HomeProgram EvaluationM12249Evidence
Topic/Matter Intersection

Topic:"Program Evaluation" in M12249

Matter: EfficiencyOne - 2026 DSM Extension ApplicationIN THE MATTER OF An Application by EfficiencyOne for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension for Demand-Side Management Activities between EfficiencyOne and Nova Scotia Power Inc., and for Approval of the Amendment to the 2023-2025 Demand-Side Management Purchase Agreement between EfficiencyOne and Nova Scotia Power Inc.
300 passages 34 documents

Program Evaluation across all matters →

E-1Application and Evidence 34 passages
1.3 DESIGN OBJECTIVES p. pp. 9-10
1.3 DESIGN OBJECTIVES E1's overarching objectives in developing the 2026 DSM Extension were as follows: - a) program continuity with the 2023-2025 DSM Plan; - b) achievability of performance targets; - c) continued cost-effectiveness; and...

AI summary E1's 2026 DSM Extension objectives include program continuity, achievable targets, cost-effectiveness, and balance. It maintains 50/50 residential-BNI investment splits but reduced low-income equity investment to 15-20% (from 17-22%) due to updated census data showing fewer low-income Nova Scotians.

1.4 KEY INPUTS p. p. 10
1.4 KEY INPUTS The key input categories that informed the 2026 DSM Extension were as follows: - a) The prescribed statutory investment level of $63,750,000; - b) The 2023-2025 DSM Plan portfolio and corresponding programs; - c) To date 202...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension is informed by four key inputs: a statutory investment level of $63.75M, the 2023-2025 DSM Plan portfolio, implementation results to 2023, and the 2025 forecast. Statistics Canada's 2021 census data on Nova Scotia's Low-Income Measure After Tax (LIM-AT) is also referenced.

1.6 PROGRAM CONTINUITY p. pp. 11-12
1.6 PROGRAM CONTINUITY - Consistent with the concept of an extension to the existing Board approved DSM Plan, there are no new - programs contemplated under the 2026 DSM Extension. The three residential energy efficiency programs - categor...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension continues existing programs without new initiatives, maintaining residential and BNI energy efficiency categories, retiring some components like New Home Construction, and retaining demand response programs. E1 monitors and adjusts programs as needed.

2.3 ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY p. pp. 17-18
2.3 ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY A context-setting exercise in the current era would not be complete without noting the significant economic uncertainty that has arisen due to America's ever-evolving trade policies. The United States (US) tariffs...

AI summary Economic uncertainty from US tariffs on Canada, combined with lingering supply chain and labor market issues post-pandemic, may impact Nova Scotia's E1 programs and DSM costs. E1 acknowledges potential effects but has not adjusted 2026 targets due to policy unpredictability.

16 4. 2026 DSM PROGRAMS p. p. 21
16 4. 2026 DSM PROGRAMS

AI summary The document outlines the 2026 Demand-Side Management (DSM) Programs under regulatory review by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB). Key entities include the DSM Cost Recovery Rider (DCRR) and the Public Utilities Act (PUA), with involvement from the Independent Energy System Operator (IESO) and the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).

22 Table 3: Program Modifications and Retirements in the 2026 DSM Extension p. p. 21
22 Table 3: Program Modifications and Retirements in the 2026 DSM Extension Program Program Component Changes and Enhancements in the 2026 DSM Extension as compared to the 2023-2025 Plan Continued/Modified/ Retired • No longer offering app...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension outlines modifications and retirements to various programs, including the discontinuation of appliance replacements in favor of the Appliance Retirement program, continued support for residential behavior programs, and renaming of the Strategic Energy Management program component.

Preamble p. pp. 28-51
Avoided costs of both energy and capacity were based on NS Power's Evergreen IRP and avoided costs of transmission and distribution were provided by NS Power, both provided to the DSMAG on August 23, 2024. Avoided costs of carbon are embed...

AI summary The text discusses avoided costs of energy, capacity, transmission, and distribution based on NS Power's Evergreen IRP, and how they are used in cost-effectiveness calculations for energy efficiency (EE) and demand response (DR) programs. It also highlights the collaboration required between E1 and NS Power for DR benefits and the use of various metrics like TRC and PAC for evaluating program performance.

6. EVALUATION AND REPORTING p. p. 29
6. EVALUATION AND REPORTING E1 intends to follow the current Board approved measurement and evaluation activities as established in the 2023-2025 Plan. This includes an annual impact evaluation for each program. - Similarly, throughout the...

AI summary E1 will follow the Board-approved measurement and evaluation activities from the 2023-2025 Plan, including annual impact evaluations and specific reporting for the 2026 DSM Extension. References to M10473 and compliance filings are cited.

7. CONCLUSION p. pp. 29-31
7. CONCLUSION - The 2026 DSM Extension Application is a filing brought about through recently enacted legislative - amendments to the Public Utilities Act which; - (1) extends the demand-side management purchase agreement approved by the B...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension Application seeks to extend the existing DSM Plan until 2026 under new PUA amendments, proposing energy and demand savings targets. The extension aligns with legislative intent, maintains program continuity, and meets cost-effectiveness criteria with a TRC of 1.6. E1 requests Board approval for the extension.

2.2.1 2023 AND 2024 PLAN RESULTS p. pp. 38-39
2.2.1 2023 AND 2024 PLAN RESULTS Table 1, below, provides E1's evaluated results for 2023 and 2024 as compared to the approved 2023-2025 Plan. E1's 2023 and 2024 annual impact evaluations provide up-to-date impacts on the net electrical en...

AI summary This section presents the 2023 and 2024 plan results, comparing E1's evaluated outcomes to the approved 2023-2025 Plan. It highlights progress indicators such as net electrical energy and net system peak-demand savings, as well as available capacity, to assess performance against the approved targets.

2.3 2025 PLAN FORECAST p. p. 41
M10473, 2023-2025 DSM Resource Plan Compliance Filing, October 4, 2022, Appendix C, Schedule E, page 113 M12186, E1 2024 DSM Annual Progress Report, March 31, 2025

AI summary The document references two filings: M10473, a 2023-2025 DSM Resource Plan Compliance Filing from October 4, 2022, and M12186, the E1 2024 DSM Annual Progress Report dated March 31, 2025.

5. ENERGY EFFICIENCY p. pp. 63-64
5. ENERGY EFFICIENCY The 2026 DSM Extension continues to deliver cost-effective energy savings benefits for Nova Scotia's residential and BNI customers. In the program sections that follow, E1 has highlighted changes, modifications or enha...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension continues to deliver cost-effective energy savings for residential and BNI customers, with E1 highlighting changes compared to the 2023-2025 Plan.

5.1 RESIDENTIAL EFFICIENT PRODUCT REBATES p. p. 64
5.1 RESIDENTIAL EFFICIENT PRODUCT REBATES The Residential Efficient Product Rebates program offers residential customers financial incentives for consumer products through retail channels. In the 2023-2025 DSM Plan, the program included tw...

AI summary The Residential Efficient Product Rebates program, part of the DSM Plan, initially had two components: Instant Savings and Appliance Retirement. E1 terminated Appliance Retirement in 2025 due to rising costs and declining savings, leaving only Instant Savings in the 2026 DSM Extension.

4 5.2 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL p. pp. 65-66
4 5.2 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL - 5 The Existing Residential program provides residential customers with access to information, technical - 6 support, and financial assistance to identify, assess and implement energy efficiency behaviours and -...

AI summary The Existing Residential program, part of the 2023-2025 Plan, will transition from seven to six components by 2026, removing Green Heat due to declining participation. The 2026 DSM Extension includes six components, such as Home Energy Assessments and Mi'kmaw initiatives, while E1 cites reduced savings as the reason for ending Green Heat.

10 5.2.3 EFFICIENT PROD UCT IN STALLATION p. p. 68
10 5.2.3 EFFICIENT PROD UCT IN STALLATION Efficient Product Installation conducts energy efficient upgrades for homeowners and renters, at no-cost. During a home visit, qualified installers provide free installation of energy efficient pro...

AI summary Efficient Product Installation offers free energy upgrades, including smart devices and efficiency measures, to homeowners and renters. Customers are auto-enrolled in Eco Shift (E1's Demand Response program), enhancing capacity and promoting energy savings through direct engagement and education during home visits.

11 5.3 EFFICIENT PRODUCT REBATES p. p. 72
11 5.3 EFFICIENT PRODUCT REBATES - 12 The Efficient Product Rebates program provides BNI customers with financial incentives, in the form of - 13 prescriptive rebates or financing for the installation of energy efficient and system-peak de...

AI summary The Efficient Product Rebates program offers BNI customers financial incentives for installing energy-efficient and demand-reducing equipment. It targets non-profit, commercial, industrial, and institutional customers, with a focus on predictable savings. The program includes a single component: Business Energy Rebates.

15 5.4 CUSTOM INCENTIVES p. p. 73
15 5.4 CUSTOM INCENTIVES - 16 The Custom Incentives program provides financial incentives and technical assistance to help non-profit, 17 institutional, commercial, and industrial customers reduce their electrical energy consumption and 18...

AI summary The Custom Incentives program offers tailored financial and technical support to non-profit, institutional, commercial, and industrial customers to reduce energy consumption and peak demand. It includes two components: Custom and Strategic Energy Management (SEM), with E1 collaborating directly on projects not covered by other programs.

7 Table 17: 2026 Summary of Custom Program Component p. p. 74
7 Table 17: 2026 Summary of Custom Program Component Extension Investment ($M) Energy Savings (GWh) Demand Savings (MW) Participation (projects) 2026 Total 9.8 34.0 7.0 172 Program Component Changes • approved 2023-2025 Plan. • Efficiency...

AI summary Table 17 outlines the 2026 DSM Extension with $9.8M investment, 34GWh energy savings, 7MW demand savings, and 172 participating projects. The 2023-2025 Plan was approved, and the 2026 strategy includes targeted marketing, AMI data use, and engagement with professionals. Attachment 3 provides detailed measure-level data.

12 5.4.2 STRATEGIC EN ERGY M AN AGEM EN T p. p. 74
12 5.4.2 STRATEGIC EN ERGY M AN AGEM EN T Strategic Energy Management focuses on operational and procedural changes companies can make to reduce their energy usage. The goal of Strategic Energy Management is to help develop an energy manag...

AI summary Strategic Energy Management aims to reduce energy usage through operational and procedural changes, focusing on long-term energy performance and continuous savings. Participants collaborate with service providers to identify opportunities and implement a 12-month action plan. Table 18 summarizes the program component for the 2026 DSM Extension.

1 Table 18: 2026 Summary of Strategic Energy Management Program Component p. pp. 74-75
1 Table 18: 2026 Summary of Strategic Energy Management Program Component Extension Investment ($M) Energy Savings (GWh) Demand Savings (MW) Participation (participants) 2026 Total 0.9 4.0 0.4 11 Program Component Changes • • tool to Strat...

AI summary Table 18 outlines the 2026 Summary of Strategic Energy Management Program Component, including investment, energy savings, demand savings, and participation numbers. The program will follow the same approach as the approved 2023-2025 Plan and includes marketing strategies such as business development engagement and industry events.

6 6. DEMAND RESPONSE p. p. 76
6 6. DEMAND RESPONSE In the 2023-2025 Plan, E1 introduced a new demand response (DR) program, a significant new development for the Nova Scotia electricity sector and E1. In the 2020 IRP, DR was selected as a new cost- effective resource f...

AI summary E1 introduced a new demand response (DR) program in the 2023-2025 Plan, building on 2019 DR pilots and the 2020 IRP's recognition of DR as a cost-effective resource. Collaborating with NS Power and Guidehouse, E1 developed DR pathways like battery control and CPP, with plans to expand initiatives in 2026. The 2023-2025 DSM Plan aimed to test DR feasibility and optimize costs.

6.1 DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAM p. pp. 76-77
6.1 DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAM - E1's Demand Response program is comprised of two program components: - Residential Demand Response; and - BNI Demand Response.

AI summary E1's Demand Response program consists of two components: Residential Demand Response and BNI Demand Response. The text outlines the structure of the program as part of a regulatory proceeding.

Table 24: 2023-2026 Performance Indicators p. p. 83
Table 24: 2023-2026 Performance Indicators Approved 2023-2025 Performance Indicators 2026 2023-2026 • Annual incremental energy savings (reported by program and rate class) (GWh) ✓ ✓ • Cumulative annual energy savings (reported by program...

AI summary Table 24 outlines 2023-2026 performance indicators for energy savings, demand response, and customer satisfaction. Key metrics include annual and cumulative energy savings (GWh), system-peak demand savings (MW), ratepayer benefits, and low-income program impacts. The table emphasizes reporting by program, rate class, and equity considerations.

4 9. EVALUATION p. p. 85
4 9. EVALUATION - 5 In the 2026 DSM Extension, E1 proposes to follow the same measurement and evaluation activities as - 6 approved in the 2023-2025 Plan. This includes an annual impact evaluation for each program. - 7 As in the approved 2...

AI summary E1 proposes to follow the same measurement and evaluation activities as the 2023-2025 Plan for the 2026 DSM Extension, including annual impact evaluations and condensing activities for mature programs. Collaboration with the Evaluator will determine components for process and market evaluations.

16 Table 1: Dedicated Low-Income and Equity Program Components p. p. 101
16 Table 1: Dedicated Low-Income and Equity Program Components Program Component Assumptions Calculation for 2026 DSM Extension Calculation for DSM Reporting Affordable Multi-Family Housing and Non-Profit Organizations (AMF) • Exclusively...

AI summary This section outlines dedicated low-income and equity program components, including Affordable Multi-Family Housing, Affordable Single-Family Housing, and the Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project. It details assumptions, savings calculations, and performance targets established by the NSUARB for the 2023-2025 Plan period.

3. INCIDENTAL LOW-INCOME AND EQUITY IMPACTS FROM NON-TARGETED PROGRAMS p. pp. 101-102
3. INCIDENTAL LOW-INCOME AND EQUITY IMPACTS FROM NON-TARGETED PROGRAMS E1 has also assumed that customers from low-income and equity communities participate in other E1 programs in varying proportions. These are "incidental" low-income and...

AI summary E1 assumes low-income and equity customers participate in non-targeted programs, leading to incidental impacts. Sections 3.1 and 3.2 detail assumptions for the 2026 DSM Extension and DSM reporting methodologies.

3.1 2026 DSM EXTENSION ASSUMPTIONS: INCIDENTAL IMPACTS p. p. 102
3.1 2026 DSM EXTENSION ASSUMPTIONS: INCIDENTAL IMPACTS To estimate the incidental low-income and equity impacts for the 2026 DSM Extension from non-targeted programs, E1's historical low-income and equity reporting relies on information ab...

AI summary The document discusses estimating incidental low-income and equity impacts for the 2026 DSM Extension using E1's historical data from 2023-2024, as actual project details are not available through modeling. Table 2 outlines assumptions and calculations for non-targeted program components.

Program Component Assumptions p. p. 102
The calculations use the general term "savings". The same calculations are applied to energy savings, peak demand savings, and program expenditures. Program Component Assumptions Calculation for 2026 DSM Extension Small Business Energy Sol...

AI summary The text discusses the assumptions and calculations used for the 2026 DSM Extension, specifically for the Small Business Energy Solutions (SBES) program. It includes scaling estimates based on low-income and equity participation in 2023 and 2024, with percentages applied to energy savings, demand savings, and expenditures.

4. TIME PERIOD DEFINITIONS p. p. 151
4. TIME PERIOD DEFINITIONS - The following time periods apply to the RBIA analysis: - DSM delivery period: the timeframe over which DSM programs are delivered. - The DSM delivery period included in the 2026 DSM Extension RBIA is 2026. - Co...

AI summary The text defines time periods for the RBIA analysis, including the DSM delivery period (2026), cost recovery period (2026), and study period (2026-2041). The study period ends when all average rate class DSM impacts expire, with impacts modeled over the full timeframe.

6. RATE CLASSES INCLUDED p. p. 152
6. RATE CLASSES INCLUDED - E1's RBIA model presents results by rate class for the following NS Power customer classes: - Residential (rate codes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 16); - Small General (rate code 10); - General (rate code 11); - Large Ge...

AI summary E1's RBIA model analyzes NS Power rate classes including Residential, Small/General/Large Industrial, and Municipal, but excludes Unmetered, GRLF, Shore Power, and ELIADC classes. E1 does not offer programs for excluded classes.

7. CALCULATION OF PARTICIPATION p. pp. 152-153
7. CALCULATION OF PARTICIPATION This section describes the development of participation figures, which are used for the participant bill impact calculations.

AI summary This section outlines the methodology for calculating participation figures, which are essential for determining the financial impact on participants in the regulatory proceeding. It forms part of the NSUARB's analysis under the PUA.

7.3 UNTRACKED (POINT-OF-SALE PROGRAM) PARTICIPATION p. pp. 154-155
7.3 UNTRACKED (POINT-OF-SALE PROGRAM) PARTICIPATION - E1 operates two program components that offer rebates at the point-of-sale: residential Instant - Savings and the Instant Rebates portion of Business Energy Rebates (BER-IR). These prog...

AI summary E1's Untracked Point-of-Sale Program includes residential and business rebate components (BER-IR) with participation estimated via transaction records and assumptions about rate class participation. For 2026, annual and active participants are estimated using forward-looking RBIA methods, with assumptions about flat participation until energy savings expire. Residential Behaviour and Demand Response participation methods are also detailed, including cross-participation rates and DRSim™ model inputs.

"Total-Savings" tab p. p. 169
"Total-Savings" tab The "Total-Savings" tab provides a sum of annual class savings in energy and demand usage at the generator's gate and customer's meter. In addition, class demand savings at the high side of the bulk power substation are...

AI summary The 'Total-Savings' tab calculates annual energy and demand savings at the generator's gate, customer's meter, and bulk power substation. It details methods for determining avoided fuel, generation, transmission, and distribution costs, distinguishing between FAM-related and non-FAM-related calculations.

12 The 2024 Payment Schedule will be revised to reflect the carryforward , if any, related to 13 underspend from the 2020-2022 DSM Plan. p. p. 181
12 The 2024 Payment Schedule will be revised to reflect the carryforward , if any, related to 13 underspend from the 2020-2022 DSM Plan. 1 2 SCHEDULE C 3 4 Performance Requirements 5 I. UARB/NSEB-APPROVED PERFORMANCE TARGETS, THRESHOLDS, A...

AI summary The 2024 Payment Schedule will be revised to account for any carryforward from underspend in the 2020-2022 DSM Plan. Performance targets and indicators are outlined, including energy savings, demand response capacity, and reporting requirements for the UARB/NSEB.

E-2Savings Verification Review - Gil Peach 49 passages
SAVINGS VERIFICATION REVIEW p. p. 2
SAVINGS VERIFICATION REVIEW Of Efficiency Nova Scotia Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results Report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board 06/04/2025 H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC H. Gil Peach, PhD John Mitchell, BS Yvonne J. Whitelaw, MA Marty Ku...

AI summary This document presents the 2024 evaluation results of the Efficiency Nova Scotia Program, submitted to the Nova Scotia Energy Board by H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC. The report details program year outcomes and is authored by a team of experts in energy efficiency and related fields.

H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC p. pp. 2-3
H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC 16232 NW Oak Hills Drive Beaverton, Oregon 97006 USA E-mail: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Website: [www.peachandassociates.biz](http://www.peach...

AI summary H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC submitted a savings verification review report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board, evaluating Program Year 2024 results. The report was authored by H. Gil Peach, John Mitchell, Yvonne J. Whitelaw, Martin Kushler, and Ayala Cnaan, and published in June 2025.

II. How Savings Verification fits in the Policy, Planning, Program Cycle p. pp. 7-8
II. How Savings Verification fits in the Policy, Planning, Program Cycle It can be useful in approaching evaluation to review how the Policy, Planning and Program cycle works and where evaluation and savings verification fit.[2](#page-7-3)...

AI summary This section explains how Savings Verification is integrated into the Policy, Planning, and Program cycle for Demand Side Management (DSM). It outlines the role of Efficiency Nova Scotia and Econoler in evaluation and verification, noting the Residential Behavior Program as new in 2024. The cycle includes steps like Independent Evaluation and Savings Verification, which feed into program planning.

