0.00 104 kWh

$23.60 $5.12 4.6 $18.48 $0.0493/kWh

$23.60 $2.70 8.8 $20.90 $0.0260/kWh

D-6

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Typical Refrigeration Project - Ice Rink Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $0.40/ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $0.72/ft2 2.5 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 2.7 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Demand Savings: .00034 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .00037 kW/ft2 Participant's Savings on Year 1: $0.43/ft2 20 yr Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

111% 111% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Warning to analysts: This worksheet is  connected to Government Rate Data

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM1002 10.01 $6.50 $0.0261/kWh 0.7 yr 0.96 -$0.33 $0.2553/kWh 6.20 $5.87 $0.0393/kWh 8.31 $6.15 $0.0294/kWh 0.43 -$3.43 $0.2245/kWh 2.11 $4.00 $0.1161/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D-7

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.72 $0.40 $0.44 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test from YEC Perspective (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test from YEC Perspective (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$6.82 28 kWh

$6.82 28 kWh

$7.22 $0.72 10.01 $6.50 $0.0261/kWh 0.7 yr

$7.22 $0.72 10.01 $6.50 $0.0261/kWh 0.7 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$7.00 $0.00 $6.48 29 kWh

$7.00 $0.00 $6.48 29 kWh

$7.00 $7.33 1.0 -$0.33 $0 2553/kWh

$7.00 $6.88 1.0 $0.11 $0.2398/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$7.00 $0.00 29 kWh

$7.00 $0.00 29 kWh

$7.00 $1.13 6.20 $5.87 $0.0393/kWh

$7.00 $0.69 10 2 $6.31 $0.0239/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$7.00 $0.00 29 kWh

$7.00 $0.00 29 kWh

$7.00 $0.84 8.3 $6.15 $0.0294/kWh

$7.00 $0.40 17 5 $6.60 $0.0139/kWh

D-8

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations ES Desktop Computer and Monitor Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $30.00 Measure/Project Cost: $0.00 148 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 161 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: 0.03 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: 0.03 kW $25.59 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 4 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects: Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

211% 211% 10% 0% 5% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM101 * $125.01 $0.0000/kWh -1.2 yr 0.65 -$64.08 $0.3318/kWh 1.89 $56.18 $0.1145/kWh 1.28 $26.18 $0.1687/kWh 0.52 -$42.38 $0.1630/kWh 1.14 $19.73 $0.2446/kWh

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D-9

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.00 $30.00 $63.38 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 4 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$95.01 534 kWh

$95.01 534 kWh

$125.01 $0.00 * $125.01 $0.0000/kWh -1 2 yr

$125.01 $0.00 * $125.01 $0.0000/kWh -1.2 yr

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$119.56 $0.00 $90.26 554 kWh

$119.56 $0.00 $90.26 554 kWh

$119.56 $183.64 0.7 -$64.08 $0 3318/kWh

$119.56 $120.26 1.0 -$0.70 $0.2173/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$119.56 $0.00 554 kWh

$119.56 $0.00 554 kWh

$119.56 $63.38 1.89 $56.18 $0.1145/kWh

$119.56 $0.00 * $119.56 $0.0000/kWh

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$119.56 $0.00 554 kWh

$119.56 $0.00 554 kWh

$119.56 $93.38 1.3 $26.18 $0.1687/kWh

$119.56 $30.00 4.0 $89.56 $0.0542/kWh

D - 10

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects: Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

ES Laptop Computer

$10.00 $0.00 41 kWh/yr 8.3% 45 kWh/yr 0.01 kW 0.01 kW $7.09 4 yr

211% 211% 10% 0% 5% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM102 * $36.32 $0.0000/kWh -1.4 yr 0.59 -$23.01 $0.3661/kWh 1.57 $12.00 $0.1378/kWh 1.06 $2.00 $0.2030/kWh 0.52 -$11.74 $0.1630/kWh 1.00 $0.21 $0.2784/kWh

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 11

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.00 $10.00 $21.13 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 4 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.32 148 kWh

$26.32 148 kWh

$36.32 $0.00 * $36.32 $0.0000/kWh -1.4 yr

$36.32 $0.00 * $36.32 $0.0000/kWh -1.4 yr

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$33.12 $0.00 $25.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $0.00 $25.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $56.13 0.6 -$23.01 $0 3661/kWh

$33.12 $35.00 09 -$1.88 $0.2283/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$33.12 $0.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $0.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $21.13 1.57 $12.00 $0.1378/kWh

$33.12 $0.00 * $33.12 $0.0000/kWh

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$33.12 $0.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $0.00 153 kWh

$33.12 $31.13 1.1 $2.00 $0 2030/kWh

$33.12 $10.00 33 $23.12 $0.0652/kWh

D - 12

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Gov. ES Desktop Computer and Monitor Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $18.00 Measure/Project Cost: $0.00 148 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 161 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: 0.03 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: 0.03 kW Participant's Savings on Year 1: $31.41 4 yr Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects: Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

189% 189% 50% 0% 5% 0%

Warning to analysts: This worksheet is  connected to Government Rate Data

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM1012 * $134.62 $0.0000/kWh -0.6 yr 0.60 -$46.89 $0.3623/kWh 2.04 $35.25 $0.1060/kWh 1.33 $17.25 $0.1622/kWh 0.43 -$36.24 $0.2001/kWh 0.91 -$7.18 $0.2381/kWh

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 13

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.00 $18.00 $33.97 55%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 4 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$116.62 534 kWh

$116.62 534 kWh

$134.62 $0.00 * $134.62 $0.0000/kWh -0.6 yr

$134.62 $0.00 * $134.62 $0.0000/kWh -0.6 yr

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Ratepayer Impact Measure Test from YEC Perspective (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$69.22 $0.00 $64.14 320 kWh

$69.22 $0.00 $64.14 320 kWh

$69.22 $116.11 0.6 -$46.89 $0 3623/kWh

$69.22 $82.14 0.8 -$12.92 $0.2563/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$69.22 $0.00 320 kWh

$69.22 $0.00 320 kWh

$69.22 $33.97 2.04 $35.25 $0.1060/kWh

$69.22 $0.00 * $69.22 $0.0000/kWh

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Program Administrator Cost Test from YEC Perspective (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$69.22 $0.00 320 kWh

$69.22 $0.00 320 kWh

$69.22 $51.97 1.3 $17.25 $0.1622/kWh

$69.22 $18.00 3.8 $51.22 $0.0562/kWh

D - 14

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects: Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Gov. ES Laptop Computer

$6.00 $0.00 41 kWh/yr 8.3% 45 kWh/yr 0.01 kW 0.01 kW $8.70 4 yr

189% 189% 50% 0% 5% 0%

Warning to analysts: This worksheet is  connected to Government Rate Data

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM1022 * $38.31 $0.0000/kWh -0.7 yr 0.55 -$15.92 $0.3953/kWh 1.69 $7.85 $0.1276/kWh 1.11 $1.85 $0.1951/kWh 0.43 -$10.04 $0.2001/kWh 0.80 -$4.91 $0.2706/kWh

*There is no incremental cost to the Participant to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer.

