Post on 10-Jul-2020
Academic Director: William Jones PhD,
MIM Team: Heath Nieddu, Ian Barker,
Rodrigo George & Qingru Meng
Portland State University
09/20/2013
Energy Management at Bonneville Power Administration
Page 1 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 4
ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................................. 4 DEFINITION OF TERMS ............................................................................................................................... 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 9
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 11
CLIENT PROJECT CHALLENGE / PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING ............................................................................. 11 CLIENT GOALS ....................................................................................................................................... 11 PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS ............................................................................................... 11 PROJECT TEAM/CONSULTANT GOALS ......................................................................................................... 12 PROJECT WORK PLAN DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 12
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ............................................................................................................ 13
STAKEHOLDER GROUP ....................................................................................................................... 13
BENCHMARKING ................................................................................................................................ 13
BENCHMARKING KEY FINDINGS IN ORDER OF RELEVANCE ................................................................................ 14
GAP ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................... 16
SUMMARY OF SEG ENERGY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT (EMA) .................................................................... 16 PSU MIM ISO 50001 GAP ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 17 COMPARISON OF PSU GAP ANALYSIS WITH SEG’S EMA ....................................................................................... 17 KEY METHODOLOGICAL SIMILARITIES .................................................................................................................. 17 KEY METHODOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 17 SIMILARITIES BETWEEN SEG ANALYSIS AND PSU ISO 50001 GAP ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS .......................................... 18 KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SEG ANALYSIS AND PSU GAP ANALYSIS CONCLUSIONS ..................................................... 18 KEY AREAS IN WHICH THE PSU TEAM EXPANDS UPON THE CONCLUSIONS SEG ........................................................... 18 PSU MIM ISO 50001 GAP ANALYSIS SCORING................................................................................................... 19 GAP ANALYSIS KEY FINDINGS (APPENDIX N) ......................................................................................................... 21 HOW KEY FINDINGS CHANGED OVERALL ASSUMPTIONS .......................................................................................... 21
AGENCY DECISION FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................................... 23
BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 23 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................................................... 23 CONNECTIONS TO AGENCY STRATEGIC DIRECTION ......................................................................................... 24 DECISION MAKERS ................................................................................................................................. 26 DECISION CRITERIA ................................................................................................................................. 26 MAJOR RISKS ........................................................................................................................................ 27 SUMMARY OF ENMS IMPACT ON KEY ENTERPRISE RISKS ........................................................................................ 27 ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................................... 31 ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION ...................................................................................................................... 32 FINANCIAL CRITERIA SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 33
Page 2 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
DISCUSSION OF KEY VARIABLES FOR FINANCIAL EVALUATION ............................................................................ 33 KEY VARIABLES ................................................................................................................................................ 33 ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 34 SCENARIO 0: STATUS QUO ................................................................................................................................ 34 SCENARIO 1: STEP-UP ...................................................................................................................................... 35 SCENARIO 2: STEP-UP PLUS............................................................................................................................... 36 SCENARIO 3: MAX IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................. 37 RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................................................................ 38
STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................... 39
STRATEGIC COMPONENTS .................................................................................................................. 39 DEFINE AN ENERGY POLICY ............................................................................................................................... 39 ADOPT STRATEGIC ENERGY MANAGEMENT PLANNING .......................................................................................... 40 ENABLING COMPONENTS ................................................................................................................... 42 IDENTIFY AN ENERGY MANAGER ........................................................................................................................ 42 DEVELOP AN INTERNAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY TRAINING AND AWARENESS PROGRAM ................................................... 43 FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS .............................................................................................................. 44 INVEST IN AN ENERGY MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM ................................................................................. 44 ESTABLISH AN INTEGRATED ENERGY INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND REPORTING FRAMEWORK ....................................... 44
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................................................... 46
CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 49
WORKS CITED .................................................................................................................................... 50
APPENDIX A: INTERNATIONAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT STANDARDS ................................................. 52
ISO 50001 ........................................................................................................................................... 52 ANSI/MSE 50021-2013 ....................................................................................................................... 52 EN16001:2009 .................................................................................................................................... 52
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH PLAN AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 54
PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS ............................................................................................... 54 RESEARCH DESIGN STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................. 54 KEY ANALYTIC QUESTIONS ....................................................................................................................... 54 LYNCHPIN ASSUMPTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 56 SUGGESTED POSSIBLE HYPOTHESES ............................................................................................................ 57 RESEARCH METHODS ............................................................................................................................... 58 RESEARCH MATRIX ................................................................................................................................. 59
APPENDIX C: ISO 50001 CYCLE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ....................................................... 60
APPENDIX D: ISO 50001 DATABASE SURVEY RESULTS FOR 2011 ......................................................... 61
APPENDIX E: ST. MARY’S CEMENT INTERNAL ENMS STRUCTURE ........................................................ 62
APPENDIX F: DELOITTE DBRIEFS ENERGY & RESOURCES SERIES .......................................................... 64
Page 3 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX G: TVA SUSTAINABILITY BENCHMARKING REPORT ............................................................ 66
TVA INTERNAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ....................................................................................... 67
APPENDIX H: TVA (TREES) INTERFACE ................................................................................................ 69
APPENDIX I: US DEPARTMENT OF STATE UTILITY DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT 70
APPENDIX J: TECHNICAL TEAM AND STAKEHOLDER MATRIX .............................................................. 73
BPA TECHNICAL TEAM ............................................................................................................................ 73 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS MATRIX .............................................................................................................. 74
APENDIX K: SEG ENERGY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 75
APPENDIX L: ISO 50001 ENMS GAP ANALYSIS – PSU 2013 .................................................................. 77
APPENDIX M: BPA METERING MAP .................................................................................................... 96
APPENDIX N: GAP ANALYSIS STRATEGIC RECOMMNEDATIONS .......................................................... 97
APPENDIX O: ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ...................................................... 98
STATUS QUO (0) .......................................................................................................................................... 98 STEP UP (1) .................................................................................................................................................. 99 STEP UP PLUS (2) ....................................................................................................................................... 100 MAX IMPLEMENTATION (3) ...................................................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX P: EXPLANATION OF KEY VARIABLES ............................................................................... 102
APPENDIX Q: BPA AGENCY DECISION FRAMEWORK ......................................................................... 104
APPENDIX R: DOE EGUIDE FOR ISO 50001 IMPLEMENATION ............................................................ 105
APPENDIX S: BPA FACILITY PORTFOLIO BASELING ENERGY INTENSITY .............................................. 109
APPENDIX T: SITES RECOMMENDED FOR METERING (5000SQ/FT+) .................................................. 113
APPENDIX U: STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) ..................................................................................... 115
CLIENT PROJECT CHALLENGE / PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING ........................................................................... 115 CLIENT GOALS ..................................................................................................................................... 116 PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS ............................................................................................. 116 PROJECT TEAM/CONSULTANT GOALS ....................................................................................................... 117 PROJECT WORK PLAN DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 117 TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION ........................................................................................................................... 117 TASK 2: CONSULT WITH BPA TECHNICAL ADVISORY TEAM ................................................................................... 120 TASK 3: CONDUCT RESEARCH .......................................................................................................................... 121 TASK 4: ANALYZE RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 123 TASK 5: CREATE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BPA’S USE OF AN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BASED ON ISO 50001 ... 125 TASK 6: DELIVER PERIODIC REPORTING AND FINAL PRESENTATION ......................................................................... 126
Page 4 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
SCHEDULE & SUMMARY OF KEY DELIVERABLES ........................................................................................... 126 PROJECT SCHEDULE GANNT CHART ......................................................................................................... 129
ABBREVIATIONS
ACRONYMS
ACEEE American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
ADF BPA’s Agency Decision Framework
AICC Audit and Internal Controls Committee
ANSI The American National Standards Institute
APSC Agency Prioritization Steering Committee
ASF Agency Strategy Forum
BOB Business Operations Board
BOR Bureau of Reclamation
BPA Bonneville Power Administration
BPA HQ BPA Headquarters on Lloyd District
BPAX BPA Connection - Intranet
BTU British Thermal Unit
BTU/sf/yr BTUs per square foot per year
BUD Bonneville User Domain
CAB Capital Allocation Board
CBR Component Balance Rating
CCN Control Center Network
CDD Cooling Degree days
CONTR BPA Contractor
COE US Army Corps of Engineers
Page 5 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
EE Energy Efficiency
EIS Energy information System
EISA 2007 Energy independence and Security Act of 2007
EMA Energy Management Assessment
EnMS Energy Management System
EnPIs Energy Performance Indicators
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPAct 2005 Energy Policy Act of 2005
ERMC Enterprise Risk Management Committee
EUI Energy Use Intensity (also Energy Use Index)
FAM Facilities Asset Management
FEMP Federal Energy Management Program
FCRPS Federal Columbia River Power System
FRPP Federal Real Property Profile
GIS Geographic Information System
GSA U.S. General Services Administration
GSF Gross Square Footage
GUI Graphic User Interface
HDD Heating Degree Days
HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning
IBS Internal Business Services
IECC International Energy Code Council
ISO International Standards Organization
Page 6 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
ISO 9001 Quality Management System
ISO 14001 Environmental Management System
ISO 50001 Energy Management System
KPI Key Performance Indicator
kWh Kilowatt hour
kWh/sf Kilowatt hour per square foot
LED Lighting-Emitting Diode
LOE Level of Effort
LR Level of Rigor
MIM Masters of International Management
MV90 BPA’s ITRON revenue metering platform
MtCO2 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide
NPV Net Present Value
NW Facilities Operations
OHSAS 18001 Occupational Health and Safety Management System
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PDCA Plan-Do-Check-Act Methodology
PEH BPA’s Energy Efficiency ORG
PMC Power Services Management Committee
PSU Portland State University
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SEGEMA Strategic Energy Group Energy Management Assessment
SEMP Strategic Energy Management Plan
SEUs Significant Energy Users
SOP Standard Operational Procedure
Page 7 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
TCR The Climate Registry
TMC Transmission Services Management Committee
TRMC Transacting Risk Management Committee
TREES Tririga Real Estate Environmental Sustainability IBM proprietary software
TVA Tennessee Valley Authority
VFA BPA’s Facilities Capital Planning and Management platform
XAT Performance Scorecard Cross Agency Targets
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Benchmark A standard against which something can be measured or assessed.
CBECS
Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey - National sample survey
that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their
energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and
expenditures.
Electricity Reductions (kilowatt-hours)
The Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator uses the Emissions &
Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) U.S. annual non-base
load CO2 output emission rate to convert reductions of kilowatt-hours into
avoided units of carbon dioxide emissions. Most users of the Equivalencies
Calculator who seek equivalencies for electricity-related emissions want to
know equivalencies for emissions reductions from energy efficiency or
renewable energy programs. These programs are not generally assumed to
affect base load emissions (the emissions from power plants that run all the
time), but rather non-base load generation (power plants that are brought
online as necessary to meet demand). For that reason, the Equivalencies
Calculator uses a non-base load emission rate (EPA, 2013).
EO 13423
Executive Order (EO) 13423, "Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy,
and Transportation Management," was signed by President Bush on January
24, 2007. EO 13423 instructs Federal agencies to conduct their environmental,
transportation, and energy-related activities under the law in support of their
respective missions in an environmentally, economically and fiscally sound,
integrated, continuously improving, efficient, and sustainable manner.
EO 13514
Executive Order (EO) 13514, "Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy,
and Economic Performance," was signed by President Obama on 5 October
2009. This EO does not rescind/eliminate the requirements of EO 13423.
Instead, it expands on the energy reduction and environmental performance
requirements for Federal agencies identified in EO 13423. The goal of EO
Page 8 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
13514 is "to establish an integrated strategy towards sustainability in the
Federal Government and to make reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
(GHG) a priority for Federal agencies."
Energy Aspect
Element of the organization’s activities, goods or services that can affect
energy use or energy consumption and is significant if it accounts for a high
proportion of total energy consumption and has a potential for more efficient
energy use, increased use of embedded renewable energy or increased
energy exchange with the rest of society (BSI Standards Publication, 2009).
Energy Model
A software program that calculates the energy use of various energy using
systems within a building. The resulting ‘model’ is used by design firms to
compare the energy impact of system options, estimate the energy use of a
building and its systems, and as a compliance tool to demonstrate a buildings
meets the requirements of a code, policy or program.
Energy Star Portfolio Manager
An interactive energy management tool that allows you to track and assess
energy and water consumption across your entire portfolio of buildings in a
secure online environment. Enter energy consumption and cost data into your
Portfolio Manager account to benchmark building energy performance, assess
energy management goals over time, and identify strategic opportunities for
savings and recognition opportunities.
Energy Star Score A national building energy use ranking against comparable buildings.
EUI
Energy Use Intensity (or Index) is a metric of total building energy use
commonly used in benchmarking. EUI is the sum of all fuels used in the
building per year divided by the building’s floor space and is expressed in
thousands (kilos) of British Thermal Units (BTUs) per square foot (sf) of
occupied space per year.
Plug Loads Devices that plug into wall outlets.
Roll-Wave planning Method for building timelines incrementally as more information & deliverables
are defined throughout the project.
Page 9 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BPA in May requested a team of graduate students at Portland State University’s (PSU)
Master’s of International Management (MIM) program assess BPA’s energy practices.
The Ask: What is the best way to implement an energy management system at BPA, and how
should BPA use the ISO 50001 framework?
Response: The Bonneville Power Administration would likely realize energy efficiency
gains by designating an energy manager to lead key elements of the energy management
system (EnMS) described in ISO 50001.
Before this project, the Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO) in 2012 assessed BPA’s current
energy management maturity and suggested recommendations that align with ISO
50001. The PSU team used a different methodology to assess BPA’s current maturity,
and tried to provide more specifics about how to execute recommendations.
The PSU team conducted secondary research, a survey-driven gap analysis, and
external benchmarking to understand BPA’s performance in relation to its peers.
The PSU team used BPA’s Agency Decision Framework (ADF) to analyze alternatives.
BPA’s current maturity is low relative to the ISO 50001 framework, benchmarked peers,
and in terms of documented efficiency gains, but increased investments would likely
lead to increased energy efficiency. The PSU team found five benchmarking sources in the
US and Canada. These included two industry reports and three individual organizations.
The PSU team conducted multiple rounds of interviews with over 20 individuals ranging
from managers, to key technical stakeholders.
The PSU team’s gap analysis found a roughly 60 percent gap between BPA’s current
processes and those processes that would likely be required by an ISO 50001 audit.
BPA scored below the median on TVA’s 2012 sustainability benchmarking report.
Most benchmarked organizations designated an energy manager and this is a lynch-pin
element needed to drive most parts of ISO 50001.
The benchmarked organizations valued their data management systems. Technical
teams we interviewed wished to make better use of the current MV90 system.
Policy and training were the largest gaps between BPA’s current state and ISO 50001.
We assessed that a range of 2 to 15 percent to be conservative based on the US State
Department’s results and the Deloitte survey study results. BPA since 2003 has
documented 2 percent efficiency gain.
BPA would likely receive the greatest benefit over a five-year period if it made upfront
investments in an EnMS. The PSU team relied on a net present value (NPV) estimate and a
discussion amongst team members to rank alternatives against seven decision criteria.
The alternative that received the highest average score in the ADF (Scenario 2) included
designating one full time manager, investing in a data management system, and
increasing metering to all sites larger than 5,000 square feet.
Page 10 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
o This assumed that BPA would achieve a 15 percent energy gain by the fifth year
after the investment and that the population of sites metered (42) represents
most of BPA’s energy consumption.
o The net present value estimate was roughly $8 mil, while the total first year cost
was roughly $.6 mil. The payback period was 5 years.
o This alternative scored highly on a number of other decision criteria.
The PSU team provided an implementation plan that puts in place strategic components required to execute this recommendation.
Page 11 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
INTRODUCTION
CLIENT PROJECT CHALLENGE / PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING
The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is a federal nonprofit entity based in the
Pacific Northwest. Although BPA is part of the U.S. Department of Energy, it is self-
funding and covers its costs by selling its products and services. BPA markets
wholesale electrical power from 31 federal hydro projects in the Columbia River Basin,
one nonfederal nuclear plant and several other small nonfederal power plants. About
one-third of the electric power used in the Northwest comes from BPA. BPA’s service
territory includes Idaho, Oregon, Washington, western Montana and small parts of
eastern Montana, California, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming.
