Topic:"Low Income Programs" in M08888

2.1 Comments from Synapse Energy Economics On pages one and two of its letter of comment (section 2), Synapse suggests several report modifications to aid in the clarity and presentation of the Report. Those suggestions were: An updated ve...

AI summary Synapse Energy Economics recommends updates to tables and sections in the report, including standardizing NEB categories, breaking down TRC values by end use, clarifying data sources in Table 10, and prioritizing research recommendations. VEIC responded by updating Table 1 but excluded exclusive low-income NEBs for market-rate programs.

EFFICIENCYONE RESPONSE TO DSMAG NEBs COMMENTS EfficiencyOne supports the application of low-income specific participant and utility NEBs and suggests their inclusion be subject to additional discussion at the DSMAG. EfficiencyOne suggests...

AI summary EfficiencyOne supports incorporating low-income specific non-energy benefits (NEBs) but recommends further DSMAG discussion. They reference the Three3/NMR study and note no jurisdictions (e.g., Massachusetts) have integrated such NEBs into market-rate programs. They agree with Synapse on HomeWarming program reporting and advocate for a long-term NEB strategy, including National Screening Practice Manual alignment.

- Customer Calls and Collections - Notices - Rate Discounts - Safety Related Emergency Call s - Price Hedging - Improved Safety - Rental Units Marketability - Reduced Tenant Complaints 1 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Department of Pub...

AI summary The document outlines Action Item #2, requiring VEIC and EfficiencyOne to summarize Massachusetts' regulatory processes, focusing on non-energy benefits (NEBs) that influenced discussions. It notes that in Massachusetts, utility benefits are limited to low-income programs. Key entities include EfficiencyOne, VEIC, and Massachusetts' regulatory bodies.

Synapse Question 2: Per Table 1 of the VEIC report, a number of utility NEBs were not included in the VEIC analysis. Does E1 have plans to quantify these utility NEBs separately? If not, why not? Given the differing methodologies and signi...

AI summary EfficiencyOne excluded utility NEBs in their analysis due to differing methodologies and focus on market-rate programs, referencing a 2011 NMR study that recommends including Utility NEBs only for low-income programs.

Low-Income Proportions - 2017 2017 Results First-Year Energy Savings (GWh) Lifetime Energy Savings (GWh) 1 Peak Demand Savings (MW) Expenditures ($ million) Residential Efficient Product Rebates 22.6 202.2 3.0 4.2 Instant Savings 19.5 179....

AI summary This table provides a breakdown of energy savings and expenditures for low-income and overall residential and business programs in 2017. It highlights the contribution of various initiatives, such as efficient product rebates, home energy assessments, and business energy programs, to energy savings and expenditures, with low-income proportions noted for each category.

Analysis of the Affordable Multifamily Housing Pilot - AEC and others have submitted that the exclusion of lowincome NEBs from the analysis was inappropriate - AEC and others suggested that an initial analysis could include the Affordable...

AI summary AEC and others argue that excluding low-income non-energy benefits (NEBs) from the analysis was inappropriate and suggest including the Affordable Multifamily Housing pilot in initial assessments. Resource Insight recommends incorporating participant and utility NEBs in future evaluations of low-income programs.

The scope of this project focuses on Efficiency Nova Scotia's market-rate portfolio. However, a percentage of participants of market-rate programs offered by Efficiency Nova Scotia qualify as low-income. Because energy costs consume a larg...

AI summary This text discusses a study commissioned by Massachusetts' Program Administrators to assess non-energy impacts of low-income weatherization and energy efficiency projects. It highlights the disproportionate benefits of energy efficiency in low-income households and references studies, labor rates, and fuel price data from various sources.

al service providers and health and safety experts. The goal of these interviews was to review NEBs in the literature, identify additional NEBs and to understand how NEBs were treated in other states. NMR proceeded to use this information...

AI summary The study involved interviews with service providers and experts to review Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs), design surveys for households and low-income rental housing, and assess NEI (Non-Energy Impacts). Surveys included 213 low-income and 209 non-low-income households, stratified by installed measures, with questions on perceived NEI value, health changes, and demographics. The methodology details sample size and weighting.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL Request IR-01: How will NEBs affect low income DSM programs moving forward? Response IR-01: The inclusion of NEBs in the TRC screening for DSM program development does have the potential to impact measure selection for low...

AI summary The response to Request IR-01 discusses how the inclusion of NEBs in the TRC screening may affect the selection of measures for low-income DSM programs. It refers to EfficiencyOne's response to UARB IR-07 for further details.

E1 Responses to Affordable Energy Coalition Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-02: 2 3 To illustrate the practical impact that NEBs could have: 4 a. if a measure being considered for a low income rental program has a Total...