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 15

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.00 $6.00 $11.32 55%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 4 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$32.31 148 kWh

$32.31 148 kWh

$38.31 $0.00 * $38.31 $0.0000/kWh -0.7 yr

$38.31 $0.00 * $38.31 $0.0000/kWh -0.7 yr

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Ratepayer Impact Measure Test from YEC Perspective (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$19.18 $0.00 $17.77 89 kWh

$19.18 $0.00 $17.77 89 kWh

$19.18 $35.09 0.5 -$15.92 $0 3953/kWh

$19.18 $23.77 0.8 -$4.59 $0.2677/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$19.18 $0.00 89 kWh

$19.18 $0.00 89 kWh

$19.18 $11.32 1.69 $7.85 $0.1276/kWh

$19.18 $0.00 * $19.18 $0.0000/kWh

*Incremental cost to purchase an ENERGY STAR computer is $0.00. Program Administrator Cost Test from YEC Perspective (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 4 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 4 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 4 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$19.18 $0.00 89 kWh

$19.18 $0.00 89 kWh

$19.18 $17.32 1.1 $1.85 $0.1951/kWh

$19.18 $6.00 32 $13.18 $0.0676/kWh

D - 16

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Typical High-Performance New Building - 25% Better Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $1.50/ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $2.00/ft2 6 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 6 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Demand Savings: .001 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .001 kW/ft2 $1.03/ft2 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 20 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

250% $1.64 10% 0% 5% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM89 7.36 $12.72 $0.0304/kWh 0.5 yr 1.00 $0.08 $0.2427/kWh 3.78 $12.24 $0.0645/kWh 4.16 $12.64 $0.0586/kWh 0.52 -$5.53 $0.1829/kWh 1.58 $6.12 $0.1432/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 17

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$2.00 $1.50 $2.50 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$13.22 66 kWh

$13.22 66 kWh

$14.72 $2.00 7.36 $12.72 $0.0304/kWh 0 5 yr

$14.72 $2.00 7.36 $12.72 $0.0304/kWh 0.5 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 $12.56 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 $12.56 68 kWh

$16.64 $16.56 1.0 $0.08 $0 2427/kWh

$16.64 $14.06 12 $2.58 $0.2060/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $4.40 3.78 $12.24 $0.0645/kWh

$16.64 $1.90 8.8 $14.74 $0.0278/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $4.00 4.2 $12.64 $0.0586/kWh

$16.64 $1.50 11.1 $15.14 $0.0220/kWh

D - 18

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Typical High-Performance New Building - 40% Better Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $4.00/ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $6.00/ft2 9 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 10 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Demand Savings: .002 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .002 kW/ft2 $1.64/ft2 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 20 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

250% $2.63 10% 0% 5% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM90 4.19 $19.15 $0.0569/kWh 1.2 yr 1.00 $0.02 $0.2436/kWh 3.25 $18.42 $0.0751/kWh 4.09 $20.12 $0.0595/kWh 0.52 -$8.85 $0.1829/kWh 1.57 $9.69 $0.1441/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 19

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$6.00 $4.00 $2.50 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$21.15 105 kWh

$21.15 105 kWh

$25.15 $6.00 4.19 $19.15 $0.0569/kWh 1 2 yr

$25.15 $6.00 4.19 $19.15 $0.0569/kWh 1.2 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 $20.09 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 $20.09 109 kWh

$26.62 $26.59 1.0 $0.02 $0 2436/kWh

$26.62 $24.09 1.1 $2.52 $0.2207/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $8.20 3.25 $18.42 $0.0751/kWh

$26.62 $5.70 4.7 $20.92 $0.0522/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $6.50 4.1 $20.12 $0.0595/kWh

$26.62 $4.00 6.7 $22.62 $0.0366/kWh

D - 20

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Gov. Typical High-Performance New Building - 25% Better Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $0.90 /ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $2.00 /ft2 6 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 6 kWh/yr 0.00 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: 0.00 kW Participant's Savings on Year 1: $1.26 20 yr Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

82% 82% 10% 0% 5% 0%

Warning to analysts: This worksheet is  connected to Government Rate Data

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM892 8.56 $15.13 $0.0304/kWh 0.9 yr 0.98 -$0.41 $0.2498/kWh 6.32 $14.00 $0.0386/kWh 10.18 $15.00 $0.0239/kWh 0.43 -$8.17 $0.2245/kWh 2.21 $9.88 $0.1111/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 21

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$2.00 $0.90 $0.73 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test from YEC Perspective (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test from YEC Perspective (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.23 66 kWh

$16.23 66 kWh

$17.13 $2.00 8.56 $15.13 $0.0304/kWh 0 9 yr

$17.13 $2.00 8.56 $15.13 $0.0304/kWh 0.9 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 $15.41 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 $15.41 68 kWh

$16.64 $17.05 1.0 -$0.41 $0 2498/kWh

$16.64 $16.31 1.0 $0.32 $0.2391/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $2.63 6.32 $14.00 $0.0386/kWh

$16.64 $1.90 8.8 $14.74 $0.0278/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $0.00 68 kWh

$16.64 $1.63 10.2 $15.00 $0.0239/kWh

$16.64 $0.90 18 5 $15.74 $0.0132/kWh

D - 22

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Gov. Typical High-Performance New Building - 40% Better Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $2.40 /ft2 Measure/Project Cost: $6.00 /ft2 9 kWh/ft2/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 10 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: 0.00 kW/ft2 Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: 0.00 kW Participant's Savings on Year 1: $2.01 20 yr Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

82% 82% 10% 0% 5% 0%

Warning to analysts: This worksheet is  connected to Government Rate Data

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM902 4.73 $22.36 $0.0569/kWh 1.8 yr 0.92 -$2.40 $0.2658/kWh 3.48 $18.96 $0.0701/kWh 6.11 $22.26 $0.0399/kWh 0.43 -$13.07 $0.2245/kWh 1.95 $14.07 $0.1259/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 23

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Commercial DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$6.00 $2.40 $1.96 95%

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test from YEC Perspective (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test from YEC Perspective (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover N.-p. Sp llover - Rebound

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25.96 105 kWh

$25.96 105 kWh

$28.36 $6.00 4.73 $22.36 $0.0569/kWh 1.8 yr

$28.36 $6.00 4.73 $22.36 $0.0569/kWh 1.8 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 $24.66 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 $24.66 109 kWh

$26.62 $29.02 0.9 -$2.40 $0 2658/kWh

$26.62 $27.06 1.0 -$0.45 $0.2479/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $7.66 3.48 $18.96 $0.0701/kWh

$26.62 $5.70 4.7 $20.92 $0.0522/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $0.00 109 kWh

$26.62 $4.36 6.1 $22.26 $0.0399/kWh

$26.62 $2.40 11.1 $24.22 $0.0220/kWh

D - 24

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

12W LED A19 Bulb

$18.00 $44.00 48 kWh/yr 8.3% 52 kWh/yr .017 kW .019 kW $6.97 20 yr

177% 177% 0% 0% 10% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM24 2.45 $63.93 $0.0825/kWh 3.7 yr 1.05 $7.15 $0.2326/kWh 1.94 $75.67 $0.1255/kWh 3.13 $106.07 $0.0779/kWh 0.62 -$34.47 $0.1537/kWh 1.52 $58.11 $0.1612/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 25

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$44.00 $18.00 $31.84 110%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$89.93 533 kWh

$89.93 533 kWh

$107.93 $44.00 2.45 $63.93 $0.0825/kWh 3.7 yr

$107.93 $44.00 2.45 $63.93 $0.0825/kWh 3.7 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$155.92 $0.00 $98.92 640 kWh

$155.92 $0.00 $98.92 640 kWh

$155.92 $148.77 1.0 $7.15 $0 2326/kWh

$155.92 $116.92 13 $38.99 $0.1828/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$155.92 $0.00 640 kWh

$155.92 $0.00 640 kWh

$155.92 $80.24 1.94 $75.67 $0.1255/kWh

$155.92 $48.40 32 $107.52 $0.0757/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$155.92 $0.00 640 kWh

$155.92 $0.00 640 kWh

$155.92 $49.84 3.1 $106.07 $0.0779/kWh

$155.92 $18.00 8.7 $137.92 $0.0281/kWh

D - 26

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

8W LED A19 Bulb

$12.00 $30.00 32 kWh/yr 8.3% 35 kWh/yr .011 kW .012 kW $4.65 20 yr

177% 177% 0% 0% 10% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM60 2.40 $41.95 $0.0844/kWh 3.9 yr 1.05 $4.76 $0.2326/kWh 1.92 $49.71 $0.1272/kWh 3.13 $70.71 $0.0779/kWh 0.62 -$22.98 $0.1537/kWh 1.52 $38.74 $0.1612/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 27

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$30.00 $12.00 $21.23 110%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$59.95 355 kWh

$59.95 355 kWh

$71.95 $30.00 2.40 $41.95 $0.0844/kWh 3 9 yr

$71.95 $30.00 2.40 $41.95 $0.0844/kWh 3.9 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$103.94 $0.00 $65.95 426 kWh

$103.94 $0.00 $65.95 426 kWh

$103.94 $99.18 1.0 $4.76 $0 2326/kWh

$103.94 $77.95 13 $25.99 $0.1828/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$103.94 $0.00 426 kWh