As part of its responsibilities, BPA promotes energy efficiency, renewable resources and
new technologies. BPA also funds regional efforts to protect and rebuild fish and wildlife
populations affected by hydroelectric power development in the Columbia River Basin.
In 2012, the Department of Energy (DOE) conducted an ISO 14001 audit of BPA. One
of the recommendations resulting from this audit was a conversation around the
possibility of BPA integrating portions of ISO 50001 into its operational practices.
BPA’s FY13 sustainability cross agency targets call for a gap analysis of the agency’s
ability to implement Energy Management Standards not limited to but including
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Standard 50001. PSU graduate
degree candidates at the School of Business Administration completed this gap analysis
and made recommendations on implementing an EnMS.
CLIENT GOALS
A recommendation on how BPA should plan and manage its facilities’ energy
consumption using the Agency Decision Framework (ADF). The range of the
alternatives to answer this question goes from doing nothing, to building a fully
certified energy management system not limited to but including ISO 50001.
A comprehensive gap analysis that includes a cost analysis and Level of Effort
(LOE) assessment associated with implementation of the above recommendation
A high level implementation strategy and timeline
PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS
The PSU team acted as consultants for BPA. The PSU team conducted primary and
secondary research in order to develop an understanding of how BPA consumes power
at its facilities, how other commercial and industrial organizations are applying energy
Page 12 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
management framework ISO 50001, and what practical steps BPA could take to
manage its energy use internally.
The team used existing data at BPA to gain insight into BPA’s facilities landscape and
augmented that data with interviews/surveys where necessary. Students also identified
and analyzed other organizations that had implemented energy management ISO
50001 as models for BPA’s energy management recommendations.
The team took the results and created the following (Appendix U):
Input for ADF decision framework
Energy Management System gap analysis based on ISO 50001
Alternative scenarios of four varying degrees of implementation of Energy
Management Systems ISO 50001
EnMS implementation recommendations
A cost/benefit and LOE estimate
Final written report and presentation
There are administrative and unseen costs and risks that cannot be predicted by the
PSU team to implement of a fully certified energy management system ISO 50001. The
PSU team identified the major costs and benefits involved in implementing an energy
management system, and provided an evidenced-based, understandable analysis of
likely costs and benefits as well as associated risks.
PROJECT TEAM/CONSULTANT GOALS
To provide the deliverables listed above
To consider how ISO 50001 is being applied domestically and internationally
To maintain appropriate project management infrastructure, including: plan
development and approval, reporting, execution, and accountability of plan tasks
PROJECT WORK PLAN DESCRIPTION
Work plan items included:
1. Conducted project initiation and kick-off meeting(s) with client in order to gain a
consensus on the projects goals and outcomes
2. Consulted with BPA technical advisory team to understand key constraints and
needs for the implementation of an energy management system at BPA
3. Conducted primary/secondary research and benchmarking analysis to
understand how BPA and other organizations have or have not benefited from
the implementation of energy management systems. (Appendix B)
Page 13 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
4. Synthesized research results into various forms of analysis, including: current
over-all assessment, cost/benefit analysis for three levels of implementation of an
EnMS, an LOE analysis, comparison of BPA results to benchmarks, and inputs
into ADF.
5. Analyzed and identified strategic recommendations and action plan on how BPA
should approach energy management at BPA facilities using Energy
Management Systems including but not limited to ISO 50001
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
Per the statement of work above, research on international energy management
standards other than ISO 50001, such as EN16001:2009 and ANSI/MSE 50021-2013
was completed and can be found on Appendix A.
STAKEHOLDER GROUP
Primary research was conducted at BPA headquarters with a cross functional team
comprised of energy efficiency experts, civil and mechanical engineers, resource
efficiency managers, public utilities metering specialists, environmental policy and
governance subject matter experts.
A total of 20 different resources were interviewed and consulted in 5 business lines
throughout BPA which included Power Services, Transmission Services, Internal
Business Services, Corporate Strategy and Environment, Fish and Wildlife.
The Stakeholder Analysis Matrix on Appendix J lists all ISO 50001 Energy Management
System components and matches them to corresponding internal organizations that
may be directly or indirectly impacted as BPA considers the implementation of an
EnMS.
BENCHMARKING
According to ISO, Europe leads the world in ISO 50001 certifications, counting 363
organizations throughout 19 countries which were documented as certified as of 2011.
This is the most current data available from ISO at the time of this writing. (International
Standards Organization, 2011). At that time, North America showed only 1 organization
certified for 2011, St Mary’s Cement. Appendix D
The disparity does not mean that other organizations across North America are not
implementing Energy Management Systems, but it does serve as a clear indicator that
Energy Management is still in its infancy in North America.
Page 14 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Google, on July 29, 2013 became the first company in North America to obtain a multi-
site ISO 50001 certification for the energy management system covering its corporate
data center operations and six US data centers (Energy Manager Today, 2013).
BENCHMARKING KEY FINDINGS IN ORDER OF RELEVANCE
1. TVA Benchmarking Report and Internal EnMS
a. The benchmark for manning sustainability efforts is a rough average of 1.2
FTE per billion dollars of annual revenue. Based on BPA’s revenues, this
suggests that BPA should be manned at about 3.8 FTEs for its
sustainability efforts.
b. TVA focuses on the half of its buildings that are significant energy users,
and it bases the determination on what buildings experience electricity
cost of over $20,000 to $30,000 annually.
c. Eighty percent of their utility costs go to electricity.
d. TVA stated that 25 percent of their facilities were metered.
e. TVA has an FTE clerk that enters data manually for over 500 utility bills,
which takes 20 hrs. /per week. They use a centralized data entry system.
Further details of TVA EnMS are located in (Appendix G)
2. Deloitte Study
a. Concern for electricity efficiency for consumers and businesses appears to
be slightly softening due to the increasing relevance of natural gas and
stable energy prices.
b. The average time to achieve efficiency targets is roughly 4 years.
c. Goals are getting more difficult to achieve as ‘low hanging fruit’ projects
are done.
d. The largest group of firms, 30 percent, is targeting a 25 percent total
electricity efficiency gain. The second largest group (25 percent of
respondents) is targeting a 10-14 percent electricity efficiency gain from
their efforts.
Details of the Deloitte report can be found in (Appendix F)
3. US Department of State
a. Buildings of gross square footage of over 5,000 sq. ft. are the focus of
their energy efficient efforts, and they represent about 10 percent of their
building portfolio.
b. The departure from ‘home grown’ systems to commercially developed
enterprise systems was a major milestone and gave the Bureau more
Page 15 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
relevant means to analyze their data and make strategic decisions when
managing its portfolio.
c. Decentralizing data gathering through customized front-end interfaces with
single points of entry significantly decreased costs and time spent.
d. The Department was able to document energy performance
improvements ranging from 10 -15 percent.
US Department of State details are located in (Appendix I)
4. St. Mary’s
a. St Mary’s was the most dedicated to a variety of ISO standards because
they are an industrial company.
b. Energy represents 40 percent of their total operating costs.
c. St. Mary’s gained the first ISO certification and realized an 8 percent
absolute reduction in energy operating costs from their efforts.
d. Employee awareness and training was essential for behavioral change.
Further details of St. Mary’s Cement EnMS can be found in (Appendix E)
Page 16 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
GAP ANALYSIS
SUMMARY OF SEG ENERGY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT (EMA)
In Q1 2012, the Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO) sponsored BPA’s participation in their
Commercial Energy Improvement (CEI) program. The Strategic Energy Group (SEG)
generated a report that included recommendations for improvement based upon their
own proprietary analysis tool. These recommendations were based upon the Strategic
Energy Group’s criteria and ISO 50001 compliance benchmarks, and they were not
weighed against any internal BPA criteria.
The SEGEMA tool is based on ISO 50001 standards and is composed of 3 main
components: strategic, enabling and functional. SEG broke each topic area up into a
series of characteristics grouped into four levels of increasing rigor using the
established requirements for compliance with the ISO 50001 standards. The EMA is
designed to identify the specific actions needed to gain organizational balance, increase
momentum and contribute to sustainability.
Level of Rigor Score
Energy Management Continuum
According to ETO’s EMA, BPA’s Level of Rigor (LR) score of 0.43 points to BPA’s
primary tactical approach to energy management internally within the agency.
(Appendix K)
0.0 - 1.00 Tactical Approach
1.01 - 2.00 Strategic Approach
2.01 - 3.00 Operationally Integrated Approach
3.01 - 4.00 Continuous Improvement Approach
0.43
Page 17 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
PSU MIM ISO 50001 GAP ANALYSIS
SEG’s EMA report was an important first step in the process of developing a more
mature EnMS at BPA. In spite of the existence of some methodological differences and
levels of detail, there many similarities in conclusions and recommendations between
the SEG analyses and our own. This has helped to validate and underscore key
recommendations made by our team. This section will review key points of the PSU
MIM ISO 50001 gap analysis, and also highlight important differences between the
earlier SEG analysis and our own.
Comparison of PSU Gap Analysis with SEG’s EMA
Our team began work with the goal of being able to recommend how BPA might best
“plan and manage its facilities’ energy consumption through the agency’s decision
framework (ADF)”. At this point in time, more than a year had passed, and some of
SEG’s recommendations had already begun to be implemented.
We looked to identify up-to-date opportunities for energy management improvement, to
make a general EnMS maturity assessment, and also to examine ways to inform
management’s decision-making process around implementing an EnMS.
Key Methodological Similarities
The SEG work and our own were both partially based upon a gap analysis using the
ISO 50001 standard to look for areas of opportunity in managing an EnMS. For the sake
of continuity, our team adopted some of the language utilized by SEG in their 2012
analysis in its own ISO 50001 gap analysis.
Key Methodological Differences
1. Our team based our criteria for formulating action plan suggestions on our
research, conversations with our sponsor and interviews with technical team.
Suggestions were shaped using our analysis in combination with the ADF.
2. Our team looked at industry best practices and benchmarked efforts made by
similar organizations like the TVA.
3. Our team did not assume that ISO 50001 compliance was necessarily the most
desirable scenario for BPA. We researched other energy management standards
beyond ISO 50001 to determine what other standards might be of use to BPA
prior to conducting our gap analysis.
4. Our team conducted simple cost-benefit analyses of several levels of EnMS
standard implementation in order to arrive at its action plan suggestions/strategic
recommendations.
Page 18 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
5. Our team conducted interviews with the key stakeholders/technical teams
beyond management to identify areas of opportunity not highlighted by our gap
analysis.
6. Our team utilized stakeholder interviews and information from our secondary
research in assessing the maturity level at which ISO 50001 items have been
implemented.
7. Our team examined ways to determine whether or not there is a “business case”
for various implementation scenarios to aid management’s decision-making
process around improving the EnMS.
Similarities between SEG analysis and PSU ISO 50001 gap analysis conclusions
1. A well-defined energy policy should be in place, and is essential to providing the
foundation for an energy management plan.
2. Designating an Energy Manager is ideal to maximize the effectiveness of an
EnMS.
3. A detailed energy management plan must be in place in order to guide
operational plans and energy use targets.
4. An infrastructure conducive to collecting, tracking, storing, analyzing and
reporting key data at regular intervals is necessary to measure progress and to
set goals.
5. Training around the implementation of an EnMS and occupant behavior is key
element in maximizing the effectiveness of an EnMS.
6. It is important that BPA acknowledge the long-term financial benefit of energy
efficiency projects and include the use of financial calculations that show this
benefit for accurate cost-benefit analysis of energy efficiency expenditures.
7. Overall awareness of and organizational commitment to energy efficiency as a
priority throughout the organization is core to long-term success.
Key differences between SEG analysis and PSU gap analysis conclusions
The SEG analysis and PSU ISO 50001 gap analysis point to similar conclusions. The
SEG EMA session in 2012 was an important first step in developing a more mature
EnMS at BPA. Our team attempted to provide enough information to actually choose a
path forward and likely implementation steps.
Key areas in which the PSU team expands upon the conclusions SEG:
1. An Energy Manager is ideal, but there are various ways of appointing one:
designating an existing employee in an existing position, placing an existing
employee into a newly created FTE, or hiring from the outside into a newly
created position. Our group recognizes and addresses these scenarios.
Page 19 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
2. The SEG analysis did not provide a way to determine the extent to which
metering or other EE expenditures are cost effective. Our team has examined
this issue of implementation with reasonable cost data.
3. Development of a targeted energy management policy is dependent upon the
existence of data. Our team suggests taking steps that will provide this data and
support further sound policy and procedures in an iterative fashion.
4. Our analysis also acknowledges the need for increased energy use data
collection and normalization at BPA facilities. The SEG analysis suggested that
this should happen but did not provide specifics with regard to implementation.
PSU MIM ISO 50001 Gap Analysis Scoring
The graphic on the next page provides an idea of the maturity of BPA’s EnMS relative to
ISO 50001 standards based upon our team’s analysis and survey results from
interviews with key stakeholders through the lens of a Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA)
cycle of continuous improvement. (Appendix C)
Each component contains several line items, and these line items (57 total) are
individually scored with one of three possible percentile rankings: Not in Place: 0
percent, Partially in Place: 50 percent, or In Place: 100 percent.
The result of “38 percent complete” can give the reader a false sense of precision. This
number is the result of each of the 57 line items receiving a blunt score, rather than a
sign of precision. This method serves to give an estimate of system maturity.
The following graphic shows our assessed level of “completeness” for each ISO 50001
item category, and our over-all assessment of complete or partially complete vs.
incomplete items. (Appendix L)
Page 20 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Roughly 65 of 172 line items were at least partially in place according to our
assessment. This is a reflection of the limited maturity of the EnMS.
Program Totals
Not in place
Partially in place
In place
Element subtotals: 107 57 8
Program Total: 172 points available
65
Total Program percentage % complete: 38
38%
Page 21 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Gap Analysis key findings (Appendix N)
BPA is at a roughly 40 percent readiness level for ISO 50001 certification based
on surveys of experts and our research findings.
The lack of an energy management information system limits BPA’s ability to
improve energy performance.
The absence of an overall policy limits the urgency around the EnMS program
from an ISO 50001 perspective.
There is no current EnMS manager to be held accountable for various aspects of
an EnMS program.
There is little or no internal energy efficiency awareness and training program
There is poor governance and minimal operational controls in place that support
an effective EnMS through the control of records, internal audits and corrective
action procedures.
How key findings changed overall assumptions
We reviewed our main assumptions after our research and concluded the following:
1. Our first key assumption was that ISO 50001 was a valid framework to use as a
reference for an EnMS program. We found no evidence to refute the assumption,
and we found that it provided a helpful way to talk about the necessary
components to implement an EnMS.
2. Our second key assumption was that the cost of implementing an EnMS is less
than not implementing one, which we found to be probably true over a roughly
five-year period based on the limited financial information we could gather. For a
detailed example see the Alternative Evaluation section of the ADF, specifically
the finance criteria.
3. Our third key assumption was that BPA has reached a maturity level at which it is
ready to implement a more mature EnMS. We found this assumption to be true
based on the following:
BPA has already employed sustainability analysts who work on the topic of
energy management as a portion of their portfolio and are ready for the next
level of maturity.
Page 22 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
We also found there were projects in place to identify major energy users in
the non-commercial sites, indicating key data needed for determining where
to deploy meters would soon be in place.
We found general enthusiasm from the technical team in regards to improving
our ability to understand energy consumption across both commercial and
non-commercial sites.
Our analysis found that BPA was slightly more mature than the ETO study
conducted in February of 2012, which indicated BPA is moving in the right
direction.
Page 23 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
AGENCY DECISION FRAMEWORK
BACKGROUND
In this section we use the findings from our gap analysis and benchmark analysis as
input into a scenario evaluation framework.
We have followed the BPA ADF process and presented it in the following pages in order
to provide our conclusions in a format relevant to BPA, and meet our project’s core
objectives of comparing alternatives and recommending a course of action.