III. Resource Acquisition and Other Evaluation Frameworks p. pp. 8-11
III. Resource Acquisition and Other Evaluation Frameworks Efficiency Nova Scotia programs are almost entirely resource acquisition programs that treat saved energy as equivalent to generated energy. This is the original framework for the e...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia's energy efficiency programs are evaluated under a resource acquisition framework, equating saved energy to generated energy. Econoler's approach is highlighted, with mentions of evolving evaluation frameworks and market transformation. DSM evaluation types (impact, process, market) are discussed.

IV. Evaluation Standards p. pp. 12-13
IV. Evaluation Standards In this section we highlight three standards for evaluation: independence, transparency, and the desirability of familiarity with current evaluation guidelines. - (1) Independent Evaluator In energy efficiency eval...

AI summary The section outlines three evaluation standards: independence, transparency, and adherence to evaluation protocols. The Evaluator meets independence standards but requires improvements in transparency, such as disclosing detailed statistical test information. Most evaluations align with current methodological guidelines, though one exception exists.

V. Summary of Evaluated Savings Results p. pp. 13-14
V. Summary of Evaluated Savings Results Evaluation of demand savings, first year energy savings, and lifetime net energy savings at the generator as reported by the Evaluator are summarized in this section.

AI summary This section summarizes the evaluation of demand savings, first-year energy savings, and lifetime net energy savings at the generator level, as reported by the Evaluator. These metrics are central to assessing the effectiveness of energy efficiency initiatives.

VI. Evaluation Effort for 2024 Programs p. p. 19
VI. Evaluation Effort for 2024 Programs As shown in [Table 3,](#page-20-0) the Econoler impact evaluation work was substantial, including sixteen impact evaluations. There are nine residential evaluations, of which six are comprehensive an...

AI summary The document discusses the evaluation effort for 2024 programs, highlighting the comprehensive and condensed impact evaluations conducted by Econoler. It outlines the types of evaluations, their purposes, and the methodology used, including baseline definitions, savings calculations, and net-to-gross ratios. The evaluation plan for Program Year 2024 is referenced in Table 3.

Table 3: Planned Evaluations for 2024 Programs. p. pp. 19-20
Table 3: Planned Evaluations for 2024 Programs. 2024 Portfolio Evaluation Plan D Impact Ev Impact Evaluation Market Program Component Comprehensive Condensed Evaluation Evaluation Residential Appliance Retirement Х Instant Savings Х Afford...

AI summary Table 3 outlines the planned evaluations for 2024 programs, including various residential and business energy efficiency initiatives. It includes evaluations such as the Appliance Retirement Program, Instant Savings, and Strategic Energy Management. The table also references supporting reports from Econoler and Efficiency One.

VII. Savings Verification Approach p. pp. 20-21
VII. Savings Verification Approach The savings verification review was conducted as follows: - We focus on the "installed" annual energy savings and demand reductions. These are the annualized value of savings and demand reductions from th...

AI summary The savings verification process focuses on annualized energy savings from installed measures, not actual yearly savings. The review checked methodologies for interaction, free-ridership, and other approaches, and included 93 site visits for the 2024 program year.

VIII. General Findings p. p. 21
VIII. General Findings • The method followed in each program impact evaluation follows a recognized analytic approach appropriate for each program type. The structure and format of each impact evaluation follows a consistent template (exce...

AI summary The document highlights that program impact evaluations follow recognized methods and consistent templates, with Econoler using Efficiency Nova Scotia's CIRx Screening Tool. Evaluations include executive summaries, methodological diagrams, and appendices. The Evaluator conducted four process and two market evaluations, with process evaluations being desirable for future work. Carbon emissions offsets are appropriately developed.

IX. General Recommendations p. pp. 21-23
IX. General Recommendations SVR24-G-1. The Savings Verification study recommends acceptance of the 2024 evaluation estimates for energy savings and demand reduction except for four programs . These are the Residential Behavior program (6.2...

AI summary The Savings Verification study recommends accepting 2024 energy savings estimates for most programs but excludes four due to evaluation issues. Key concerns include lack of independent evaluation for compressed air projects, insufficient practical significance of savings for residential and demand response programs, and protocol limitations. Recommendations include flagging low-impact programs, improving evaluation transparency, and emphasizing practical significance over statistical significance.

A. Appliance Retirement Program (ARet) p. pp. 24-25
A. Appliance Retirement Program (ARet) The Appliance Retirement (ARet) program is one of two program components of the Residential Efficient Product Rebates program. Appliance Retirement advances the retirement of old, inefficient full siz...

AI summary The Appliance Retirement (ARet) program retires inefficient appliances (refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners) via rebates and free removal, retiring 77,696 units since 2012. Participants must own working appliances over 10 years old; certain appliances require co-retirement with full-sized units. ARCA Canada Inc. handles collection and recycling. Rebates range from $10–$50 per appliance. Efficiency Nova Scotia adjusted criteria post-2016 to boost participation and cost-effectiveness.

B. Instant Savings (IS) p. pp. 25-27
B. Instant Savings (IS) The Instant Savings program is one of two components of the Residential Efficient Product Rebates program. Instant Savings is an instant cash rebate program offered to purchasers of energy efficient products, delive...

AI summary The Instant Savings (IS) program, part of the Residential Efficient Product Rebates, offers instant cash rebates for energy-efficient products via retailers and online platforms. In 2024, 395,472 products were sold, with Energy Start LED Fixtures leading sales. Energy savings rose 73% to 26.884 GWh, and peak demand savings reached 2.955 MW. A 2025 phase-out of LED rebates was announced. The program's evaluation focuses on energy savings, GHG reductions, and market impact.

Evaluator Findings. The Evaluator reported the following key Instant Savings findings: p. p. 27
Evaluator Findings. The Evaluator reported the following key Instant Savings findings: - Instant Savings exceeded both 2024 planned net electrical energy and peak demand savings of 12.544 GWh and 1.680 MW, respectively. - 2024 net electric...

AI summary The Evaluator found that Instant Savings exceeded 2024 energy and peak demand targets by 77% and 45%, respectively, with LED products driving 69% of savings. Non-lighting product savings rose 17% YoY, and free ridership for LEDs dropped to 39%. Evaluated savings were 16-10% higher than Efficiency Nova Scotia's tracked values. No new recommendations were provided.

C. Home Energy Assessment (HEA) p. pp. 27-30
C. Home Energy Assessment (HEA) Home Energy Assessment (HEA) is a component of the Existing Residential Programs. This program encourages homeowners to increase the efficiency and comfort of their homes by providing rebates for qualified e...

AI summary The Home Energy Assessment (HEA) program offers rebates for energy efficiency retrofits and equipment. It uses 'test-in/test-out' audits and blower door testing to measure performance. A 2024 marketing campaign focused on promoting heat pumps for electricity-saving homes, though the program also serves non-electric homes since 2018. The 2024 evaluation included surveys, audit reviews, energy savings calculations, and AMI data analysis.

D. Green Heat p. p. 31
the Canada Greener Homes Grant (CGH) rather than the Green Heat program. This shift began in May 2021 to access higher federal incentive levels which were not available through the Green Heat program. Nova Scotia homeowners enrolled in HEA...

AI summary Nova Scotia shifted from the Green Heat program to the Canada Greener Homes Grant (CGH) in 2021 for higher federal incentives. HEA, linked to CGH, outperformed Green Heat in installing Mini-split Heat Pumps (MSHPs) until CGH closed in 2024. Green Heat's 2024 performance dropped significantly, with 70% lower savings attributed to fewer installations, reduced MSHP efficiency, and updated billing analysis.

Efficient Product Installation (EPI) p. p. 33
Efficient Product Installation (EPI) The Efficient Product Installation program (EPI) provides free direct installation of energy-efficient products to homeowners and renters, provided through contractors. In 2024 the Evaluator conducted a...

AI summary The Efficient Product Installation (EPI) program provides free installation of energy-efficient products. In 2024, a market evaluation identified new opportunities, including nine jurisdictions scanned. New eligible measures include smart thermostats, lighting products, and air sealing. The program expanded to include electrician-installed measures as E1 phases out lighting initiatives.

EPI's two funding sources are: p. p. 33
EPI's two funding sources are: - 1. Electricity ratepayers to fund upgrades to reduce electricity consumption. - 2. Government of Nova Scotia and the federal Low Carbon Economy Fund funds upgrades that reduce the use of other fuels. The Ev...

AI summary EPI's funding comes from electricity ratepayers and the federal Low Carbon Economy Fund. 2024 saw a 2.4% increase in participation (9,993 vs. 9,763) and 150,722 efficient products installed, but average savings per participant fell 6.3%. LED lamps dominated (74% of installations), though smart thermostat installation rates dropped 16% due to dissatisfaction. The Evaluator recommends improving installer education and follow-up to address issues.

F. Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Program (MHEEP) p. pp. 33-37
F. Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Program (MHEEP) MHEEP is a component of the Existing Residential Programs. Initiated in June 2018 as the First Nations Home Energy Efficiency Pilot, MHEEP began operations in 2019 as a residential energy e...

AI summary The Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Program (MHEEP) provides no-cost energy efficiency upgrades to band-owned homes in 13 Mi'kmaw communities in Nova Scotia. Initiated in 2018 as a pilot, it operates through collaboration with E1 Program Staff, community housing managers, and delivery agents. Upgrades include building envelope improvements, heating equipment, and appliance replacements, assessed via EnerGuide audits. Funding sources are not fully detailed in the text.

G. Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) p. pp. 37-39
G. Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) The Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program provides affordable-housing owners and nonprofit organizations, including rehabilitation and transition housing, with incentives for building-wide ene...

AI summary The Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program offers incentives for energy retrofits in affordable housing, funded by electric ratepayers and the Province of Nova Scotia. Since 2021, the Green Fund increased incentives to 80% for electrical projects and 100% for shelters. Participation rose from 79 to 83 projects between 2023-2024, with comprehensive projects increasing by 70% and prescriptive projects decreasing slightly. The Evaluator noted lower savings per prescriptive project and outlined evaluation objectives including energy savings and GHG emission reductions.

The Evaluator conducted: p. p. 39
The Evaluator conducted: - Interviews with program staff, participants, and Energy Advisors. - Interviews with dropped-out participants and non-participants to analyze barriers to participation and operating agreement design. To determine...

AI summary The Evaluator assessed the Affordable Multifamily Housing (AMH) program, noting high participant satisfaction but challenges with incentive clarity, project delays, and audit templates. Energy savings fell short of targets, though participation increased. Recommendations include revising incentives, providing technical support, and improving audit templates. The evaluation method was deemed appropriate.

H. [Affordable Single-Family Homes (ASFH)](bookmark://_Toc170668323/) p. pp. 39-42
H. [Affordable Single-Family Homes (ASFH)](bookmark://_Toc170668323/) The Affordable Single-Family Housing (ASFH) program began in 2023 and provides energy efficiency retrofits and heat pump installations at no cost to income qualified hom...

AI summary The Affordable Single-Family Homes (ASFH) program, launched in 2023, offers free energy efficiency retrofits and heat pump installations to income-qualified homeowners. It partners with Efficiency Nova Scotia's Appliance Retirement and Efficient Product Installation programs. In 2024, 1,210 homes participated, achieving 3.719 GWh in energy savings, up from 1.444 GWh in 2023. Evaluations focused on program impact, savings calculations, and GHG emission reductions.

The Evaluator: p. p. 42
The Evaluator: - Developed participant survey. - Conducted interviews with program staff, heat pump contractors, and delivery agents (DAs) To determine the gross and net electrical energy and peak demand savings and avoided annual GHG emis...

AI summary The evaluator assessed the Affordable Single-Family Homes (ASFH) program, noting high participant satisfaction but identifying issues like long wait times and insufficient information. The program exceeded energy and demand reduction targets, achieving 3.719 GWh net savings and 2.089 MW peak demand reduction. Adjustments reduced tracked savings by 21% and 3%. Recommendations focus on improving delivery processes, communication, and training.

I. Residential Behavioral Program (Efficiency Insights) p. pp. 42-44
I. Residential Behavioral Program (Efficiency Insights) The Residential Behaviour program, "Efficiency Insights", is new for Program Year 2024, and follows a similar previous residential behaviour program, administered by Efficiency Nova S...

AI summary Efficiency Insights, a new 2024 residential behavioral program, provides bi-monthly Home Energy Reports to participants, comparing their energy use with similar homes and promoting energy-saving behaviors. It differs from other DSM programs by focusing solely on behavioral change without physical measures, aiming to drive participation in measure-based efficiency initiatives.

Section 69 p. p. 48
The reduction of group sizes over time occurs due to several factors. First, there are account closures, for example, due to death of the last person in an elderly household. Second there are ordinary move-outs. According to the evaluator,...

AI summary The text discusses the reduction of group sizes in a program due to account closures, move-outs, and the discontinuation of Efficiency Insights reports for inactive accounts. It also mentions the exclusion of households with solar DSM resources from the program to avoid double counting of energy savings, while other DSM technology options are still supported. The text notes that attrition is normal and that equivalence between treatment and control groups is demonstrated in the 2024 Evaluation report.

Section 72 p. pp. 49-50
he randomized assignment of households to treatment and control group, the technical definition of the energy use subgroups, data selection and cleaning, and all results calculations. [39](#page-50-1) The standard is summarized in [Figure...

AI summary The text discusses the importance of random assignment in evaluating energy use subgroups and ensuring the integrity of reported energy savings. It references the SEE Action protocol and highlights the need to prevent conflicts of interest by clearly defining evaluator and program vendor responsibilities.

Section 75 p. pp. 51-52
participation in the measure-based programs[.42](#page-52-1) Out of nine similar analyses of possible effect, the Evaluator only claims a (very tiny) effect for three of the nine analyses (one-third). The three claims include for Green Hea...

AI summary The analysis of measure-based programs shows minimal effectiveness, with only three out of nine analyses claiming a very small effect (0.1% for Green Heat and 0.4% for Efficient Products Installation). The Home Energy Assessment program had no claimed effect. The Evaluator emphasizes the importance of including opt-out subjects in energy savings analysis to avoid bias.

Section 76 p. p. 52
data in the table is from Econoler Table 85: Other Program Participation Levels. Econoler, Residential Behavior, P. 195. The "Claimed Effect" column reflects results of Econoler significance testing. Statistical significance testing assess...

AI summary The text discusses the difference between statistical significance and practical importance, emphasizing that statistical significance refers to the likelihood of an event occurring by chance, while practical importance relates to real-world impact and cost-effectiveness in business contexts.

Table 7: Evaluation Claimed Influence on Participation in Other Programs. p. pp. 52-53
Table 7: Evaluation Claimed Influence on Participation in Other Programs. Measure-Based Program Encouragement Results (Difference of Means) Subgroup Treatment Control (Size of) Difference (Is There a) Claimed Effect High Energy Use HEA 1.6...

AI summary Table 7 evaluates the influence of participation in energy efficiency programs on other programs, showing mixed results. Green Heat and EPI showed claimed effects in some subgroups, while HEA did not. The table also includes references to statistical methodologies and academic sources discussing significance testing.

Preamble p. pp. 56-64
other way to say this is that for most months the effect size (average kWh savings per household) is extremely small, and the number of observations is not large enough to detect it.[49](#page-57-0) The data quality rule used for use of th...

AI summary The analysis highlights challenges in evaluating energy savings from programs like ARet and SEM, noting extremely small effect sizes (average kWh savings per household) and data quality rules that undercount savings by assigning zero to most months. Yearly analysis using average daily savings appears to validate cumulative savings but relies on statistically insignificant daily savings. Large sample sizes can falsely inflate significance of trivial effects.

1. Findings (Observations Regarding the Evaluation) p. pp. 58-60
1. Findings (Observations Regarding the Evaluation) This evaluation is well constructed at a technical level, is well executed, and fully meets the requirements of the two most relevant evaluation protocols (Universal Methods Project and S...

AI summary The evaluation meets technical standards but protocols like Universal Methods Project and SEE Action fail to address challenges from large sample sizes and small effect sizes in residential behavior studies. The text critiques reliance on statistical significance and advocates for practical effect size assessments.

2. Recommendations p. pp. 60-61
2. Recommendations SVR2024-Behaviour-5. Overall, we recommend that the program be continued, but not as a direct energy savings program. Rather, it should be redesigned and evaluated as a marketing and promotional program designed to (1) s...

AI summary The document recommends redesigning the program as a marketing tool rather than a direct energy savings initiative, emphasizing the need for process evaluation to improve household-level energy savings. It highlights the lack of systematic data on effective energy-saving behaviors and the need to analyze high-impact households to identify practical measures.

K. BNI Custom Incentives Program (Custom Component) p. pp. 64-71
K. BNI Custom Incentives Program (Custom Component) For 2024, the BNI Custom Incentives Program consists of two components, Custom and Strategic Energy Management (SEM). The Custom program is comprised of four parts: Retrofit, New Construc...

AI summary The BNI Custom Incentives Program's Retrofit component in 2024 provides technical and financial support for efficiency improvements. Rooftop solar contributed 10% of savings, while compressed air leak audits accounted for 42%, with two sites contributing 69.6% of total savings. Audit savings increased by 522% compared to 2023, driven by these sites.

Recommendations p. p. 71
Recommendations SVR2024-Compressed Air – 10. We strongly recommend that the compressed air program be redesigned to follow UMP protocol requirements. SVR2024-Compressed Air – 11. The Evaluator should examine and explain the unusual pattern...

AI summary Recommendations include redesigning the compressed air program to align with UMP protocol, investigating unusual savings patterns, and excluding clients who do not allow data access for evaluation.

L. BNI Strategic Energy Management (SEM) p. pp. 71-72
L. BNI Strategic Energy Management (SEM) Strategic Energy Management (SEM) is an approach for integrating energy management into business practice – so that a focus on continually advancing energyefficiency becomes an integral aspect of wo...

AI summary Strategic Energy Management (SEM) integrates energy efficiency into workplace practices, inspired by Japanese Kaizen. In 2024, SEM saw a 32.4% increase in tracked savings, driven by two major participants, with 53% of savings from compressed air leak repairs. The program exceeded 2024 targets by 6% in energy savings (4.478 GWh) and 14% in peak demand reduction (0.537 MW).

M. BNI Small Business Energy Solutions Program (SBES) p. pp. 72-74
M. BNI Small Business Energy Solutions Program (SBES) Small Business Energy Solutions (SBES). SBES is available to businesses that use less than 350,000 kWh annually. There are two paths within the program, the audit path, and the do-it-yo...

AI summary The SBES program in Nova Scotia serves small businesses with annual usage under 350,000 kWh, offering audit and DIY paths. In 2024, 493 projects were completed, with 89% on the DIY path. Energy savings increased by 46% (10.854 GWh) and demand reduction by 45% (2.155 MW). Evaluation methods included audits, desk reviews, and a non-participant spillover survey, which found no significant results, suggesting a need for larger samples.

N. Demand Response (DR) p. pp. 74-75
N. Demand Response (DR) There are two demand response programs, Residential Demand Response and Business-Nonprofit-Institutional (BNI) Demand Response. Demand response concerns capacity (Watts, kW, MW, GW) rather than energy (kWh, GWh). Th...

AI summary Nova Scotia's Demand Response (DR) programs include Residential and BNI (Business-Nonprofit-Institutional) DR, focusing on capacity reduction rather than energy savings. Participants totaled 353 (residential) and 76 (BNI) in 2024. Events are triggered by Nova Scotia Power to reduce load during peak periods, with savings measured in watts/kW.

1. Residential Demand Response (Eco Shift Pilot Pathway) p. p. 75
1. Residential Demand Response (Eco Shift Pilot Pathway) For Residential Demand Response (DR), Efficiency Nova Scotia created a tracking sheet. The Residential DR tracking sheet is limited to a spreadsheet with participant raw thermostat a...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia's Residential Demand Response (DR) evaluation focused on Mysa thermostats due to data limitations. A regression model predicted hourly energy use, comparing it to actual data to quantify DR capacity. Analysis included 199 participants, with recommendations to repeat the 2025 evaluation for accuracy. Other devices like EV chargers were excluded due to data issues.

2. BNI DR p. pp. 75-76
2. BNI DR For BNI, the Evaluator first reviewed Efficiency Nova Scotia BNI tracking sheets to ensure consistency, resulting in a small correction (magnitude 2%-3%) to Efficiency Nova Scotia tracking values. By agreement between Efficiency...

AI summary BNI DR capacity calculation involves corrections to Efficiency Nova Scotia tracking sheets, event-based capacity determination (Dec-Feb, excluding weekends/holidays), participant classification for morning/evening events, and whole-house AMI data analysis. Evaluated results show 8.034 MW for BNI DR and 0.057 MW for Residential DR, with methodologies deemed logical and complete.