$103.94 $0.00 426 kWh

$103.94 $54.23 1.92 $49.71 $0.1272/kWh

$103.94 $33.00 3.1 $70.94 $0.0774/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$103.94 $0.00 426 kWh

$103.94 $0.00 426 kWh

$103.94 $33.23 3.1 $70.71 $0.0779/kWh

$103.94 $12.00 8.7 $91.94 $0.0281/kWh

D - 28

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

LED MR16 Bulbs

$10.00 $20.00 15 kWh/yr 8.3% 16 kWh/yr .005 kW .006 kW $2.18 20 yr

100% 100% 0% 0% 10% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM61 1.91 $18.10 $0.1200/kWh 4.6 yr 0.96 -$2.14 $0.2545/kWh 1.52 $16.77 $0.1599/kWh 2.44 $28.77 $0.0998/kWh 0.62 -$10.77 $0.1537/kWh 1.35 $13.79 $0.1814/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 29

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$20.00 $10.00 $9.95 110%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$28.10 167 kWh

$28.10 167 kWh

$38.10 $20.00 1.91 $18.10 $0.1200/kWh 4.6 yr

$38.10 $20.00 1.91 $18.10 $0.1200/kWh 4.6 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$48.72 $0.00 $30.91 200 kWh

$48.72 $0.00 $30.91 200 kWh

$48.72 $50.87 1.0 -$2.14 $0 2545/kWh

$48.72 $40.91 12 $7.81 $0.2047/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$48.72 $0.00 200 kWh

$48.72 $0.00 200 kWh

$48.72 $31.95 1.52 $16.77 $0.1599/kWh

$48.72 $22.00 22 $26.72 $0.1101/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$48.72 $0.00 200 kWh

$48.72 $0.00 200 kWh

$48.72 $19.95 2.4 $28.77 $0.0998/kWh

$48.72 $10.00 49 $38.72 $0.0500/kWh

D - 30

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

LED PAR30 Bulbs

$20.00 $51.00 40 kWh/yr 8.3% 44 kWh/yr .014 kW .016 kW $5.81 20 yr

133% 133% 0% 0% 10% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM62 1.86 $43.94 $0.1148/kWh 5.3 yr 1.01 $0.95 $0.2420/kWh 1.57 $47.29 $0.1551/kWh 2.79 $83.39 $0.0873/kWh 0.62 -$28.72 $0.1537/kWh 1.44 $43.43 $0.1698/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 31

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$51.00 $20.00 $26.54 110%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$74.94 444 kWh

$74.94 444 kWh

$94.94 $51.00 1.86 $43.94 $0.1148/kWh 5 3 yr

$94.94 $51.00 1.86 $43.94 $0.1148/kWh 5.3 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$129.93 $0.00 $82.44 533 kWh

$129.93 $0.00 $82.44 533 kWh

$129.93 $128.97 1.0 $0.95 $0 2420/kWh

$129.93 $102.44 13 $27.49 $0.1922/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$129.93 $0.00 533 kWh

$129.93 $0.00 533 kWh

$129.93 $82.64 1.57 $47.29 $0.1551/kWh

$129.93 $56.10 23 $73.83 $0.1053/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$129.93 $0.00 533 kWh

$129.93 $0.00 533 kWh

$129.93 $46.54 2.8 $83.39 $0.0873/kWh

$129.93 $20.00 65 $109.93 $0.0375/kWh

D - 32

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

LED PAR38 Bulbs

$20.00 $43.00 55 kWh/yr 8.3% 60 kWh/yr .02 kW .021 kW $7.99 20 yr

182% 182% 0% 0% 10% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM63 2.86 $80.05 $0.0704/kWh 2.9 yr 1.05 $8.81 $0.2318/kWh 2.13 $94.86 $0.1143/kWh 3.16 $122.16 $0.0771/kWh 0.62 -$39.49 $0.1537/kWh 1.53 $67.21 $0.1604/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 33

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$43.00 $20.00 $36.49 110%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$103.05 611 kWh

$103.05 611 kWh

$123.05 $43.00 2.86 $80.05 $0.0704/kWh 2 9 yr

$123.05 $43.00 2.86 $80.05 $0.0704/kWh 2.9 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$178.65 $0.00 $113.35 733 kWh

$178.65 $0.00 $113.35 733 kWh

$178.65 $169.84 1.1 $8.81 $0 2318/kWh

$178.65 $133.35 13 $45.30 $0.1820/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$178.65 $0.00 733 kWh

$178.65 $0.00 733 kWh

$178.65 $83.79 2.13 $94.86 $0.1143/kWh

$178.65 $47.30 3.8 $131.35 $0.0645/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$178.65 $0.00 733 kWh

$178.65 $0.00 733 kWh

$178.65 $56.49 3.2 $122.16 $0.0771/kWh

$178.65 $20.00 89 $158.65 $0.0273/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL0

D - 34

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Spot or Task Lighting

$10.00 $25.00 40 kWh/yr 8.3% 44 kWh/yr .014 kW .016 kW $5.81 10 yr

96% 96% 20% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM44 2.27 $31.76 $0.0841/kWh 2.6 yr 1.03 $1.90 $0.2200/kWh 1.99 $29.31 $0.1143/kWh 3.00 $39.31 $0.0758/kWh 0.62 -$13.53 $0.1440/kWh 1.47 $19.58 $0.1553/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL1

D - 35

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$25.00 $10.00 $9.65 80%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$46.76 297 kWh

$46.76 297 kWh

$56.76 $25.00 2.27 $31.76 $0.0841/kWh 2.6 yr

$56.76 $25.00 2.27 $31.76 $0.0841/kWh 2.6 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$58.96 $0.00 $37.41 259 kWh

$58.96 $0.00 $37.41 259 kWh

$58.96 $57.06 1.0 $1.90 $0 2200/kWh

$58.96 $47.41 12 $11.55 $0.1828/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$58.96 $0.00 259 kWh

$58.96 $0.00 259 kWh

$58.96 $29.65 1.99 $29.31 $0.1143/kWh

$58.96 $20.00 29 $38.96 $0.0771/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$58.96 $0.00 259 kWh

$58.96 $0.00 259 kWh

$58.96 $19.65 3.0 $39.31 $0.0758/kWh

$58.96 $10.00 59 $48.96 $0.0386/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL2

D - 36

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Block Heater Timer

$20.00 $37.50 130 kWh/yr 8.3% 142 kWh/yr 0.05 kW 0.05 kW $18.86 10 yr

378% 378% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM151 4.58 $134.24 $0.0389/kWh 0.9 yr 0.97 -$8.20 $0.2351/kWh 2.11 $126.05 $0.1075/kWh 2.50 $143.55 $0.0909/kWh 0.62 -$54.89 $0.1440/kWh 1.34 $63.49 $0.1698/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 37

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$37.50 $20.00 $75.62 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$151.74 965 kWh

$151.74 965 kWh

$171.74 $37.50 4.58 $134.24 $0.0389/kWh 0 9 yr

$171.74 $37.50 4.58 $134.24 $0.0389/kWh 0.9 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 $151.74 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 $151.74 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $247.36 1.0 -$8.20 $0 2351/kWh

$239.16 $171.74 1.4 $67.42 $0.1632/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $113.12 2.11 $126.05 $0.1075/kWh

$239.16 $37.50 6.4 $201.66 $0.0356/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $95.62 2.5 $143.55 $0.0909/kWh

$239.16 $20.00 12.0 $219.16 $0.0190/kWh

D - 38

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

$0.00 $8.62 325 kWh/yr 8.3% 354 kWh/yr .116 kW .126 kW $47.22 10 yr

$193.78 $193.78 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM091 44.08 $371.34 $0.0036/kWh 0.2 yr 1.04 $25.12 $0.2178/kWh 2.96 $396.46 $0.0768/kWh 3.09 $405.08 $0.0736/kWh 0.62 -$137.43 $0.1440/kWh 1.49 $204.61 $0.1531/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 39

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$8.62 $0.00 $193.78 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$379.96 2,416 kWh