The ADF provides a structured and consistent process for identifying actions that best
deliver on BPA’s business objectives while appropriately addressing significant risks. It
demonstrates to decision makers the full range of issues, perspectives, alternatives and
risks, and provides a well-documented basis for decisions. (Appendix Q)
OBJECTIVES
Establish, document, implement and maintain systems and processes necessary to
improve energy performance at BPA facilities.
The achievable outcomes of a mature EnMS include:
Increase scope and boundaries of BPA’s current energy management system by
increasing metering in the largest 16 non-commercial sites.(Appendix S)
Reduce energy intensity by 7 percent for all BPA metered facilities by FY19
through active energy management, operations & maintenance projects, capital
investments, policies and training
Combine expertise of energy efficiency program managers, mechanical &
electrical engineers and policy analysts to drive energy performance
improvement at BPA.
Meet reporting requirements to the DOE, EPA and TCR with higher accuracy and
timeliness of data acquisition.
Increase organizational commitment and accountability from Power,
Transmission, Internal Business Services and all levels and functions of the
organization, including top management, which directly impact energy
management at BPA facilities.
Enable BPA to evaluate and prioritize the implementation of new energy-efficient
technologies and improve the reliability of BPA energy-consuming facility assets.
Align and integrate the EnMS with other management frameworks such as those
for existing quality, environment, risk management and internal audits.
Page 24 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
CONNECTIONS TO AGENCY STRATEGIC DIRECTION
Stakeholder Perspective
S5 – Energy Efficiency: BPA and public power cooperatively accomplish public power’s
share of regionally cost-effective energy efficiency and demand management.
Achieving electric energy efficiency within BPA facilities and operations is not verifiable
unless there is a robust internal EnMS in place that can monitor, track and report
consumption in an accurate, timely and reliable manner. Reduction of the cost of power
delivery to consumers can only be achieved and validated by establishing,
implementing and maintaining a framework that systematically enables achievement of
continual improvement in energy performance, efficiency and conservation.
S8 – Climate Change: BPA is prepared for the physical, economic and policy changes
stemming from climate change developments, and promotes and implements cost-
effective strategies to address these changes.
Potential changes that climate change poses to the energy sector may require electric
system investment. Regulations may begin to price CO2 emissions and further promote
investments in conservation, renewable energy and smart grid technologies. In order for
BPA to internally advance energy efficiency investment which will ultimately reduce the
region’s carbon footprint, a robust internal EnMS will be required to maximize use of
energy-consuming assets.
Internal Operations Perspective
I1 – Operational Excellence: BPA meets the demands of business operations efficiently
and effectively through standardized, continuously-improved systems and processes.
The adoption of a framework which can integrate energy performance into management
practices will help BPA broaden its use of disciplined, repeatable and standardized
business processes and systems. Following a Plan-Do-Check-Act process for energy
management will drive continual improvement within internal systems and processes
that support effective business operations.
I3 – Governance & Internal Controls: BPA’s governance and internal controls are
robust, balanced and adhered to across the organization.
An EnMS will create transparency and facilitate communication across the organization
ensuring an effective governance structure is in place based on adequate controls, clear
guidelines, and appropriate policies and procedures for directing day-to-day business
operations related to energy management.
Page 25 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
I4 – Asset Management: BPA maximizes the long-term value of FCRPS power and
transmission assets through integrated asset management practices.
Energy-consuming facilities which support power and transmission assets are also
aging and need increased maintenance or replacement. As BPA manages its assets
and capital investment decisions with a comprehensive understanding of the long-term
costs, benefits, risks, and strategic opportunities it faces, the implementation of an
EnMS will ensure adequate, efficient and reliable energy performance within its
facilities. This will enable BPA to employ a more rigorous, risk-informed and transparent
facility asset management program that applies leading practices in planning,
prioritizing, investing, operating and maintenance of energy-consuming assets.
I5 – Technology Innovation: BPA solves business challenges and enables
breakthroughs using a program of disciplined research and technology innovation that is
recognized to deliver high value to the region.
The adoption of an internal EnMS will assist BPA to evaluate and prioritize the
implementation of new energy-efficient technologies and continuously refocus
resources on the most promising efforts that improve the reliability, cost-effectiveness
and efficiency of energy-consuming facility assets.
I6 – Collaboration: BPA strengthens collaborative relationships internally and externally
to support achievement of objectives.
Implementing a robust internal EnMS will foster a culture of collaboration and continual
energy performance improvement within BPA facilities. As issues, priorities and
alternatives are identified and addressed in alignment with agency policy and cross-
functional team’s allocated resources, long-term objectives that benefit the region as a
whole including the environment will be met.
I7 – Risk-Informed Decision Making & Transparency: BPA’s processes, decision making
and performance are transparent, risk-informed and based on structured analysis.
The current process is not a standardized repeatable framework. The implementation of
an EnMS, appropriate to BPA’s size and facilities’ portfolio, would inform decisions
regarding the procurement of energy services and products through risk analysis and
opportunity identification inherit within energy management and in accordance to
specific criteria, including business, legal, environmental, people and process.
People & Culture Perspective
P1 – High Performance: We excel with clear performance expectations to deliver the
mission.
Page 26 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Making persons working for the organization aware of the importance of conformity with
the energy policy and procedures will set clear performance expectations that are
designed to drive business outcome. Defining roles and responsibilities as well as
providing meaningful feedback and recognizing high performance within BPA’s internal
energy management program will allow BPA to achieve it mission and improve energy
performance.
P3 – Right Skills & Competencies: We develop skills and competencies needed to meet
current and future business challenges.
Surveying whether staff with energy responsibilities have the relevant background,
training, and capabilities to effectively carry out their job functions/tasks will help BPA to
identify training needs associated with the EnMS. Providing the required training will
optimize the capability of BPA’s workforce by leveraging current skills and
competencies to improve BPA’s energy performance and future business challenges.
By developing its talent through training in energy management, BPA will meet
changing business needs as well as maintain a competitive edge in the labor market.
DECISION MAKERS
The implementation of an EnMS will ultimately be a topic to be discussed and approved
by the BOB (Board of Business Operations) which includes the COO (Chief Operating
Officer) and other Tier I & II executives, specifically in IBS and NW which manage BPA
facilities.
DECISION CRITERIA
The following decision criteria were used to rank four scenarios. Each criterion could be
assigned points ranging from 0-4. Since this was a qualitative analysis, we assumed
that slight differences should not necessarily mean that two scenarios should receive
different scores. Therefore, some criteria received the same score across multiple
alternatives.
The method used to rank the alternatives was mostly through qualitative discussion.
PSU team members debated what the score should be based on the available
evidence.
Business/Finance: Rank based on net present value estimate of each scenario
based on readily available information and reasonable assumptions. Two
scenarios only differed slightly and received the same score.
Legal/Regulatory: Rank based on the extent to which the proposed solution
manages a volatile regulatory environment
Environment: Rank based on the extent to which the solution provides a net
environmental benefit
Page 27 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Public Interest: Rank based on the extent to which the solution helps BPA lead
by example when it comes to energy conservation and the general public easily
values the improvement
BPA’s Processes: Rank based on the extent to which the alternative helps
establish a more efficient processes with minimal disruption
BPA’s People: Rank based on the extent to which BPA uses its human
resources in the best way possible
Time to Implement: Rank based on the extent to which the payback period
relative to other alternatives
MAJOR RISKS
Summary of EnMS impact on key Enterprise Risks
Identified
Enterprise Risks
Level of relevance to
an improvement in
the EnMS
Effect on Impact Affect Likelihood
Business Continuity
and Asset Health
Reliability
High High High
Cyber Attack Moderate Moderate Moderate
Regulatory and
Compliance Moderate Moderate Moderate
Net Secondary
Revenue Low Low Low
BPA’s Energy Risk Management Group created a business risk framework in 2012 that
focuses on managing hazards (Bonneville Power Administration, 2013). In this section
we will identify which hazards from the Energy Risk Management Group framework are
most significant to an EnMS and briefly discuss how an EnMS can affect the impact and
likelihood assumptions of these hazards. We will not attempt a quantitative analysis of
how the risk changed before and after the implementation of an EnMS because we do
not yet have the required data.
The following hazards are addressed because they are associated with the adoption of
an EnMS:
Page 28 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Business Continuity (I) and Asset Health and Reliability (G)
Cyber Attack (K)
Regulatory and Compliance (A)
Net Secondary Revenue (C)
Each of these risks will now be discussed against the backdrop of how an EnMS
decreases their likelihood or impact.
Business Continuity (I) and Asset Health and Reliability (G)
Definition: “A lack of adequate Business Continuity preparedness leads to BPA being
unable to appropriately respond to an act of nature or man that disrupts critical business
functions, interrupts service to customers, harms people or the environment, or
damages BPA’s reputation as an effective steward of the FCRPS. Short-term
deferments of investment in aging infrastructure lead to major power and transmission
reliability events that may require highly-accelerated investments to remediate.”
Warning: One characteristic that is consistent with events that hinder business
continuity is surprise. There will be warnings generated both internally and externally for
some event types, but not for others. Deficiencies in asset health are more dependent
on internally generated warnings.
Impact: The impact of these types of events is that they require accelerated
investments to remediate. An EnMS does require more upfront investment, with the
hope that it reduces the reaction costs. A mature EnMS system includes the collection,
collation, synthesis, and reporting of metering information. This metering data could
provide early warning, and event diagnosis.
Recovery: Recovery time and cost should be reduced because of the existence of an
EnMS. With more accurate metering and data management, it should be easier to
identify what parts of the business are being affected.
Conclusion: Of the Enterprise Risks listed, we believe a mature EnMS will have the
greatest positive impact on this risk. The EnMS is designed not only to find areas to
gain marginal efficiencies, but can also illustrate power usage through the system
through more effective monitoring. This data analysis function has been used to react
and mitigate to malfunctioning equipment in the past on a limited basis.
Cyber Attack (K)
Definition: “Cyber-attacks on BPA’s BUD and CCN networks by an internal source with
specialized knowledge or external source impair BPA’s ability to operate the FCRPS
and maintain reliability, and have the potential to spread to COE/BOR systems.”
Page 29 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Warning: There will generally be very little warning of a cyber-attack, but again an
EnMS helps inform analysts about irregularities in power use. Having better diagnostic
tools and feeding data to the appropriate information security analyst when appropriate
should provide better early warning.
Impact: The impact of a cyber-attack is variable, but could conceivable affect business
continuity. Cyber-attacks against critical infrastructure are rare but impactful. Critical
infrastructure has become a more attractive target to nation states in the past couple
years, and adversaries are making large investments into understanding how to
manipulate machine language and SCADA systems. These systems were previously
considered too complex for general targeting, but adversaries are maturing their ability
to attack these systems. The Enterprise Information Security department at BPA should
be able to provide the most current analysis on the level of threat BPA faces and likely
impacts to its networks.
The impact of maturing an EnMS on the cyber-attack risk is both positive and negative.
On the one hand it increases detection and recovery of an attack. On the other hand,
the deployment of meters can introduce further complexity. Our interviews indicated that
these meters are able to do more than just passively record power usage, but can in
some cases actually manipulate various aspects of facility functions. This sort of
functionality represents an attractive target for formidable adversaries. Vulnerabilities on
these systems would require adequate controls.
Recovery: The EnMS could aid the recovery, or delay the recovery if the EnMS has
been compromised by a cyber-attack.
Conclusion: The determination of the net effect of an EnMS on the risk of cyber-attack
will require a risk assessment jointly written by the Enterprise Security function at BPA
and EnMS program analysts. It should be noted that these sorts of risk are present any
time new technology is adopted, and that technology innovation is a strategic objective
on BPA’s roadmap. If the processes are in place to manage the security of
implementing new technology, than many of the concerns associated with deployment
of more meters should be addressed.
Regulatory and Compliance (A)
Definition: “Frequent regulation changes, new rulings, reinterpretation of laws and
regulations or application in new situations lead to higher costs of compliance and/or
consequences of being found to be out of compliance.”
Warning: The Government Affairs and Legal departments should be able to provide
warning on the instability of the regulatory environment. The EnMS does not provide
warning related to this risk.
Page 30 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Impact: The more volatile the regulatory environment, the more insurance against
forthcoming regulations is required. An EnMS system provides preemptive measures
against future regulations related to energy efficiency.
Recovery: An EnMS directly improves BPA’s ability to react to an increase in regulation
regarding energy efficiency.
Conclusion: The Executive Order 13514 and the EPAct 2005 nominally cover all
federal agencies, although all references in these regulations to “agency” refers to DOE.
BPA is held accountable to DOE and held accountable to its own internal regulations
and operational exemptions. Because of this structure, BPA is able to mitigate the
regulatory risk by having the flexibility to conduct its own feasibility analysis.
Although BPA is probably managing this risk effectively at this time, the maturing of an
EnMS could indicate to regulators that more strict oversight is not needed in the future.
Net Secondary Revenue (C)
Definition: “Low stream flows and/or market prices that continue to be suppressed due
to the overabundance of natural gas lead to severe underachievement of Net
Secondary Revenue, impacting BPA’s ability to meet its strategic objectives.”
Warning: Industry analysts, economists, engineers, and business analysts probably
provide warning of the increase of the use of natural gas, and its effect on the price of
energy during critical situations. A mature EnMS helps diagnose use and overuse in our
own system, and may provide a helpful stream of data in regards to what energy may
be available for resale.
Impact: An EnMS does not directly impact this risk, but it is impacted by the risk. If the
risk is realized, then assumptions about the financial benefit used in modeling
cost/benefit of an EnMS will need to be recalibrated. For example, any energy saved is
valued using average revenue per kWh. This average is bounded on the high end by
the sale price in these Secondary Revenue transactions. If the price would to fall, so
would the average value of the energy saved through a mature EnMS.
Recovery: An EnMS will probably not affect the recovery from this market risk.
Conclusion: This risk should be monitored in order to ensure that any future
cost/benefit analysis on the value of the EnMS is valid.
Page 31 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
ALTERNATIVES
This group considered four main alternative scenarios summarized in the table below.
Further discussion is provided in the following section and in the appendix.
1. Status Quo This scenario relies on two or three main analysts working
on a part-time basis to manage data related to energy use
by reading scanned PDFs of utility bills, entering them
manually into Access database and using excel
spreadsheets to perform analysis of non-normalized raw
data. Without an energy policy in place, metering efforts are
happening on an ad-hoc basis without necessarily following
a uniform process for implementation.
2. Step-up This scenario suggests BPA makes an increased
investment in order to streamline data acquisition and
meter targeted SEUs*. This scenario relies on increased
use of the current data management system, MV90, by
increasing key analysts’ focus on the EnMS. This scenario
suggests maturing through the years until CAPEX
investments help realize double digit energy intensity
reductions.
3. Step-up Plus
This scenario includes the designation of a full time EnMS
Manager, deploying meters to facilities above 5,000 sq. ft.
and the investment in a robust data management system.
These changes accelerate EnMS maturity, but are more
costly.
4. Max
Implementation
This scenario suggests that BPA implement a certifiable
ISO 50001 program. This is the most expensive scenario
because it is labor and process intensive.
*Targeted SEU’s (Appendix S)
Page 32 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION
In this section we compare these scenarios to the decision criteria. This section
identifies to what extent each alternative meets our decision criteria. The results drive
our recommendations. Below is a summary table and a discussion follows. Points are
assigned based on how well the scenarios compared to each other. (Higher scores are
better).
Scenario
Average Rating (0 to 4 range)
Avg Business
/Finance
Legal/
Regs
Env Public
Interest
Process People Time
Status Quo (0) 1.4 0 1 1 1 2 2 1
Step-up (1) 2.3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4
Step-up Plus (2) 3.3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3
Max
Implementation
(3)
2.7 3 3 3 3 2 3 2
Before we dive into the four scenarios, we will explain how we analyzed the financial
criterion and what variables we used. We will then return to a discussion of the four
scenarios and how they performed against the various criteria.