Recommendations p. pp. 76-77
Recommendations SVR2024-Demand Response – 13 . In the next evaluation, include an analysis of the relative importance or lack of importance to the possible capacity shortfall problem to Nova Scotia Power, the roles of the load research sho...

AI summary The document recommends evaluating Demand Response (DR) programs' impact on Nova Scotia Power's capacity shortfall, clarifying their practical benefits beyond learning experiences, and justifying their business case. It critiques DR programs for minimal kW demand reduction and calls for analysis of whole-home vs. device-level approaches in residential DR. A citation to Econoler's report is included.

A. General Recommendations p. p. 78
A. General Recommendations There are four general recommendations . SVR24-G-1. The Savings Verification study recommends acceptance of the 2024 evaluation estimates for energy savings and demand reduction except for four programs . These a...

AI summary Four recommendations address energy savings program evaluations. Four programs (Residential Behavior, Residential Demand Response, BNI Demand Response, and BNI Custom Incentive Program’s compressed air component) are rejected due to insufficient practical savings despite statistical significance. Evaluations must flag programs with trivial savings, ensure protocol compliance, and disclose statistical test details for transparency.

B. Program Specific Recommendations p. pp. 78-79
B. Program Specific Recommendations There are recommendations for only five of the program evaluations, Residential Behavior, BNI Efficient Product Rebates, the compressed air leak detection part of BNI Custom Incentives, and the two Deman...

AI summary Recommendations are provided for five programs: Residential Behavior, BNI Efficient Product Rebates, BNI Custom Incentives (compressed air leak detection), and two Demand Programs (Residential and BNI). Other programs lack evaluation issues. Key focus areas include program-specific evaluations and demand-side initiatives.

1. Residential Behaviour Program p. p. 79
1. Residential Behaviour Program SVR2024-Behaviour-5. Overall, we recommend that the program be continued, but not as a direct energy savings program. Rather, it should be redesigned and evaluated as a marketing and promotional program des...

AI summary The Residential Behaviour Program should be restructured as a marketing tool rather than a direct energy savings program. Current evaluations show minimal household-level energy savings, necessitating better measurement of behavioral impacts and analysis of high-saving households to identify effective practices.

2. BNI Efficient Products Rebates p. pp. 79-80
2. BNI Efficient Products Rebates SVR2024-BNI Efficient Products – 8. Change baselines for BER and IR rebates to reflect current market practices that have indoor DLC-Standard products as the new baseline with incentives offered for compar...

AI summary The document proposes adjusting BER and IR rebate baselines to DLC-Standard products, offering incentives for DLC-Premium alternatives. It also recommends reviewing in-situ meter studies for LED lighting products or commissioning a study if necessary.

3. BNI Custom Incentives Program (Custom Component – Compressed Air Leak Detection) p. p. 80
3. BNI Custom Incentives Program (Custom Component – Compressed Air Leak Detection) SVR2024-Compressed Air – 10. We strongly recommend that the compressed air program be redesigned to follow UMP protocol requirements. SVR2024-Compressed Ai...

AI summary The document recommends redesigning the BNI Custom Incentives Program for compressed air leak detection to align with UMP protocols, investigating unusual savings patterns, and excluding clients who restrict site access or data sharing. These measures aim to ensure program integrity and transparency.

4. BNI Demand Reduction Programs p. pp. 80-81
4. BNI Demand Reduction Programs SVR2024-Demand Response – 13 . In the next evaluation, include an analysis of the relative importance or lack of importance to the possible capacity shortfall problem to Nova Scotia Power, the roles of the...

AI summary The text requests an evaluation of BNI Demand Response programs, emphasizing the need to analyze their impact on Nova Scotia Power's capacity shortfall, clarify their practical benefits, and justify their business case. It criticizes the programs' weak demand reduction effects and calls for a comparison of whole-home vs. device-level approaches in residential analysis.

XII. References p. pp. 81-82
XII. References American Statistical Association, Statement on Statistical Significance and P-Values, Provides Principles to Improve the Conduct and Interpretation of Quantitative Science, March 7, 2016 [(www.amstat.org/asa/files/pdfs/p-va...

AI summary The references include academic and industry sources on statistical methods, energy efficiency programs, and policy evaluation. Key entities are organizations like the American Statistical Association, the Consortium for Energy Efficiency, and reports on thermostat programs and energy sufficiency.

Table 10: Evaluation Questions - Summary Table. p. pp. 86-88
Table 10: Evaluation Questions - Summary Table. Asked and Answered for Program Year 2024 General Questions to Ask of Energy Efficiency Program Evaluations 1 Does the independent evaluator have control over methods and measurement approache...

AI summary Table 10 evaluates the energy efficiency program for 2024, focusing on the independence, transparency, and methodology of the evaluation process. It confirms that the evaluator has control over methods and measurement approaches, and that evaluation guidelines are used. However, some areas, like transparency in reporting significance tests, require improvement.

XV. Appendix 3: Statistical vs. Practical Significance p. pp. 88-89
XV. Appendix 3: Statistical vs. Practical Significance Statistical significance is a measure of the probability that a result in an analysis could have occurred by chance alone, out of many (theoretical) repetitions of a test. It can be re...

AI summary The text distinguishes between statistical significance (probability of results occurring by chance) and practical significance (real-world relevance). It argues that large samples can produce statistically significant but trivial results, emphasizing the need to prioritize practical significance for meaningful program evaluation, particularly in energy savings contexts.

E-4E1 (IG) RIR 1 to 26 8 passages
3) Continue to Manage Program Expenditures p. p. 8
3) Continue to Manage Program Expenditures E1 will continue to provide explanations for program spending variances compared to the DSM Plan that are greater than 25% in its Quarterly and Annual Progress Report. In the development of the DS...

AI summary E1 will continue managing program expenditures in line with the DSM Plan, providing explanations for variances exceeding 25% in its reports. Flexibility in reallocating funds between programs is emphasized to meet performance targets, while considering rate class spending and potential impacts on customer participation and future DSM Plan success.

1 uncertainty on whether the program would be curtailed on short notice; and there p. pp. 8-19
1 uncertainty on whether the program would be curtailed on short notice; and there 2 would be inequity created between customers in the rate classes with only a few having 3 access. 4 5 Please also refer E1's response to IG IR–16 for more...

AI summary The text discusses uncertainty about curtailment of a program on short notice and potential inequity between customer rate classes. It also references EfficiencyOne's (E1) responses to previous requests regarding budget management and modelling inputs for the 2026 DSM Extension, noting consistency with the 2023–2025 DSM Plan and updates based on real-time adjustments and internal improvements.

Section 24 p. p. 19
ligns with provincial decarbonization goals including: phasing out coal by 2030; achieving 80% renewable energy by 2030; reaching net-zero emissions by 2050; and implementing the Green Choice Program. - DR enhances grid reliability and pea...

AI summary Demand response (DR) enhances grid reliability and aligns with Nova Scotia's decarbonization goals, including phasing out coal by 2030 and achieving 80% renewable energy by 2030. DR reduces peak demand, supports system reliability during extreme weather, and mirrors best practices from California, New York, and Ontario. Continued investment in DR is critical for Nova Scotia's early-stage DR framework development and long-term market growth.

1 Request IR-12: p. p. 19
1 Request IR-12: 2 3 Reference: Page 24 4 5 (a) Please confirm that the two directives (e) and (f) were two recommendations of the 6 Industrial Group in matter M10473. 7 8 (b) Please confirm that there is nothing explicit in these directiv...

AI summary Request IR-12 asks EfficiencyOne (E1) to confirm directives from the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, clarify compliance with multi-year plans, and provide details on cost-effectiveness testing and payback periods for measures in the DSM Plan. E1 responds that directives align with Industrial Group recommendations and that the 2026 DSM Extension is a continuation of the 2023-2025 plan.

Section 26 p. pp. 19-26
Date Filed: June 25, 2025 E1 (IG) IR-12 Page 2 of 4 M10473, E1 2023-2025 Demand Side Management (DSM) Resource Plan, Board Decision, page 65, Directives (e) and (f), November 8, 2022 M10473 M10473, E1 2023-2025 Demand Side Management (DSM)...

AI summary The document references E1's 2023-2025 DSM Plan and discusses updates in the 2026 DSM Extension model, noting changes in naming conventions, data sources, assumptions, and methodologies. It emphasizes that the new model is a separate exercise and that prior cost effectiveness test results are not directly comparable to current results.

& lt;sup>c Weighted average measure life for Q1 2025 actuals was calculated by dividing the lifetime energy savings by the first year energy savings. p. p. 29
& lt;sup>c Weighted average measure life for Q1 2025 actuals was calculated by dividing the lifetime energy savings by the first year energy savings. 1 Request IR-14: Small Business Energy Solutions 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.1 0.1 0.0 = 0.0 0.0 0.0...

AI summary The text discusses the calculation of weighted average measure life for Q1 2025 actuals and provides a table with data on various programs and their spending by rate class. It highlights the influence of customer mix and project timing on spending, particularly in the BNI sector, and E1's commitment to improving reporting and ensuring equity in program access.

Section 56 p. p. 46
Rebates were raised and promoted during 2024 spring and fall campaigns to increase customer awareness that this would be the final year that rebates would be offered on these product categories. As part of the 2024 program evaluation, cust...

AI summary The document discusses the 2024 rebate campaigns by E1, highlighting a decrease in free-ridership for LED products compared to 2022 and increased rebate amounts. Customer satisfaction with Business Energy Rebates was 8.8 on a 10-point scale, though some customers felt the rebate amounts were too small.

(c) Please see part (b) of this IR response. p. pp. 46-47
(c) Please see part (b) of this IR response. 1 Request IR-22: 2 3 Reference: Appendix A, Attachment 3 – 2026 DSM Extension Energy Efficiency Technical 4 Tables. 5 6 Preamble: In Section 1.6 of EfficiencyOne 2026 DSM Extension Evidence, pag...

AI summary The text outlines a request for clarification and alignment of the 2026 DSM Extension Energy Efficiency Technical Tables with previous years' data, including the need for working Excel files, explanations of cost changes, and reconciliation of measure names.

E-6E1 (NSEB) RIR 1 to 17 - Redacted 2 passages
9. ADDITIONAL SYSTEM IMPACTS OF DSM p. p. 53
9. ADDITIONAL SYSTEM IMPACTS OF DSM As part of its May 13, 2024 comments E1 requested information on additional system impacts that had either (a) been identified through E1's BCA workshops or (b) been identified as additional use cases fo...

AI summary E1 requested quantification of system impacts (credit, risk, reliability) and additional demand response use cases. NS Power cited the Smart Grid project but used 2021 DSM avoided costs as a proxy, which E1 deems insufficient. E1 seeks specific references and characterization of new use cases for program design.

E1 Responses to Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 58
E1 Responses to Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 • Updates to measure characterizations and cost assumptions for the Affordable Multi 2 Family Housing and Home Energy Assessment program components in...

AI summary E1 notes that updates to residential energy efficiency programs, including Affordable Multi-Family Housing and Home Energy Assessment, have reduced TRC results for 2026. The removal of Appliance Retirement and Green Heat programs, which had higher TRC results in prior plans, further contributed to this reduction. Some measures show reduced energy savings or increased costs.

E-8E1 (Synapse) RIR 1 to 36 - Redacted 18 passages
2026 DSM Extension Application p. p. 6
2026 DSM Extension Application DSMAG Session 22 April 2025

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension Application is under review by the DSMAG during a session on 22 April 2025. The proceeding involves EfficiencyOne (E1), Nova Scotia Power (NSP), and the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG), focusing on extending demand-side management programs.

Support for Residential Customers – Efficient Products Rebates p. pp. 11-12
Support for Residential Customers – Efficient Products Rebates

AI summary The document discusses Nova Scotia Power's (NSP) Efficient Products Rebates program, administered by EfficiencyOne (E1), aimed at supporting residential customers through energy-efficient product incentives. The Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG) recommended the program, which must pass the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) for approval.

Appliance Retirement p. p. 12
Appliance Retirement • E1 ended Appliance Retirement on January 8, 2025. This was influenced by several considerations. Delivery costs were rising, and savings were declining as eligible units being retired were newer and more efficient. T...

AI summary E1 terminated the Appliance Retirement program on January 8, 2025, citing rising delivery costs, declining savings from retiring newer efficient units, and limited service providers in Canada.

Home Energy Assessment p. p. 13
Home Energy Assessment - Continued support for existing program. - The Green Heat program component will be incorporated into HEA with expanded customer support through a streamlined remote audit path - In 2026, a program investment of $5....

AI summary The Home Energy Assessment (HEA) program will continue with the integration of the Green Heat program component, offering expanded customer support via a streamlined remote audit process. A 2026 investment of $5.0 million is planned to support 1,900 homeowners.

Mikmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project p. p. 14
Mikmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project - Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project will largely follow the same approach for the 2026 DSM Extension as outlined in the approved 2023-2025 Plan. - Appliance replacements will no longer be offered,...

AI summary The Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency Project will follow the 2023-2025 Plan approach for 2026, excluding appliance replacements due to the Appliance Retirement program's wind-up. A $1.1 million investment will support 180 Mi'kmaw homes in 2026.

Support for Business Customers – Direct Installation Program p. pp. 15-16
Support for Business Customers – Direct Installation Program Direct Installation, marketed as Small Business Energy Solutions provides small business customers with access to technical assistance and financial incentives for the installati...

AI summary The Direct Installation Program, marketed as Small Business Energy Solutions, provides technical assistance and incentives for energy-efficient equipment installation. 2024 changes increased eligibility to 600,000 kWh annually and extended preapproval windows. 2026 enhancements include a $5.8 million investment for over 42,000 product installations, improved contractor portals, and expanded commercial direct installation services.

Support for Business Customers – Demand Response p. p. 17
Support for Business Customers – Demand Response - The BNI DR program component offers financial incentives to BNI customers for the DR capacity made available during peak events called by NS Power, aiming to reduce their electric load dur...

AI summary The BNI DR program provides financial incentives to customers for reducing electric load during peak events called by NSP. The 2026 DSM Extension will follow the 2023-2025 Plan's approach, focusing on Curtailment and Commercial Batteries, with annual payments based on performance during DR events.

Enabling Strategies p. p. 21
Enabling Strategies There are three Enabling Strategies programs: Education & Outreach; Development & Research; and Other Enabling Strategies. In 2026, investment in these programs at $7.0 million is aligned with the 2025 Forecast. Educati...

AI summary Three Enabling Strategies programs (Education & Outreach, Development & Research, Other Enabling Strategies) with investments of $7.0M in 2026, aligned with the 2025 Forecast. Education & Outreach focuses on community outreach, diverse communities, partnerships, and green schools. Development & Research includes innovation, market research, heat pump water heater pilot, and data analytics.

E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. pp. 26-122
E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 (c) The avoided costs used to calculate the Lifetime Benefits (TRC and PAC), TRC ratios and PAC 2 ratios for 2026 in the 2026 DSM Extension were dev...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) outlines that Nova Scotia Power (NSP) provided avoided cost data for TRC and PAC calculations to the DSMAG in 2024 and 2021, using the 2022 and 2020 IRP updates respectively. Updated transmission/distribution avoided costs were shared in 2024, developed outside the 2022 IRP modelling. References to matter numbers M12249 and M10473 are included.

E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 27
E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL Energy Savings, Lifetime Energy Savings, Peak EE Demand Savings, Total Resource Cost Test (TRC), and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) for lightin...

AI summary The document provides responses to information requests from Synapse Energy Economics regarding energy savings, peak demand savings, and cost tests for lighting measures in various programs. It includes data for 2023, 2024, and 2025 forecasts.

M12249 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension p. pp. 27-71
M12249 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) seeks approval for the 2026 DSM extension, subject to Total Resource Cost (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost (PAC) tests, with Nova Scotia Power (NSP) and the Demand Side Management Advisory Group (DSMAG) involved. The Nova Scotia Utility and Regulatory Board (NSUARB) will evaluate the application.

E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 27
E1 Responses to Synapse Energy Economics (Synapse) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL Efficient Product Installation - Lighting 2023 Actuals 2024 Actuals 2025 2026 2023 Actuals 2024 Actuals Forecast Extension Program Administrator Cost...

AI summary The document provides a table related to the Efficient Product Installation - Lighting program, including data on the Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) and the Lighting Weighted Average Measure Life for the years 2023 to 2026. It mentions the net present value of avoided costs from the 2023-2025 DSM Plan.

1 Request IR-09: p. p. 27
1 Request IR-09: 2 - 3 Please refer to Table 5: 2026 Program Savings and Investment on page 23 of the Evidence. - 4 Footnote f states, "Reflects planned participation by low-income & equity customers. Numbers - 5 are a subset of Existing R...

AI summary Request IR-09 seeks tables breaking down Residential and BNI Low-Income & Equity program savings by component. EfficiencyOne (E1) responds by providing the Residential Low-Income & Equity subtotal breakout in Table 1 from their Evidence (page 23). The request references Table 5 in the Evidence but does not explicitly cite regulatory orders or legislation.

Table 1: Breakout of 2026 Residential Low-income and Equity Subtotal p. p. 27
Table 1: Breakout of 2026 Residential Low-income and Equity Subtotal - 40010 21 21 24 04 10 41 0 0 20 20 11001 G = 9 G. 1 C / C 2026 Investment ($ million) Lifetime Benefits ($ million) First Year Energy Savings (GWh) Lifetime Energy Savin...

AI summary The table provides a detailed breakdown of the 2026 residential low-income and equity programs, including investments, lifetime benefits, energy savings, and cost tests. The data highlights the financial and energy efficiency impacts of various initiatives aimed at supporting low-income households and promoting equity.

M12249 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension p. p. 71
M12249 – EfficiencyOne (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension 1 E1 has established a six-year evaluation plan to evaluate these changes (which include 2 market actor interviews, surveys and sales data) at set intervals (i....

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) has proposed a six-year evaluation plan for the 2026 DSM Extension, including market assessments and evaluation of household installations of heat pump water heaters (HPWHs). The response to Request IR-28 outlines a proposed budget of $3.0 million for 2026 activities, including development of the 2027-2031 DSM Resource Plan and engagement with the DSMAG.

1 Table 1: E1 2026 DSM Extension: Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs Estimates p. p. 71
1 Table 1: E1 2026 DSM Extension: Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs Estimates EfficiencyOne 2026 DSM Extension Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs 2026 Activities 2026 Estimates Development of 2027-2031 DSM Plan & Compliance wi...

AI summary The text presents a table outlining the estimated costs for the 2026 DSM Extension, including activities such as the development of the 2027-2031 DSM Plan, compliance with directives, regular DSM matters, and support for the Integrated Resource Plan. Costs are categorized into E1 Costs and Flow Through Costs.

6 Table 2: 2026 DSM Extension - Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs, 2023 & 2024 Actual and 2025 Forecast p. p. 71
6 Table 2: 2026 DSM Extension - Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs, 2023 & 2024 Actual and 2025 Forecast EfficiencyOne 2023-2025 DSM Plan Enabling Strategies - Regulatory Affairs Activities 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Forecast DSM P...

AI summary The document provides a summary of EfficiencyOne's (E1) 2026 DSM Extension, including regulatory costs and performance targets. It outlines E1's progress towards meeting its 2023-2026 Performance Targets and confirms that E1 is on track to achieve the compliance threshold of 90% or greater for all four targets.

Smart Synergy Business Non-Profit and Institutional (BNI) Demand Response) p. p. 122
Smart Synergy Business Non-Profit and Institutional (BNI) Demand Response) - Marketing and Outreach: The Smart Synergy audience is BNI customers across key verticals in - 4 Nova Scotia. Marketing and outreach are primarily 1-to-1 focused s...

AI summary The Smart Synergy BNI Demand Response program targets Nova Scotia's BNI customers, using AMI data and 1-to-1 outreach to identify demand savings opportunities. Key activities include education, site visits, test events, and post-event feedback collection. Quality assurance involves validating reports and customer insights to refine the program.

E-9E1 (IG) RIR 1 to 7 4 passages
EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. pp. 2-7
EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL with associated electrical and non-electrical savings is provided in the 2024 Existing Residential Evaluation Report[1](#page-2-0) 2 . 3 (b) The ap...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) responds to Industrial Group (IG) information requests, stating their evaluation approach does not rely on cost-effectiveness tests. They reference the 2024 Existing Residential Evaluation Report and clarify that cost-effectiveness testing aims to assess program value, not distinguish electricity ratepayer portions from other funding sources.

EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 2
EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Industrial Group (IG) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Request IR-03: 2 3 Reference: E-2 Verification Report, Section I. Residential Behavioural Program (Efficiency 4 Insights). 5 6 Preamble: In the V...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) disagrees with certain recommendations from the Verification Report regarding the Residential Behavioural Program, particularly those suggesting the program should be reclassified as a marketing initiative. E1 acknowledges the correct evaluation of the program's 6.27 GWh energy savings but is awaiting a decision from the Nova Scotia Energy Board (NSEB) before implementing changes.

Date Filed: July 3, 2025 E1 (IG) IR-05 Page 4 of 4 p. p. 7
Date Filed: July 3, 2025 E1 (IG) IR-05 Page 4 of 4 1 Request IR-06: 2 3 Reference: E-2 Verification Report, page 72. 4 5 SVR24-G-1. The Savings Verification study recommends acceptance of the 6 2024 evaluation estimates for energy savings...

AI summary The document discusses the Savings Verification Study's recommendations for energy savings and demand reduction, excluding certain programs such as the Residential Behavior program and parts of the BNI Custom Incentive Program. It requests a restatement of energy savings, performance targets, unit costs, and program delivery approaches for 2024 and 2025.

13 Table 3: 2023-2025 (with adjusted 2025 forecast) p. pp. 7-15
13 Table 3: 2023-2025 (with adjusted 2025 forecast) Evaluated 2023 Savings3 2024 Adjusted Savings 2025 Forecast Savings with Adjustments4 2023-2025 Savings Net Electrical Energy Savings (GWh) 131.6 157.7 108.6 397.9 Net Peak Demand Savings...

AI summary The table provides energy savings data from 2023 to 2025, including net electrical energy savings, peak demand savings, and available capacity. Adjustments to the 2025 forecast are noted, such as the removal of certain savings due to recommendations from the Savings Verification Review report. E1's results are restated with and without adjustments, while low-income and equity programs remain unaffected.

E-10E1 (SBA) RIR 1 to 5 10 passages
Section 1 p. p. 2
Request IR-01: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results, Report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board (2024 Peach Report) June 4, 2025, authored by H. Gil Peach & Associates, (Peach) Sect...

AI summary The Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results recommends accepting energy savings and demand reduction estimates for most programs, except four, including the Residential Behavior and two Demand Response programs. The Evaluator followed protocols but notes that the protocols fail to account for the very large sample size problem, which affects the practical value of the results.

Section 2 p. p. 2
correctly followed the relevant protocols, but a problem with the protocols is that they do not take into account the very large sample size problem. For very large sample sizes statistical significance loses meaning and it is necessary to...

AI summary The text discusses the importance of practical significance over statistical significance in program evaluation, particularly in the context of large sample sizes. It raises questions about the roles of the verifier and evaluator, and the definition of practical value in energy savings and demand reduction.

Section 3 p. p. 2
cally, the verifier has reviewed program data tracking systems, program procedures, and methods for quality assurance control, as well as performed site visits to assess installation rates and whether 1 measures are operating as expected....

AI summary The verifier has reviewed program data tracking systems, procedures, and quality assurance methods, and conducted site visits to assess installation rates and performance of measures. The verifier can provide recommendations on evaluation methodologies and produce a report outlining program savings and adjustments.

Section 4 p. p. 2
[k1](#page-2-0) 3 outlines that the verifier will produce a 4 report that states program net energy savings and peak demand savings and outlines any 5 recommended adjustments to evaluation reports. 6 7 The independent evaluator has been pr...

AI summary The text outlines the role of an independent evaluator in assessing energy efficiency programs, including the production of reports on net energy and peak demand savings, and the requirement for transparent communication and methodology. The evaluator has extensive experience and does not provide strategic support on program design.

Section 6 p. p. 2
- (b) E1 understands from the 2024 Savings Verification Review report that Mr. Peach " verifies electricity energy savings and demand reduction for 2024. It reviews measurements, models, and estimates provided by Econoler, the Independent...

AI summary E1 references the 2024 Savings Verification Review report, noting that Mr. Peach verifies energy savings and demand reduction for Efficiency Nova Scotia's DSM programs. E1 also mentions that the 2023-2025 DSM Plan was approved by the NSUARB and that E1 is seeking clarification on the definition of 'practical value' used by Mr. Peach.

EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Small Business Advocate (SBA) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 3
EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Small Business Advocate (SBA) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 from both a qualitative and quantitative perspective and explain how the use of this term 2 is consistent with current methodological gui...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) responds to the Small Business Advocate's (SBA) information requests regarding the inclusion of specific programs in its DSM plans and the evaluation of program savings. E1 confirms that the BNI Demand Response program and compressed air leak audit projects are considered BNI program components.

Section 12 p. p. 10
2475 Laurier blvd., Suite 250 MEMORANDUM Quebec City, QC G1T 1C4 Canada BY EMAIL Quebec, July 2, 2025 To: EfficiencyOne From: Econoler Subject: SBA IR 3a – Significance Test Example Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section...

AI summary This memorandum from Econoler to EfficiencyOne discusses the need to include detailed significance test information in the SBA IR 3a report, referencing a specific recommendation from the 2024 Peach Report. It provides context on the Residential Behaviour program evaluation and mentions the statistical software JMP used for analysis.

Preamble p. p. 10
Below is the printout of the results of this test for the high users (wave 1), medium users (wave 2) and low users (wave 3). The test provides multiple results, but, for the purpose of our analysis, the Evaluator analyzed the p-values high...

AI summary The analysis examines participation levels in energy efficiency programs (GH, HEA, EPI) using p-values from a two-tailed test with a 10% significance level. Statistically significant differences were found for GH and EPI, but not for HEA, indicating varying effectiveness across programs.

Wave 2 – Medium users p. p. 12
Wave 2 – Medium users Two Sample Test for Proportions 2 3 Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section X, Individual Program Component 4 Review, subsection B. Instant Savings (IS), pages 21-22, under Evaluator Findings on p. 22...

AI summary The text discusses the Instant Savings (IS) program's performance in 2024, highlighting that it exceeded planned energy and peak demand savings targets. It also notes a decrease in free ridership for LED lamps and fixtures and a discrepancy between evaluated and tracked savings values. A question is posed regarding the cause of the difference in net energy and peak demand savings.

EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Small Business Advocate (SBA) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL p. p. 12
EfficiencyOne (E1) Responses to Small Business Advocate (SBA) Information Requests NON-CONFIDENTIAL - 1 resulted in a change to unitary energy savings for LED lighting measures and updated the - 2 free-ridership level for LED lamps and fix...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) applied 2024 evaluation findings to adjust 2025 tracked energy savings, noting a 7.7% decline in BER evaluated savings due to reduced LED Linear Lamp sales. The 2024 Peach Report recommended updating BER baselines to reflect current DesignLights Consortium standards, with no further study deemed necessary.

E-11Peach (CA) RIR 1 to 5 8 passages
Preamble
2 3 Reference: 2024 Savings Verification, Table 7, and below (p. 46-47): 4 5 "The three claims include for Green Heat (2 analyses out of 3), although the magnitude of each is 6 only 0.1% (a participation difference of one-tenth of one perc...

AI summary The text discusses the evaluation of participation rates in the Green Heat and Efficient Products Installation (EPI) programs, highlighting small differences (0.1% and 0.4%) between control and treatment groups. It questions whether these seemingly minor increases (33%, 25%, and 50%) in participation rates are considered 'practical importance' by the authors.

1 Response IR-1-a:
1 Response IR-1-a: 2 The evaluation for Green Heat found that the high user group had a 0.4% participation rate 3 compared to the 0.3% participation rate for the control group (a difference of one tenth of one 4 percent). While the relativ...

AI summary The evaluation of the Green Heat program found a 0.4% participation rate in the high user group versus 0.3% in the control group, a 33% relative increase but considered impractically insignificant. The response argues the behavioral component's impact is negligible, attributing energy savings solely to Green Heat, not behavioral encouragement.

15 Response IR-1-b:
15 Response IR-1-b: 16 The evaluation found that for the EPI program, the high user treatment group had a 2% 17 participation rate compared to 1.6% or the control group (the difference between the groups is four 18 tenths of one percent)....

AI summary The evaluation of the EPI program found a 0.4% higher participation rate in the high user treatment group compared to the control group, but this 25% increase is deemed not practically significant. The response emphasizes that measure-based programs offer substantial benefits to participating households despite minor behavioral changes.

1 Response IR-1-c:
1 Response IR-1-c: - 2 For Green Heat, the evaluation found that the medium user treatment group had a 0.2% - 3 participation rate compared to the 0.1% participation rate for the control group (a difference of one - 4 tenth of one percent)...

AI summary The evaluation of Green Heat's medium user group showed a 0.2% participation rate versus 0.1% in the control group (a 50% relative difference), but the response argues this is not practically significant. The program is deemed to have minimal energy savings per household, functioning mainly as a marketing tool. Redesigning the program to focus on marketing and measure-based bill reductions is recommended.

14 Response IR-2-b:
14 Response IR-2-b: - 15 No, we do not believe that an average or mean value is fully representative of participant outcomes. - 16 Instead, the combination of the two questions (dispersion and measures of central value) should - 17 capture...

AI summary The response argues that using an average or mean value is not sufficient to represent participant outcomes in energy efficiency programs. It suggests using graphs to identify subgroups, clusters, or anomalies in energy savings data and highlights concerns about the small average savings from behavioral programs possibly being skewed by physical energy-saving measures in some homes.

7
7 1 Request IR-4: 2 3 Reference: 2024 Savings Verification, p. 54: 4 5 "Currently, behavioural RCTs, of which the current program is an example, are black boxes. There 6 is no coherent specification of the mechanism or warrant, either of s...

AI summary The response discusses the effectiveness of Home Energy Reports (HERs) in residential behavioral programs, noting they provide standard energy-saving recommendations but have minimal impact at the household level. At the system level, the program's energy savings are calculated as 6.270 GWh, which is a very small percentage of the total system requirement, suggesting limited utility in utility planning.

1 Request IR-5:
1 Request IR-5: 2 3 Reference: 2024 Savings Verification, p. 55: 4 - 5 What amount of savings would the authors consider to be "real" energy savings at a household - 6 level and why? 7

AI summary Request IR-5 asks for the definition of 'real' energy savings at the household level, referencing the 2024 Savings Verification document on page 55.

8 Response IR-5:
8 Response IR-5: 9 We do not have a specific number for real energy savings. Here is why: Our role is to flag 10 problems, so that they can be discussed and considered. This is how our role contributes to policy 11 development and planning...

AI summary The respondent explains that real energy savings cannot be quantified specifically, as savings depend on utility system planning, customer type, and subjective customer perceptions of effort and cost. They emphasize the need for discussions with customers during site visits to understand residential perceptions of meaningful savings.

E-12Peach (IG) RIR 1 3 passages
Section 2 p. p. 1
- Reference: Figure 1: Savings Verification in DSM Cycle, page 9. - 3 Please explain how savings verification feeds forward into program planning. Specifically, please - 4 provide examples of how the work done in prior periods has been emp...

AI summary The response explains that savings verification feeds forward into program planning by reviewing evaluation work and providing recommendations. These recommendations are included in the Savings Verification study annually and may influence program changes or evaluation methods. Efficiency Nova Scotia (E-1) reviews these recommendations and responds to them.

Section 3 p. p. 1
inistrator, Efficiency Nova Scotia (or "E-1") reviews our recommendations and responds 3 stating which they accept and how they are implementing changes and which recommendations 4 they do not accept. 6 Second, though it feeds forward, our...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia (E1) reviews recommendations, implementing accepted changes and rejecting others. Site visits identify program issues, leading to collaborations with the DSM administrator and NSEB. Examples include revising evaluation processes post-2016 and detecting bulb discrepancies, improving program integrity and policy planning.

Section 5 p. p. 1
tor stalled over a whole summer and into the fall, failing to make good on the guarantee. We reported the issue to the DSM administrator, and Efficiency Nova Scotia followed up with the contractor and 1 the heat pumps were replaced within...

AI summary A contractor's delay in replacing heat pumps led to Efficiency Nova Scotia (E1) intervening to resolve the issue. E1 emphasizes using annual verification reports to evaluate program effectiveness, flagging underperforming initiatives for redesign or cancellation. Responses to information requests clarify E1's limited role in developing a new Benefits Costs Analysis (BCA) test and propose enhancing program evaluation processes.

E-13Peach (SBA) RIR 1 to 5 11 passages
Preamble
- Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 Evaluation - Results, Report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board (2024 Peach Report), June 4, 2025, authored by - H. Gil Peach & Associates, (Peach). Section IX....

AI summary The Savings Verification Review (SVR24-G-1) recommends accepting 2024 evaluation estimates for energy savings and demand reduction, except for four programs. These include the Residential Behavior Program and three Demand Response programs, which are noted for not producing practical energy savings or demand reduction. The report highlights a limitation in evaluation protocols regarding very large sample sizes and the need for practical significance over statistical significance.

Response IR-1-b:
Response IR-1-b: - Yes, the role of the verifier is applied science. In science a commitment to the goal of truth is one - of the most basic of science community norms. It is a norm that often requires proactive assertion. - "Defining the...

AI summary The response emphasizes the verifier's role in ensuring scientific integrity by identifying program flaws and prioritizing practical significance over statistical significance. It highlights issues with weak energy savings results in 2024 evaluations and ethical obligations to report problems to Efficiency Nova Scotia and NSEB. The shift toward practical significance reflects the American Statistical Association's 2016 guidance.

Response 1-c:
Response 1-c: - The programs that Peach concluded should have been flagged by the Evaluator for low practical - value are the residential behavior program, and the two demand reduction programs(the residential - and BNR demand response pro...

AI summary Peach identified residential behavior and demand reduction programs (including BNR demand response) as having low practical value. Savings (e.g., 4 kWh/month for residential customers) are deemed insignificant for customers due to high bill variability and unlikely to impact utility planning. The evaluation distinguishes customer-level and system-level value assessments.

Request IR-2:
Request IR-2: - Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section IX, General Recommendations, - including Recommendation SVR24-G-2, which states, at page 17: SVR24-G-2. The Evaluator should flag programs which the evaluation demons...

AI summary Request IR-2 seeks clarification on programs with minimal savings under the DSM Plan, asking which should be closed, their cost percentage, funds freed by closure, and the meaning of 'spend available energy efficiency dollars more effectively' as per Peach Report Recommendation SVR24-G-2.

Response IR-2-a:
Response IR-2-a: - We are not recommending the evaluation consultant flag any of the programs for closing. We are - recommending the flagging of any exceptionally weak program that appears not to be returning - practical value at the custo...

AI summary The response outlines a framework for evaluating demand-side management programs, stating that only exceptionally weak programs with insufficient energy savings or demand reduction should be flagged for closure. Programs below a reasonable performance threshold should be improved or cancelled to enhance productivity relative to investment.

Response IR2-d:
Response IR2-d: - What Peach means by the phrase, "in order to expend available energy efficiency dollars more - effectively" is the general business understanding that would apply to any business to make a - portfolio more efficient and e...

AI summary Efficiency Nova Scotia argues that pruning low-return programs to reallocate funds to more effective ones is reasonable, though other factors like maintaining customer group programs must be considered. They recommend evaluators flag weak programs for cancellation or redesign.

Request IR-3: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section IX, General Recommendations, including Recommendation SVR24-G-4, which states at page 18: SVR24-G-4. The Evaluator should include full worksheets or computer printout information for all significance tests, specifying for each test, whether the comparison is one-tailed or two-tailed, the p-value of the test, the power of the test, the number of cases in each group, and the significance level criterion used in the analysis. a) Did Peach confirm with the Evaluator and EfficiencyOne that the requested worksheets and information on significance tests were not provided? i. If not provided, did Peach request such information during its review or request that it be provided at a later date? b) Please provide an example of what the requested worksheet and significance test information should look like, taken from another report that Peach has reviewed. Response IR-3-a: We did an extended series of requests to the evaluation consultant through the Efficiency Nova Scotia Evaluation Manager. The evaluation consultant did not answer all our questions, but they did answer in good faith and answered enough questions that we could proceed in our analysis. Although we did not get all the answers we requested, when we got the information that the power of the tests was 100% that confirmed the analysis was within the problem area in which significance tests should not be relied upon (the area in which statistical significance is almost
Request IR-3: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section IX, General Recommendations, including Recommendation SVR24-G-4, which states at page 18: SVR24-G-4. The Evaluator should include full worksheets or computer printout i...

AI summary Peach requested detailed significance test information from the evaluator, but the consultant provided only partial responses. Peach noted that power values of 100% indicated statistical significance was not reliable. The recommendation SVR24-G-4 requires full test details for future evaluations to ensure transparency. The evaluator's incomplete responses were deemed sufficient for analysis.

Response IR-3-b:
Response IR-3-b: This example shows a format for a computer printout. It is a t-test of household income data from another project, using SPSS version 30. The example is a paired samples t-test comparing two types of income data for the sa...

AI summary The text describes a paired samples t-test example using SPSS version 30, comparing household income data. It notes the provision of one-sided and two-sided significance levels, Cohen's d for effect size, and references a book for calculating test power.

Paired Samples 9 Statistics
Paired Samples 9 Statistics Mean N Std. Devia ition Std. Er ror Mean ir 1 V1 44952.9043 30758 108.56 204 .61901 V2 11923.6974 30758 13877.49 449 7 79.12833 Paired Sar nples Cor relations S ignificance N Correlation One-Side dp Two-Si ded p...

AI summary The document references a request for clarification regarding 'savings at the generator' in the context of Instant Savings (IS) program findings and asks for an explanation of the difference between savings at the generator and savings on a customer's bill. It also requests an explanation of the fifth bullet point regarding the discrepancy between evaluated savings and those tracked by Efficiency Nova Scotia.

exact understanding of the differences.
exact understanding of the differences. 1 Request IR-5: 2 Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section X, Individual Program Component 3 Review, subsection J. BNI Efficient Products Rebates (BER), pages 58-60, which states, at...

AI summary The 2024 Peach Report discusses a 7.7% decline in evaluated savings for the BNI Efficient Products Rebates (BER) program compared to 2023, primarily due to a 41% decline in LED Linear Lamps incentives. Despite this, the Net to Gross Ratio (NTGR) for instant rebates slightly improved from 81% to 84%, reducing year-on-year declines. The report recommends updating baselines for BER and IR rebates to align with current market practices.

Response IR-5-a:
Response IR-5-a: - We looked for the statistical significance level for the BNR program, the residential DR program - and the BNR DR program in the evaluations and the appendix for each of the evaluations and did - not find a reported stat...

AI summary The response indicates that statistical significance levels for the BNR program, residential DR program, and BNR DR program were not found in evaluations or appendices. The DSM administrator or evaluation consultant is expected to hold this information.

E-14Peach (E1) RIR 1 to 14 - Redacted 20 passages
H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC (Peach) Responses to Efficiency One (E1) Information Requests Regarding 2024 Savings Verification Review Report In the Matter of EfficiencyOne's (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension p. p. 5
H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC (Peach) Responses to Efficiency One (E1) Information Requests Regarding 2024 Savings Verification Review Report In the Matter of EfficiencyOne's (E1) Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension (M12249)...

AI summary H. Gil Peach & Associates LLC responds to EfficiencyOne's information requests regarding the 2024 Savings Verification Report in the context of EfficiencyOne's application for the 2026 DSM Extension under the Public Utilities Act (M12249).

5 Response IR-01 p. p. 5
5 Response IR-01 4 16 6 The scope of work covers on-site visits, review and monitoring of the DSM administrator's 7 database for tracking and measurement of energy and demand savings; review of all the 8 evaluation consultant's studies and...

AI summary The scope of work involves reviewing DSM program data, verifying energy savings estimates, collaborating with Efficiency One on reports, and submitting verification filings. It also includes participation in DSMAG meetings and other required sessions.

Response IR-03 b: p. p. 5
Response IR-03 b: 6 This response describes scopes associated with " Policy ", " Plan ", and " Implement ". Policy . Operational policies direct actions. For example, we might consider the interpretations of 9 benefit-cost tests in the pro...