$379.96 2,416 kWh

$379.96 $8.62 44.08 $371.34 $0.0036/kWh 0 2 yr

$379.96 $8.62 44.08 $371.34 $0.0036/kWh 0.2 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 $379.96 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 $379.96 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $573.74 1.0 $25.12 $0 2178/kWh

$598.86 $379.96 1.6 $218.90 $0.1442/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $202.40 2.96 $396.46 $0.0768/kWh

$598.86 $8.62 69 5 $590.24 $0.0033/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $193.78 3.1 $405.08 $0.0736/kWh

$598.86 $0.00 #DIV/0! $598.86 $0.0000/kWh

D - 40

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Ed. Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $0.00 Measure/Project Cost: $25.00 68 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 74 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: .024 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .026 kW $9.85 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

$40.41 $40.41 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM111 3.17 $54.24 $0.0496/kWh 2.5 yr 1.04 $5.24 $0.2178/kWh 1.91 $59.48 $0.1191/kWh 3.09 $84.48 $0.0736/kWh 0.62 -$28.66 $0.1440/kWh 1.49 $42.67 $0.1531/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 41

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$25.00 $0.00 $40.41 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$79.24 504 kWh

$79.24 504 kWh

$79.24 $25.00 3.17 $54.24 $0.0496/kWh 2 5 yr

$79.24 $25.00 3.17 $54.24 $0.0496/kWh 2.5 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 $79.24 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 $79.24 549 kWh

$124.89 $119.66 1.0 $5.24 $0 2178/kWh

$124.89 $79.24 1.6 $45.65 $0.1442/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $65.41 1.91 $59.48 $0.1191/kWh

$124.89 $25.00 5.0 $99.89 $0.0455/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $40.41 3.1 $84.48 $0.0736/kWh

$124.89 $0.00 #DIV/0! $124.89 $0.0000/kWh

D - 42

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. DHW Tank Insulation

$0.00 $37.58 62 kWh/yr 8.3% 68 kWh/yr .022 kW .024 kW $9.01 14 yr

$51.75 $51.75 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM181 2.47 $55.06 $0.0658/kWh 4.2 yr 1.01 $1.62 $0.2317/kWh 1.63 $56.68 $0.1433/kWh 2.82 $94.26 $0.0830/kWh 0.62 -$32.97 $0.1482/kWh 1.44 $47.04 $0.1637/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 43

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$37.58 $0.00 $51.75 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 14 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$92.64 571 kWh

$92.64 571 kWh

$92.64 $37.58 2.47 $55.06 $0.0658/kWh 4 2 yr

$92.64 $37.58 2.47 $55.06 $0.0658/kWh 4.2 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 $92.64 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 $92.64 623 kWh

$146.01 $144.40 1.0 $1.62 $0 2317/kWh

$146.01 $92.64 1.6 $53.37 $0.1487/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $89.33 1.63 $56.68 $0.1433/kWh

$146.01 $37.58 39 $108.43 $0.0603/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $51.75 2.8 $94.26 $0.0830/kWh

$146.01 $0.00 #DIV/0! $146.01 $0.0000/kWh

D - 44

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. DHW Pipe Insulation

$0.00 $0.79 34 kWh/yr 8.3% 37 kWh/yr .012 kW .013 kW $4.94 15 yr

$30.41 $30.41 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM201 67.39 $52.44 $0.0024/kWh 0.2 yr 1.00 $0.26 $0.2352/kWh 2.69 $52.70 $0.0877/kWh 2.76 $53.49 $0.0855/kWh 0.62 -$18.88 $0.1492/kWh 1.42 $26.59 $0.1664/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 45

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.79 $0.00 $30.41 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 15 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$53.23 326 kWh

$53.23 326 kWh

$53.23 $0.79 67.39 $52.44 $0.0024/kWh 0 2 yr

$53.23 $0.79 67.39 $52.44 $0.0024/kWh 0.2 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 $53.23 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 $53.23 356 kWh

$83.90 $83.64 1.0 $0.26 $0 2352/kWh

$83.90 $53.23 1.6 $30.67 $0.1497/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $31.20 2.69 $52.70 $0.0877/kWh

$83.90 $0.79 106 2 $83.11 $0.0022/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $30.41 2.8 $53.49 $0.0855/kWh

$83.90 $0.00 #DIV/0! $83.90 $0.0000/kWh

D - 46

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Ed. Motion Detectors - Indoor and Outdoor Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $0.00 Measure/Project Cost: $22.94 66 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 72 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: .024 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .026 kW $9.59 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

$39.35 $39.35 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM481 3.36 $54.21 $0.0468/kWh 2.4 yr 1.04 $5.10 $0.2178/kWh 1.95 $59.31 $0.1164/kWh 3.09 $82.25 $0.0736/kWh 0.62 -$27.90 $0.1440/kWh 1.49 $41.55 $0.1531/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 47

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$22.94 $0.00 $39.35 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$77.15 490 kWh

$77.15 490 kWh

$77.15 $22.94 3.36 $54.21 $0.0468/kWh 2.4 yr

$77.15 $22.94 3.36 $54.21 $0.0468/kWh 2.4 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 $77.15 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 $77.15 535 kWh

$121.60 $116.50 1.0 $5.10 $0 2178/kWh

$121.60 $77.15 1.6 $44.45 $0.1442/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $62.28 1.95 $59.31 $0.1164/kWh

$121.60 $22.94 53 $98.66 $0.0429/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $39.35 3.1 $82.25 $0.0736/kWh

$121.60 $0.00 #DIV/0! $121.60 $0.0000/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL0

D - 48

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. Prog. Thermostats (Central)

$0.00 $62.50 827 kWh/yr 8.3% 902 kWh/yr .295 kW .322 kW $120.16 11 yr

$542.41 $542.41 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM141 16.63 $976.76 $0.0095/kWh 0.5 yr 1.04 $56.31 $0.2212/kWh 2.71 $1,033.07 $0.0846/kWh 3.02 $1,095.57 $0.0759/kWh 0.62 -$374.34 $0.1451/kWh 1.47 $552.01 $0.1557/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL1

D - 49

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$62.50 $0.00 $542.41 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 11 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,039 26 6,556 kWh

$1,039.26 6,556 kWh

$1,039.26 $62.50 16.63 $976.76 $0.0095/kWh 0 5 yr

$1,039.26 $62.50 16.63 $976.76 $0.0095/kWh 0.5 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 $1,039.26 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 $1,039.26 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $1,581.66 1.0 $56.31 $0 2212/kWh

$1,637.98 $1,039.26 1.6 $598.72 $0.1454/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $604.91 2.71 $1,033.07 $0.0846/kWh

$1,637.98 $62.50 26 2 $1,575.48 $0.0087/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $542.41 3.0 $1,095.57 $0.0759/kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 #DIV/0! $1,637.98 $0.0000/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL2

D - 50

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. Prog. Thermostats

$0.00 $285.43 826 kWh/yr 8.3% 901 kWh/yr .295 kW .321 kW $120.02 11 yr

$541.75 $541.75 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM211 3.64 $752.57 $0.0436/kWh 2.4 yr 1.04 $56.25 $0.2212/kWh 1.98 $808.82 $0.1158/kWh 3.02 $1,094.25 $0.0759/kWh 0.62 -$373.89 $0.1451/kWh 1.47 $551.34 $0.1557/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL3

D - 51

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$285.43 $0.00 $541.75 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 11 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,038.00 6,548 kWh

$1,038.00 6,548 kWh

$1,038.00 $285.43 3.64 $752.57 $0.0436/kWh 2.4 yr

$1,038.00 $285.43 3.64 $752.57 $0.0436/kWh 2.4 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 $1,038.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 $1,038.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $1,579.75 1.0 $56.25 $0 2212/kWh

$1,636.00 $1,038.00 1.6 $598.00 $0.1454/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $827.18 1.98 $808.82 $0.1158/kWh

$1,636.00 $285.43 5.7 $1,350.57 $0.0400/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $541.75 3.0 $1,094.25 $0.0759/kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 #DIV/0! $1,636.00 $0.0000/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL4