Page 33 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Financial Criteria Summary
Description Status
Quo (0)
Step-up
(1)
Step-up
Plus (2)
Max
Implementation
(3)
Cost Total Year 1 Cost $96k $264K $603k $728k
Total Yearly Cost $96k $184K $293k $320k
Benefits Percent Savings in 5th
year 2% 12% 15% 15%
Dollar value of
efficiency gain in 5th
year
$33k $665k $922k $954k
Net
Present
Value of
gains
(Initial stages plus
perpetuity)
=(FV/(1+i)n…)+Future
Value (n=5) / i
($1 mil) $6.5 mil $7.9 mil $7.8 mil
Payback
period,
yrs.
N/A 3.3 4.9 5.2
Appendix O
DISCUSSION OF KEY VARIABLES FOR FINANCIAL EVALUATION
The financial evaluation here used limited data and subjective judgments of the
BPA environment. We created an analysis in Excel to accompany this evaluation so
that key assumptions can be refined in the future.
Key variables
Cost Variables
Cost to deploy meter: Includes material and labor to install
Lump sum payouts to install specialty meters at big sites
Annual cost to maintain a meter
Total number of meters deployed, and total number of new meters deployed
Man hours dedicated to EnMS on an annual basis
Page 34 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Avg. dollar cost of a man-hour
Initial cost of data management system
Annual cost of data management system
Training costs
Benefit Variables
Total BPA energy consumption
Market value of a kWh
Likely efficient gains under different scenarios
Required rate of return (used to discount future cash flows)
Explanation of key variables (Appendix P)
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION DISCUSSION
The alternatives were judged on their ability to meet financial, legal, public interest,
process, people, and time requirements.
Scenario 0: Status Quo
Definition: This scenario relies on two or three main analysts working on a part-time
basis to manage energy use data. Without an energy policy in place, metering efforts
are happening on an ad-hoc basis without necessarily following a uniform process.
Financial: The points allotted to this criterion are 0 because net present value is below
zero.
Legal/Regulatory: The points allotted to this criterion are 1. BPA is not taking additional
steps through an EnMS to mitigate a volatile regulatory environment. BPA continues to
mostly rely on its unique status to manage regulatory risk.
Environmental: The points allotted to this criterion are 1. Although many steps are
being taken across BPA to protect the environment, little is known about to what extent
an EnMS provides net environmental benefit. The single point is based on the
assumption that the 2 percent efficiency gain since 2003 probably led to reduction of
GHG.
Public Interest: The points allotted to this criterion are 1. BPA can claim to the public
that they are conducting energy management based on 2 percent efficiency gains and
this claim is probably easily valued and understood. The public interest is probably
addressed less in the Status Quo scenario than in other scenarios.
Process: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. The ultimate goal is to achieve
maximum benefit with the most limited impact to current business processes. The status
Page 35 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
quo scenario would provide the least amount of disruption to current processes, but also
the least amount of maturity improvement. A score of 2 reflects a net neutral impact.
People: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. BPA is leveraging its current
resources but it could probably be doing so in better ways. There are currently manual
data entry processes that could be automated, and work efforts could be more focused.
Time: The points allotted to this criterion are 1. Although the initial financial evaluation
indicated that NPV is negative and there is no payback period, there is a probable
modest energy efficiency gain of 2 percent achieved in the next five years of this
scenario.
Scenario 1: Step-up
Definition: This scenario suggests BPA makes an increased investment in order to
streamline data management and increase meter deployment to targeted SEUs. This
scenario relies on increased use of the current data management system, MV90, by
increasing key analysts’ focus on the EnMS. This scenario suggests maturing through
the years until CAPEX investments help realize double-digit energy intensity reductions.
Financial: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. Our estimate of this alternative
produced a positive net present value of roughly $6.45 mil and a payback period of
roughly 3.3 years. The assumed efficiency gains are 2 percent of total kWh
consumption for the first two years, 7 percent for the next two years, and 12 percent for
all the following years. This is a lower NPV than the following two alternatives.
Legal/Regulatory: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. The step-up scenario
represents a slightly more proactive management of regulatory risks because more time
is being spent to discover efficiency opportunities. The following two alternatives
addressed this criterion to a greater degree.
Environmental: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. Although many steps are
being taken across BPA to protect the environment, little is known about to what extent
energy management aids those efforts. The 2 points are based on the assumption that
the 12 percent efficiency gain will probably lead to reduction of GHG.
Public Interest: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. While BPA can claim that it is
stepping up efforts above the status quo alternative, it cannot point to a change in hiring
practices. The following two scenarios will probably be interpreted by the public more
easily as practicing what BPA preaches.
Process: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. The ultimate goal is to achieve
maximum benefit with the most limited impact to current business processes. The step-
Page 36 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
up scenario will require process changes, but without a single, accountable manager,
those changes could be more painful than under other scenarios. This means it scores
lower the following two alternatives.
People: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. This scenario asks analysts to
increase their work efforts, but does not fundamentally change how human resources
are arranged. There is no single person taking primary responsibility for the program.
Time: The points allotted to this criterion are 4. This criterion has the shortest payback
period of the four alternatives.
Scenario 2: Step-up Plus
Definition: This scenario includes the hiring of a full time EnMS Manager, deploying
meters to facilities above 5,000 sq. ft. and the investment in a robust data management
system. These changes accelerate EnMS maturity, but are more costly.
Financial: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. This scenario achieved the highest
NPV by a slim margin at $ 7.9 mil, and a payback period of roughly 5 years. The
assumed efficiency gains are 2 percent of total kWh consumption for the first two years,
7 percent for the next two years, and 15 percent for all the following years.
Legal/Regulatory: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The step-up scenario
represents proactive management of likely regulatory risks and sends a preemptive
message to regulators that BPA is focusing on an EnMS independently. This
management includes the designation of a manager, who is likely to also establish
efficiency targets. Efficiency targets are not required by ISO, but they have been
required by recent regulations.
Environmental: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The three points are based on
the assumption that appointing a manager will drive environmental benefit and that
there is a direct correlation between higher efficient and a reduction in GHG.
Public Interest: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. BPA can reasonably claim to
the public that they major steps to conduct energy management.
Process: The points allotted to this criterion are 4. The step-up plus scenario will
require process changes, but with a single, accountable manager, those changes
should be less painful than in other scenarios. Also, the manager will not be constrained
with following ISO processes that may limit efficiency, giving BPA the greatest flexibility
to mold processes to their own environment.
People: The points allotted to this criterion are 4. This scenario represents the ideal use
of human resources because it allows a single individual to focus their efforts.
Page 37 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Time: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The payback period for this scenario
was slightly longer than the step up scenario (5.2 years versus 4.9).
Scenario 3: Max Implementation
Definition: This scenario suggests that BPA implement a certifiable ISO 50001
program. This is the most expensive scenario because it is labor and process intensive.
Financial: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. This scenario represents NPV of
$7.8 mil, coupled with a payback period of 5.2 years. The assumed efficiency gains are
2 percent of total kWh consumption for the first two years, 7 percent for the next two
years, and 15 percent for all the following years.
Legal/Regulatory: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The max scenario
represents proactive management of likely regulatory risks and sends a preemptive
message to regulators that BPA is focusing on an EnMS independently. This
management includes the designation of a manager, who is likely to also establish
efficiency targets. Efficiency targets are not required by ISO, but they have been
required by recent regulations.
Environmental: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The three points are based on
the assumption that appointing a manager will drive environmental benefit and that
there is a direct correlation between higher energy efficiency and a reduction in GHG.
Public Interest: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. BPA can claim to the public
that they are conducting energy management and using the ISO certification, they can
easily justify that they are doing their utmost to manage energy use. The average
constituent is probably unfamiliar with ISO standards.
Process: The points allotted to this criterion are 2. The ultimate goal is to achieve
maximum benefit with the most limited impact to current business processes. This
scenario has the greatest potential to impact current processes. There will be a
manager to oversee these efforts, but that role may be overwhelmed with the process
change required by an ISO auditor. The net process disruption probably outweighs the
net process improvement.
People: The points allotted to this criterion are 3. The scenario should include more
training, and with a single, accountable manager, it is more likely that the training will be
effective compared to other scenarios.
Time: The points allotted to this criterion are 2, because it had a payback period of 5.2
years.
Page 38 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
RECOMMENDATION
With the highest score of 3.3 on a scale of 1 to 4, we recommend BPA to adopt
SCENARIO 2, or STEP-UP PLUS.
This scenario includes the following components:
adoption of an internal energy policy
designation of a full time EnMS Manager
deploying meters to all facilities above 5,000 sq. ft
investment in a robust data management system
SCENARIO 2 has an estimated NPV of $ 7.9 mil and a payback period of roughly 5
years.
The assumed efficiency gains are 2 percent of total kWh consumption for the first two
years, 7 percent for the next two years, and 15 percent for the following years.
This scenario represents proactive management of likely regulatory risks and sends a
preemptive message to regulators that BPA is focusing on an EnMS independently.
Due to expected efficiency gains ranging from 2 percent to 15 percent, improved
environmental performance through the reduction in GHG emissions is assumed.
This scenario does not require certification and centralizes efforts with a single,
accountable manager. This gives BPA has greater flexibility to mold processes to their
own environment eliminating constraints inherent within standards such as ISO.
The investment in an automated and dynamic reporting system optimizes FTE usage
eliminating inaccuracy and freeing up time for efforts directly related to energy
efficiency.
The above alternative evaluation was used to create our strategic recommendations
contained in the next section as well as the implementation plan that follows.
Page 39 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS
STRATEGIC COMPONENTS
Define an Energy Policy
A clearly defined energy policy that supports the EnMS needs to be in place and many
other items in this analysis are directly or indirectly dependent upon it. Policy maker’s
job is made harder by the lack of data about energy consumption. The following EnMS
policy characteristics should be present in order to maximize effectiveness of the EnMS
and consequently energy performance:
defines the scope (property/sites, facilities/buildings, activities/operations and
management team) and boundaries (energy systems, processes, equipment and
people/functions) of the EnMS.
commits to energy efficiency and continual improvement and considers
applicable legal requirements and compliance.
provides a framework for setting, documenting, implementing and reviewing
measurable energy objectives and achievable targets.
assigns roles, responsibilities and authorities to the resources with the relevant
background, training and capabilities required for the effective implementation
and maintenance of the EnMS.
offers guidance for internal communication between various levels and functions
within the organization as well as document control for the planning and
operation associated with significant energy aspects.
identifies the key characteristics of operations which have significant energy
impact that should be monitored, tracked and verified for continual improvement.
establishes an internal EnMS audit plan in regular intervals that ensures non-
conformities are identified and that corrective and preventive actions are taken to
mitigate energy impacts.
ensures continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the EnMS through
top management review in planned intervals.
establishes need for data and reporting in order to make optimal decisions about
energy use.
This recommendation is supported by ETO EMA report, ISO 50001, EN 160001 and
ANSI SEP standards.
Page 40 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Adopt Strategic Energy Management Planning
Strategic Energy Management Plan
A Strategic Energy Management Plan (SEMP) will provide BPA with a clear strategy for
coordinating the various efforts required to achieve the long-term goal of the energy
management policy. A SEMP is a comprehensive plan, or roadmap for addressing
energy efficiency across the organization and its assets, enabling the company to
change its business practices and deliberately undertake a wide variety of energy
management actions to aggressively control and lower energy consumption on a
sustained basis.
ETO suggests the following SEMP objectives and specific areas of organizational focus
in order to achieve economic, environmental and social benefit from an EnMS:
gain and maintain the organizational commitment needed to successfully apply
best practices in managing energy consumption to reach energy reduction goals
identify and apply best practices in facility operations to minimize energy related
operating costs and enhance the reliability and longevity of building systems,
equipment and infrastructure
identify and invest in financially attractive facility upgrades that reduce the cost of
asset ownership and contribute to reaching energy reduction goals
establish and use purchasing and procurement standards that minimize company
life cycle costs and total cost of ownership
adopt and apply new construction practices using integrated design principles to
reduce the cost of asset ownership and contribute to reaching its energy
reduction goals
engage and empower employees and building occupants as partners in
organizational efforts to effectively manage energy use and reduce consumption
track and report energy performance to assure organizational accountability and
continuous improvement in efforts that effectively manage energy use and
reduce consumption
The identified objectives can be customized with input from the Executive Sponsor,
Energy Manager and technical team to determine the appropriate level of detail required
to assure organizational accountability and plan follow-through.
The following are quantitative sub-components which should be defined within the
SEMP:
Energy consumption baselines
Energy performance indicators (ENPIs)
Page 41 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Energy Intensity reduction targets
EUI benchmarks
Operational Plans
Operational plans are tactical and outline specific facility O&M improvements, capital
projects, and behavioral activities to be undertaken.
The operational planning is comprehensive and should include all O&M improvements,
capital projects, and behavioral activities which require organizational resources to
implement. In addition to the financial and human resources required, expected cost
savings should be forecasted and verified for comparison to facility specific energy
reduction targets and the overall organizational goal.
Metering Plan
BPA’s Facility Asset Management has been working on a Metering Plan which is guided
by:
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), Section 103, Energy Use
Measurement and Accountability
Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance, requires that 15 percent of an agency’s portfolio comply
with the Guiding Principles of Federal High Performance Sustainable Buildings
2010 Sustainability Action Plan in Goal #1 presented to DOE for the metering of
BPA facilities as our intent to comply with the intent of the E.O. 13514
DOE’s Document, Guidance for Electric Metering in Federal Facilities
We recommend that FAM continue to develop, implement and enhance its metering
plan as a lead organization with support from Power and Transmission services
technical stakeholder groups and decision makers. The technical details included within
the metering plan should define the SEUs and priority sites based on ongoing project
activities such as any major new construction and/or retrofit.
The SEMP, O&M and metering strategy should be multi-year plans adjusted at the end
of every fiscal year to ensure alignment between projects, departmental budgets,
energy targets and agency goals, organizational resource availability and the agency’s
strategic direction. (Appendix M)
Page 42 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
ENABLING COMPONENTS
Identify an Energy Manager
ISO, SEG, and ANSI all suggest that an Energy Manager be designated. Top
management should appoint an individual with the appropriate skills and competence
who has the responsibility and authority to:
ensure the EnMS is established, implemented, maintained and continually
improved.
ensure that an energy policy appropriate to the nature and scale of the
organization’s energy use and consumption is defined and adopted.
ensure that planning of energy management activities, objectives and targets is
designed to support the organization’s energy policy.
define and communicate roles and responsibilities to facilitate energy
management as well as the means and time frame for achieving improvement.
promote awareness of the energy policy and energy management objectives at
various levels of the organization.
conduct a full energy review to evaluate past and present energy use and
consumption, identify areas of significant energy use and prioritize opportunities
for improving energy performance.
assist in identification of training needs associated with the operation of the
EnMS.
document and communicate internally and externally on the EnMS and energy
performance.
monitor, measure and analyze EnPIs and relevant variables related to significant
energy uses.
report to top management on energy performance as well as EnMS performance.
review evaluation of compliance with legal requirements, EnMS audit results and
implement corrective and preventive actions for continual improvement.
The designation of an Energy Manager can be carried out in two ways. First, it can be
accomplished by designating an existing individual to carry out all of the necessary
responsibilities. The potential advantage of this is avoiding the costs associated with
adding 1 FTE to staff, though there are likely FTE gains resulting from the re-distribution
of this individual’s workload / duties to other staff. Second one FTE can be designated.
The hiring of an Energy Manager is necessary to ensure the efficiency and success of
the EnMS and introduces the key variable of accountability.
Page 43 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Develop an Internal Energy Efficiency Training and Awareness Program
The EnMS should emphasize raising occupant awareness amongst SEUs and goal-
subject facilities. The Energy Manager should assure relevant staff has the
competence, education, training, skills and experience required to meet program goals.
Customized training for individuals and organizations which directly support the energy
management objectives of the agency should be a priority and should communicate:
importance of organizational commitment, accountability and conformity to BPA’s
internal energy policy.
roles, responsibilities and authorities delegated within BPA’s EnMS.
financial, operational and environmental benefits of improved energy
performance.
impact of energy use and consumption at the facility level as it relates to the
overarching agency energy targets.
correlation between occupant behavior and energy performance.
the means by which any person working for, or on behalf of, the organization can
make comments, report non-conformities or suggestions for improvements at the
facility level as well as the EnMS as a whole.
availability of energy efficiency incentive programs which the agency is eligible
for or subscribes to.
reward and recognition programs in place for individual and business lines with
outstanding contributions to the agency’s energy management activities.