AI summary This response outlines the scopes of Policy, Plan, and Implement in regulatory proceedings. Policy involves hierarchical decision-making with input from stakeholders, while Plan follows NSEB guidance for DSM. Implement allows flexibility in program execution with evaluator roles. Consultants aid in policy refinement and issue identification.

Request IR-03 c: p. p. 5
Request IR-03 c: - Please explain why "[suggested] modifications in the Evaluation data, methods, and reported - results" falls under the "Verify Savings & Review" centre of focus in the DSM cycle.

AI summary The document requests an explanation of why modifications to evaluation data, methods, and reported results fall under the 'Verify Savings & Review' phase of the Demand Side Management (DSM) cycle, emphasizing the importance of verification in assessing program effectiveness.

Response IR3 c: p. p. 5
Response IR3 c: - Modifications in the Evaluation data, methods, and reported results fits in the "Verify Savings & - Review" centre of focus in the DSM cycle since the verification consultant is directed to " Review - all methods and calc...

AI summary The response emphasizes that modifications to evaluation data, methods, and results fall under the 'Verify Savings & Review' phase of the DSM cycle. It outlines a process of checking data, methods, and results to ensure accuracy, involving Efficiency Nova Scotia and NSEB. Collaboration with the evaluation consultant and stakeholder input improve DSM processes and outcomes.

1 Request IR-03 d: p. p. 5
1 Request IR-03 d: - 2 Please explain why "[suggested] modifications….in 'future [i]mplementation' " falls under the - 3 Verify Savings & Review centre of focus in the DSM cycle.

AI summary The request seeks clarification on why proposed modifications to 'future implementation' fall under the 'Verify Savings & Review' phase of the DSM cycle. It emphasizes the need to align changes with the program's verification and review processes, ensuring compliance with regulatory standards.

5 Response IR3 d: p. p. 5
5 Response IR3 d: 4 - 6 Suggestions for modification future implementation fall under the Verify Savings & Review centre - 7 of focus in the DSM cycle because the verification consultant is verifying the work with a full - 8 overview of al...

AI summary The response discusses modifying future Demand Side Management (DSM) implementation through the Verify Savings & Review centre. Verification consultants identify errors and recommend improvements to ensure program integrity and enhance efficiency. Modifications aim to strengthen DSM cycle processes and evaluation effectiveness.

Response IR-04: p. p. 5
Response IR-04: - 8 The focus of the report is within the scope of the original Resource Acquisition model of DSM, - 9 and when Market Transformation, Climate Change and Energy Sufficiency are discussed, the - report notes that policy auth...

AI summary The report discusses the limitations of current Demand-Side Management (DSM) frameworks, emphasizing the need for policy authorization in Climate Change, Energy Sufficiency, and Market Transformation. It highlights gaps in disaster preparedness, the potential of Energy Sufficiency (notably in Europe), and the need for enhanced Market Transformation strategies. Regulated utilities are urged to engage in climate adaptation, while Energy Sufficiency remains a focus for ECEEE.

1 Request IR-05: p. p. 5
1 Request IR-05: - 2 Please confirm that Figure 3, page 11 of the 2024 Verification Report, demonstrates that all - 3 program components achieve net lifetime energy savings.

AI summary Request IR-05 seeks confirmation that Figure 3 on page 11 of the 2024 Verification Report demonstrates that all program components achieve net lifetime energy savings, focusing on verification of energy efficiency outcomes.

5 Response IR-05: p. pp. 5-12
5 Response IR-05: 4 13 6 Figure 3, from Page 11 of the 2024 Verification Report is reproduced below. The purpose of the 7 Figure is to show the contrast in effective for the programs. Each of the programs shown in the 8 figure has a lifeti...

AI summary The text discusses Figure 3 from the 2024 Verification Report, highlighting varying lifetimes of energy savings for programs (20–27 years vs. 1 year). It notes that not all program components achieve net savings and excludes two Demand Response (DR) programs, as they focus on reducing demand rather than energy savings.

1 Request IR-06: p. p. 12
1 Request IR-06: - 2 Please confirm whether the methodology used in quantifying net lifetime energy savings was - 3 consistent with current methodological guidance for evaluating energy efficiency programs.

AI summary Request IR-06 seeks confirmation on whether the methodology for quantifying net lifetime energy savings in energy efficiency programs aligns with current methodological guidance. The focus is on ensuring consistency in evaluating program effectiveness.

5 Response IR-06: p. p. 12
5 Response IR-06: 4 11 - 6 The method for quantifying net lifetime energy savings was selected by the evaluation consultant - 7 and the numbers used in Verification report are provided in Table 5 on Page 16 of the evaluator's - 8 Overall E...

AI summary The response details the evaluator's methodology for quantifying net lifetime energy savings in the DSM MA update, including revised EUL values based on literature reviews and alignment with ACEEE guidelines. The approach accounts for baseline evolution over time and calculates adjusted EUL by dividing lifetime savings by first-year savings.

Request IR-09: p. p. 12
Request IR-09: - 1 Please confirm what is meant by the term " practical value ", from both a qualitative and - 2 quantitative perspective, and explain how the use of this term is consistent with current - 3 methodological guidance for eval...

AI summary The document requests clarification on the term 'practical value' in energy efficiency programs, seeking both qualitative and quantitative explanations and its alignment with current methodological guidance.

Response IR-9: p. p. 12
Response IR-9: 6 " Practical value " is used to indicate a test of the magnitude of program results (energy savings 7 or demand reduction), which is separate from statistical significance. For any test of the 8 magnitude of program results...

AI summary Discusses the distinction between practical and statistical significance in evaluating energy efficiency programs, citing the 2016 American Statistical Association's shift towards practical significance. Highlights that large sample sizes in residential programs can lead to statistically significant results with minimal practical value.

Request IR-10: p. p. 12
Request IR-10: - 2 Reference: page 52 of the 2024 Verification Report: (Section I. Residential Behavioral Program - 3 (Efficiency Insights): Because significance and confidence are driven by number of cases and the cases are joined physica...

AI summary The document challenges the methodology used to determine that system-level energy savings of 6.27 GWh are not meaningful compared to Nova Scotia Power's (NSP) total system requirements of 11,326 GWh. It questions whether savings from small household-level reductions, without physical measures, have practical impact on power plant decisions.

Request IR-11: p. p. 12
Request IR-11: - 2 Reference: page 54 of the 2024 Verification Report (Section I. Residential Behavioral Program - 3 (Efficiency Insights): Currently, behavioural RCTs, of which the current program is an example, are black boxes. There is...

AI summary Request IR-11 critiques the use of behavioral RCTs in a program, arguing they are 'black boxes' without clear mechanisms for energy savings. It references Cartwright and Hardie's methodology and suggests a process evaluation to assess savings. The response notes no jurisdictions have implemented the proposed approach and questions the program's value due to minimal savings. It references Matter M12249 and highlights the need for regulatory review.

Response IR-12-a: p. p. 12
Response IR-12-a: - The source for the referenced customer data supporting the Verifier's findings is the evaluation - consultant's 2024 final report and E1 tracking sheet ex-ante claim for the two locations.

AI summary The response identifies the evaluation consultant's 2024 final report and E1 tracking sheet as the sources for customer data supporting the Verifier's findings.

Response IR12-b: p. p. 12
Response IR12-b: - Cumulative leak repair energy savings over multiple program years are best expressed in terms - of total energy saved as a percentage of total energy demand for a single year. This is an effective - proxy for total air l...

AI summary The document discusses compressed air leak repair energy savings in Nova Scotia, citing 3.7 and 4.0 GWh of savings in 2024. It notes that 42% of total savings came from two sites, with savings increasing 522% compared to 2023. The response references a 10% leakage rate benchmark from the Uniform Methods Protocol and asserts that the sites' savings fall within acceptable ranges.

Request IR-13: 2 Reference: page 65 (Evaluation Issue 3-b), the following was stated: "Leakage rate has increased. There has been an unexplained recent surge in claimed savings at these two locations, as compared to prior years." 6 (a) Please provide leakage rates and claimed savings for the relevant years to support this 7 statement. Response-IR-13: The observation of increased leakage rates of the sites for air compression were derived from the 2024 and 2023 evaluator reports. In 2024 the Evaluator reported that total claimed savings from the two sites yielded 7.7 GWh of savings at the generator. In the previous Evaluator report,12 total claimed savings for the entire Custom retrofit program, of which compressed air leak audits is a component, produced 10% of the total claimed savings at the generator for the program. The total claimed savings that year was 21.178 GWh, hence the total claimed energy savings for all compressed air leak audits in 2023 was approximately 2.1 GWh of total savings or 27% of the savings claimed in 2024 from the two sites. p. p. 12
Request IR-13: 2 Reference: page 65 (Evaluation Issue 3-b), the following was stated: "Leakage rate has increased. There has been an unexplained recent surge in claimed savings at these two locations, as compared to prior years." 6 (a) Ple...

AI summary The response to Request IR-13 cites 2023 and 2024 evaluator reports showing increased leakage rates and a surge in claimed savings. In 2024, two sites reported 7.7 GWh savings, while 2023's compressed air leak audits accounted for 2.1 GWh, 27% of 2024's savings.

Request IR-14: p. p. 12
Request IR-14: 2 Reference: page 65-66 2024 Verification Report: SVR2024-Compressed Air-12 "Proprietary data issue. It is not unusual for some organizations to try to keep operational data proprietary and confidential, as a strategic polic...

AI summary The text addresses a proprietary data issue in energy efficiency evaluations, emphasizing the need for site access and data sharing. The NSEB requests details on clients who restricted access during the 2024 independent evaluation, citing evaluation requirements for direct measurement and data access.

E-15Evidence of J. Kallay - Synapse 4 passages
- Advocate in assessing the impacts of utility energy efficiency plans and delivery p. p. 3
- Advocate in assessing the impacts of utility energy efficiency plans and delivery 1 strategies on customers. I have also evaluated DSM program efforts in New 2 Brunswick, New Mexico, Prince Edward's Island, Ontario, Vermont, Hawaii, 3 Ne...

AI summary The witness has extensive experience evaluating demand-side management (DSM) programs across multiple jurisdictions and has provided testimony before various regulatory bodies. They are now providing evidence on behalf of Counsel to the Nova Scotia Energy Board regarding the 2026 DSM Extension, concluding that the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency is declining due to reduced savings and benefits relative to costs.

11 Q. Why have energy savings decreased for energy efficiency measures from 12 2024 to 2026? p. p. 9
11 Q. Why have energy savings decreased for energy efficiency measures from 12 2024 to 2026? A. First-year energy savings decreased by 56.8 GWh from 2024 to 2026. There are several reasons for this decrease, including: 1) the phase out of...

AI summary Energy savings from energy efficiency measures decreased by 56.8 GWh between 2024 and 2026 due to the phase-out of residential lighting measures, the end of the Green Heat and Appliance Retirement program, and updates to measure characterizations.

17 A. In its response to Synapse IR-08, E1 provided 2023 and 2024 actual lifetime 18 benefits and 2025 forecasted lifetime benefits for the energy efficiency portfolio p. pp. 12-14
17 A. In its response to Synapse IR-08, E1 provided 2023 and 2024 actual lifetime 18 benefits and 2025 forecasted lifetime benefits for the energy efficiency portfolio 1 as a whole. However, E1 did not break out actual and forecasted lifet...

AI summary E1 provided actual and forecasted lifetime benefits for the energy efficiency portfolio but did not break them down by program component, making it difficult to calculate Program Administrator Costs (PACs) by component. A comparison of PACs by program component for the 2023, 2024, and 2025 plans to the 2026 DSM Extension is provided in Table 4, showing similar planned PACs for certain program components.

Q. Do you have any concerns that these energy efficiency program components are not cost-effective in the 2026 DSM Extension? p. p. 14
Q. Do you have any concerns that these energy efficiency program components are not cost-effective in the 2026 DSM Extension? A. No. These two program components that are not cost-effective using the PAC serve low-income customers and prog...

AI summary The respondent does not have concerns about the cost-effectiveness of the 2026 DSM Extension's energy efficiency programs. They note that low-income programs are not typically cost-effective using PAC due to higher incentives, but similar ratios were approved in the 2023-2025 Plan by NSEB. Cost-effectiveness is evaluated at the portfolio level.

E-16Evidence of T. Love - CA 8 passages
Q. ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT THIS SHARP INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL SAVINGS ACQUISTION COSTS? p. p. 5
Q. ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT THIS SHARP INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL SAVINGS ACQUISTION COSTS? Yes. The primary goal of the portfolio is to acquire energy savings, with the main constraint coming from the budget available to do so. As costs to ac...

AI summary The respondent confirms concern over rising residential savings acquisition costs, which reduce savings and net benefits under the current Total Resource Cost (TRC) test, yielding a 0.9 benefit-cost ratio (BCR). This indicates negative net benefits, though an ongoing proceeding (Matter No. 12282) may revise the benefit-cost test.

1 Q. WHAT IS DRIVING THIS INCREASED COST TO ACQUIRE SAVINGS? p. p. 5
1 Q. WHAT IS DRIVING THIS INCREASED COST TO ACQUIRE SAVINGS? - 2 A. There are many factors driving this change. One of the main drivers is the retiring of - 3 LED savings from the residential sector, with the effects of this starting in 20...

AI summary The increased cost to acquire savings is driven by retiring residential LED savings starting in 2025, alongside rising program costs and declining savings per participant. Program design and viability require thorough examination in future filings.

8 Q. SHOULD EFFICIENCYONE DISCONTINUE ANY OF THESE PROGRAMS? p. p. 5
8 Q. SHOULD EFFICIENCYONE DISCONTINUE ANY OF THESE PROGRAMS? - 9 A. No, not at this time. There are many uncertainties surrounding the future direction of the - 10 EfficiencyOne portfolio including new policy directives from the new Nova S...

AI summary EfficiencyOne will not discontinue its programs due to uncertainties including new policy directives from the Nova Scotia Energy Board, updated benefit-cost tests, reevaluated savings, and new program areas like solar and storage. A plan extension allows continued service while policy questions are resolved and further planning occurs.

2 Q. HOW DOES THE RESIDENTIAL SECTOR 2026 PROPOSED KWH SAVINGS 3 COMPARE TO THE 2025 APPROVED PLAN GWH SAVINGS? p. p. 7
2 Q. HOW DOES THE RESIDENTIAL SECTOR 2026 PROPOSED KWH SAVINGS 3 COMPARE TO THE 2025 APPROVED PLAN GWH SAVINGS? 4 A. Residential savings went down significantly as a portion of portfolio savings. Total 5 residential GWh savings went from 4...

AI summary The 2026 proposed plan shows a significant drop in residential sector savings from 48% to 25% of portfolio savings compared to the 2025 approved plan. EfficiencyOne attributes this to LEDs becoming baseline but emphasizes the need for further analysis of actual savings potential versus continued programs without LEDs.

20 A. In EfficiencyOne's response to CA IR-02 they give the following for the reason for 21 decreasing the GWh savings for Affordable Multi-Family Housing program: "A decline p. pp. 9-10
20 A. In EfficiencyOne's response to CA IR-02 they give the following for the reason for 21 decreasing the GWh savings for Affordable Multi-Family Housing program: "A decline 1 in energy savings and increase in unit cost is expected as a r...

AI summary EfficiencyOne adjusted its methodology for allocating low-income savings in programs not solely dedicated to low-income customers to avoid double counting, as recommended by GEEG. They also suggest conducting surveys for better assessment and note that the 2026 allocation may be overly conservative.

6 Q. DO YOU INTERPRET THE EVALUATION RESULTS IN THE SAME WAY AS 7 MR. PEACH? p. pp. 10-11
6 Q. DO YOU INTERPRET THE EVALUATION RESULTS IN THE SAME WAY AS 7 MR. PEACH? 8 A. No. While I agree that there are observable results, I disagree that they are so small as to 9 warrant no practical value. Mr. Peach's description of the eff...

AI summary The witness disagrees with Mr. Peach's interpretation of evaluation results, arguing that small absolute values still hold practical significance due to their impact on program participation. Mr. Peach's analysis relies on Table 2, but the witness contends his approach overlooks relative impacts.

16 Table 5. Potential Impact of Residential Behavior Program on Green Heat Progra[m](#page-12-2) 9 p. pp. 11-13
16 Table 5. Potential Impact of Residential Behavior Program on Green Heat Progra[m](#page-12-2) 9 2024 Results Residential Behavior Participants 239,309 0.1% of Behavior Participants 239 Homes in Green Heat 1,408 % Represented by 0.1% Inc...

AI summary The text discusses the impact of the Residential Behavior Program on the Green Heat program, noting that only 1,408 homes participated in Green Heat in 2024, far below the projected 3,408. It also highlights concerns about the effectiveness of the Efficiency Insights program, with savings per household deemed too small to be meaningful.

- 24 A. Yes. Average savings are below the projected values assumed by EfficiencyOne, and 25 there should be effort put into improving average savings value and increasing p. pp. 14-16
- 24 A. Yes. Average savings are below the projected values assumed by EfficiencyOne, and 25 there should be effort put into improving average savings value and increasing 1 conversion rates to other programs. Mr. Peach's recommendation fo...

AI summary The testimony highlights that average energy savings are below projected values by EfficiencyOne, recommending efforts to improve savings and increase conversion rates. The witness suggests reallocation of funds, adjustments to low-income allocations, and continuation of savings from the Efficiency Insights program.

E-16-(i)Resume of Theodore Love 4 passages
Economic and Policy Analysis p. p. 0
Economic and Policy Analysis Small Business Utility Advocate - California (June 2020 – Present) - Provided testimony and analysis on cost recovery for wildfire management and grid hardening efforts for Southern California Edison (Docket No...

AI summary The individual served as the Small Business Utility Advocate in California, providing testimony and analysis on various energy-related topics including cost recovery for wildfire management, grid hardening, program budgets, non-energy benefits, phase-out of gas incentives, cost-effectiveness tests, and clean energy financing. They also worked on program design, underserved customer definitions, and participation rates in energy efficiency programs.

Program Management and Benefit Cost Analysis Expert p. p. 0
Program Management and Benefit Cost Analysis Expert Public Service Enterprise Group (PSE&G) – New Jersey. (Oct 2021 – Apr 2023, Feb 2024 - present) - Consulted on tracking, forecasting and management of PSE&G's internally run commercial En...

AI summary The expert provided program management and benefit-cost analysis services for PSE&G's energy efficiency programs in New Jersey, including tracking system development, economic test calculations, and training material creation. Work spanned 2021–2023 and 2024, involving collaboration with ANB Enterprises and implementation across seven utilities.

Technical Assistance for Energy Efficiency Programs p. p. 0
Technical Assistance for Energy Efficiency Programs Focus on Energy - Wisconsin (June 2011 – August 2013) - Developed and customized cost-effectiveness calculators for Wisconsin's Focus on Energy portfolio of energy efficiency programs; -...

AI summary Focus on Energy in Wisconsin (2011–2013) developed cost-effectiveness calculators, trained staff, and conducted QA/QC on 14 energy efficiency programs with $160M in spending over two years.

Testimony and Proceeding Participation p. p. 0
Testimony and Proceeding Participation Forum On Behalf Of Docket/Matter Date Issues Addressed Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General D.P.U. 24-140 through D.P.U. 24-149 - 2025-2027 Three-Y...

AI summary This section lists various regulatory proceedings and testimonies from different states, focusing on energy efficiency plans, rate cases, and wildfire mitigation costs. Key issues addressed include policy design, incentive structures, cost-effectiveness, and plan development.

E-17Reply Evidence- E1 including Appendix A -Econoler Reply Evidence 37 passages
1 1. INTRODUCTION p. pp. 0-2
1 1. INTRODUCTION - 2 EfficiencyOne's ("E1") Application for Approval of the 2026 DSM Extension for Demand-Side Management - 3 Activities ("DSM") between E1 and Nova Scotia Power Inc. ("NS Power"), and for Approval of the - 4 Amendment to...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) seeks approval to extend its Demand-Side Management (DSM) services until 2026, aligning with the Nova Scotia Energy Board's (NSEB) new mandate and pending Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) test (Matter M12282). The application includes an amendment to the DSM Purchase Agreement with Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NS Power). E1 concurs with intervenor findings but addresses limited divergences and relies on Econoler's report for the Peach Report (Matter M12186).