AI summary The response to Affordable Energy Coalition's information requests discusses the impact of Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) on Total Resource Cost (TRC) calculations for low-income rental programs. It explains that TRC is one of several considerations in program decisions and that including NEBs may influence whether a measure is included in the program.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL Request IR-05: Practical considerations of implementation aside, does EfficiencyOne believe that Nova Scotia should have a dedicated low-income program that includes the use of low income NEBs in the Cost Effectiveness Tes...

AI summary EfficiencyOne supports a directed low-income demand-side management (DSM) program in Nova Scotia, emphasizing customer equity and the use of low-income net energy benefits (NEBs) in cost-effectiveness tests to determine eligible measures.

Ingrid Malmgren Transportation Policy Manager Ingrid Malmgren supports VEIC's Transportation Efficiency department deliverables with research and collaborative project management. She researches and analyzes topics on energy policy and reg...

AI summary Ingrid Malmgren, a Transportation Policy Manager at VEIC, focuses on energy policy, transportation efficiency, and clean energy benefits. She has analyzed EV grid feasibility, low-income energy programs, and environmental health impacts. Her work includes NYSERDA studies, Sierra Club reports, and NASEO toolkits for VW settlement mitigation plans.

nal wage rates; fewer fires valued via insurance tables; arrearage studies) and (3) specialized comparative statistical surveys estimated household and business-accruing NEBs. Additional studies identified priority NEBs (based on size, for...

AI summary The text outlines three stages of NEB (Non-Energy Benefits) development: initial studies (1980s-1990s), California's comprehensive NEB model and revised LIPPT (2001), and expanded applications (2001-present). It highlights NEB use in program evaluations, marketing, and benefits testing, emphasizing low-income programs.

The Colorado Case Study Two main factors led to Colorado's 2008 decision to adopt an NEB adder for electric and low-income electric programs: evidence from research and the engagement of interveners. Evidence in research contributed greatl...

AI summary Colorado's 2008 decision to adopt an NEB adder for electric and low-income programs was driven by research evidence and interverner support. The Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) incorporated an NEB adder into a modified Total Resource Cost Test (TRC). Proxy values (e.g., 10% for electric programs) were mandated for cost-effectiveness analyses, with special consideration for low-income programs using a Utility Cost Test (UCT) if TRC fell below 1.0.

o PUC's cost-effectiveness proceeding coincided with Vermont's proceeding. In 2008, the Colorado PUC adopted an NEB adder of 10% for electric programs, and a 20% adder for lowincome electric programs. The introduction of an NEB adder in Co...

AI summary Vermont's adoption of a 15% NEB adder for energy efficiency programs was influenced by Colorado's NEB adder policies and collaboration among Vermont entities. The Board deemed 15% a conservative rebuttable presumption, to be revisited in biennial proceedings, acknowledging the uncertainty around NEB values but rejecting a zero estimate.

References Allen, R. 2009. Vermont Public Service Board Memorandum, October 30. page 16. http://psb.vermont.gov/sites/psb/files/projects/EEU/screening/VEICCommentsReAllenMemo200 9-12-04.pdf - Clean and Affordable Energy Act, Council of the...

AI summary The references include legal documents, studies, and legislation related to energy efficiency, non-energy benefits, and regulatory decisions. Key entities involve Vermont and Colorado regulatory bodies, ACEEE, and Brookings Institution. Topics focus on cost-effectiveness screening, TRC, and NEBs. Cross-references include Colorado PUC decisions and Vermont PSB memoranda.

te that, "NEBs may reflect some of the most important effects from energy efficiency measures and programs, and may especially represent some of the most important outcomes for low-income strategies." In 2009, the Colorado Public Utility C...

AI summary The text discusses the valuation of Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) in energy efficiency programs, highlighting Colorado's approach with different NEB adders for low-income and non-low-income programs. VEIC supports a 30% non-energy benefit adjustment, citing administrative efficiency and additional benefits for low-income programs. Colorado PUC increased the NEB adder for low-income programs to 25% in 2011.

2. Valuation of HPF Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) in Low-Income Programs Fluctuations in Heating and Process Fuel markets disproportionately affect low income households. As a result, an increasing number of state programs are incorporating N...

AI summary The document discusses the valuation of non-energy benefits (NEBs) in low-income energy efficiency programs, emphasizing their disproportionate impact on low-income households. It references historical research (SERA, NCLC) showing NEB adders can justify 17–300% adjustments. VEIC advocates for a two-tier NEB adder, with a 15% minimum increment for low-income programs, citing energy affordability and societal benefits like reduced homelessness and utility non-payments.