Our research made clear that BPA energy efficiency training and awareness campaigns
were outwardly focused on its federal programs. Our research has also verified that
greater energy performance improvement occurs in organizations that dedicate time
and resources to training their own employees and internal business lines on energy
efficiency and occupant awareness, based on the ETO report, benchmarking studies
conducted and international standards.
Page 44 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTS
Invest in an Energy Management Information System
BPA should invest in a platform that can improve operational effectiveness, financial
and environmental performance. Monitoring and measurement equipment can range
from utility meters up to intelligent systems capable of:
direct integration with basic and advanced meters, offline spreadsheets and data
exchange with third-party billing systems
consolidating raw data, integrating databases, producing automatic reports and
interfacing with other related systems
providing a centralized repository with single points of entry of utility consumption
data at the facility level
accurately measuring and tracking energy and environmental performance,
evaluating cost reduction and ROI for opportunities to reduce energy
project portfolio management across all enterprise locations through integrated
analytics and automated tracking and notification processes
being customized to BPA’s requirements for operational and document control of
internal records in conformity with EnMS standards and agency policy
BPA decision makers will have to decide between investing in an energy management
information system or leveraging its internal systems like MV90 and VFA based on their
own internal criteria and available budget. BPA is currently managing data manually and
does not use any of its internal systems in an integrated manner based on the
interviews with key sustainability analysts accountable for data gathering and reporting.
BPA will probably soon outgrow a solution based on patching together current systems
and data because of the complexity and size of BPA’s energy consumption footprint.
The commercially available platforms designed especially for energy and environmental
performance management would cost more in the near term, but probably offer better
analytic and reporting capabilities and greater returns over a five-year period.
Establish an Integrated Energy Information Analysis and Reporting Framework
BPA will receive multiple benefits from imbedding reporting and analysis into its EnMS
at the policy and operational levels, including:
advanced visibility into resource consumption, operational costs and
environmental performance benchmarks
the display of the interconnectedness between real estate, space management,
facility maintenance, capital projects and energy management in a single
technology platform
Page 45 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
automated evaluation of asset deficiencies and identification of maintenance
projects that improve energy efficiency through integrated databases
comprehensive analysis operational, financial and environmental benefits with
alternative comparison
prioritization and optimization of financial and environmental returns from energy
reduction investments in alignment with organization’s business strategy
strategic performance improvement through a dynamic platform for people,
process and technology
BPA should establish a reporting framework that fully integrates all components
of the EnMS together, and integrates with other types reporting. The need for
integrated analysis and reporting for strategic decision making will be the lynchpin to
whether BPA realizes the net present value of all its energy efficiency gains that offset
the investments suggested within this study.
Page 46 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Here we illustrate the key elements of our implementation plan which integrates SEG and PSU recommendations based on DOE’s implementation e-guide. (Appendix R)
Task 1
Establish the structure of the for EnMS implementation
- Appoint management representative & assign members of energy team
- Review ETO/PSU strategic recommendations
- Identify key internal influencers
- Establish scope & boundaries of the EnMS
- Develop the implementation plan & timeframe for execution
NW
Task 2
Draft Energy Policy
- Review sample energy management policies created by other organizations
- Identify operations with significant energy impact
- Establish communication channels
- Draft internal energy policy within BPAM guidelines
Energy Team
Task 3
Secure Top Management Commitment
- Understand your business drivers/case
- Prepare EnMS/Energy Policy sales pitch
- Brief top management and secure commitment
Energy
Management
Representative
Task 4
Create Organizational Awareness
- Communicate energy policy to all key stakeholders within the organization
- Review/Modify current SOPs to support the implementation of the energy policy
- Refine final draft and route for approval through TAC process
Energy Team
Task 5 Define, approve and communicate BPA's Energy Policy for internal operations NW
M2 M3 M1
ACTION ITEMQ1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M2 M3M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1I. Define Energy Policy
Staff ResponsibleM1
STRATEGIC COMPONENTEstablish and formalize your energy policy to include a mission statement with guiding principles and goals
pertaining to energy management . The mission statement will contain an essential theme that will help build
momentum for the overall energy program.
1
2
3
4
5
Task 1
Formulate a Strategic Energy Management Action Plan
- Identify internal & external legal/compliance requirements
- Establish energy consumption baseline
- Determine energy performance indicators (EnPIs)
- Determine significant energy users (SEUs)
- Benchmark portfolio Energy Use Intensity (EUI)
- Define an document energy objective & targets (XATs)
Energy Team
Task 2
Document Operational Plans for goal-subject facilities
- Identify energy opportunities
- energy assessments
- O&M improvements
- capital projects
- behavioral activities
- Prioritize opportunities based on determined criteria
- capital requirement/ financial investment criteria
- ease of implementation/ impact on employee bandwidth and available resources
- correlation with other organization objectives/ non-financial benefits
- Forecast expected cost savings & energy efficiency gains
- compare facility specific targets to the overall organizational goal
- investigate available utility rebates & internal support programs
Energy Team
Task 3
Formalize an internal Metering Plan & Implementation Strategy
- establish scope and boundaries of metering plan (SEUs)
- define metering equipment standards and requirements
- determine systems for metering data collection, communication & storage
- align metering approach with ongoing project activities/major construction
- elaborate strategy for streamlined data capture from metered sites
- allocate resources/budget for ongoing metering efforts
Energy Team
Task 4
Obtain management approval
- review energy management plans with executive leadership
- demonstrate the contribution toward energy policy goals
- adjust as needed based on management feedback
Energy
Management
Representative
Task 5
Execute Plans
- Monitor and report on progress against the plan, objectives and long-term goal over
timeNW
ACTION ITEMStaff Responsible
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M1 M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1 M2
STRATEGIC COMPONENTDevelop a SEMP and annual operational plans for projects and activities that includes behavior, operations,
maintenance and equipment energy efficiency. Establish and use a baseline for energy consumption and
system efficiency as the basis point for developing, planning, and implementing projects and activities, and
linking them to the established targets and long-term goals.
M3 M1 M2 M3II. Adopt Strategic Energy Management Planning
4
1
2
3
5
Page 47 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Task 1
Appoint an Energy Manager
- chair the energy management committee
- draft energy policy
- establish a SEMP and annual operating plans
- develop BPA's internal metering plan
- coordinate the identification & implementation of projects and activities
Energy
Management
Representative
Task 2
Create a cross functional energy management committee
- including site coordinators responsible for carrying out projects and activities
- ensure participation from the key functional areas across the organization
- identify staff training needs associated with the implementation of EnMS
- schedule and deliver tailored training courses to site energy coordinators as needed
Energy Manager
Task 3
Determine significant energy users
- establish criteria for significance
- develop tools and techniques for applying criteria
- identify key sites for meeting energy use efficiency targets
- prepare list of your energy systems
- record significant energy uses and the methods used
Energy Team
Task 4
Acquire, analyze and track energy data
- Identify data needs
- determine availability of data
- investigate tools for analyzing and tracking data
- choose and implement an energy data management tool
Energy Team
Task 5 Implement, maintain and continually improve the EnMS Energy Team
ENABLING COMPONENTIdentify an Energy Champion, create an energy management committee and assign site area coordinators to
work with the energy champion and employees/occupants to support planning, communication and
implementation of energy efficiency projects and activities.
ACTION ITEMStaff Responsible
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M1 M2 M2 M3I. Identify an Energy Manager
M3 M1 M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1
1
2
3
4
5
Task 1
Increase strategic framework for internal energy efficiency messaging
- evaluate past energy awareness activities and effectiveness
- improve coordination with sustainability messaging/existing team meetings
- utilize multiple delivery channels
- understand target audience and tailor messaging accordingly
- improve purpose and intent of messaging
Energy Team
Task 2
Determine optimal avenues for communicating the energy policy & objectives
- newsletter articles/SharePoint
- BPAX intranet communication/sustainability report
- visible signage/electronic suggestion boxes
- related training activities/webcasts
Energy Team
Task 3
Communicate across the organization
- consider appropriate ways for soliciting energy efficiency ideas from employees
- implement most effective energy efficiency ideas
- plan publicity campaign to raise awareness for staff in all departments
- report back to contributors on ideas implemented and results
- consider recognition rewards for contributed ideas with measurable improvements
Energy Team
Task 4
Ensure competence and awareness of personnel
- define competencies and assess personnel awareness
- develop and implement plan to address training needs
- provide incentives for energy efficiency actions initiated by staff
Energy Team
Task 5Regularly schedule and deliver energy awareness communication activities
- evaluate effectiveness of awareness campaign and adjust as necessary Energy Team
ENABLING COMPONENTProvide basic awareness of energy use and efficiency opportunities, and encourage employee and occupant
participation. Motivate and empower employees and building occupants to impact energy use.
M2 M3 M1 M2 M3II. Develop an Internal Energy Efficiency Training and Awareness Program
M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1
ACTION ITEMStaff Responsible
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M1
4
1
2
3
5
Page 48 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Task 1
Assess internal system capabilities
- assemble team of SMEs on Intron MV90 revenue metering system
- map current data flow for energy at BPA facilities
- establish requirements for capturing existing & future metered data
- identify resource requirements & constraints of MV90 system
Energy Team
Task 2
Research vendor managed Energy Management Systems
- research available vendor systems based on requirements
- benchmark with organizations that have adopted similar systems
- evaluate cyber-security concerns/requirements
- establish Total Cost of Ownership (TOC)
Energy Team
Task 3
Evaluate options and choose platform for monitoring and tracking energy use at BPA
- the following aspects should be considered:
- business & functional requirements
- integration with other data systems
- ability for customization
- ease of implementation & training requirements
- cost of implementation and maintenance
Energy
Management
Representative
Task 4
Deploy an Energy Management Information System
- expand MV90 capability to include BPA metered facilities by gaining access to
interval data in real time
- gain approval and connect existing meters to MV90 platform
- monitor and track metered sites data through BPA MV90 platform; or
- issue RFP for vendor managed and maintained EIS
- review terms & conditions for software purchase/license
- allocate budget/resources for deployment
Energy Team
Task 5Monitor, track and verify energy performance for metered sites and continually
integrate targeted SEUs which have new meters installedEnergy Team
FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTInvest in a platform that can improve operational effectiveness, financial and environmental performance by
monitoring and measuring through equipment and platforms ranging from utility meters up to intelligent
energy data management systems.
ACTION ITEMStaff Responsible
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M1 M2 M2 M3I. Invest in an Energy Management Information System
M3 M1 M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1
1
2
3
4
5
Task 1
Data Normalization
- Energy data is normalized for operating parameters, weather, and/or all other
elements appropriate to BPA operations
Metering
- Site level meters have the capability to capture energy data on an interval basis that
allows for intra-day readings
- Metered energy data is stored in a centralized location for easy analysis and review
as needed
Site level consumption
- Site-level consumption has been base-lined and opportunities for savings within
each major system is well understood
Variance analysis
- Energy use information, appropriately summarized and in a format that is
meaningful to employees in general, is broadly disseminated and used for raising
energy consumption awareness
- Energy intensity reports that examine large variances from established energy
reduction targets and previous periods are delivered at least monthly to technical
staff and operating area managers
Cost Analysis
- Energy cost and consumption data from utility bills is stored in a centralized location
for easy analysis and review as needed
Energy Team
FUNCTIONAL COMPONENTEstablish metrics for measuring energy usage normalized for operating conditions that staff cannot control
and track energy performance. Targets are generated and variances from expected performance are tracked
and tagged for follow-up and appropriate information is provided to senior management to show that energy
efficiency investments are worthwhile.
M2 M3 M1 M2 M3II. Establish an Integrated Energy Information Analysis/Reporting Framework
M2 M3 M1 M2 M3 M1
ACTION ITEMStaff Responsible
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
M1
5
Page 49 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
CONCLUSION
The advancement of energy management at BPA facilities per the recommendations in
this paper is directly connected to the agency’s strategic direction as it pertains to
energy efficiency, operational excellence and the reduction of its carbon footprint in the
region. Energy management systems offer insight into asset health and system
reliability, mitigates exposure to unexpected regulation, and reduces operational costs.
Defining an energy policy, designating an energy manager and investing in a data
management system are undeniable components of an effective EnMS. Our
benchmarking and gap analysis studies confirmed those statements as did literature
review and previous assessments conducted by the ETO.
Qualitative and quantitative analysis in this study serve not as a final or definite answer,
but as a starting point for further discussion and decision making based on the agency’s
priorities and allocated resources to internal energy management.
The notion that maturing energy management internally is a gradual process was
confirmed in our studies. We are confident that BPA will benefit from improved energy
performance and governance by implementing an EnMS.
The size of net energy efficiency gains that BPA may realize will greatly vary according
to metering footprint, human and capital investment, and the project timeline.
Considering BPA’s size and complexity, significant dedication to change management
will be required to build organizational commitment and promote awareness throughout
all levels of the organization.
As a leader in energy-efficiency programs within the Pacific Northwest, BPA has a clear
opportunity to ‘walk the talk’ as it matures the way it internally manages energy.
Page 50 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
WORKS CITED
American National Standard. (2013). ANSI/MSE 50021-2013 - Superior Energy performance - Additional requirements for Energy Management Systems. ANSI.
Bonneville Power Administration. (2013). Agency Decision framework. Portland: BPA.
BSI Standards Publication. (2009). BS EN 16001:2009 Energy Management Systems - requirements with Guidance for USe. BSI.
DEKRA. (2013). Energy Management Systems - ISO 50001 and Superior Energy Performance. DEKRA.
Deloitte. (2013). The Power Shift: Businesses take a New Look at Energy Strategy. Deloitte Development LLC.
Energetics Incorporated. (2012). Superior Performance Certificatin Protocol. Energetics Incorporated.
Energy Trust of Oregon. (2012). 2012/2013 Proposed Action Plan. Portland: Strategic Energy Group.
Energy Trust of Oregon. (2012). Energy Management Assessment. Portland: Strategic Energy Group.
Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Clean Energy. Retrieved 08 15, 2013, from http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/refs.html
George Tech Research Corporation. (2012). Industrial Facility Best Practice Scorecard - Superior Energy Performance. George Tech Research Corporation.
Georgia Tech Research Corporation. (2011). ISO 50001 Correspondence table for the eGuide. Georgia Tech Research Corporation & US DOE.
International Standards Organization (ISO). (2011). ISO 50001 2011 Survey Database. ISO.
International Standards Organization (ISO). (2011). Win the Energy Challenge with ISO 50001. ISO.
International Standards Organization. (2011). Energy Management Systems - Requirements with Guidance for use. ISO.
International Standards Organization. (2011). ISO 50001 2011 Survey Database. ISO.
Navigant Energy. (2012). TVA Benchmarking Participant Report. Navigant.
New Buildings Institute. (2013). EVIDENCE-BASED DESIGN AND OPERATIONS PIER PROGRAM: Improving the Real World Performance of Commercial Buildings. New building Institute.
PECI. (2013). Commercial Project Anlaysis Using EIS. PECI.
Page 51 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Russell, C. (2013). Onsite Energy Manager Pilot Program: A survey of Practices and Lessons Learned. Washington DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.
St. Mary's Cement. (2012). EnMS Business Case at St. Mary's Cement canada. St.Mary's Cement.
Strategic Energy Group. (2012). Strategic Energy Management Template.
Superior Energy Performance. (2012). A Roadmap for Achieving Continual Improvements in Energy Performance. ANSI.
Sustainable Real Estate Roundtable. (2011). ISO 50001: 2011 Energy Management Systems. New York: Sustainable Real Estate Roundtable.
Tenessee Valley Authority. (2013). Tririga Real Estate Environmental Sustainability (TREES) at TVA & The Stet Department. TVA.
US Department of Energy - Advanced Manufacturing office. (2012). ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard and Superior Energy Performance. Energy Federal Contractors Group (EFCOG).
US Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. (2006). Guidance for Electrical Metering in Federal Buildings. Washington, DC: Federal Energy Management program.