2.1 IMBALANCED TOTAL RESOURCE COST TEST p. pp. 3-4
2.1 IMBALANCED TOTAL RESOURCE COST TEST

AI summary The document section introduces the 'Imbalanced Total Resource Cost Test,' a regulatory methodology used in Nova Scotia's energy proceedings to evaluate cost allocation and efficiency. While no specific arguments or entities are detailed in the provided text, it is part of a broader regulatory process involving energy stakeholders.

Synapse p. p. 4
Synapse Synapse states: The [Total Resource Cost] TRC test is imbalanced in that it includes all the costs and only a portion of the benefits. The participant benefits are missing from the TRC test. ...the TRC test is likely to be skewed a...

AI summary Synapse argues that the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test is imbalanced, excluding participant benefits and leading to a skewed assessment. This omission risks misleading conclusions about resource efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

1 cost-effectiveness ratios in the 2023-2025 Plan and received approval from the NSEB. Lastly, p. p. 5
1 cost-effectiveness ratios in the 2023-2025 Plan and received approval from the NSEB. Lastly, 2 cost effectiveness is assessed at the portfolio level.3 3 4 E1 Response 5 E1 asserts that program components which serve low-income and equity...

AI summary The document discusses the cost-effectiveness ratios in the 2023-2025 Plan, which were approved by the NSEB. It highlights E1's concern that low-income and equity program components may fall below cost-effectiveness thresholds due to the need for higher incentives. Synapse recommends that NSPI respond to E1's questions regarding August 2024 avoided costs and that the NSEB direct NSPI and E1 to update the 2027-2031 DSM Plan accordingly.

Synapse p. p. 6
Synapse On June 4, 2025, Synapse posed the following IR-08 to E1:[5](#page-6-1) Request IR-8: Please refer to Table 5: Program Savings & Investments on page 23 of the Evidence. Please provide an Excel workbook that reproduces Table 5 in fi...

AI summary Synapse requested E1 to provide an Excel workbook with five worksheets reproducing Table 5 data for 2023-2026, ensuring consistent formatting and zero values for inactive programs. The request is part of the E1 2026 DSM Extension Application (M12249).

3.3.1 SURVEYS OF LOW-INCOME PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS p. p. 14
3.3.1 SURVEYS OF LOW-INCOME PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS

AI summary This section discusses surveys conducted on low-income participants in energy programs, focusing on their experiences and feedback. Key entities include Nova Scotia Power Inc. and the Nova Scotia Energy Board, with topics related to program effectiveness and participant engagement.

E1 Response p. pp. 14-15
E1 Response E1 supports this recommendation, subject to the following conditions: (1) surveys will be executed exclusively for programs that involve some level of low-income and equity participation; and (2) the scheduling of these surveys...

AI summary E1 supports the recommendation with conditions: surveys limited to programs with low-income/equity participation and flexible scheduling aligned with program timelines. The response cites multiple exhibits and RIRs from the DSM Extension Application (M12249) and other documents.

E1 Response p. pp. 15-16
E1 Response E1 submits that the reported low-income and equity impacts in Efficient Product Installation (EPI) for the undisclosed income group represents a small proportion of the overall total reported low-income and equity impacts for E...

AI summary E1 argues that the undisclosed income group's low-income and equity impacts are minimal, so using the 14.9% prevalence factor is appropriate until a survey is conducted. They oppose applying the same factor to all groups, as it may underreport impacts.

Q. Are you concerned about this sharp increase in residential savings acquisition costs? p. p. 17
Q. Are you concerned about this sharp increase in residential savings acquisition costs? A. Yes. The primary goal of the portfolio is to acquire energy savings, with the main constraint coming from the budget available to do so. As costs t...

AI summary The respondent is concerned about the sharp increase in residential savings acquisition costs, which has led to a decline in acquired savings despite stable or slightly increased budgets. They emphasize the need for a thorough review of residential energy efficiency programs to ensure cost-effective savings for ratepayers.

Introduction p. pp. 19-38
Introduction Econoler was commissioned by E1 to evaluate E1's 2024 DSM program portfolio, including the Residential Behaviour program component. E1's Residential Behaviour program component, publicly branded as Efficiency Insights, constit...

AI summary Econoler evaluated E1's 2024 Residential Behaviour program (Efficiency Insights), which uses NS Power data and Bidgely's algorithms to generate personalized energy reports for customers. The program aims to reduce electricity consumption through behavioral change, with Econoler conducting a randomized controlled trial to assess its impact.

Reply Evidence p. pp. 19-38
Reply Evidence The Savings Verification Review of Efficiency Nova Scotia Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results (the "Peach Report") authored by H. Gil Peach & Associates ("the Verifier") for the Nova Scotia Energy Board, and filed on June 5...

AI summary Econoler responds to the Peach Report's evaluation of the Residential Behavioural Program under the EfficiencyOne 2026 DSM Extension Application (M12249), addressing concerns about the program's effectiveness and long-term behavioral impacts.

1. 2024 Residential Behaviour Evaluation Approach and Results p. p. 20
1. 2024 Residential Behaviour Evaluation Approach and Results The Peach Report states as follows in relation to Econoler's 2024 Independent Evaluation of EfficiencyOne's DSM programs:[2](#page-21-0) This evaluation is well constructed at a...

AI summary The Peach Report evaluates Econoler's 2024 assessment of EfficiencyOne's DSM programs, noting technical adequacy but highlighting flaws in statistical significance and effect size interpretation. The 6.27 GWh first-year effect size is deemed trivial (0.06% of NSP's 2024 system requirement), with large samples undermining statistical validity. The report advocates shifting focus from statistical significance to practical business case assessments.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 20-36
Econoler Response: Econoler does not agree with the Verifier's evidence respecting large sample sizes and statistical significance. Econoler's approach is fully aligned with two specific industry standards for behaviour programs, both of w...

AI summary Econoler disagrees with the Verifier's evidence on sample size and statistical significance, citing industry standards from SEE Action and NREL's Uniform Methods Project. They argue that RCT with regression analysis is the standard, as used in their 2024 Residential Behaviour Program Evaluation.

2. Sample Size and Statistical Significance p. p. 22
2. Sample Size and Statistical Significance The Peach Report states as follows in relation to the use of statistical significance testing for large sample sizes:[6](#page-23-0) Use of statistical significance testing for very large sample...

AI summary The Peach Report critiques the use of statistical significance testing with large sample sizes, noting that these tests were developed for smaller samples. It highlights a tension between the benefit of larger samples in enhancing statistically significant results and the questionable applicability of significance testing with very large samples.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 22-28
Econoler Response: Econoler respectfully disagrees with the assertion that the statistical tests employed in the evaluation, as well as those recommended in the evaluation protocols, lack reliability when applied to large sample sizes. - T...

AI summary Econoler disputes claims that statistical tests lack reliability with large samples, citing protocols, usage by other jurisdictions, and sample bias corrections. They emphasize statistical significance for validating savings and note that the Peach Report highlights that large samples may detect trivial differences.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 22-28
Econoler Response: Econoler respectfully disagrees with the statement that a statistical test will almost always demonstrate a significant difference with large sample. While it is true that a large sample size increases ability to detect...

AI summary Econoler disputes the claim that large sample sizes always detect significant savings, arguing that they reduce standard errors and increase statistical power but cannot detect non-existent effects. They reference studies and exhibits (e.g., Peach Report, NREL protocols) to support their position on statistical methodology in energy efficiency evaluations.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 25-28
Econoler Response: Econoler does not agree that due to the effect size at the household level, a savings claim for the program does not make sense. - Behaviour change initiatives are designed to make small, simple changes in how individual...

AI summary Econoler argues that residential behavior programs should claim energy savings if measurable, even with small per-household effects. The program achieved 6.270 GWh savings (0.34%-0.62% annual household consumption), consistent with other jurisdictions. Savings are comparable to E1's LED lamp program (0.113 kWh/day).

4. Causal Effect p. pp. 25-26
4. Causal Effect The Peach Report states as follows in relation to effect size at the household level:[16](#page-26-1) Currently, behavioural RCTs, of which the current program is an example, are black boxes. There is no coherent specifica...

AI summary The Peach Report critiques current behavioral RCTs in DSM programs, emphasizing the need for warrants and causal analysis. It highlights the necessity of evaluating program elements like Home Energy Reports and energy advisor interactions, as well as tracking survey completion and its impact on energy savings.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 26-27
Econoler Response: Econoler does not agree that behavioural RCTs, and therefore energy behaviour programs, are black boxes and that additional justification is needed to claim savings for the following reasons: - First, behavioural RCTs do...

AI summary Econoler argues that behavioral RCTs are not black boxes, citing theory-informed mechanisms like social norms and personalized feedback. They emphasize that current protocols, including RCTs and meter-based savings estimation, are industry standards and more transparent than engineering models. Econoler disputes the Verifier's stance on program effectiveness.

5. Verifier's Recommendations p. p. 27
5. Verifier's Recommendations The Peach Report states the following general recommendation regarding the acceptance of 2024 evaluation results for four program components, including Residential Behaviour:[18](#page-28-0) SVR24-G-1. The Sav...

AI summary The Peach Report recommends accepting 2024 evaluation results for most programs but flags the Residential Behavior and two Demand Response programs. While protocols were followed, savings are statistically significant but lack practical value due to large sample sizes. The Evaluator should have highlighted this discrepancy.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 27-28
Econoler Response: Econoler disagrees that the 2024 evaluated energy savings for Residential Behaviour should not be accepted and that this program should have been flagged for not producing practical energy savings. As explained in detail...

AI summary Econoler argues that the 2024 Residential Behaviour program's energy savings should be accepted, citing industry-wide use of residential behavior as DSM programs and statistically significant metering data. The Peach Report recommends reclassifying the program as a marketing tool rather than a direct energy-saving initiative due to insufficient household-level savings.

Residential Demand Response description p. pp. 34-35
Residential Demand Response description In 2024, Residential DR was composed only of Eco Shift – a residential "bring your own device" offering generating available DR capacity through three pathways: 1) Smart thermostats for electric spac...

AI summary In 2024, Nova Scotia's Residential Demand Response (DR) program, Eco Shift, focused on smart thermostats due to limited participation in other pathways (EVs, batteries). Econoler evaluated DR capacity using regression models on AMI data, aiming to aggregate participant impacts to reduce NS Power's need for new capacity or expensive peak-period electricity purchases.

Business, Non-profit, and Institutional (BNI) Demand Response p. p. 35
Business, Non-profit, and Institutional (BNI) Demand Response In 2024, BNI DR was composed solely of the DR Aggregator program component. Through the DR Aggregator program component, E1 hired aggregators to enroll groups of BNI customers c...

AI summary In 2024, BNI Demand Response (DR) relied on the DR Aggregator program, managed by E1 and implemented by Parsons Inc. During events triggered by NS Power, aggregators reduced load via remote control or predefined plans. E1 calculated DR capacity using a baseline load adjusted by same-day factors, with Econoler reviewing project guidelines and adjustment ratios for accuracy.

1. Verifier's Recommendations p. pp. 35-36
1. Verifier's Recommendations The Peach Report states the following general recommendation regarding the acceptance of 2024 evaluation results for four program components, including the DR program:[29](#page-36-0) SVR24-G-1. The Savings Ve...

AI summary The Peach Report recommends accepting 2024 evaluation results for four programs except the Demand Response (DR) programs due to their lack of practical significance despite statistical significance. The Evaluator followed protocols but failed to address the issue of large sample sizes, which rendered statistical significance irrelevant for practical value assessment.

Residential DR p. p. 36
Residential DR - › Practical value at the utility system level: The Residential DR program component is not required to generate savings or demand reduction of practical value at the utility system level since it is still in the early stag...

AI summary The Residential DR program is in early stages, focusing on testing new technologies rather than immediate system-level savings. Econoler argues that small household-level reductions aggregate to meaningful capacity, citing examples like thermostats. The Verifier disputes claims of 'very large sample size,' noting only 199 of 272 projects were analyzed, making statistical significance applicable.

BNI DR p. p. 36
BNI DR - › Practical value at the utility system level: The BNI DR program is not required to generate savings or demand reduction of practical value at the utility system level at this stage in the program component's development, since i...

AI summary The BNI DR program's early-stage practical value is acknowledged, with 8.034 MW of available DR capacity in 2024. Econoler argues savings claims are justified despite household-level demand reduction, as the program targets system-level capacity for NS Power. The Verifier disputes the 'very large sample size' claim, noting only 93 projects analyzed.

Conclusion p. p. 36
Conclusion Econoler disagrees that the 2024 evaluated available DR capacity for Residential and BNI DR should not be accepted and disagrees with the recommendation that these program components should have been flagged for not producing pr...

AI summary Econoler disputes the recommendation to flag DR programs, arguing statistical significance, not practical effect size, should validate impact evaluations. The 2024 evaluation used valid sample sizes and followed industry best practices. The Peach Report recommends analyzing DR program importance, roles of NSP and Efficiency Nova Scotia, and clarifying program benefits for utility operations.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 36-38
Econoler Response: While some of these activities could be supported by the Evaluator, Econoler notes that many of the aforementioned categories of information would most likely have to be provided by NS Power. Econoler also notes that its...

AI summary Econoler clarifies that NS Power is primarily responsible for providing information on program business cases, while Econoler's role as an evaluator does not include assessing these cases. The text also references a regulatory proceeding discussion on residential demand response approaches.

1. Protocol Issue p. pp. 38-40
1. Protocol Issue The Peach Report states as follows in relation to the measurement & verification (M&V) protocol for compressed air leak projects: [31](#page-40-0) […] The Uniform Methods Protocol, provided by the U.S. Department of Energ...

AI summary The Peach Report discusses the M&V protocol for compressed air leak projects, noting that ultrasonic leak detectors are ineffective for quantifying leakage rates due to their reliance on sound correlation rather than direct measurement. The protocol recommends standardized leak-down tests before and after repairs for accurate measurement.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 40-42
and requires full-facility consumption data pre- and post-retrofit (International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) Option C) for all measures implemented by each participant. Based on Econoler's industrial field ex...

AI summary Econoler argues that ultrasonic detectors are a practical and industry-accepted method for measuring compressed air leaks, unlike costly leak-down tests. They reference IPMVP Core Concepts (2022) to justify their approach. The Verifier criticizes the evaluation methods, stating savings should not be accepted without independent verification via an operationally definable measurement process.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 42-43
Econoler Response: Econoler disagrees with this assertion, and specifically disagrees with the statement, that there are no records of the leaks having existed or no way to check how much they were leaking. The participant submitted detail...

AI summary Econoler disputes claims of missing leak records, citing detailed files with leak locations, rates (CFM), and repair data. E1 supported the customer with training and tools for compressed air leak management. Econoler's evaluation process includes reviewing documents with leak details, repair logs, and energy loss metrics.

3. Pattern of Reported Savings p. pp. 42-43
3. Pattern of Reported Savings The Peach Report states as follows in relation to leakage rates for the two facilities under consideration: [38](#page-43-1) Observations of total claimed savings for the two locations showed that the cumulat...

AI summary The Peach Report notes that cumulative savings claims at two facilities represent a significant portion of compressed air energy demand, with leakage rates far higher than typical. This anomaly, unlike other sites with minimal leak detection, raises concerns about special site conditions. The Evaluator is urged to investigate and explain this discrepancy.

Econoler Response: p. pp. 44-45
Econoler Response: Based on Econoler's experience, in large industrial facilities similar to both sites under consideration, electricity savings generated by compressed air leak repairs may represent only a small share of facility-wide ann...

AI summary Econoler notes that compressed air leak repairs yield minimal electricity savings (3-4%) and are not a corporate priority without DSM programs. Free-ridership is measured via self-report interviews, confirming the two projects likely wouldn't have occurred without the program.

5. Proprietary data issue p. p. 44
5. Proprietary data issue The Peach Report states as follows in relation to the site access and documentation provided by the customer for project reviews:[42](#page-45-0) It is not unusual for some organizations to try to keep operational...

AI summary The Peach Report highlights a conflict between organizations' proprietary data policies and evaluation requirements. While some organizations restrict operational data access, evaluations necessitate site access and data sharing for accurate energy efficiency assessments. Evaluators must report restrictions that hinder independent evaluations or public reporting.

6. Verifier's Recommendations p. p. 45
6. Verifier's Recommendations The Peach Report states the following general recommendation regarding the acceptance of 2024 evaluation results for four program components, including compressed air leak projects completed at two sites: [43]...

AI summary The Savings Verification study recommends accepting 2024 evaluation results for most programs but excludes the compressed air part of the BNI Custom Incentive Program due to lack of independent evaluation per the Universal Methods Protocol.

Econoler Response to SVR24-G-1: p. pp. 45-46
Econoler Response to SVR24-G-1: Econoler disagrees that the 2024 evaluated energy savings for compressed air leak projects completed under the Custom Incentives Program (Custom) should not be accepted. Econoler considers them to have been...

AI summary Econoler argues that the 2024 compressed air leak project energy savings under the Custom Incentives Program are valid, complying with industry standards and using trained technicians. They clarify that the 2024 evaluation included partial claims from prior years and true-up adjustments, following existing reporting practices. The Peach Report recommends aligning the program with UMP protocol requirements.

Econoler Response: p. p. 46
Econoler Response: Econoler investigated the pattern of reported savings for the two sites highlighted by the Verifier in the Savings Verification Report. As explained in detail in Item 3. above, Econoler concludes that the pattern of repo...

AI summary Econoler analyzed savings patterns for two sites, concluding they align with expected leak rates and internal management efforts. The response also recommends excluding clients who block independent evaluators or data access from the Compressed Air program.

100400Board Decision 10 passages
Preamble p. p. 4
out of lighting as a low-cost opportunity (Instant Savings and Efficient Product Installation), and the expected decrease in participation in Home Energy Assessment. [Exhibit E-1, Appendix A, p. 19] [27] E1's application highlights the fol...

AI summary E1's 2026 DSM Extension application evaluates cost-effectiveness using TRC and PAC tests. While the overall portfolio passes both tests, low-income programs like Affordable Multi-Family Homes and Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency fail TRC due to lower cost-effectiveness. The application highlights challenges in maintaining participation in Home Energy Assessment programs.

4.3 Small Business Advocate p. pp. 14-16
4.3 Small Business Advocate - [36] The Small Business Advocate is generally supportive of E1's application to extend the DSM Plan. However, she identified concerns she felt should be held in abeyance and brought forward in the 2027-2031 DS...

AI summary The Small Business Advocate supports extending EOne's DSM Plan but raises two concerns: (1) Synapse's cost-effectiveness claims for Demand Response programs may expand the application's scope beyond the Board's portfolio-level cost-benefit analysis mandate; (2) Econoler's response to the Peach Report's valuation concepts (Practical Value to Utility System and Households) lacks participant value consideration. Both issues are deferred to future filings.

5.1 Scope of 2026 DSM Extension p. p. 17
5.1 Scope of 2026 DSM Extension [40] The Industrial Group argued E1 filed this application as a "one year extension," and as a result, the application lacked the full consultative approach generally employed by E1. The Industrial Group als...

AI summary The Industrial Group argues that E1's 2026 DSM extension application lacked a full consultative approach and failed to meet filing requirements. E1 defends its submission, stating it provided sufficient information and that the one-year extension does not require multi-year planning. Long-term issues, like program design and test methodologies, are to be addressed in the 2027-2031 DSM Plan.

5.3 Savings and Verification Report Recommended Disallowances p. p. 20
5.3 Savings and Verification Report Recommended Disallowances [50] Dr. Gil Peach, Board Counsel's consultant, recommended that savings from the residential behavioural program, the residential and BNI demand response programs, and the comp...

AI summary Dr. Gil Peach recommends disallowing savings from residential behavioral, demand response, and compressed air programs due to insufficient independent evaluation. Econoler defends its methodology, arguing it balances accuracy and cost, and notes no other jurisdictions require the disputed test. Disagreement centers on evaluation protocols and reliability of reported savings.

5.3.1 Findings p. pp. 20-23
5.3.1 Findings [59] The issues raised by Dr. Peach leading to his recommendation to disallow the claimed energy and demand savings in four programs are of concern to the Board. [60] Regarding the compressed air leak audits under the BNI Cu...

AI summary The Board addresses concerns raised by Dr. Peach regarding energy savings claims in four programs. Econoler's compressed air leak audits lacked UMP Protocol compliance, while the Residential Behaviour Program's lack of measurable savings raises credibility issues. The Board directs improved reporting, program evaluation, and considers discontinuing the Residential Behaviour Program. Demand response programs are acknowledged with retention of 2024 savings.