E1 Responses to Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (Synapse) Information Requests 1 Request IR-04: 2 3 Please refer to Page 20 of the Study. 4 a. How are low-income customers defined? 5 b. By program, what percentage of customers eligibl...

AI summary The document responds to information requests regarding how low-income customers are defined and their participation in market-rate programs offered by EfficiencyOne. EfficiencyOne uses low-income prevalence data from Statistics Canada based on before-tax low-income cutoffs to estimate incidental participation.

2 Table 1: Low-income prevalence by county, Statistics Canada Community Profiles, 2006 County % Low Income Annapolis 14.9 Antigonish 9.7 Cape Breton 18.4 Colchester 12.6 Cumberland 15.9 Digby 13.2 Guysborough 13.2 Halifax 14.3 Hants 9.4 In...

AI summary Table 1 presents the percentage of low-income residents by county in Nova Scotia based on Statistics Canada Community Profiles from 2006. The data shows varying rates of low-income prevalence across different counties, with Cape Breton having the highest rate at 18.4% and Yarmouth, Victoria, and Inverness having the lowest rates.

c) Please see table 2, which summarizes 2017 participation by % of participants estimated to be low-income. Please refer to Attachment 1 of this IR response for an explanation of the process used to estimate low-income participation. These...

AI summary The text references a table and attachment that provide information on low-income participation in the Appliance Retirement program, distinguishing between direct and incidental participation. It also mentions a response to information requests by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board.

1 Table 2: Percentage of customers in programs offered by EfficiencyOne estimated to be low income (2017) Residential Programs % of participation estimated to be low income Participation unit Efficient Product Rebates Instant Savings1 1% U...

AI summary Table 2 provides an overview of the estimated percentage of low-income participants in various EfficiencyOne programs in 2017, highlighting the distribution of participation across residential, business, and institutional programs.

1 OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) delivers the HomeWarming service to Nova Scotians that primarily use non-electric heating. Since HomeWarming is only offered to low income Nova Scotians, it is considered "dedicated"...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia (ENS) provides the HomeWarming service to low-income Nova Scotians using non-electric heating. The document outlines assumptions for estimating incidental participation in ENS programs, used in reports but not tied to performance targets.

Overall Prevalence (OP) of Low Income Nova Scotians From the county-level low income census data, the provincial average percentage of low income residents was calculated to be 14%. This is the Overall Prevalence (OP).

AI summary The Overall Prevalence (OP) of low income residents in Nova Scotia was calculated as 14% using county-level census data, representing the provincial average percentage of low-income individuals.

Assumption Low income Nova Scotians are assumed to be 10 per cent as likely to participate as the general population (as estimated by a local low-income expert).

AI summary The analysis assumes low-income Nova Scotians have a 10% participation rate relative to the general population, based on estimates from a local low-income expert. This assumption underpins calculations related to program engagement and resource allocation in regulatory proceedings.

Calculation Low income savings = (total savings) x (OP) x (10%)

AI summary The calculation formula for low-income savings is derived by multiplying total savings by Overall Prevalence (OP) and a 10% factor. This method is part of a regulatory proceeding in Nova Scotia, likely related to energy efficiency or utility programs.

Assumptions When tracking savings and expenditures, ENS includes appliance replacements (which are delivered through the HomeWarming service) within the Appliance Retirement program component, however the low income participation is calcul...

AI summary ENS tracks appliance replacements (via HomeWarming) within the Appliance Retirement program, noting low-income participation calculations differ. Replacements are exclusively low-income, while retirements assume low-income Nova Scotians participate at 10% the rate of the general population, per a local expert estimate.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no low-income participation, which may influence the evaluation of non-energy benefits and overall prevalence. This assumption could affect the consideration of efficiency programs and their broader implications.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no participation from low-income groups, which may affect the consideration of their needs in the regulatory decisions.

Assumptions Income disclosure is optional for this program component. Low income participants are tracked where income information is available; otherwise low income Nova Scotians are assumed to participate in proportion to the general pop...

AI summary Income disclosure is optional for the program component. Low-income participants are tracked when income data is available; otherwise, their participation is assumed to mirror the general population's proportion within each county.

Calculation Total low income savings = (tracked low income savings) + [(total low income savings from undisclosed income group) x (AP)]

AI summary The document presents a formula to calculate total low income savings, combining tracked savings with an adjustment factor (AP) applied to savings from an undisclosed income group. The calculation emphasizes quantifying benefits for low-income populations within regulatory proceedings.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no participation from low-income groups, which may affect the consideration of their needs in the regulatory decisions.

Calculation Low income savings = (total savings from apartment buildings) x (AP)

AI summary The calculation for low-income savings is derived by multiplying the total savings from apartment buildings by a factor (AP), indicating a method to quantify benefits specific to low-income households in energy efficiency programs.