US Department of Energy. (2013, 04 12). Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Retrieved 05 31, 2013, from ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/energymanagement/
US Department of Energy. (2013, 04 12). Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy: DOE eGuide for ISO 50001. Retrieved 05 31, 2013, from ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/energymanagement/
US DOE Advanced Manufacturing office. (2012). ISO 50001 Energy Management Standard and Superior Energy Performance. Energy Federal Contractors Group (EFCOG).
Page 52 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX A: INTERNATIONAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT STANDARDS
ISO 50001
The request to ISO to develop an international energy management standard came
from the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) which had
recognized industry’s need to mount an effective response to climate change. Experts
from 44 ISO member countries were able to draw from numerous national energy
management standards, specifications and regulations to develop the framework which
was initially published in 2009.
Its purpose is to enable organizations of all sizes to integrate energy aspects into every-
day management practice based on a model of continual improvement. The ultimate
goal is to improve energy performance by establishing systems and processes that help
reduce energy cost, GHG emissions and environmental impact.
The standard can be tailored to organizational requirements depending on the
complexity and successful implementation depends primarily on commitment from all
levels of the organization specifically top management.
ANSI/MSE 50021-2013
Developed with the assistance of 29 organizations which ranged from governmental to
private companies such as EPA and Ford Motor Company, the ANSI Standard requires
ISO 50001 implementation with additional requirements to meet Superior Energy
Performance (SEP) standard certification. While applicable to organizations of all sizes,
SEP has thus far only developed specific program requirements for the industrial sector.
While ISO 50001 focuses on energy policy and the implementation of components
related to energy aspects, SEP’s goal is for organizations to demonstrate the achieved
continual improvement in energy performance during the elected performance
improvement period. SEP has a three-year requirement for the implementation of
improvements after a one year baseline period and uses a scorecard to evaluate level
of compliance (Silver, Gold, or Platinum - respectively, a 5 percent, 10 percent, or 15
percent improvement over baseline at the time of review).
EN16001:2009
This standard helps organizations in 30 European countries establish the systems and
processes necessary to improve energy efficiency. Its components are practically the
same as ISO 50001 and do not establish absolute requirements for energy performance
Page 53 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
beyond the commitments in the energy policy of the organization and its obligation to
comply with relevant legislation. Therefore, the success of the system depends on
commitment from all levels and functions of the organization, especially top
management.
Also based on a PDCA methodology, EN16001 describes the requirements for an
organization’s to complete certification or self-declaration of their energy management
system. It can be used independently or integrated with any other management systems
such as ISO 14001.
Page 54 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH PLAN AND METHODOLOGY
PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS
(This paragraph should be drastically reduced if not removed) The PSU team will
conduct primary and secondary research in order to develop an understanding of how
BPA consumes power at its facilities.
Create a recommendation on how BPA should plan and manage its facilities’
energy consumption. The range of the alternatives to answer this question goes
from doing nothing to building an ISO certified system.
Create a comprehensive gap analysis to aid executive-level decision process to
address changes to agency policy on energy management.
A high level implementation strategy and timeline
The team will use existing data at BPA to gain an overview of BPA’s facility landscape
and augment that data with interviews/surveys and do the same for other agencies.
The team will take the results of this research and deliver the following by 9/13/2013:
Input for ADF decision framework
Energy Management System gap analysis based on ISO 50001
Alternative scenarios of three varying degrees of implementation of Energy
Management Systems ISO 50001
EnMS implementation recommendations
A cost/benefit and LOE estimate
Final written report and presentation
RESEARCH DESIGN STRUCTURE
This research design includes key analytic questions, lynchpin assumptions and leading
hypotheses. The research design will also explain research methods. (This should lead
into three or four paragraphs. I will address each questions, assumptions and
hypotheses with a paragraph)
KEY ANALYTIC QUESTIONS
Definition:
Key analytic questions transform client goals into relevant research questions
Page 55 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Question 1.1: What is the current-state of BPA’s energy management efforts at
its facilities?
Sub-questions:
To what extent does BPA use international standards to manage its energy at its
facilities?
How has BPA managed energy at its facilities in the past?
How does BPA currently measure its energy use?
What organizations are responsible for energy management?
How many facilities does BPA currently manage?
Of the facilities that BPA manages, how many of have energy management
goals?
How much do BPA’s current energy management practices cost?
How much energy does BPA’s current energy management practices save?
Question 1.2: What are the relevant international standards for energy
management?
Sub-questions:
What are the relevant energy management frameworks or standards that are
relevant to BPA?
How do these standards relate to ISO 14001, and international standard that
BPA has received an audit on?
What specific parts of those standards could literally be applied to BPA?
Which parts of those international standards should probably be applied to BPA
given BPA’s strategic goals?
Question 1.3: How well is the rest of the international power industry managing
power at its facilities?
Sub-questions:
What firms represent BPA’s international counterparts?
At those firms, which organizations are responsible for managing energy at their
agency’s facilities?
How do those firms currently measure their energy use?
Do those firms use international standards for energy management?
How many facilities do those firms currently manage?
Page 56 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Of the facilities that those firms manage, how many of have energy management
goals?
How much did it cost to institute an energy management system?
How much do those firms pay for their current energy management systems on
an on-going basis?
How much energy do those firms save from their energy management efforts?
Question 1.4: What are the relevant BPA strategies, objectives, and goals that
indicate to what degree BPA should adopt an energy management
system?
Sub-questions:
What are BPA’s key strategic objectives and goals and do any of them relate to
energy management at BPA’s facilities?
Question 1.5: What are the current plans for energy management in the future?
Sub-questions:
What plans does BPA currently have to manage its energy in the future?
Question 1.6: What are the likely outcomes if BPA adopts various degrees of an
energy management system?
Sub-questions:
What is the relationship between energy management system adoption and
energy savings?
How much will it cost BPA to implement various degrees of an energy
management system?
LYNCHPIN ASSUMPTIONS
Definition
Lynchpin assumptions are the assumptions used in analysis that are so important that if
they were removed, then the analysis would be invalid.
Assumption 2.1: ISO 50001 is a valid energy management framework.
Assumption description:
Page 57 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
ISO 50001 is one of the most known frameworks referenced in the industry for energy
management and is considered “the” standard. Are there other frameworks that can be
used/applied that are not an international standard?
Assumption 2.2: The cost of implementing an Energy Management System is
less costly than not implementing one
Assumption description:
Considering the amount of energy that could be put back into the grid by optimizing
energy consumption required for operation of transmission facilities, it seems that
implementing an active energy management system will cost less than not doing
anything at all. However, what do the financial projections look like and do they support
this assumption?
Assumption 2.3: BPA has reached a maturity level at which it is ready to
implement and active Energy Management System
Assumption description:
Had BPA not reached a point where it is seriously considering the implementation of an
EnMS through a standard like ISO 50001, it would not have set this as one of their main
policy targets for FY13 nor would it have engaged PSU MBA team to pursue further
research, analysis and recommendations. However, depending on the recommendation
is BPA ready to allocate resources and budget to obtain the benefit of having an
operating EnMS?
SUGGESTED POSSIBLE HYPOTHESES
Definition
The following hypotheses are the starting positions that team members will attempt to disprove (or prove).
Hypothesis 3.1: BPA will receive the most financial benefit if it fully adopts ISO
50001 and it is capable of doing so.
Assumption description:
Investment is implementing ISO 50001 is less than the benefits incurred
Page 58 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Hypothesis 3.2: BPA would receive the most financial benefit if it adopts a
hybrid energy management system comprised of internally created
standards and ISO 50001 standards, and it is capable of doing so.
Assumption description:
Investment is implementing a hybrid EnMS is less than the benefits incurred
Hypothesis 3.3: BPA would receive the most financial benefit by adopting a
hybrid energy management system comprised of internally created
standards as opposed to fully implementing ISO 50001
Assumption description:
Investment is implementing a hybrid EnMS is less than implementing ISO 50001
Hypothesis 3.4: BPA would receive the most financial benefits if it maintains its
current energy management system level of effort, and it is capable of
doing so.
Assumption description:
Investment is implementing an EnMS is greater than the benefit incurred
RESEARCH METHODS
Definition
The following section describes our likely research methods and which ones should be
applied in which cases
Method 4.1: Secondary and exploratory
Method 4.2: Focus groups
Method 4.3: Interviews
Method 4.4: Surveys
Page 59 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
RESEARCH MATRIX
PRIMARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
To what extent does BPA use international standards to manage its energy at its facilities?
How has BPA managed energy at its facilities in the past?
How does BPA currently measure its energy use?
What internal organizations are responsible for energy management?
What are BPA’s key strategic objectives and goals and do any of them relate to energy management at BPA’s facilities?
What plans does BPA currently have to manage its energy in the future?
PRIMARY QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
How many facilities does BPA currently manage?
Of the facilities that BPA manages, how many of have energy management goals?
How much do BPA’s current energy management practices cost?
How much energy does BPA’s current energy management practices save?
SECONDARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
What firms represent BPA’s counterparts?
At those firms, which organizations are responsible for managing energy at their agency’s facilities?
How do those firms currently measure their energy use?
Do those firms use international standards for energy management?
What are the relevant energy management frameworks or standards that are relevant to BPA?
How do these standards relate to ISO 14001, and international standard that BPA has received an audit on?
What specific parts of those standards could literally be applied to BPA?
Which parts of those international standards should probably be applied to BPA given BPA’s strategic goals?
SECONDARY QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
What is the (financial) relationship between energy management system adoption and energy savings?
How much will it cost BPA to implement various degrees of an energy management system?
How many facilities do those firms currently manage?
Of the facilities that those firms manage, how many of have energy management goals?
How much did it cost to institute an energy management system?
How much do those firms pay for their current energy ?
How much energy do those firms save from their energy management efforts?
Research Guide
Page 60 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX C: ISO 50001 CYCLE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Page 61 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX D: ISO 50001 DATABASE SURVEY RESULTS FOR 2011
Top 10 countries for ISO 50001 certificates - 2011
1 Spain 95 6 Denmark 26
2 Romania 65 7 India 25
3 Sweden 62 8 Korea, Republic of 19
4 Germany 42 9 Taipei, Chinese 11
5 Italy 30 9 United Kingdom 11
Page 62 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX E: ST. MARY’S CEMENT INTERNAL ENMS STRUCTURE
Our team was able to directly contact St. Mary’s Cement and inquire about their
becoming the first ISO 50001 certification in North America.
The majority of the findings from St. Mary’s support the notion that the implementation
of an EnMS is a gradual process that evolves and is optimized over time. As processes
are formalized and systems put in place, energy is managed pro-actively, financial
savings are accumulated and reinvested in additional energy management, thus
promoting a cycle of continuous improvement.
Early in 2006, a team of employees at the Bowmanville Plant in Ontario, Canada formed
E=MC², an Energy Management Conservation Committee. This cross-functional team
was tasked with creating ways to reduce the operation’s energy consumption. As a
leading manufacturer of cement and related construction products in North America,
energy represented 30 percent of the cost of operating the business.
The conservation committee includes representation from all departments which affect
the business such as Production, Procurement, Mining, Maintenance, Finance and
others. This ensures that strategic suggestions, directions and activities provided by the
committee lead to improved energy performance tracked through a performance
scorecard system.
St. Mary’s internal energy management program focuses on Process, Programs and
Projects in 5 key areas:
Energy Data Management
Energy Supply Management
Energy Use in Facilities
Equipment Efficiency
Page 63 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Organizational Integration
With support from top management, the St. Mary’ s team created a Sustainable Energy
Plan to capture tracking and measurement efforts, identify opportunities, guide the
company’s energy efficiency priorities and investments and communicate the status of
energy management activities to key stakeholders.
The team reduced electrical consumption by 9.4 million kWh and $2 million in direct
energy costs have been avoided since 2006. This represents approximately an 8 to 10
percent reduction in energy operating costs per year. The targeted activities included
process optimization, improved thermal efficiency, utilization of specialist system control
for process activities, retrofitting light fixtures, installing occupancy sensors in the office
space, adding monitoring and control software and load shifting, rescheduling operation
to off-peak hours.
Their program has also secured funding from external sources such as the Sustainable
Technology Development Canada (STDC) to invest in equipment improvement and
tapped into financial incentives available through the Electricity Retrofit Incentive
Program (ERIP).
Employee awareness and training is also a key component of the program for the
behavioral change required when maturing energy management. Energy use is
communicated in real-time to employees in the plant through energy data displays,
newsletters highlighting conservation issues and awards are published, training
opportunities are promoted and a rewards and recognition program is in place. (St.
Mary's Cement, 2012)
The consolidation of frameworks is also an important aspect of the evolution that led St.
Mary’s Cement to become the first ISO 50001 certified organization in North America.
With previous adoption and certification of ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001
frameworks, the organization already understood the benefits of putting in place formal
processes which would further help them improve energy performance.
St. Mary’s example shows that the type of organization and its level of commitment will
greatly weigh on the decision to pursue ISO 50001. As an industrial firm, the ISO 50001
certification yielded positive results for St. Mary’s Cement considering energy
represented approximately 30 percent of their operating cost.
Page 64 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX F: DELOITTE DBRIEFS ENERGY & RESOURCES SERIES
Deloitte and the Harrison Group on March 2013 completed a survey of more than 600
business decision makers responsible for energy management within their companies
across the US in the last 3 years.
Page 65 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Those companies surveyed that set the most aggressive energy reduction targets were
primarily motivated by competitive advantage derived from potential financial savings,
although this motivation may be getting weaker. Since the recent economic recession,
the focus on cost cutting has led companies to achieve energy savings in most of the
‘low hanging fruit’ projects. As companies are deciding to tackle larger projects,
electricity costs have stabilized with the availability of natural gas. Fears of electricity
rate increases have continued to ease despite volatile prices, according to the study.
Energy management is seen more as a means to meet increasing regulatory
requirements rather than a motivation based on a sense corporate social responsibility
and reduced environmental impact. Nationally, attitudes and behaviors toward carbon
cost as a measure of performance have shifted as the national debate on carbon Cap
and Trade have also cooled down.
Most companies are reporting a marginal degree of success and, goals are getting
more difficult to achieve as the easy things have been done. The study looked at the
hurdles inherent in energy management and concluded that bureaucracy and the length
of time required for investments to pay off were the greatest challenges.
Roughly 33percent of the companies surveyed have on-site energy generation and 15
percent plan to do so through renewable supply systems or on-site cogeneration. The
majority of the companies (69 percent) currently do not participate in renewable energy
purchase programs offered by their electricity suppliers because of high cost.
A total of 40 percent of the companies surveyed allocated a pool of funds for energy
efficiency programs and which averaged 12 percent of the total capital budget for
companies with $500MM+ in revenues. Pay-off period requirement for investments in
energy efficiency solutions average 4 years and are required by 6 out 10 of the
companies surveyed. About 50 percent of them have a specific Internal Rate of Return
(IRR) of 21 percent on average for energy efficiency projects.
Page 66 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX G: TVA SUSTAINABILITY BENCHMARKING REPORT
The TVA produced a benchmarking report that focused on staffing and expenses for
sustainability functions, which meet specific sustainability goals. Ten organizations
participated, 8 of which are utility companies including BPA.
The benchmark results for sustainability were normalized for 5 factors including
revenue, employees, customers, net power generated and sustainability projects and
used quartile calculations.
Sustainability FTE per $ Billion Revenue
For FTE, the benchmark median is 0.58 FTE per $ billion revenue and ranged from 0.39
(1st quartile) to 1.37 (3rd quartile). BPA placed slightly above the first quartile.
Sustainability FTE per Thousand Company FTE
Page 67 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
For FTE, the benchmark median is 0.35 FTE per thousand company and ranged from
0.21 (1st quartile) to 0.46 (3rd quartile). BPA placed between the first quartile and the
median benchmark.
Sustainability FTE per TWh Net Power Generated (1TWh=1,000,000 MWh)
For FTE, the benchmark median is 0.059 FTE per TWh net power generated and
ranged from 0.028 (1st quartile) to 0.096 (3rd quartile). BPA placed below the first
quartile.
Sustainability FTE per Sustainability Project
For FTE, the benchmark median is 0.22 FTE per sustainability project and ranged from
0.17 (1st quartile) to 0.43 (3rd quartile). BPA placed well below the first quartile. Since
the definition of what constitutes a project is subjective, this is a less objective
benchmark.