5.4 Demand Response p. pp. 23-24
5.4 Demand Response [64] E1 acknowledges the potential for further development within the demand response programs. It submits that concerns about the design of its demand response programs, including an analysis of any overlap with NS Pow...

AI summary E1 acknowledges potential for further development in demand response programs but argues that concerns about program design, overlap with NSP's Critical Peak Pricing Program, and data usage are beyond the current proceeding's scope. These issues should be addressed during E1's engagement with DSMAG and application for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan.

5.5 Mid-course Adjustments p. p. 25
5.5 Mid-course Adjustments [67] The Industrial Group expressed concerns about E1's discretion to reallocate spending between programs and customer classes through "mid-course adjustments". The Industrial Group said E1 was granted this disc...

AI summary The Industrial Group criticizes E1's lack of definition for 'substantial change' in mid-course adjustments, arguing a 25% spending shift violates Board guidelines. E1 defends flexibility but commits to improved reporting. Proposed 2026 spending increases for industrial classes face scrutiny over customer cost impacts.

5.9.1 Findings p. pp. 29-30
5.9.1 Findings [84] The Board approves E1's proposed amended cumulative targets, which build on the targets previously approved by the Board to account for the extension.

AI summary The Board approves E1's proposed amended cumulative targets, which build on previously approved targets to account for an extension. This decision reflects adjustments to existing program goals under regulatory oversight.

5.10 Evaluation and Reporting p. p. 30
5.10 Evaluation and Reporting [85] In the 2026 DSM Extension, E1 proposes to follow the same measurement and evaluation activities as approved in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. This includes an annual impact evaluation for each program. E1 also p...

AI summary E1 proposes to follow existing DSM evaluation methods, but Synapse requests PAC and TRC calculations for 2023-2026. E1 lacks verified data for retroactive analysis and suggests limiting reporting to PACs, which would not require third-party support. Synapse emphasizes the value of actual results in other jurisdictions for cost-effectiveness transparency.

6.0 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS p. pp. 31-32
6.0 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS [90] The Board approves E1's proposed performance targets for the 2026 DSM year and the amendments to its 2023-2025 DSM Supply Agreement with NS Power to incorporate the legislative changes and...

AI summary The Board approves E1's 2026 DSM performance targets and amends its DSM Supply Agreement with NSP. E1 must address concerns in its programs, engage with DSMAG, and report PAC results. An Order will be issued.

100401Board Order 1 passage
ORDER
ORDER EfficiencyOne (E1) applied to the Nova Scotia Energy Board on April 30, 2025, for approval of amendments to the Board-approved 2023-2025 DSM Agreement necessary to incorporate legislative changes to the Public Utilities Act directing...

AI summary EfficiencyOne (E1) requested amendments to its 2023-2025 DSM Agreement to extend it to 2026 with a plan cost of $63.75 million. The Board approved the amendments and performance targets for 2026, while directing E1 to address concerns regarding its demand response programs and include cybersecurity-related impacts and PAC test results in its reports.

97518Letter EOne re: EfficiencyOne 2026 DSM Extension Application 2 passages
Section 1 p. p. 0
James R. Gogan Direct +1 (902) 563 5920 [email protected] 292 Charlotte Street Suite 300 Sydney NS Canada B1P 1C7 Tel +1 (902) 563 1000 Fax +1 (902) 563 1113 Our File: 262880 April 30, 2025 Nova Scotia Energy Board. 3rd Floor,...

AI summary EfficiencyOne seeks approval for the 2026 DSM Extension, aligning with a legislative amendment to the Public Utilities Act that extends the 2023-2025 DSM Plan to 2026. The amendment sets a 2026 DSM investment of $63.75M and maintains program continuity with 2025 offerings. The application is not standalone but adopts the legislative extension, creating cumulative four-year performance targets.

Section 2 p. p. 0
DSM Resource Plan. The 2026 Extension maintains programming continuity with the 2025 program offerings, ensuring DSM program accessibility for customers and consistency with service delivery partners. EOne proposes to follow the same DSM r...

AI summary EfficiencyOne submits the 2026 DSM Extension Plan, maintaining continuity with prior programs and including appendices with reports, analyses, and technical tables. The plan includes stakeholder engagement acknowledgments and details on rate impacts, equity considerations, and supply agreements.

97916Synapse (EOne) IR 1 to 36 14 passages
NON-CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION REQUESTS
Extension is that the avoided costs of carbon are now embedded in the avoided costs of energy for the 2026 DSM year. The avoided cost of carbon has not been provided by NS Power as a separate input." - a. Please provide the avoided cost va...

AI summary The NSUARB is requesting detailed information on avoided costs in the 2026 DSM Plan Extension, including comparisons with prior IRPs, sources of data, and program component changes related to LED baseline adoption. Specific focus is on avoided carbon costs and program adjustments post-2024.

- Cost Test (TRC), and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) for lighting measures in the
- Cost Test (TRC), and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) for lighting measures in the 1 Efficiency Product Installation program component over time. Please include 2023 23 b. Please provide the Investment, Lifetime Benefits (TRC), Life...

AI summary The text requests detailed information on the Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) and Program Administrator Cost Test (PAC) for lighting measures, including investment, benefits, energy savings, and payback periods, particularly for measures failing cost-effectiveness testing and those with a 3-year or less payback period.

Section 15
h higher than the actual values from 2023 and 2024? Do the 2026 Plan Extension assumptions correct for the historical over-projections of Investment/Lifetime Energy Savings in the 2023 and 2024 plans? - Request IR-13: Page 5 of Appendix A...

AI summary The text requests detailed information on E1's challenges in meeting demand response (DR) targets due to customer awareness, retention, and device quality issues, and asks for a table comparing planned vs actual adoption and 2026 Plan Extension projections.

a. Please provide a comparison of the Investment, Lifetime Benefits (TRC), Lifetime Benefits (PAC), TRC, and PAC for heat pump measures in the Green Heat program
a. Please provide a comparison of the Investment, Lifetime Benefits (TRC), Lifetime Benefits (PAC), TRC, and PAC for heat pump measures in the Green Heat program 1 component to the heat pump measures in the Home Energy Assessment program 2...

AI summary The text requests a comparison of investment and lifetime benefits (TRC and PAC) for heat pump measures in the Green Heat program, including data from 2023 Actuals, 2024 Actuals, 2025 Forecast, and 2026 Plan Extension. It also asks about the evaluation and billing analysis of the Green Heat program and whether similar evaluations have been conducted for the Home Energy Assessment program component.

Section 22
A states, "Eligibility was extended to support Mi'kmaw homeowners in 2024, in addition to Band owned homes, in Mi'kmaw communities." a. To what extent has the inclusion of homeowners increased demand? b. Please explain if and how the propo...

AI summary The text requests information on the impact of expanding eligibility to Mi'kmaw homeowners in 2024 on demand and how the 2026 Plan Extension addresses this. It also seeks clarification on E1's performance targets for demand response and energy efficiency, including definitions of 'energy efficiency savings targets' and differences between Demand Savings for EE and Available Capacity for DR.

Section 23
mand Savings in GW? If not, please explain the meaning of this term in this context. - b. Please describe the difference between the definitions of Demand Savings for EE and Available Capacity for DR.

AI summary The text requests clarification on the term 'Demand Savings in GW' and seeks to understand the distinction between Demand Savings for Energy Efficiency (EE) and Available Capacity for Demand Response (DR). These questions pertain to definitions and terminology used in regulatory proceedings related to demand-side management and resource planning.

Section 24
- Request IR-24: Table 20: 2026 Summary of the Residential Demand Response Program Component and Table 21: 2026 Summary of the BNI Demand Response Program Component on pages 43 and 44 of Appendix A respectively include New Capacity and Ava...

AI summary The document includes three information requests related to Nova Scotia's Demand Response (DR) programs. IR-24 seeks definitions of 'New Capacity' and 'Available Capacity' and their relation to E1's 2025 forecasts. IR-25 asks for the proposed start date of enrollments. IR-26 inquires about data-driven marketing strategies using AMI data for personalized customer outreach. The NSUARB is involved in regulating these programs.

Section 25
sponse program), and targeted BNI email campaigns based on electricity use patterns using AMI data." - a. How will E1 leverage data analytics tools including segmentation data, website user behaviour insights, and advanced metering infrast...

AI summary The document outlines information requests to E1 regarding the use of AMI data for marketing strategies, personalized messaging, and identifying high-potential customers. It also inquires about the timeline and success metrics for E1's heat pump water heater pilot program. Questions focus on data analytics, segmentation, and program evaluation.

Section 26
uation of E1's heat pump water heater market transformation pilot, launched in 2024." - a. When will results from this pilot be available? - b. How does E1 intend to measure the success of this pilot?

AI summary The document requests information about E1's 2024 heat pump water heater market transformation pilot, specifically asking when results will be available and how success will be measured. The pilot aims to transform the market for heat pump water heaters.

Section 27
Request IR-28: Page 45 of Appendix A states, "Investment in this category has been increased in 2026 as compared to 2023-2025 to support the development of the 2027-2031 DSM Resource Plan and initiation of an updated Potential Study to inf...

AI summary The document requests a breakdown of the proposed $3.0 million budget for the 2026 DSM Plan Extension and compares investment by activity to previous years. It also inquires whether E1 is at risk of not achieving its 2023-2026 Performance Targets, noting that as of 2024, E1 had achieved 74% of energy savings, 74% of peak demand savings, 45% of available capacity, and 55% of low-income and equity targets.

Section 28
emand savings target; • 45% of the available capacity target; and • 55% of the low-income and equity target." Is E1 currently at risk of not achieving any of the 2023-2026 Performance Targets? If so, which one(s)? For each one, please expl...

AI summary The document requests information on E1's risk of missing 2023-2026 performance targets, focusing on low-income and equity metrics. It references tables detailing 2024 Residential Behavior program participation (14.9% energy savings, 0% demand savings) and asks for 2023 vs. 2024 actuals by program component.

Section 29
equity participation in RB represented: • 14.9% of energy savings a. Please provide the actuals broken out for 2023 versus 2024 by program component. • 0% of demand savings • 14.9% of expenditures"

AI summary The text requests actuals for 2023 vs. 2024 by program component, noting 14.9% energy savings and 0% demand savings. It highlights equity participation in RB with 14.9% of expenditures. The context involves a Nova Scotia regulatory proceeding related to demand-side management and energy efficiency.

Section 30
b. Please explain why 2023 actuals are not included in the scaling factors for the Residential Behavior program component. c. For program components in which the actuals are not relatively consistent from 2023 to 2024, please discuss why E...

AI summary The NSUARB requests clarification on scaling factors for the Residential Behavior program, excluding 2023 actuals and using 2023-2024 averages. It also questions methodology for attributing low-income savings in DSM Reporting, focusing on Business Energy Rebates, Custom, and Small Business Energy Solutions programs.

Section 31
for DSM Reporting' for the Small Business Energy Solutions program component states, "Incidental low-income & equity savings = (total savings from residential dedicated low-income & affordable housing projects "Housing\ ")." Please discuss...

AI summary The document contains non-confidential information requests related to DSM reporting methodologies, the 2026 Plan Extension's alignment with future plans, energy and demand savings comparisons, evaluation plans for DSM programs, AMI data agreements, and demand response marketing strategies. Requests focus on low-income savings attribution, program evaluation frameworks, and regulatory compliance.

97920IG (EOne) IR 1 to 26 4 passages
21 (a) Please confirm this understanding or explain otherwise.
21 (a) Please confirm this understanding or explain otherwise. 1 2 3 (b) Where E1 is relying on the increased prescribed investment amount of $63.75 million for 2026, on what basis does E1 justify a lower performance target with a higher i...

AI summary The text includes several requests for clarification and data related to demand-side management (DSM) programs, performance targets, and budget variances. It also mentions the ongoing process for the 2026-2030 DSM Plan and references a table detailing budget allocations for enabling strategies.

26 consideration and how it has been accounted for. If not, why not.
26 consideration and how it has been accounted for. If not, why not. 1 (e) Please provide a list of measures in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan which failed 2 cost-effectiveness testing (provide the TRC for each) and indicate whether 3 each of thes...

AI summary The text requests information on the 2023-2025 DSM Plan, including failed measures, cost-effectiveness testing, and proposed changes for the 2026 DSM Plan. It also asks for details on measures with a payback period of three years or less and their incentive levels in the 2026 Plan. Additionally, it requests population of a table with 2025 Q1 and Q2 results and forecasts.

11 Reference: Appendix A, page 27, Table 8: 2026 DSM Extension Rate Class Expenditures.
11 Reference: Appendix A, page 27, Table 8: 2026 DSM Extension Rate Class Expenditures. - 12 (a) Please provide a breakdown by program component of the proposed 13 expenditures for each of the Large Industrial and Medium Industrial 14 Clas...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board requests detailed breakdowns of proposed and actual 2026 DSM expenditures for Large and Medium Industrial rate classes, including forecasted and actual costs, energy savings, and demand savings from 2023 to 2025.

7 Request IR-26:
7 Request IR-26: - 8 Reference: Appendix B, page 13 of 24, and pages 15-16 of 24. - 9 On page 13 of Appendix B, E1 states that: When examining non-participant bill impacts, it is important to note the broad reach of E1's point-of-sale reba...

AI summary Request IR-26 seeks data on participation rates in energy efficiency (EE) and demand response (DR) programs for industrial rate classes under the 2023–2025 and 2026 DSM Plans. It emphasizes that E1's rebate programs (Instant Savings, BER-IR) likely result in near-universal participation, affecting non-participant bill calculations (0.1–0.3% increases).

97923CA (EOne) IR 1 to 7 1 passage
21 Request IR-2:
21 Request IR-2: 22 23 Reference: EfficiencyOne's Evidence, p. 23, Table 5 24 25 With reference to each of the programs, please provide in Microsoft Excel format a side-by-side 26 comparison of the kWh and kW savings for the originally fil...

AI summary The request asks for a side-by-side comparison of DSM program savings goals for 2025 and 2026, explanations for differences, formulas used, and evaluations referenced, including subtotals for Low Income and Equity.

98158SBA (E1) IR 1 to 5 3 passages
Preamble
Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results, Report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board (2024 Peach Report) June 4, 2025, authored by H. Gil Peach & Associates, (Peach) Section IX. General...

AI summary The document references a savings verification report evaluating energy efficiency programs in 2024, highlighting concerns about the practical value of savings and demand reduction from specific programs. It raises questions about the roles of the verifier and evaluator, and the definition of practical value in program evaluation.

Request IR-2:
Request IR-2: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section IX, General Recommendations including Recommendation SVR24-G-2, which states, at page 17: SVR24-G-2. The Evaluator should flag programs which the evaluation demonstrate...

AI summary The document requests EfficiencyOne to confirm inclusion of specific low-impact energy efficiency programs in its 2026 Plan Extension and 2027-2031 DSM Plan, their cost percentages, and their stance on a recommendation to flag such programs. The recommendation suggests closing or explaining programs with statistically significant but impractically small savings.

Request IR-4:
Request IR-4: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section X, Individual Program Component Review, subsection B. Instant Savings (IS), pages 21-22, under Evaluator Findings on p. 22, which includes the following 5 bullets, at p...

AI summary The document discusses Instant Savings (IS) exceeding 2024 targets by 77% and 45% for energy and peak demand savings, with LED products driving 69% of savings. It also notes a 17% increase in non-lighting savings and a 20% reduction in free ridership. The 5th bullet highlights discrepancies between evaluator and Efficiency Nova Scotia's tracked savings. Additionally, BER rebate program savings declined 7.7% in 2024, with recommendations to update baselines for energy efficiency programs.

98159SBA (Peach) IR 1 to 5 3 passages
Preamble
Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 Evaluation Results, Report for the Nova Scotia Energy Board (2024 Peach Report), June 4, 2025, authored by H. Gil Peach & Associates, (Peach). Section IX. Gener...

AI summary The Savings Verification Review of Program Year 2024 highlights that four programs—Residential Behavior, Residential Demand Response, BNI Demand Response, and the compressed air part of the BNI Custom Incentive Program—were not found to deliver significant practical energy savings or demand reduction, despite passing statistical significance tests. The report recommends that these programs be flagged for lack of practical value.

Request IR-2:
Request IR-2: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section IX, General Recommendations, including Recommendation SVR24-G-2, which states, at page 17: SVR24-G-2. The Evaluator should flag programs which the evaluation demonstrat...

AI summary The document references the 2024 Peach Report's recommendation (SVR24-G-2) to evaluate energy efficiency programs with minimal savings and consider closing them to reallocate funds. Questions are raised about identifying such programs, their cost percentage, potential funds freed, and the meaning of 'spending energy efficiency dollars more effectively.'

Request IR-5:
Request IR-5: Refer to M12249, Exhibit E-2, 2024 Peach Report, Section X, Individual Program Component Review, subsection J. BNI Efficient Products Rebates (BER), pages 58-60, which states, at pages 58-59: Point-of-sale rebate evaluated sa...

AI summary The 2024 Peach Report notes a 7.7% decline in BER program savings, with LED Linear Lamps dropping 41%, but a slight increase in NTGR from 81% to 84% mitigated the decline. The report recommends updating baselines for BER and IR rebates to use DesignLights Consortium-Standard products as the new baseline. Questions are raised about the statistical significance of BER results compared to demand response programs and how the baseline change would address savings decline.

98160IG (E1) IR 1 to 7 3 passages
23 in light of the evaluation.
23 in light of the evaluation. 1 Request IR-2: 2 Reference: E-2 Verification Report - Section E – Residential Efficient Production 3 Installation (EPI). 4 (a) How do E1 and its evaluator distinguish what is the electricity ratepayer 5 port...

AI summary The text contains regulatory requests related to the evaluation of energy efficiency programs, including questions about distinguishing electricity ratepayer portions, program continuation, and methodology issues in leak detection.

Section 3
28 estimates that are unverifiable in any way. 29 - 1 (a) Please explain how the methodology was established (i.e. the basis for it, 2 including any jurisdictional cross-references) and whether it was modified 3 in any way during the curre...

AI summary The text raises concerns about the methodology and effectiveness of a demand response program, questioning its impact on utility operations and the justification for its continuation. It highlights the need for clearer evaluation of the program's practical benefits and business case.

31
31 1 Request IR-6: 2 Reference: E-2 Verification Report, page 72. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 SVR24-G-1. The Savings Verification study recommends acceptance of the 2024 evaluation estimates for energy savings and demand reduction except for four progra...

AI summary The text refers to a Savings Verification study that recommends accepting 2024 energy savings estimates for several programs, with exceptions for four programs, including Residential Behavior and BNI Demand Response. It requests a restatement of energy and demand savings, performance targets, unit costs, and program delivery approaches for 2025 and 2026.

98161IG (Peach) IR 1 1 passage
Section 1
1 2025 M12249 2 NOVA SCOTIA ENERGY BOARD 3 IN THE MATTER OF: The Public Utilities Act, RSNS 1989, c.380, as amended 4 IN THE MATTER OF: An Application by EfficiencyOne for approval of the 2026 DSM 5 Extension for Demand-Side Management Act...

AI summary EfficiencyOne seeks approval for a 2026 DSM extension and amendment to a 2023-2025 Purchase Agreement with Nova Scotia Power Inc. The document includes information requests from H. Gil Peach, PhD., regarding savings verification processes, involvement in the Benefits Cost Analysis (BCA) test, and utilization of verification reports in BCA development.

98162E1 (Peach) IR 1 to 14 7 passages
Request IR-03:
Request IR-03: - At page 2 of the 2024 Verification Report, the following statement is made: - "For this report we call attention to only two steps in the cycle: Independent Evaluation and Verify Savings & Review." The other three centres...

AI summary Request IR-03 seeks clarification on the five 'centres of focus' in the DSM cycle, specifically the scope of 'Verify Savings & Review' and the other three ('Policy', 'Plan', 'Implement'). It also asks for explanations on why modifications to evaluation data and future implementation fall under 'Verify Savings & Review'. The matter relates to E1's 2026 DSM Extension application (M12249).

Request IR-05:
Request IR-05: - Please confirm that Figure 3, page 11 of the 2024 Verification Report, demonstrates that all - program components achieve net lifetime energy savings.

AI summary Request IR-05 seeks confirmation that Figure 3 on page 11 of the 2024 Verification Report demonstrates that all program components achieve net lifetime energy savings. This pertains to verifying the effectiveness of EfficiencyOne's programs in delivering energy savings.