D - 52

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. E-Star TVs

$0.00 $125.00 69 kWh/yr 8.3% 75 kWh/yr .025 kW .027 kW $10.03 10 yr

$41.14 $41.14 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM061 0.65 -$44.33 $0.2437/kWh 12.5 yr 1.04 $5.33 $0.2178/kWh 0.77 -$39.00 $0.2971/kWh 3.09 $86.00 $0.0736/kWh 0.62 -$29.18 $0.1440/kWh 1.49 $43.44 $0.1531/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL5

D - 53

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$125.00 $0.00 $41.14 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$80.67 513 kWh

$80.67 513 kWh

$80.67 $125.00 0.65 -$44.33 $0 2437/kWh 12 5 yr

$80.67 $125.00 0.65 -$44.33 $0.2437/kWh 12.5 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 $80.67 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 $80.67 559 kWh

$127.14 $121.81 1.0 $5.33 $0 2178/kWh

$127.14 $80.67 1.6 $46.47 $0.1442/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $166.14 0.77 -$39.00 $0 2971/kWh

$127.14 $125.00 1.0 $2.14 $0.2235/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $41.14 3.1 $86.00 $0.0736/kWh

$127.14 $0.00 #DIV/0! $127.14 $0.0000/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL6

D - 54

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost Per Unit: Suggested Program Cost ($ per Unit): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ed. ESTAR Printers and Fax

$0.00 $25.00 32 kWh/yr 8.3% 35 kWh/yr .011 kW .012 kW $4.61 6 yr

$11.36 $11.36 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM081 0.98 -$0.52 $0.1554/kWh 5.4 yr 1.08 $2.74 $0.2043/kWh 1.06 $2.22 $0.2072/kWh 3.40 $27.22 $0.0647/kWh 0.62 -$9.01 $0.1394/kWh 1.54 $13.85 $0.1430/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL7

D - 55

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$25.00 $0.00 $11.36 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 6 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$24.48 161 kWh

$24.48 161 kWh

$24.48 $25.00 0.98 -$0.52 $0.1554/kWh 5.4 yr

$24.48 $25.00 0.98 -$0.52 $0.1554/kWh 5.4 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 $24.48 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 $24.48 175 kWh

$38.58 $35.84 1.1 $2.74 $0 2043/kWh

$38.58 $24.48 1.6 $14.10 $0.1395/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $36.36 1.06 $2.22 $0 2072/kWh

$38.58 $25.00 15 $13.58 $0.1425/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $11.36 3.4 $27.22 $0.0647/kWh

$38.58 $0.00 #DIV/0! $38.58 $0.0000/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL8

D - 56

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot 12W LED A19 Bulb

$44.00 $44.00 48 kWh/yr 8.3% 52 kWh/yr .017 kW 0.02 kW $6.97 20 yr

100% 111% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM242 3.04 $89.93 $0.0825/kWh 0.0 yr 0.80 -$36.19 $0.3060/kWh 1.61 $53.74 $0.1514/kWh 1.61 $53.74 $0.1514/kWh 0.62 -$31.33 $0.1537/kWh 1.07 $10.14 $0.2292/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 57

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$44.00 $44.00 $44.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$89.93 533 kWh

$89.93 533 kWh

$133.93 $44.00 3.04 $89.93 $0.0825/kWh 0.0 yr

$133.93 $44.00 3.04 $89.93 $0.0825/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$141.74 $0.00 $89.93 581 kWh

$141.74 $0.00 $89.93 581 kWh

$141.74 $177.93 0.8 -$36.19 $0 3060/kWh

$141.74 $133.93 1.1 $7.81 $0.2304/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$141.74 $0.00 581 kWh

$141.74 $0.00 581 kWh

$141.74 $88.00 1.61 $53.74 $0.1514/kWh

$141.74 $44.00 32 $97.74 $0.0757/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$141.74 $0.00 581 kWh

$141.74 $0.00 581 kWh

$141.74 $88.00 1.6 $53.74 $0.1514/kWh

$141.74 $44.00 32 $97.74 $0.0757/kWh

D - 58

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot 8W LED A19 Bulb

$31.00 $31.00 32 kWh/yr 8.3% 35 kWh/yr .011 kW 0.01 kW $4.65 20 yr

100% 105% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM602 2.93 $59.95 $0.0872/kWh 0.0 yr 0.77 -$27.46 $0.3146/kWh 1.52 $32.49 $0.1600/kWh 1.52 $32.49 $0.1600/kWh 0.62 -$20.89 $0.1537/kWh 1.03 $3.43 $0.2372/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 59

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$31.00 $31.00 $31.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$59.95 355 kWh

$59.95 355 kWh

$90.95 $31.00 2.93 $59.95 $0.0872/kWh 0.0 yr

$90.95 $31.00 2.93 $59.95 $0.0872/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$94.49 $0.00 $59.95 388 kWh

$94.49 $0.00 $59.95 388 kWh

$94.49 $121.95 0.8 -$27.46 $0 3146/kWh

$94.49 $90.95 1.0 $3.54 $0.2347/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$94.49 $0.00 388 kWh

$94.49 $0.00 388 kWh

$94.49 $62.00 1.52 $32.49 $0.1600/kWh

$94.49 $31.00 3.0 $63.49 $0.0800/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$94.49 $0.00 388 kWh

$94.49 $0.00 388 kWh

$94.49 $62.00 1.5 $32.49 $0.1600/kWh

$94.49 $31.00 3.0 $63.49 $0.0800/kWh

D - 60

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot LED MR16 Bulbs

$25.00 $25.00 15 kWh/yr 8.3% 16 kWh/yr .005 kW 0.01 kW $2.18 20 yr

100% 61% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM612 2.12 $28.10 $0.1501/kWh 0.0 yr 0.57 -$33.81 $0.4299/kWh 0.89 -$5.71 $0.2752/kWh 0.89 -$5.71 $0.2752/kWh 0.62 -$9.79 $0.1537/kWh 0.71 -$19.33 $0.3440/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 61

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$25.00 $25.00 $25.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$28.10 167 kWh

$28.10 167 kWh

$53.10 $25.00 2.12 $28.10 $0.1501/kWh 0.0 yr

$53.10 $25.00 2.12 $28.10 $0.1501/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$44.29 $0.00 $28.10 182 kWh

$44.29 $0.00 $28.10 182 kWh

$44.29 $78.10 0.6 -$33.81 $0.4299/kWh

$44.29 $53.10 0.8 -$8.81 $0.2923/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$44.29 $0.00 182 kWh

$44.29 $0.00 182 kWh

$44.29 $50.00 0.89 -$5.71 $0 2752/kWh

$44.29 $25.00 1.8 $19.29 $0.1376/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$44.29 $0.00 182 kWh

$44.29 $0.00 182 kWh

$44.29 $50.00 0.9 -$5.71 $0 2752/kWh

$44.29 $25.00 1.8 $19.29 $0.1376/kWh

D - 62

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot LED PAR30 Bulbs

$64.00 $64.00 40 kWh/yr 8.3% 44 kWh/yr .014 kW 0.02 kW $5.81 20 yr

100% 64% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM622 2.17 $74.94 $0.1441/kWh 0.0 yr 0.58 -$84.83 $0.4189/kWh 0.92 -$9.88 $0.2642/kWh 0.92 -$9.88 $0.2642/kWh 0.62 -$26.11 $0.1537/kWh 0.74 -$46.21 $0.3337/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 63

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$64.00 $64.00 $64.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$74.94 444 kWh

$74.94 444 kWh

$138.94 $64.00 2.17 $74.94 $0.1441/kWh 0.0 yr

$138.94 $64.00 2.17 $74.94 $0.1441/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$118.12 $0.00 $74.94 484 kWh

$118.12 $0.00 $74.94 484 kWh

$118.12 $202.94 0.6 -$84.83 $0.4189/kWh

$118.12 $138.94 09 -$20.83 $0.2868/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$118.12 $0.00 484 kWh

$118.12 $0.00 484 kWh

$118.12 $128.00 0.92 -$9.88 $0 2642/kWh

$118.12 $64.00 1.8 $54.12 $0.1321/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$118.12 $0.00 484 kWh