The broad range between industry peers evidences the diversity of work being
performed which covers reduction of energy, water, waste, GHG emissions and others
as well as a small sample size. (Navigant Energy, 2012)
Nevertheless, based on TVA’s 2012 benchmarking report on sustainability, it is also
evident that BPA consistently is below the benchmark median and the 1st quartile.
TVA INTERNAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (IEMP)
The TVA represents perhaps one of the most comparable agencies for BPA to
benchmark against for the size of its portfolio and the mission that it is bound to. The
TVA is a government owned corporation founded in 1933 and is the largest public
power provider serving 9 million people in the southeastern area of the US.
The TVA building territory extends over 47 dams, 20 fossil plants and 3 nuclear plants.
A total of 1,391 buildings are subject to the EO 13423 3%/year energy reduction goals.
This represents roughly 55 percent of the total number of buildings and approximately
33 percent of the total square footage recorded in 2012. The remaining 1,138 buildings
are used to generate, transmit and control electricity and are classified as “excluded”
under EPAct05 and the EO.
In order to manage the portfolio, the TVA has adopted a facility and real estate
management database software called Tririga TREES.
The TREES system is operated on TVA internal servers reducing cyber security risk.
Many data streams interface with the TREES system, including: Smart meter data,
Page 68 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
utility invoice wizard, CAD integrator, custom GUI for manual utility data entry, Energy
Star Portfolio Manager automated benchmarking system, annual FEMP energy
management reports, site survey, GIS data and FRPP reports. (Appendix H)
Proportionately, the TVA holds a very similar situation to BPA: roughly 25 percent of
their goal subject buildings are metered and billed for electricity consumption on a
monthly basis. The remaining buildings energy use is calculated from past energy
surveys and adjusted to account for energy efficiency improvements. The TVA has an
FTE assigned to validate utility data, but uses a GUI that automatically feeds the data
through TREES for reporting. The FTE spends approximately 20 hours a week to enter
1500 utility bills (energy/water/sewer) into the system.
Electricity represents 80 percent of utility costs at the TVA and it has chosen to
segregate its SEUs by energy cost, not necessarily square footage. Thresholds are set
for annual consumption between $20,000 and $30,000 worth of electricity. The installed
meters cost between $5,000 and $10,000 depending on the infra-structure and building
design. Different from DOE Guidance for Electric Metering in Federal Buildings, TVA
has found the cost of meter maintenance much higher than $25.00 considering the
significant investment in TREES.
Upgrading their system to a newer version in order to benefit from the dynamic reporting
capabilities is one of its main priorities at the moment for TVA.
Page 69 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX H: TVA (TREES) INTERFACE
Page 70 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX I: US DEPARTMENT OF STATE UTILITY DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT
Page 71 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
The US State Department’s Bureau of Overseas Building Operations is landlord to 70
million gsf across 200+ locations across the world and manages the utilities for 19,221
buildings which cover embassies, consulates, diplomatic housing, warehouses and
related properties.
Based on the data elements necessary for the Federal Real Property Portfolio (FRPP)
which requires reporting for buildings larger than 5,000 gsf, a total of 10 percent of the
portfolio or roughly 2000+ buildings are actively managed.
With a large and diverse portfolio, a complex web of databases, lack of building meters
and inconsistent data input quality, the bureau decided to invest in energy management
information system. After commissioning an independent study of 10 environmental
sustainability software providers the bureau adopted the TREES system.
The Bureau for many years used a ‘home grown’ system to manage its portfolio of
buildings. The need for an industry-leading system that could do more than just collect
data quickly became evident. The use of ‘intelligent systems’ that can interconnect
property management databases, track compliance, generate interactive internal
dashboards and customizable external reports offered the means for the organization to
mature its program and increase its ‘reach’ within its vast inventory of building scattered
across the globe.
The ability to customize the TREES system has given the Bureau of Overseas Building
Operations (OBO) the possibility to roll out its Building Management Information System
(BMIS) as a distributed model with a front-end interface that can eliminate the duplicate
entries. Technical barriers are gradually being broken down by linking financial and
metering systems to the utility management system as future iterations of the software
are deployed. TREES is the first application of OBO headquarters’ BMIS system
distributed to overseas Post users. The custom front-end interface has allowed users to
enter data in a consistent manner all over the world. As they move around the postings,
they have a familiar set of tools to help them manage their local portfolios.
The ability to filter the portfolio by building type, climate zone, gsf, consumption, cost or
FTE provides the Bureau with more relevant reports to analyze consumption and make
strategic decisions about its portfolio. The system does have built-in the ability to collect
real-time weather observations (HDD & CDD) and provide comparisons against the
metrics, but the real-time data feed is currently not available for our use.
Energy performance improvement in the range of 10 to 15 percent was demonstrated
from localized studies of behavioral change at a single post where the manager
provided monthly feedback on cost and consumption to the housing pool residents.
Future plans to incorporate this “Residential Portfolio Manager” tool into the TREES
system are underway.
Page 72 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
By empowering several levels of its users through a decentralized model, a large
amount of man-hours previously required for data gathering and reporting has shifted to
a focus on performance. Increased awareness and compliance tracking are now offered
by the system. The next frontier lies in leveraging opportunity identification and project
tracking.
Page 73 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX J: TECHNICAL TEAM AND STAKEHOLDER MATRIX
BPA TECHNICAL TEAM
Name Org Role
Brad Wright NWM Program Manager Civil Engineering
Caitlin Hirneisen NWP Program Analyst Sustainability
Dan Krauss NWF Facilities Operations BPA HQ
Guy Kyle NWP Operations & Planning Manager
Jason Gamby KSM Public Utilities Specialist Metering
Jeff Lane SE Operational Excellence Consultant
Jennifer Riehl CONTR Resource Efficiency Manager
Jennifer Williamson PEJD Engineering Services
Matt Tidwell PEH Policy Development Specialist
Mira Vowles PEJD General Engineer
Rick Hodges PEJC Public Utilities Specialist
Ryan Fedie PEJD Supervisory Mechanical Engineer
Sonya Baskerville DKN Manager, National Relations Office
Stephan Capps NW Director of Facilities
Stephen Sander KEP Physical Scientist Environmental
Terry Oliver ST Chief Technology Innovation Officer
Thane Miller CONTR Facilities Engineering
Todd Amundson PEJD Mechanical Engineer
Tony Koch PEJD Mechanical Engineer
Page 74 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS MATRIX
Organization/ Functional area
>>>
Exec
Off
ice (
A)
Ris
k (
DB
)
Go
vern
an
ce (
DG
)
Pu
blic A
ffair
s (
DK
)
Inte
rnal A
ud
it (
DN
)
Fin
an
ce (
F)
F&
W (
KE
)
En
vir
o. P
lan
& A
nal (K
EC
)
Po
ll. P
rev.
& A
bate
me
nt
(KE
P)
Fis
h &
Wil
dlife
Pro
g (
KE
W)
Cu
st
Su
pp
(K
S)
Gen
era
lCo
un
sel
(LC
)
Sa
fety
(N
F)
HC
M (
NH
)
IT (
NJ
)
Secu
rity
(N
N)
Su
pp
ly C
hain
(N
S)
Inte
rnal B
us
. S
erv
ice
s (
N)
Po
wer
(P)
Co
rp S
tra
teg
y (
S)
Tra
ns
mis
sio
n (
T)
TE
(E
ng
.Tec
hn
ical svcs)
TF
(T
ran
sm
. F
ield
svcs
)
TG
(T
ran
sm
. In
tern
al O
ps)
TO
(S
yste
m o
pe
rati
on
s)
TP
(P
lan
nin
g &
Aset
Mg
t)
TS
(T
ran
sm
. M
kt
& S
ale
s)
EnMS component
not applicable
sc
op
e
de
fin
itio
n
4.1 General Requirements
4.3 Energy Policy
Pla
n
4.4.2 Legal, requirements
4.4.3 Energy Review
4.4.4 Energy Baseline
4.4.5 Energy Performance Indicators
4.4.6 Objectives, Targets
Do
4.2 Management Responsibility
4.5.2 Competence, Training
4.5.3 Communication
4.5.4 Documentation
4.5.4.2 Control of Documents
4.5.5 Operational Control
4.5.6 Design
4.5.7 Procurement of Energy Services
Ch
ec
k
4.6.1 Monitoring, Measurement
4.6.2 Evaluation of Compliance
4.5.3 Internal Audit
4.6.4 Nonconformity, Corr. Action
4.6.5 Control of Records
Ac
t 4.7 Management Review
Page 75 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APENDIX K: SEG ENERGY MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT
Page 76 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Page 77 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX L: ISO 50001 ENMS GAP ANALYSIS – PSU 2013
Question Category: Energy Policy
EnMS Element 1: Energy Policy (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.3)
Indicators of Conformity
Status
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Not in
place
Partially in place
In place
1.
Has top management defined the organization's energy policy? Is the policy consistent with other corporate policies affecting the business?
X
Existing energy policy in BPAM or
plans to add it BSC measures and Strategy Maps linked with Energy linked to Energy Policy
2.
Does your procedure (process) for the energy policy ensure that the policy is appropriate to the nature, scale and energy impacts of its activities, products, and services that are within the defined scope of your energy management system?
X
3.
Does your energy policy within the defined scope of your EnMS commit to energy efficiency and continual
X
Question Category: Energy Policy POINTS AVAILABLE
EnMS Element 1: Energy Policy (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.3) 16
Question Category: Planning
EnMS Element 2: Energy Review, baseline & performance indicators (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.3) 8
EnMS Element 3: Legal and Other Requirements (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.2) 14
EnMS Element 4: Energy objectives, energy targets and energy management action plans (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.6) 10
Question Category: Implementation and Operation
EnMS Element 5: Resources, roles, responsibility and authority (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.2.1 & 4.2.2) 8
EnMS Element 6: Competence, training and awareness (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.2) 12
EnMS Element 7: Communication (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.3) 8
EnMS Element 8: Documentation (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.4) 10
EnMS Element 9: Control of Documents (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.4.2) 18
EnMS Element 10: Operational Control (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.5) 6
EnMS Element 11: Design & Procurement of Energy Services, Product Equipment and Energy (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.6 & 4.5.7) 8
Question Category: Checking
EnMS Element 12: Monitoring, measurement & analysis (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.1) 6
EnMS Element 13: Evaluation of compliance (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.2) 2
EnMS Element 14: Nonconformity, corrections, corrective action and preventive action (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.4) 12
EnMS Element 15: Control of Records (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.5) 6
EnMS Element 16: Internal audit of the EnMS (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.3) 18
EnMS Element 17: Management review (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.7) 10
TOTAL 172
Question Category: Management Review
Not in place = 0 points Partially in place = 1 point In place = 2 points
The responses are totaled for the entire questionnaire resulting in your score. The highest score possible, 172, indicates all components of the 17 elements are ‘In place’ in your
EnMS (85 questions/components x 2 points for each component ‘In place’ = 170 points). This baseline assessment enables you to focus on continual improvement. In the
electronic version of the EnMS Gap Analysis Questionnaire provided with the EnMS Toolkit, the second tab titled "Summary Chart", contains a bar chart to give you a visual
depiction of the degree to which you conform to the ISO 50001 EnMS Standard. This chart can be used in management presentations to show the progress of your EnMS
implementation.
Hints
1) List of Required Documentation and Records: The ISO 50001 EnMS Standard requires physical (or electronic) evidence of certain documents and records. This includes, for
example, the organization's energy policy. There is a list at the end of this gap analysis questionnaire that highlights which itEnMS require physical (or electronic) evidence in the
form of documentation or records. The list is organized by each of the 17 elements in the Standard. Elements of the ISO 50001 EnMS Standard that require documentation are
indicated in bold text in the gap analysis questionnaire for easy reference to the requirements of the Standard.
2) List of Reference Material: The second part of the list at the end of this gap analysis questionnaire is a list of reference materials you may already possess that could help
you identify your current EnMS status. This list is organized by each of the 17 elements of the Standard.
Page 78 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
improvement?
4.
Does your energy policy within the defined scope of your EnMS commit to complying with applicable energy legal requirements and other energy requirements?
X
5.
Does your procedure (process) for the energy policy provide a framework for setting and reviewing energy objectives and targets?
X
6.
Does your procedure ensure that the energy policy is documented, implemented, and maintained?
X
7.
Does your procedure (process) for the energy policy communicate the policy to all persons working for or on behalf of the organization?
X
8.
Does your procedure (process) for the energy policy make the policy available to the public?
X
Status subtotals:
0 0 0
Status Total: 0 16 points available
Percentage complete:
0
Question Category: Planning
EnMS Element 2: Energy Review, baseline & performance indicators (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.3)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
9. Does your procedure (process) for energy review address: Identifying energy aspects of activities, products, and services within the defined scope of the EnMS that it can control and those which it can influence taking into account planned or new developments, or new or modified activities, products and services? Is there a risk assessment process to determine significance or priority of identified energy aspects/impacts?
Energy Management checkpoint in the project review board Energy Management as topic of annual audit planning process
X X
10. Determining those aspects that have or can have significant impact on the environment?
Environmental criteria tied to Energy Aspects within business
X X
Respondents said partial but did not find evidence
Page 79 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
case/ADF in an actual project
11. Maintaining a documented up-to-date list of all aspects including those that are significant?
X
12. Ensuring that significant energy aspects are considered in developing, implementing and maintaining the EnMS?
Energy Management as an annual Balance Scorecard Measure
X X
Methodology section of Sustainability XAT defines scope, baseline and corrective action measures
Status subtotals: 0 0 0
Status Total: 1 8 points available
Percentage complete: 13
EnMS Element 3: Legal and Other Requirements (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.2)
Indicators of
Conformity
Status
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In plac
e
13. Does your procedure (process) for legal and other energy requirements address: – Identifying applicable legal requirements related to your organization's energy aspects?
EPAct 2007 (Metering in Federal Facilities) - In Balance Scorecard EO 13514 (Reducing Energy Intensity at Federal Facilities) – In Balance Scorecard Impacts Decision Frameworks for New Buildings/Construction of internal facilities
X
EPAct 2007 (Metering in Federal Facilities) EO 13514 (Reducing Energy Intensity at Federal Facilities)
– Accessing applicable legal requirements related to your organization's energy aspects?
X
– Determining how the legal requirements apply to your organization's aspects?
X
– Identifying other energy requirements to which your organization subscribes?
X
– Accessing other energy requirements to which your organization subscribes?
X
Page 80 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
– Determining how other energy requirements to which your organization subscribes apply to your organization's aspects?
X
14. Does your procedure ensure that legal and other energy requirements to which the organization subscribes are considered in developing, implementing and maintaining your organization's energy management system?
X
Status subtotals: 0 7 0
Status Total: 7 14 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 4: Energy objectives, energy targets and energy management action plans (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.4.6)
Indicators
of Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Does your procedure (process) for Objectives, Targets and Programs address:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
15. Establishing and maintaining documented energy objectives and targets at relevant functions and levels within the organization? Have specific energy improvement objectives been communicated to all relevant business units and employees, contractors and suppliers?
Sustainability XAT Cross Agency Targets (BSC) - distributed agency-wide
X
16. Establishing measurable objectives and targets, where practicable, that re consistent with the energy policy, including the commitments to energy efficiency, compliance with legal and other energy requirements and continual improvement? Determine whether the facility has prepared and implemented sufficient written policies and procedures to ensure compliance with applicable standards and consistency in implementation practices, and to provide guidance on how to meet applicable standards.
X X
REASON: No energy policy
17. The legal and other energy requirements, its significant energy aspects, its technology options and its financial, operational and business requirements and the views of interested parties when establishing and reviewing objectives and targets?
Energy management measures are part of the BSC which include all lead/support
X X
.
Page 81 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
→Confirm that the facility has established compliance standards to be followed
organizations
18. Does your procedure (process) address establishing and maintaining programs for achieving your organization's objectives and targets, including designating responsibility for achieving objectives and targets at relevant functions and levels of your organization? →Verify, where possible, that the facility has taken steps to achieve compliance with its energy standards. →Verify that the facility has a program in place to review the full range of capital projects, maintenance modifications, process changes, and R&D initiatives to identify potentially significant consequences.
