ICP Technical Forum Recap - Aug. 19, 2015

On August 19th, 2015 at noon EST, the ICP team reconvened the ICP Technical Forum (a monthly 90-minute webinar and conference call), which had been on hiatus for the last four months as the ICP team focused on deploying the ICP Provider Credentials and IREE Project Certification. The call was well attended with 45 people logged into the session, and a lot of participation and great feedback from project developers and QA providers such as SCIenergy, AEA, Quest, TRC, NYSERDA, the CO Energy Office, NREL, NJ PACE, and NH PACE among others.  

---

Aug 19th 2015 - Tech Forum Recording

The call focused on some of the changes being proposed for the new version of the ICP Targeted protocol (which will extend once agreed to across the portfolio of protocols).  There was great input and a lot of agreement around underwriting and performance periods, and some modifications to the technical requirement around baselining in particular, as well as discussion regarding the new Project Registry and process around it..

Highlights from the call are presented below:

• The ICP Underwriting Phase focuses on requirements regarding baseline development, savings calculations, and the development of the OPV (Cx), OM&M and M&V plans.

1. Plans need to be developed, at least a high level, for all three of these components. This can be particularly important to M&V to ensure that proper pre-retrofit data are collected, and savings estimates or energy models are properly calibrated.. 
2. The plans can be "living documents," in the sense that further development can and will need to be performed to reflect the final construction.
3. If templates are developed for these plans (which the ICP team is currently developing), then the cost to develop plans for a specific project should be minimized.

• The ICP requires development of a baseline using ASTM BEPA methods and a regression-based analysis approach. However, many projects to date use a simpler "data only" approach, without any regression applied. Should the ICP allow for non-regression-based baseline development approaches?

1. Use of as-is utility data to develop the baseline can be problematic, and can over- or under-estimate energy savings projections. Normalizing the data to weather, or other routine adjustments, is critical.
2. A baseline should be developed for the entire building for every project, even Targeted projects that may only have a single or a handful of measures. The baseline provides a valuable reference and check against savings projects, and is required by most programs or financial organizations.

• Should ICP address the idea of using one form of M&V for the first few years of the reporting / performance period (say Options A and/or B), and then using a different approach (Option C) for subsequent years, to reduce costs / effort?

1. Very few projects employ this method to date. However, the approach could reduce costs related to M&V if savings are being illustrated during the first few years of the performance period. As long as no significant non-routine adjustments are encountered while Option C is being applied.
2. If savings are not being realized during the Option C M&V period, then the Option A/B approaches (or a targeted recommissioning or operational performance verification approach) could be redeployed, to further identify the issue(s). 

• ICP is in the process of launching its Project Registry, which will record project seeking IREE designation.

1. Use of the Project Registry by projects seeking IREE should be mandatory.
2. The user could be asked for permission to release information to specific individuals, allowing it to serve as a platform to exchange project information.
3. Whether the building is owner-occupied or leased should be added to the form, as well as EPC as a financing mechanism, and water as a measure type.
4. The savings summary table should specify required points (ECM name / brief description, energy savings, cost savings, implementation costs. Simpler is better.
5. Potentially align the data platform / requirements with other benchmarking tools.

Please join us for our next ICP technical Forum call on September 16th at noon EST. And send any additional thoughts or contributions to Tracy Phillips, ICP Technical Lead, at [email protected].