$118.12 $0.00 484 kWh

$118.12 $128.00 0.9 -$9.88 $0 2642/kWh

$118.12 $64.00 1.8 $54.12 $0.1321/kWh

D - 64

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot LED PAR38 Bulbs

$53.00 $53.00 55 kWh/yr 8.3% 60 kWh/yr .02 kW 0.02 kW $7.99 20 yr

100% 106% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM632 2.94 $103.05 $0.0868/kWh 0.0 yr 0.78 -$46.63 $0.3138/kWh 1.53 $56.41 $0.1591/kWh 1.53 $56.41 $0.1591/kWh 0.62 -$35.90 $0.1537/kWh 1.04 $6.46 $0.2364/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 65

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$53.00 $53.00 $53.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$103.05 611 kWh

$103.05 611 kWh

$156.05 $53.00 2.94 $103.05 $0.0868/kWh 0.0 yr

$156.05 $53.00 2.94 $103.05 $0.0868/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$162.41 $0.00 $103.05 666 kWh

$162.41 $0.00 $103.05 666 kWh

$162.41 $209.05 0.8 -$46.63 $0 3138/kWh

$162.41 $156.05 1.0 $6.37 $0.2342/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$162.41 $0.00 666 kWh

$162.41 $0.00 666 kWh

$162.41 $106.00 1.53 $56.41 $0.1591/kWh

$162.41 $53.00 3.1 $109.41 $0.0796/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$162.41 $0.00 666 kWh

$162.41 $0.00 666 kWh

$162.41 $106.00 1.5 $56.41 $0.1591/kWh

$162.41 $53.00 3.1 $109.41 $0.0796/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL0

D - 66

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Spot or Task Lighting

$25.00 $25.00 40 kWh/yr 8.3% 43.62 kWh/yr .014 kW 0.015562 kW $5.81 10 yr

100% 81% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM442 2.87 $46.76 $0.0841/kWh 0.0 yr 0.76 -$23.06 $0.2984/kWh 1.47 $23.71 $0.1542/kWh 1.47 $23.71 $0.1542/kWh 0.62 -$16.91 $0.1440/kWh 0.99 -$0.97 $0.2306/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL1

D - 67

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$25.00 $25.00 $25.00 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$46.76 297 kWh

$46.76 297 kWh

$71.76 $25.00 2.87 $46.76 $0.0841/kWh 0.0 yr

$71.76 $25.00 2.87 $46.76 $0.0841/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$73.71 $0.00 $46.76 324 kWh

$73.71 $0.00 $46.76 324 kWh

$73.71 $96.76 0.8 -$23.06 $0 2984/kWh

$73.71 $71.76 1.0 $1.94 $0.2213/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$73.71 $0.00 324 kWh

$73.71 $0.00 324 kWh

$73.71 $50.00 1.47 $23.71 $0.1542/kWh

$73.71 $25.00 29 $48.71 $0.0771/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$73.71 $0.00 324 kWh

$73.71 $0.00 324 kWh

$73.71 $50.00 1.5 $23.71 $0.1542/kWh

$73.71 $25.00 29 $48.71 $0.0771/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL2

D - 68

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Ultra Low-flow Showerheads

$16.01 $16.01 325 kWh/yr 8.3% 354 kWh/yr .116 kW .126 kW $47.22 10 yr

1033% 1033% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM092 24.73 $379.96 $0.0066/kWh 0.0 yr 1.07 $37.49 $0.2131/kWh 3.30 $417.46 $0.0689/kWh 3.30 $417.46 $0.0689/kWh 0.62 -$137.43 $0.1440/kWh 1.53 $216.99 $0.1486/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL3

D - 69

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$16.01 $16.01 $165.39 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$379.96 2,416 kWh

$379.96 2,416 kWh

$395.97 $16.01 24.73 $379.96 $0.0066/kWh 0.0 yr

$395.97 $16.01 24.73 $379.96 $0.0066/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 $379.96 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 $379.96 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $561.36 1.1 $37.49 $0 2131/kWh

$598.86 $395.97 15 $202.89 $0.1503/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $181.40 3.30 $417.46 $0.0689/kWh

$598.86 $16.01 37.4 $582.85 $0.0061/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $0.00 2,634 kWh

$598.86 $181.40 3.3 $417.46 $0.0689/kWh

$598.86 $16.01 37.4 $582.85 $0.0061/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL4

D - 70

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Pilot Smart, Surge Protected Power Bars for PCs and TVs Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $50.00 Measure/Project Cost: $50.00 68 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: 74 kWh/yr Gross Demand Savings: .024 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .026 kW $9.85 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

69% 69% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM112 2.58 $79.24 $0.0992/kWh 0.0 yr 0.76 -$38.84 $0.2980/kWh 1.48 $40.40 $0.1538/kWh 1.48 $40.40 $0.1538/kWh 0.62 -$28.66 $0.1440/kWh 0.99 -$1.41 $0.2302/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL5

D - 71

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$50.00 $50.00 $34.49 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$79.24 504 kWh

$79.24 504 kWh

$129.24 $50.00 2.58 $79.24 $0.0992/kWh 0.0 yr

$129.24 $50.00 2.58 $79.24 $0.0992/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 $79.24 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 $79.24 549 kWh

$124.89 $163.74 0.8 -$38.84 $0 2980/kWh

$124.89 $129.24 1.0 -$4.35 $0.2352/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $84.49 1.48 $40.40 $0.1538/kWh

$124.89 $50.00 25 $74.89 $0.0910/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $0.00 549 kWh

$124.89 $84.49 1.5 $40.40 $0.1538/kWh

$124.89 $50.00 25 $74.89 $0.0910/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL6

D - 72

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot DHW Tank Insulation

$37.58 $37.58 62 kWh/yr 8.3% 68 kWh/yr .022 kW .024 kW $9.01 14 yr

118% 118% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM182 3.47 $92.64 $0.0658/kWh 0.0 yr 0.84 -$28.38 $0.2798/kWh 1.79 $64.26 $0.1312/kWh 1.79 $64.26 $0.1312/kWh 0.62 -$32.97 $0.1482/kWh 1.12 $17.04 $0.2092/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL7

D - 73

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$37.58 $37.58 $44.17 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 14 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$92.64 571 kWh

$92.64 571 kWh

$130.22 $37.58 3.47 $92.64 $0.0658/kWh 0.0 yr

$130.22 $37.58 3.47 $92.64 $0.0658/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 $92.64 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 $92.64 623 kWh

$146.01 $174.39 0.8 -$28.38 $0 2798/kWh

$146.01 $130.22 1.1 $15.79 $0.2090/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $81.75 1.79 $64.26 $0.1312/kWh

$146.01 $37.58 39 $108.43 $0.0603/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $0.00 623 kWh

$146.01 $81.75 1.8 $64.26 $0.1312/kWh

$146.01 $37.58 39 $108.43 $0.0603/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 14 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 14 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 14 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL8

D - 74

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot DHW Pipe Insulation

$0.79 $0.79 34 kWh/yr 8.3% 37 kWh/yr .012 kW .013 kW $4.94 15 yr

3285% 3285% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM202 68.39 $53.23 $0.0024/kWh 0.0 yr 1.05 $3.92 $0.2249/kWh 3.14 $57.16 $0.0752/kWh 3.14 $57.16 $0.0752/kWh 0.62 -$18.88 $0.1492/kWh 1.51 $30.25 $0.1567/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL9

D - 75

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$0.79 $0.79 $25.95 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 15 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$53.23 326 kWh

$53.23 326 kWh

$54.02 $0.79 68.39 $53.23 $0.0024/kWh 0.0 yr

$54.02 $0.79 68.39 $53.23 $0.0024/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 $53.23 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 $53.23 356 kWh

$83.90 $79.98 1.0 $3.92 $0 2249/kWh

$83.90 $54.02 1.6 $29.88 $0.1519/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $26.74 3.14 $57.16 $0.0752/kWh

$83.90 $0.79 106 2 $83.11 $0.0022/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $0.00 356 kWh

$83.90 $26.74 3.1 $57.16 $0.0752/kWh

$83.90 $0.79 106 2 $83.11 $0.0022/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 15 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 15 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 15 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL0