Calculation Low income savings = (total savings from apartment buildings) x (AP)

AI summary The calculation for low-income savings is derived by multiplying the total savings from apartment buildings by a factor (AP), indicating a method to quantify benefits specific to low-income households in energy efficiency programs.

Assumption No low income participation.

AI summary The proceeding assumes no low-income participation in the matter. This assumption is explicitly stated as a foundational premise for the analysis, though no further context or justification is provided in the text.

regarding the charitable contribution which NSPI had agreed to make to Clean Nova Scotia ("CNS") for a low income residential program (Sections 9 and 10 of the Quantum Agreement) were also important. [21] The second document (Exhibit E-62)...

AI summary The document references NSPI's charitable contribution to Clean Nova Scotia for a low-income residential program under the Quantum Agreement and the incorporation of the Consensus Agreement (Exhibit E-62) into the Quantum Agreement, signed by NSPI, E1, the CA, EAC, and other stakeholders.

4.0 LETTERS OF COMMENT AND PUBLIC SPEAKERS [129] The Board received 37 letters of comment from various persons, who wrote individually or on behalf of organizations. With only two exceptions, all were supportive of E1 and maintaining the a...

AI summary The Board received 37 letters, mostly supporting E1's DSM plan, citing environmental, economic, and low-income benefits. Public speakers emphasized maintaining DSM programs and energy efficiency culture. One letter critiqued Dr. Peach's evidence, while concerns about industry capacity if spending decreases were raised.

9) Principles of Equity a) All ratepayers are entitled to an equitable opportunity to participate in DSM programs. Low-income tenants and homeowners as well as marginally viable commercial and industrial customers are some of the most diff...

AI summary All ratepayers must have equitable access to DSM programs, with special consideration for low-income and marginalized customers. Services should address barriers they face, and cost-effectiveness must account for higher costs associated with serving these groups.

James R. Gogan Direct Dial: (902) 563-5920 E-Mail: [email protected] File No. 41736-71 September 19, 2018 Nova Scotia Utility & Review Board PO Box 1692, Unit "M" Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3S3 Attention: Doreen Friis, Regulatory Affair...

AI summary EfficiencyOne seeks approval to use measure-level Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) in cost-effectiveness (CE) testing for future Demand Side Management (DSM) planning. This follows Board Matter M06733, where a Consensus Agreement required collaborative work with the DSM Advisory Group to quantify NEBs for improving CE tests. The agreement acknowledged that low-income-focused measures may fail CE tests.

isory Group's progress on this work. - c) The Parties acknowledge that specific measures and/or programs exclusively targeted toward low-income Nova Scotians may not pass a cost-effectiveness test. In its December 22, 2016, update to the B...

AI summary EfficiencyOne submitted recommendations on non-energy benefits (NEB) to the Board, noting that low-income measures may fail cost-effectiveness tests. The Board acknowledged EfficiencyOne's work on NEB methodology, pending future applications. EfficiencyOne requested to file only an electronic copy of a large attachment. The Breton Law Group is listed as counsel.

___________________________________ Doreen Friis, Regulatory Affairs Office Clerk 1 Request IR-1: 37 38 b. Did the study analyze the extent to which cooling degree days in Nova Scotia translate into actual cooling hours, given the low pene...

AI summary The text contains regulatory requests related to the analysis of cooling degree days in Nova Scotia, incentives for heating and cooling measures by EfficiencyOne, and the methodology for combining heating and cooling days. It also includes a request regarding the definition of low-income customers.

AEC Information Requests: - 1. How will NEBs affect low income DSM programs moving forward? - 2. To illustrate the practical impact that NEBs could have: - a. if a measure being considered for a low income rental program has a Total Resour...

AI summary The Affordable Energy Coalition (AEC) requests information on how Non-Energy Benefits (NEBs) impact low-income demand-side management (DSM) programs, including TRC calculations, resource allocation for program analysis, potential measures for inclusion, and whether Nova Scotia should establish a dedicated low-income program incorporating NEBs in cost-effectiveness tests.

Group's progress on this work. - (c) The Parties acknowledge that specific measures and / or programs exclusively targeted toward low-income Nova Scotians may not pass a cost-effectiveness test. Included with the filing of the NEB Applicat...

AI summary EfficiencyOne seeks NSUARB approvals for NEB Application measures, including using specific per-measure values, adjusting BNI sector NEB calculations, and adopting a management strategy. The Parties note low-income programs may fail cost-effectiveness tests. The NSUARB issued a Hearing Order on October 1, 2018, following Information Requests filed in October 2018 and responded to in November 2018.