Request IR-07:
Request IR-07: - Please confirm what is meant by the terms, " meaningful energy savings " and " tiny savings" , from - both a qualitative and quantitative perspective, and explain how the use of these terms are - consistent with current me...

AI summary The request seeks clarification on the definitions of 'meaningful energy savings' and 'tiny savings' from qualitative and quantitative perspectives, ensuring alignment with current methodological guidance for evaluating energy efficiency programs.

Request IR-10:
Request IR-10: - Reference: page 52 of the 2024 Verification Report: (Section I. Residential Behavioral Program - (Efficiency Insights): Because significance and confidence are driven by number of cases and the cases are joined physically...

AI summary The text questions the Verifier's methodology for concluding that system-level savings of 6.27 GWh are 'likely meaningless,' citing concerns about statistical significance testing with large samples and non-independent cases. It highlights that small household energy savings may not be meaningful individually, despite high statistical significance due to sample size.

Request IR-12:
Request IR-12: - 2 Reference: page 64-65 of the 2024 Verification Report (Section X.-K., Evaluation Issue 3-a), the - 3 following was stated: "Observations of total claimed savings for the two locations showed that the cumulative annual cl...

AI summary The Verifier's findings indicate that two facilities' compressed air systems had unusually high leakage rates, with savings claims being a substantial portion of total energy demand. The request seeks data sources, calculations, comparisons to similar facilities, and methodological explanations for these conclusions.

Request IR-13:
Request IR-13: - Reference: page 65 (Evaluation Issue 3-b), the following was stated: - "Leakage rate has increased. There has been an unexplained recent surge in claimed savings at these two locations, as compared to prior years." In the...

AI summary The document highlights an increased leakage rate and an unexplained surge in claimed savings at two locations compared to prior years. It references E1's application for approval of the 2026 DSM Extension under matter M12249.

Request IR-14:
Request IR-14: Reference: page 65-66 2024 Verification Report: SVR2024-Compressed Air-12 "Proprietary data issue. It is not unusual for some organizations to try to keep operational data proprietary and confidential, as a strategic policy....

AI summary The text addresses a proprietary data issue in energy efficiency evaluations, emphasizing that while some organizations restrict data access strategically, evaluations require site access and usage data. If clients block evaluators from on-site measurements or data sharing, evaluators must report this. The request asks for details on clients who obstructed access during the 2024 independent evaluation.

98163CA (Peach) IR 1 to 5 1 passage
1 Request IR-1:
1 Request IR-1: 2 3 Reference: 2024 Savings Verification, Table 7, and below (p. 46-47): 4 5 "The three claims include for Green Heat (2 analyses out of 3), although the magnitude of each is 6 only 0.1% (a participation difference of one-t...

AI summary The document evaluates the effectiveness of three programs (Green Heat, Efficient Products Installation, and Home Energy Assessment) by analyzing participation rate differences between treatment and control groups. The evaluation found minimal differences (0.1% and 0.4%), but the text questions whether these small increases (33%, 25%, 50%) are considered practically important.

98357Letter E1 re: RIRs 1 passage
Section 1 p. p. 0
James R. Gogan Direct +1 (902) 563 5920 [email protected] 292 Charlotte Street Suite 300 Sydney NS Canada B1P 1C7 Tel +1 (902) 563 1000 Fax +1 (902) 563 1113 Our File: 262880 July 3, 2025 Nova Scotia Energy Board 3 rd Floor, 16...

AI summary EfficiencyOne submits responses to information requests (IRs) from the Industrial Group (IRs 1–7) and Small Business Advocate (IRs 1–5) regarding the (Peach) 2024 Savings Verification Review Report in regulatory proceeding M12249. The submission pertains to the 2026 DSM Extension application for demand-side management activities.

99385Submission - SBA 2 passages
Section 3 p. p. 0
BA respectfully submits that the following areas of concern should be held in abeyance in this Application and be brought forward in the next DSM plan application, for the 5-year period of 2027-2031. - 1. In the EOne reply evidence startin...

AI summary The SBA argues that two issues related to Demand Response program cost-effectiveness and valuation methodologies should be deferred to the next DSM plan application. It contends that Synapse's cost-benefit analysis at the portfolio level conflicts with the Board's order, and that Econoler's response to the Peach Report fails to address participant value considerations outside the current application's scope.

Section 4 p. p. 0
only 2 types of value being assessed, the SBA respectfully submits that there is no consideration of the value that participants either received or expected to receive when they chose to participate. The SBA respectfully suggests and recom...

AI summary The SBA argues that the current value assessment only considers two types of value, ignoring participants' received or expected benefits. It recommends deferring program decisions, funding, and cost-benefit analyses to a future Five-Year Plan application. The submission is dated September 18, 2025, by Melissa P. MacAdam, Small Business Advocate.

99386Submission - CA 1 passage
Background p. pp. 1-2
Synapse Evidence, p. 4 4 [E](#page-1-7)xhibit E-16, GEEG Evidence, p. 7 5 [E](#page-1-9)xhibit E-16, GEEG Evidence, p. 9 cost-effective savings for residential ratepayers.["](#page-2-0) 6 GEEG further recommended that "[s]urveys should be...

AI summary GEEG recommended conducting surveys to assess low-income participation in energy efficiency programs and advised against adopting a 2024 Savings Verification Report recommendation to discontinue counting savings for the Efficiency Insights program. E1 responded to these recommendations in its reply.

99389Submission - IG 9 passages
Program Design p. p. 0
Program Design The 2026 plan is largely an extension of the existing three-year plan which E1 states was developed based on concepts of equity, accessibility and transparency. The single change to the design objectives for 2026 was a reduc...

AI summary The 2026 plan extends E1's existing three-year program, adjusting the low-income inequity investment target to 15-20% (down from 21% in 2023-2025 but up from 8% earlier). E1 cites updated census data showing low-income Nova Scotians decreased from 17.2% to 14.9% as the rationale for this change, emphasizing equity, accessibility, and transparency.

Programs p. pp. 1-2
Programs There are no new programs contemplated under the 2026 DSM Extension Plan. The three residential energy efficiency programs are: (1) residential efficient product rebates; (2) existing residential; and (3) new residential (the new...

AI summary The 2026 DSM Extension Plan does not introduce new programs. Existing residential and BNI energy efficiency programs continue, with the new home construction component retired. Demand response programs are also proposed to continue.

Cost-Effectiveness Testing p. p. 2
Cost-Effectiveness Testing E1 states that it has applied the current Board-approved cost-effectiveness test to the 2026 DSM Plan i.e., the Total Resource Cost (" TRC ") test. This test compares the cost of program design and delivery with...

AI summary E1 applied the Board-approved Total Resource Cost (TRC) test to the 2026 DSM Plan, comparing program costs with NSPI's avoided costs (energy, capacity, transmission, distribution, and carbon). The Program Administrator Cost (PAC) test is presented as an informational comparator. References to exhibits and footnotes are included.

2026 DSM PROGRAMMING CHANGES p. p. 2
2026 DSM PROGRAMMING CHANGES On the residential side, E1 ended appliance retirement on January 8, 2025, as delivery costs were rising, savings were declining as units being retired were newer and more efficient already. In addition, starti...

AI summary E1 ended appliance retirement in 2025 due to rising costs and declining savings, replaced seasonal campaigns with year-round rebates, and added electrician-installed measures for 'Eco Shift' demand response. 'Green Heat' was retired due to lower participation from federal grants, while HEA introduced virtual audits and expanded eligibility. BNI programs saw small business measure expansions and commercial battery additions to demand response.

Cost Effectiveness Testing p. pp. 4-5
Cost Effectiveness Testing E1 states that at the portfolio level, cumulatively the programs exceed the threshold ratio of 1.0, with a ratio of 1.6. E1 asserts that this thereby satisfies the statutory requirement of "cost effective" under...

AI summary E1 argues that a portfolio-level cost-effectiveness ratio of 1.6 satisfies the PUA 's 'cost effective' requirement. The Industrial Group disputes this, asserting the PUA allows granular cost-effectiveness testing beyond the portfolio level to assess DSM plans' alignment with customer interests and NSPI's obligations. The Consumer Advocate's consultant emphasizes the need for detailed cost-effectiveness criteria, target markets, and evaluation methods in DSM planning.

Savings Targets and Costs of DSM p. pp. 5-6
Savings Targets and Costs of DSM The Industrial Group observes that there are two matters which may still affect the forecasted cost of energy efficiency programs in 2025 and in 2026, projected at $0.44/kWh and $0.49/kWh respectively. Firs...

AI summary The Industrial Group challenges concerns raised by Gil Peach about excluding savings from certain DSM programs, arguing inclusion is necessary to avoid increased costs. E1 suspended its residential behavior program due to AMI data issues from NSPI's cybersecurity incident, risking target achievement. The Industrial Group urges E1 to address data gaps and revise programming plans.

DEMAND RESPONSE p. p. 6
DEMAND RESPONSE As is evident from the Application (Table 5), the residential demand response program fails both the TRC and PAC tests by a wide margin: 0.3, for both. The BNI demand response program component passes the TRC with a ratio o...

AI summary The residential and BNI demand response (DR) programs fail TRC and PAC tests, with E1's efforts criticized for lack of transparency and formal pilot reports. The Industrial Group urges E1 to improve program effectiveness, commit to cost-effective DR, and coordinate with NSPI for data. Synapse recommends locational DSM in grid-constrained areas, which E1 claims lacks necessary data.

Mid-Course Adjustments and True-Ups p. pp. 6-8
Mid-Course Adjustments and True-Ups The Industrial Group has been expressing concerns with respect to E1's so-called "mid-course adjustments" by which E1 retains the discretion to shuffle spending between programs and customer classes. Whe...

AI summary The Industrial Group criticizes E1's mid-course adjustments for allowing program spending shifts between customer classes without quantifying 'substantial changes' or providing advance notice, despite Board-imposed 25% variance limits and commitments. E1 acknowledges shortcomings but outlines strategies to address concerns, citing historical data reliance and future allocation plans.

Conclusion p. p. 8
Conclusion The Industrial Group recommends that the Board: - 1. Take into consideration the cost-effectiveness results provided in relation to the program and/or measure level, in addition to the portfolio level, considering the requiremen...

AI summary The Industrial Group recommends the NSUARB consider cost-effectiveness at program and portfolio levels, engage DSMAG pre-2027-2031 plan filing, reject Mr. Peach's savings exclusion, mandate E1's comprehensive DR analysis, coordinate with NSPI on overlapping programs, and manage budgeted spending. E1 must address cybersecurity breach impacts and clarify Supply Agreement amendments.

99475Reply Submissions - E1 5 passages
Preamble p. p. 0
The legislative amendment set out in s. 79J(3) of the Public Utilities Act, directs E1 to submit 2026 targets for the one-year extension of the existing DSM Plan. (3) The franchise holder shall submit its targets for the one-year extension...

AI summary The legislative amendment to the Public Utilities Act requires E1 to submit 2026 targets for the one-year extension of the existing DSM Plan. E1 argues that detailed program design and test methodology issues should be addressed in the upcoming 2027-2031 DSM Plan process. The Industrial Group, however, suggests a broader review of the extension application, including cost-effectiveness and spending management. E1 asserts that the current application provides sufficient information for approval.

4.4 REMOVING SAVINGS FROM CALCULATION p. p. 0
4.4 REMOVING SAVINGS FROM CALCULATION Mr. Peach, in the Peach Report, recommends removing specific evaluated savings results from the portfolio on validation grounds. E1's independent evaluator, Econoler, provided detailed responses suppor...

AI summary Mr. Peach recommends removing specific savings from the portfolio due to validation concerns. E1 and the Industrial Group support retaining these savings, citing Econoler's analysis. The Industrial Group urges the Board to reject Peach's recommendation regarding residential and BNI programs. E1 also plans to engage DSMAG in reviewing the Standardized Filing Framework for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan.

4.6 NS POWER CYBER ATTACK p. p. 0
4.6 NS POWER CYBER ATTACK - 14 The Industrial Group has requested that E1 outline any revisions to its 2026 programs in relation to the - 15 impacts of the Nova Scotia Power Inc. (NS Power) cybersecurity breach and the Residential Behaviou...

AI summary The Industrial Group requests E1 to outline revisions to 2026 programs related to the NS Power cyber attack and the Residential Behaviour program. E1 states no material changes are anticipated but will collaborate with NS Power and report updates to the Board and stakeholders.

4.7 INTRA-TERM VARIANCES p. p. 0
4.7 INTRA-TERM VARIANCES - 23 The Industrial Group characterizes a 25% change in planned spending by program and customer class as a - 24 "substantial change" and asks the Board to direct tighter within-class controls. While E1 agrees that...

AI summary The Industrial Group argues a 25% spending variance in DSM programs requires tighter controls, but E1 (NS Power) warns this could hinder DSM portfolio management. E1 responded to concerns with enhanced reporting, including quarterly/year-end forecasts, variance explanations, and stakeholder engagement. The Board previously acknowledged E1's concerns about overly restrictive caps.

5. RELIEF SOUGHT p. p. 0
5. RELIEF SOUGHT E1 respectfully requests that the Board: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 - (a) approve the following 2026 targets and associated portfolio consistent with the legislated investment amount of $63,750,000: - i) Incremental annual...

AI summary E1 requests the Board to approve 2026 DSM targets and reject the removal of specific evaluated savings, citing the 2024 DSM Programs Evaluation Reports. It emphasizes the importance of maintaining evaluated savings from certain programs.

100400Board Decision 11 passages
Section 12 p. p. 4
026 DSM Extension Plan, E1 states it plans to expand and build upon these demand response initiatives outlined in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. [20] E1's Demand Response program consists of two components: - Residential Demand Response - BNI Dem...

AI summary E1's 2026 DSM extension plan builds on the 2023-2025 DSM Plan, expanding demand response initiatives. The program includes Residential and BNI Demand Response components, with the Residential program offering financial incentives to reduce peak electric load during events called by NS Power.

Preamble p. p. 4
out of lighting as a low-cost opportunity (Instant Savings and Efficient Product Installation), and the expected decrease in participation in Home Energy Assessment. [Exhibit E-1, Appendix A, p. 19] [27] E1's application highlights the fol...

AI summary E1's 2026 DSM Extension application discusses the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency and demand response programs. While the overall portfolio passes TRC and PAC tests, low-income programs like Affordable Multi-Family Homes and Mi'kmaw Home Energy Efficiency fail TRC due to lower cost savings. This highlights challenges in balancing equity-focused initiatives with broader cost-effectiveness metrics.

4.1 Industrial Group p. p. 13
4.1 Industrial Group [28] The Industrial Group argues that although the specific investment amount for the 2026 DSM extension has been prescribed by the legislation, the Board must still consider whether the proposed 2026 DSM Plan is in th...

AI summary The Industrial Group argues the Board must evaluate the 2026 DSM Plan's cost-effectiveness, ensure E1 manages spending reasonably, and address overlapping programs and cybersecurity impacts. It recommends engaging DSMAG, rejecting certain savings exclusions, and requiring detailed analysis for demand response programming. The group also urges E1 to address impacts from the NSPI cybersecurity breach and clarify tariff amendments.

4.3 Small Business Advocate p. pp. 14-16
4.3 Small Business Advocate - [36] The Small Business Advocate is generally supportive of E1's application to extend the DSM Plan. However, she identified concerns she felt should be held in abeyance and brought forward in the 2027-2031 DS...

AI summary The Small Business Advocate supports extending the DSM Plan but raises concerns about cost-effectiveness of Demand Response programs and valuation methods. She argues that Synapse's evidence may expand the application's scope beyond current matters and that Econoler's response to the Peach Report overlooks participant benefits. These issues should be addressed in future filings.

5.1 Scope of 2026 DSM Extension p. p. 17
5.1 Scope of 2026 DSM Extension [40] The Industrial Group argued E1 filed this application as a "one year extension," and as a result, the application lacked the full consultative approach generally employed by E1. The Industrial Group als...

AI summary The Industrial Group criticized E1's 2026 DSM extension application for lacking consultative processes and standardized filings, while E1 defended it as a one-year extension requiring only annual targets. E1 argued program design issues should be addressed in its future five-year DSM Plan.

5.3 Savings and Verification Report Recommended Disallowances p. p. 20
5.3 Savings and Verification Report Recommended Disallowances [50] Dr. Gil Peach, Board Counsel's consultant, recommended that savings from the residential behavioural program, the residential and BNI demand response programs, and the comp...

AI summary Dr. Gil Peach recommends disallowing savings from specific DSM programs due to insufficient independent evaluation, while Econoler defends its methodology as accurate and practical. Disputes focus on compressed air leak audit projects and adherence to the UMP Protocol.

5.3.1 Findings p. pp. 20-23
5.3.1 Findings [59] The issues raised by Dr. Peach leading to his recommendation to disallow the claimed energy and demand savings in four programs are of concern to the Board. [60] Regarding the compressed air leak audits under the BNI Cu...

AI summary The Board addresses concerns raised by Dr. Peach regarding energy savings claims in four programs, including deviations from the UMP Protocol in compressed air audits and the Residential Behaviour Program's lack of direct savings. Econoler's explanations are accepted but require more detailed reporting. The Board directs evaluations for program improvements and retention of 2024 savings, while suspending the Residential Behaviour Program due to cybersecurity issues.

5.4 Demand Response p. pp. 23-24
5.4 Demand Response [64] E1 acknowledges the potential for further development within the demand response programs. It submits that concerns about the design of its demand response programs, including an analysis of any overlap with NS Pow...

AI summary E1 acknowledges potential for demand response program development but states concerns about program design, including overlap with NS Power's Critical Peak Pricing Program and substation data use, are outside the proceeding's scope. These issues should be addressed during E1's engagement with the DSMAG and application for the 2027-2031 DSM Plan.

5.5 Mid-course Adjustments p. p. 25
5.5 Mid-course Adjustments [67] The Industrial Group expressed concerns about E1's discretion to reallocate spending between programs and customer classes through "mid-course adjustments". The Industrial Group said E1 was granted this disc...

AI summary The Industrial Group raised concerns about E1's authority to make mid-course adjustments to DSM program spending, arguing that a 25% variance constitutes a 'substantial change' and requesting stricter budget management. E1 acknowledged not defining 'substantial change' but emphasized the need for flexibility, proposing enhanced reporting and spending management strategies. The Industrial Group opposed unfettered cost shifting between customer classes, citing impacts on customer rates.

5.10 Evaluation and Reporting p. p. 30
5.10 Evaluation and Reporting [85] In the 2026 DSM Extension, E1 proposes to follow the same measurement and evaluation activities as approved in the 2023-2025 DSM Plan. This includes an annual impact evaluation for each program. E1 also p...

AI summary E1 proposes continuing existing DSM evaluation practices, while Synapse urges reporting actual PACs and TRCs for 2023-2026. E1 cites data limitations but later agrees to PAC reporting without third-party support, while TRC calculations would require additional resources and be delayed. The dispute centers on cost-effectiveness transparency and methodological complexity.

6.0 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS p. pp. 31-32
6.0 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY OF BOARD FINDINGS [90] The Board approves E1's proposed performance targets for the 2026 DSM year and the amendments to its 2023-2025 DSM Supply Agreement with NS Power to incorporate the legislative changes and...

AI summary The Board approves E1's 2026 DSM performance targets and amends its agreement with NS Power. Directives include engaging with DSMAG, addressing program concerns, including PAC test results, and handling cybersecurity impacts. E1 must address demand response program concerns and revise mid-course adjustment processes in its upcoming DSM Plan.

100401Board Order 1 passage
ORDER
ORDER EfficiencyOne (E1) applied to the Nova Scotia Energy Board on April 30, 2025, for approval of amendments to the Board-approved 2023-2025 DSM Agreement necessary to incorporate legislative changes to the Public Utilities Act directing...

AI summary EfficiencyOne applied to the Nova Scotia Energy Board for approval of amendments to its 2023-2025 DSM Agreement to extend it to 2026 with a plan cost of $63,750,000. The Board approved the amendments and performance targets for 2026, and directed E1 to address concerns with its demand response programs and include specific reporting requirements in its upcoming DSM Plan application.

Disclaimer: These summaries were generated by AI from the filings they describe. We take care to make them accurate, but errors are possible - and they aren't advice. Only the filings themselves are the record: if you're relying on something here, confirm it against the source documents or the Nova Scotia Energy Board's own record. Full disclaimer →