D - 76

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Pilot Motion Detectors - Indoor and Outdoor Measure Name: Incentive Amount: $22.94 Measure/Project Cost: $22.94 66 kWh/yr Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: 8.3% 72 kWh/yr Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: .024 kW Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: .026 kW $9.59 Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: 10 yr Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

146% 146% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM482 4.36 $77.15 $0.0468/kWh 0.0 yr 0.91 -$12.07 $0.2499/kWh 2.15 $65.08 $0.1057/kWh 2.15 $65.08 $0.1057/kWh 0.62 -$27.90 $0.1440/kWh 1.24 $24.37 $0.1840/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL1

D - 77

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$22.94 $22.94 $33.58 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$77.15 490 kWh

$77.15 490 kWh

$100.09 $22.94 4.36 $77.15 $0.0468/kWh 0.0 yr

$100.09 $22.94 4.36 $77.15 $0.0468/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 $77.15 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 $77.15 535 kWh

$121.60 $133.67 0.9 -$12.07 $0 2499/kWh

$121.60 $100.09 12 $21.51 $0.1871/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $56.52 2.15 $65.08 $0.1057/kWh

$121.60 $22.94 53 $98.66 $0.0429/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $0.00 535 kWh

$121.60 $56.52 2.2 $65.08 $0.1057/kWh

$121.60 $22.94 53 $98.66 $0.0429/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL2

D - 78

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Auto Heater Timers

$37.50 $37.50 130 kWh/yr 8.3% 142 kWh/yr 0.05 kW 0.05 kW $18.86 10 yr

100% 176% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM152 5.05 $151.74 $0.0389/kWh 0.0 yr 1.05 $12.42 $0.2155/kWh 3.19 $164.16 $0.0713/kWh 3.19 $164.16 $0.0713/kWh 0.62 -$54.89 $0.1440/kWh 1.51 $84.11 $0.1510/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL3

D - 79

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$37.50 $37.50 $37.50 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$151.74 965 kWh

$151.74 965 kWh

$189.24 $37.50 5.05 $151.74 $0.0389/kWh 0.0 yr

$189.24 $37.50 5.05 $151.74 $0.0389/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 $151.74 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 $151.74 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $226.74 1.1 $12.42 $0 2155/kWh

$239.16 $189.24 13 $49.92 $0.1799/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $75.00 3.19 $164.16 $0.0713/kWh

$239.16 $37.50 6.4 $201.66 $0.0356/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $0.00 1,052 kWh

$239.16 $75.00 3.2 $164.16 $0.0713/kWh

$239.16 $37.50 6.4 $201.66 $0.0356/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL4

D - 80

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Prog. Thermostats (Central)

$62.50 $62.50 827 kWh/yr 8.3% 902 kWh/yr .295 kW .322 kW $120.16 11 yr

741% 741% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM142 17.63 $1,039.26 $0.0095/kWh 0.0 yr 1.05 $73.27 $0.2189/kWh 3.12 $1,112.53 $0.0735/kWh 3.12 $1,112.53 $0.0735/kWh 0.62 -$374.34 $0.1451/kWh 1.50 $568.97 $0.1535/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL5

D - 81

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$62.50 $62.50 $462.95 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 11 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,039 26 6,556 kWh

$1,039.26 6,556 kWh

$1,101.76 $62.50 17.63 $1,039.26 $0.0095/kWh 0.0 yr

$1,101.76 $62.50 17.63 $1,039.26 $0.0095/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 $1,039.26 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 $1,039.26 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $1,564.70 1.0 $73.27 $0 2189/kWh

$1,637.98 $1,101.76 15 $536.22 $0.1541/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $525.45 3.12 $1,112.53 $0.0735/kWh

$1,637.98 $62.50 26 2 $1,575.48 $0.0087/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,637 98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $0.00 7,149 kWh

$1,637.98 $525.45 3.1 $1,112.53 $0.0735/kWh

$1,637.98 $62.50 26 2 $1,575.48 $0.0087/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL6

D - 82

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Prog. Thermostats

$285.43 $285.43 826 kWh/yr 8.3% 901 kWh/yr .295 kW .321 kW $120.02 11 yr

162% 162% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM212 4.64 $1,038.00 $0.0436/kWh 0.0 yr 0.92 -$149.82 $0.2501/kWh 2.19 $888.18 $0.1047/kWh 2.19 $888.18 $0.1047/kWh 0.62 -$373.89 $0.1451/kWh 1.25 $345.28 $0.1833/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL7

D - 83

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$285.43 $285.43 $462.39 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 11 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,038.00 6,548 kWh

$1,038.00 6,548 kWh

$1,323.43 $285.43 4.64 $1,038.00 $0.0436/kWh 0.0 yr

$1,323.43 $285.43 4.64 $1,038.00 $0.0436/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 $1,038.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 $1,038.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $1,785.82 0.9 -$149.82 $0 2501/kWh

$1,636.00 $1,323.43 12 $312.57 $0.1853/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $747.82 2.19 $888.18 $0.1047/kWh

$1,636.00 $285.43 5.7 $1,350.57 $0.0400/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $0.00 7,141 kWh

$1,636.00 $747.82 2.2 $888.18 $0.1047/kWh

$1,636.00 $285.43 5.7 $1,350.57 $0.0400/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 11 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 11 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 11 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL8

D - 84

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot E-Star TVs

$1,125.00 $1,125.00 69 kWh/yr 8.3% 75 kWh/yr .025 kW .027 kW $10.03 10 yr

3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM062 1.07 $80.67 $2.1935/kWh 0.0 yr 0.10 -$1,113.64 $2.2185/kWh 0.11 -$1,032.97 $2.0743/kWh 0.11 -$1,032.97 $2.0743/kWh 0.62 -$29.18 $0.1440/kWh 0.11 -$1,075.53 $2.0737/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL9

D - 85

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$1,125.00 $1,125.00 $35.11 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 10 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$80.67 513 kWh

$80.67 513 kWh

$1,205.67 $1,125.00 1.07 $80.67 $2.1935/kWh 0.0 yr

$1,205.67 $1,125.00 1.07 $80.67 $2.1935/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 $80.67 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 $80.67 559 kWh

$127.14 $1,240.78 0.1 -$1,113.64 $2 2185/kWh

$127.14 $1,205.67 0.1 -$1,078.53 $2.1557/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $1,160.11 0.11 -$1,032 97 $2.0743/kWh

$127.14 $1,125.00 0.1 -$997.86 $2.0115/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $0.00 559 kWh

$127.14 $1,160.11 0.1 -$1,032 97 $2.0743/kWh

$127.14 $1,125.00 0.1 -$997.86 $2.0115/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 10 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 10 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 10 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL0

D - 86

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot ESTAR Printers and Fax

$200.00 $200.00 32 kWh/yr 8.3% 35 kWh/yr .011 kW .012 kW $4.61 6 yr

5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM082 1.12 $24.48 $1.2431/kWh 0.0 yr 0.16 -$195.59 $1.3347/kWh 0.18 -$171.11 $1.1952/kWh 0.18 -$171.11 $1.1952/kWh 0.62 -$9.01 $0.1394/kWh 0.18 -$184.49 $1.2468/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL1

D - 87

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$200.00 $200.00 $9.69 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 6 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$24.48 161 kWh

$24.48 161 kWh

$224.48 $200.00 1.12 $24.48 $1 2431/kWh 0.0 yr

$224.48 $200.00 1.12 $24.48 $1.2431/kWh 0.0 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 $24.48 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 $24.48 175 kWh

$38.58 $234.17 0.2 -$195 59 $1 3347/kWh

$38.58 $224.48 02 -$185.90 $1.2795/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $209.69 0.18 -$171.11 $1.1952/kWh

$38.58 $200.00 02 -$161.42 $1.1399/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $0.00 175 kWh

$38.58 $209.69 0.2 -$171.11 $1.1952/kWh

$38.58 $200.00 02 -$161.42 $1.1399/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 6 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 6 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 6 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL2

D - 88

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Cold Temp Heat Pumps

$5,000.00 $8,498.44 6,780 kWh/yr 8.3% 7,394 kWh/yr 2.42 kW 2.64 kW $985.13 20 yr

138% 138% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM032 2.08 $9,204.38 $0.1129/kWh 3.6 yr 0.81 -$4,582.55 $0.2996/kWh 1.30 $4,621.84 $0.1875/kWh 1.68 $8,120.28 $0.1449/kWh 0.62 -$4,425.66 $0.1537/kWh 1.10 $1,961.99 $0.2232/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL3

D - 89

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$8,498.44 $5,000.00 $6,900.67 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$12,702.82 75,306 kWh

$12,702.82 75,306 kWh

$17,702.82 $8,498.44 2.08 $9,204.38 $0.1129/kWh 3.6 yr

$17,702.82 $8,498.44 2.08 $9,204.38 $0.1129/kWh 3.6 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 $12,702.82 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 $12,702.82 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $24,603.49 0.8 -$4,582.55 $0 2996/kWh

$20,020.95 $17,702.82 1.1 $2,318.12 $0.2156/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020 95 $15,399.11 1.30 $4,621.84 $0.1875/kWh

$20,020.95 $8,498.44 2.4 $11,522.51 $0.1035/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020 95 $11,900.67 1.7 $8,120.28 $0.1449/kWh

$20,020.95 $5,000.00 4.0 $15,020.95 $0.0609/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL4

D - 90

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Pilot Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

$9,000.00 $34,245.24 8,605 kWh/yr 8.3% 9,384 kWh/yr 3.07 kW 3.35 kW $1,250.31 20 yr

97% 97% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM372 0.73 -$9,123.14 $0.3583/kWh 20.2 yr 0.75 -$8,470.18 $0.3251/kWh 0.59 -$17,593.32 $0.4126/kWh 1.43 $7,651.91 $0.1704/kWh 0.62 -$5,616.94 $0.1537/kWh 0.99 -$164.02 $0.2468/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL5

D - 91

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$34,245 24 $9,000.00 $8,758.15 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16,122.09 95,576 kWh

$16,122.09 95,576 kWh

$25,122.09 $34,245 24 0.73 -$9,123.14 $0 3583/kWh 20 2 yr

$25,122.09 $34,245.24 0.73 -$9,123.14 $0.3583/kWh 20.2 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 $16,122.09 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 $16,122.09 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $33,880.24 0.7 -$8,470.18 $0 3251/kWh

$25,410.06 $25,122.09 1.0 $287.97 $0.2410/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $43,003 39 0.59 -$17,593 32 $0.4126/kWh

$25,410.06 $34,245.24 0.7 -$8,835.17 $0.3286/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $17,758.15 1.4 $7,651.91 $0.1704/kWh

$25,410.06 $9,000.00 2.8 $16,410.06 $0.0863/kWh

PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL6

D - 92

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Cold Temp Heat Pumps

$2,500.00 $8,498.44 6,780 kWh/yr 8.3% 7,394 kWh/yr 2.42 kW 2.64 kW $985.13 20 yr

216% 216% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM03 1.79 $6,704.38 $0.1129/kWh 6.1 yr 0.97 -$577.12 $0.2508/kWh 1.44 $6,127.27 $0.1692/kWh 2.54 $12,125.71 $0.0961/kWh 0.62 -$4,425.66 $0.1537/kWh 1.38 $5,967.42 $0.1780/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 93

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$8,498.44 $2,500.00 $5,395 24 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$12,702.82 75,306 kWh

$12,702.82 75,306 kWh

$15,202.82 $8,498.44 1.79 $6,704.38 $0.1129/kWh 6.1 yr

$15,202.82 $8,498.44 1.79 $6,704.38 $0.1129/kWh 6.1 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 $12,702.82 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 $12,702.82 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $20,598.06 1.0 -$577.12 $0 2508/kWh

$20,020.95 $15,202.82 13 $4,818.12 $0.1851/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020 95 $13,893.68 1.44 $6,127.27 $0.1692/kWh

$20,020.95 $8,498.44 2.4 $11,522.51 $0.1035/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$20,020 95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020.95 $0.00 82,122 kWh

$20,020 95 $7,895.24 2.5 $12,125.71 $0.0961/kWh

$20,020.95 $2,500.00 8.0 $17,520.95 $0.0304/kWh

D - 94

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Energy Conservation Measure - Justification of the Incentive Level Inputs - Measure Considerations Measure Name: Incentive Amount: Measure/Project Cost: Gross Consumption Savings: Transport and distribution losses: Gross Cons. Savings w/ T&D Losses: Gross Demand Savings: Gross Demand Savings w/ T&D losses: Participant's Savings on Year 1: Measure Lifetime: Inputs - Program Considerations Program Cost (% of Incentive): Suggested Program Cost (% of Incentive): Forecasted Freeridership: Forecasted Participant Spillover: Forecasted Non-participant Spillover: Forecasted Rebound Effects:

Ground Heat Pumps - Closed

$3,500.00 $34,245.24 8,605 kWh/yr 8.3% 9,384 kWh/yr 3.07 kW 3.35 kW $1,250.31 20 yr

196% 196% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Outputs with Program Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback w/ Incentive (yr) RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost RIM-YECL - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YECL - Net Present Value RIM-YECL - Levelized Cost RIM-YEC - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM-YEC - Net Present Value RIM-YEC - Levelized Cost

ECM37 0.57 -$14,623.14 $0.3583/kWh 24.6 yr 0.96 -$1,059.53 $0.2540/kWh 0.62 -$15,682.67 $0.3943/kWh 2.46 $15,062.57 $0.0993/kWh 0.62 -$5,616.94 $0.1537/kWh 1.36 $7,246.63 $0.1809/kWh

Reference Data from Other Jurisdictions:

Additional Discussions:

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

D - 95

Yukon Energy Corporation and Yukon Electrical Company Limited YEC YECL Residential DSM Program Design - ECM-level Cost-effectiveness test and Incentive Level Substantiation

Detailed Calculation of the Cost-effectiveness Tests Values Used in All Cost-effectiveness Tests Incremental Cost in Year 1 Incentive Amount in Year 1 Assumed Program Administration Costs in Year 1 Assumed Net-to-gross Ratio

$34,245 24 $3,500.00 $6,847 50 100%

NTG = 1 - Freeridership P. Spi lover

N.-p. Spillover - Rebound

Participant Cost Test (PC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PC Discount Rates Present Value of Participant's Avoided Energy Cost for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Gross Energy Savings for 20 years PC - Present Value of Benefits PC - Present Value of Costs PC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PC - Net Present Value PC - Levelized Cost Simple Payback with Incentive Ratepayer Impact Measure Test (RIM) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ RIM Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Present Value of Lost Revenues for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years RIM - Present Value of Benefits RIM - Present Value of Costs RIM - Benefit/Cost Ratio RIM - Net Present Value RIM - Levelized Cost Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ TRC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years TRC - Present Value of Benefits TRC - Present Value of Costs TRC - Benefit/Cost Ratio TRC - Net Present Value TRC - Levelized Cost Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) Cumulative Present Value of Cashflows w/ PAC Discount Rate Present Value of Avoided Energy Costs for 20 years Present Value of Avoided Capacity Costs for 20 years Discounted Cumulative Net Energy Savings for 20 years PAC - Present Value of Benefits PAC - Present Value of Costs PAC - Benefit/Cost Ratio PAC - Net Present Value PAC - Levelized Cost

ICF Marbek

CONFIDENTIAL

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$16,122.09 95,576 kWh

$16,122.09 95,576 kWh

$19,622.09 $34,245 24 0.57 -$14,623.14 $0 3583/kWh 24.6 yr

$19,622.09 $34,245.24 0.57 -$14,623.14 $0.3583/kWh 24.6 yr

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 $16,122.09 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 $16,122.09 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $26,469.59 1.0 -$1,059.53 $0 2540/kWh

$25,410.06 $19,622.09 13 $5,787.97 $0.1883/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $41,092.74 0.62 -$15,682.67 $0 3943/kWh

$25,410.06 $34,245.24 0.7 -$8,835.17 $0.3286/kWh

With Program Costs

W/o Program Costs

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $0.00 104,227 kWh

$25,410.06 $10,347 50 2.5 $15,062.57 $0.0993/kWh

$25,410.06 $3,500.00 73 $21,910.06 $0.0336/kWh

D - 96