2013 Accountability Matrix within the BSC to a person and Tier I, II, III Performance Contract Evaluation
X FY14 drive accountability to lower tiers of the organizations where implementation
19. Does your procedure (process) address establishing and maintaining programs for achieving your organization's objectives and targets, including the means and time-frame by which the objectives and targets are to be achieved? Verify that the facility has a program in place to review the full range of capital projects, maintenance modifications, process changes, and R&D initiatives to identify potentially significant consequences. Since Accountability is partial, means to meet objective is also partial
All BSC measures are time bound
X
Status subtotals: 0 4 2
Status Total: 6 10 points available
Percentage complete: 0
Question Category: Implementation and Operation
EnMS Element 5: Resources, roles, responsibility and authority (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.2.1 & 4.2.2)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Does your procedure (process) for resources, roles, responsibility and authority address:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
Page 82 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
20. Management ensuring the availability of resources (human resources & specialized skills, internal infrastructure, technology and financial resources) essential for the implementation and control of the energy management system? Verify if the roles and responsibilities cover: Legal/regulatory tracking; Updating/reviewing documentation control procedures; Training; Policy and procedure development; Contractor oversight; Follow-up to inspections/audits/periodic reviews; Updating the energy policy; Identifying energy aspects/impacts of on-site operations; and, Responding to external requests for information
X
21. Defining, documenting and communicating the roles, responsibilities and authorities to facilitate effective energy management? Verify that the roles are clearly defined, documented, and understood and that there are no redundancies or gaps in the
coverage.
Resource assignment
X
22. Top management appointing a specific management representative who, irrespective of other responsibilities, has defined responsibilities and authority for: – Ensuring that an energy management system is established, implemented, and maintained in accordance with the requirements of ISO 50001? Interview staff from various operating departments to confirm that energy roles and responsibilities are clearly understood within the facility.
Tier II management representative assigned
X
– Reporting on the performance of the energy management system to top management for review and as the basis for improvement?
Sustainability Executive Steering Committee oversight
X
Status subtotals: 0 1 6
Status Total: 7 8 points available
Percentage complete: 88
EnMS Element 6: Competence, training and awareness (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.2)
Indicator
Status
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Page 83 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Does your procedure (process) for competence, training and awareness address:
s of Conformi
ty
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
23. Identifying training needs to ensure that any person(s) performing tasks on the organization's behalf that have the potential to cause (a) significant energy impact(s) identified by the organization is/are competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, or experience? The importance of complying with established performance criteria and the potential consequences of departure from specified energy operating procedures; Adequate detail to motivate personnel to prevent, detect, and correct violations; and, The facility offers all staff an opportunity to attend internal energy training sessions.
Training Department conducting training regularly
X
FAM is conducting ongoing training (?)which one
24. Identifying training needs associated with the organization's energy aspects and its EnMS? Providing training or taking other actions to meet these needs? Identify a sample of facility personnel who perform tasks that can cause significant energy impact.
X
25. Making persons working for the organization or on its behalf aware of: – The importance of conformity with the energy policy and procedures and with the requirements of the energy management system?
→Verify that these staff members have received appropriate energy training relative to the job functions/tasks performed.
X
– The significant energy impacts, actual or potential, of their work and the energy benefits of improved personal performance? Confirm that the facility promotes energy awareness through periodic memoranda, use of bulletin boards, energy newsletters, award programs, etc.
X
Page 84 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
– Their roles and responsibilities in achieving conformity with the energy policy and procedures and with the requirements of the energy management system, including design & procurement of energy services, product equipment and energy requirements? Confirm whether staff with energy responsibilities have the relevant background, training, and capabilities to effectively carry out their responsibilities.
X
Supply Chain training
– The potential consequences of departure from specified operating procedures?
x
No Corrective Action in place
Status subtotals: 0 5 0
Status Total: 5 12 points available
Percentage complete: 42
EnMS Elément 7: Communication (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.3)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Does your procedure (process) for Communication address:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
26. Establishing and maintaining procedures for internal communication between the various levels and functions of your organization with regard to your organization's energy aspects and energy management system?
Organizational Communication address specifically Energy Management
X
BPAX, Sustainability of Operations through Public Affairs, Sustainability Report
27. Establishing and maintaining procedures for receiving, documenting, and responding to relevant communication from external interested parties with regard to your organization's energy aspects and energy management system?
X
28. The organization's decision on whether to communicate externally on its significant energy aspects and the documentation of that decision?
X
If the decision is to communicate externally on its significant energy aspects, does the organization have a method(s) for this external communication?
X
Status subtotals: 0 4 0
Status Total: 4 8 points available
Page 85 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 8: Documentation (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.4)
Indicator
s of Conformi
ty
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
29. Does your energy management system documentation include: – An energy policy, objectives and targets for your organization?
X
- A description of the scope
of the energy management system?
Identified SEUs and criteria for defining them
X Thane Miller’s TESF EnMS goal for FY14
– A description of the main
elements of the energy management system and their interaction and reference to related documents?
X
– Documents and records
required by the ISO 50001 Standard (at minimum those bolded in this gap analysis tool)?
X
Targets are documented, policy not
– Documents and records the organization determined necessary to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of processes that relate to its significant energy aspects?
X
Status subtotals: 0 5 0
Status Total: 5 10 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 9: Control of Documents (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.4.2)
Indicator
s of Conformi
ty
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
Page 86 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
30. Does your document control procedure(s) address the need to control documents required by the energy management system and by the International Standard? Evaluate whether: There are systems in place to ensure that all required reports are sent to regulators in a timely fashion; The documentation/records system clearly identifies the maintenance retention period and disposition of records; and, Employees have access to energy documents they need to conduct job activities.
Energy consumption for BPA facilities sent as report to DOE annually
X X
Resources have access to energy data and documents but process is labor intensive and gives room for inaccuracy Partial Document Control procedures exist but not in conformance with international standard
31. Does your document control procedure(s) address the need to: – Approve documents before they are issued?
X X
– Review and update them as necessary, and re-approve them before reissuing them?
X
X
– Ensure changes and the current revision status of documents is identified?
X
X
– Ensure current documents are available at points of use?
X
X
– Ensure documents are legible and easily identifiable?
X
X
– Ensure that external documentation you deem necessary for the planning and operation of the energy management system are identified and their distribution controlled?
X
X
– Ensure obsolete documentation is not unintentionally used?
X
X
– Identify obsolete documentation if it needs to be retained for any purpose?
X
X
Status subtotals: 0 9 0
Status Total: 9 18 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 10: Operational Control (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.5)
Indicator
Statu
s Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Page 87 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Does your procedure (process) for Operational Controls:
s of Conformi
ty
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
32. Identify those operations that are associated with the identified significant energy aspects consistent with your organization's energy policy, objectives and targets?
Energy management sustainability cross agency targets
X
Operational controls do not relate back to energy policy since it is inexistent and are limited to scope defined within methodology section for XAT targets
33. Establish and maintain documented procedures to control situations for those operations where absence of documented procedure(s) could lead to deviation from your energy policy, objectives and targets?
EUI benchmarking is done for metered/occupied sites in yearly targets
X Operational controls to avoid deviation from objectives and targets are established but not documented.
34. Plan these operations in order that they are carried out under specific conditions, stipulate operating criteria, establish, implement and maintain energy procedures related to goods and services used by the organization and communicate applicable requirements to suppliers and contractors?
FAM’s O&M guidelines
X
Documentation and dissemination of information is still an ongoing process and linkage to legal requirements could be strengthened
Status subtotals: 0 3 0
Status Total: 3 6 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 11: Design & Procurement of Energy Services, Product Equipment and Energy (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.5.6 & 4.5.7)
Indicators of
Conformity
Status
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Do you establish and maintain a procedure (process) for energy performance improvement that addresses how to:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
35. Identify the potential energy performance improvement opportunities and operational control in the design of new, modified and renovated facilities, equipment systems and processes? Confirm that the procedures have been updated, as appropriate, in response to new information or program reviews.
FAM’s SAP (Sustainability Action Plan)
X
36. Procure energy services, products and equipment that have, or can have, an impact on significant energy use of the organization?
X
37. Does your organization periodically review and, where necessary, revise the energy performance improvement opportunities and procurement procedures?
X
Page 88 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
38. Does your organization periodically define, document, incorporate and revise energy purchasing specifications and procedures where practicable?
X
Status subtotals: 0 3 0
Status Total: 3 8 points available
Percentage complete: 38
Question Category: Checking
EnMS Element 12: Monitoring, measurement & analysis (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.1)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Do you establish and maintain a procedure (process) for monitoring and measurement that ensures:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
39. Key characteristics of your operations (that can have a significant energy impact) are monitored and measured on a regular basis?
Access database with all energy consumption data
X
Though energy consumption data is monitored and measured on regular basis, process is labor intensive and delayed. More rigor required
40. Information is documented to monitor performance, applicable operational controls, and conformity with the objectives and targets of your organization?
Quarterly Energy data performance charts
X Though documented performance is in conformity with objectives, scope is narrow. More rigor required
41. Monitoring and measurement equipment is calibrated and maintained and all associated records are retained?
Only meters serviced by PUD are calibrated
X
Station service is metered with a variety of meters (SCADA, pulse output, etc.) and require different calibration measures and frequency. More rigor required.
Status subtotals: 0 3 0
Status Total: 3 6 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 13: Evaluation of compliance (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.2)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
42. Does your procedure (process) to meet the organization's commitment to compliance ensure that you periodically evaluate compliance with applicable energy legal requirements and other energy requirements to which the organization subscribes?
Sustainability XAT in BSC
X
Though energy intensity reduction and metering as a subcomponent of the Energy Management targets are present in BSC, periodic evaluation of compliance to energy legal requirements is not in place
Status subtotals: 0 1 0
Status Total: 1 2 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 14: Nonconformity, corrections, corrective action and preventive action (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.4)
Indicator
Status
Finding / Corrective Action Notes
Page 89 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
s of Conformi
ty
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
43. Do you establish and maintain a procedure (process) for controlling non-conformities and taking corrective and preventive actions?
Energy & Water consumption monitor and control methods
X
Though non-conformities are currently identified, they are narrow in scope and data collection methods are inappropriate for BPA’s portfolio size and lead to delayed corrective action
44. Does the procedure for controlling non-conformities and taking corrective and preventive action ensure that: – Actual non-conformity (-ies) are identified and corrected and their energy impact(s) are mitigated?
X
– Actions are taken to investigate and eliminate the causes of nonconformities so that they do not occur again?
X
– Actions are determined to eliminate the causes of potential non-conformities and to prevent their recurrence?
X
45. Are any measures taken to identify, correct, mitigate, prevent or eliminate the nonconformity (-ies) consistent with the magnitude of the problems and the energy impacts encountered?
X
46. After corrective and preventive actions have been taken, are they reviewed and the program adjusted accordingly by implementing and documenting any new changes that result from the findings?
X
Status subtotals: 0 6 0
Status Total: 6 12 points available
Percentage complete: 50
EnMS Element 15: Control of Records (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.5)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
47. Has your organization created and maintained records as necessary that demonstrate compliance with the EnMS and conformance to the requirements of the ISO 50001 Standard, including evaluation of compliance with energy legal
X
Documents are maintained, but not necessarily in conformance with ISO 50001 standard or evaluation of energy legal requirements in place. Need for a process regardless of ISO 50001 conformance.
Page 90 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
requirements and other energy requirements to which the organization subscribes and the implementation of procedures and results achieved?
48. Does your procedure (process) for records management describe how the records will be identified, stored, protected, retrieved, retained, and disposed?
X
49. Are the records themselves legible, identifiable, and traceable?
SharePoint Site
X
Status subtotals: 0 1 0
Status Total: 1 6 points available
Percentage complete: 17
EnMS Element 16: Internal audit of the EnMS (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.6.3)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Does your procedure (process) for an internal energy management system audit:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
50. – Ensure that internal energy management system audits are conducted at planned intervals?
X
Environmental Management System has a planned internal audit control procedure based on ISO 14001 but not for energy management
– Determine whether the energy management system conforms to planned arrangements for energy management including the requirements of the ISO 50001 Standard?
X
– Determine whether the energy management system has been properly implemented and is maintained?
X
– Determine whether the energy management system provides information on the results of audits to management?
X
51. Plan, establish and maintain the energy management audit program taking into consideration the energy importance of the operation(s) concerns and the results of previous audits?
X
52. – State the responsibilities and requirements for planning and conducting audits?
X
Page 91 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
– State the responsibilities and requirements for reporting results?
X
– Define the audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods and explain how you have determined them?
X
53. Ensure that the selection of auditors and the conduct of the audits maintain the objectivity and impartiality of the audit process?
X
Status subtotals: 0 0 0
Status Total: 0 18 points available
Percentage complete: 0
Question Category: Management Review
EnMS Element 17: Management review (ISO 50001:2011(E), Paragraph 4.7)
Indicators of
Conformity
Statu
s
Finding / Corrective Action Notes Does your procedure (process) for Management Review:
Not in
place
Partially in
place
In place
54. Ensure continuing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness of the energy management system through top management review of it at planned intervals? Confirm that a review process exists to update the policy and to communicate changes to appropriate stakeholders.
X
Though there permanent review of energy targets by senior management, suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the system is not being reviewed by top management
55. Ensure that opportunities are assessed for improvement and the need for changes to the energy management system including the energy policy and energy objectives and targets are assessed?
X
Changes to energy targets based on assessed opportunities are being done, but not as it relates to policy or the EnMS as a whole
Ensure that the results of the management reviews are documented?
X Partial results and review of energy targets documented
56. Contain input which includes the following: results of energy management system audits, communication from external interested parties and the performance of the energy management system? The extent to which objectives and targets have been met, status of corrective and preventive actions, follow-up actions from previous management reviews, changing circumstances, and recommendations for improvement
X Partial results and review of energy targets documented
Page 92 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
57. Ensure that the outputs from the management review include any decisions and actions related to possible changes to the energy policy, objectives and other elements of the energy management system, consistent with the commitment to continual improvement?
X Partial results and review of energy targets documented
Status subtotals: 0 4 0
Status Total: 4 10 points available
Percentage complete: 40
Program Totals
Element subtotals: 0 57 8
Program Total: 65 172 points available
Total Program percentage complete:
38
Required Documents and Records Reference Materials
Element 1: Energy Policy
- Organization's energy Policy - Energy Policy
Element 2: Energy Review, baseline & performance indicators
- List of significant aspects
- Results of energy aspects identification process
- List of all aspects - List of critical business functions
Element 3: Legal and Other Requirements
- Laws, regulatory and other code requirements
- Voluntary standard agreements
Element 4: Energy objectives, energy targets and energy management action plans
- energy objectives and targets - List of performance measures
- List of programs associated with significant aspects
- Energy management & Action Plan
- Strategic resource management Plan
- Communication Plan
Element 5: Resources, roles, responsibility and authority
Page 93 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
- Roles, responsibilities, and authorities for the energy management system - Job descriptions for key on site staff for programs to address significant aspects
- Budgets
- Work schedules
- Organizational charts
- Staffing assignments
Element 6: Competence, training and awareness
- Training material and signup sheets
- Shift change meeting notes
- Training records
- Resumes of staff responsible for key programs
- Roster of fully equipped and trained emergency personnel with the authority to perform essential functions and activities
Required Documents and Records Reference Materials
Element 7: Communication
- The organization's decision whether to communicate their energy aspects externally - Key presentations
- Newsletters
- Town meeting presentations
- PR releases
- Web based information
- Communications with customers, suppliers, contractors and other external parties
- Correspondence with management
- Master call list for employees
- Internal communication procedure
- External communication procedure
- Sample script
Element 8: Documentation
- Documents and records determined by the organization to be necessary to ensure the effective planning, operation and control of processes that relate to its significant energy aspects - Description of the main elements of the EnMS and their interaction and reference to related documents
Element 9: Document Control
Page 94 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
- List of key documents
- Legal documents
- Permits
Element 10: Operational Control
- Operational Control Procedures - Procedures for different media
(where the absence of documented procedures could lead to deviation from the
- Contractor energy plans
energy policy and the objectives and targets) - Operational controls
- Sampling procedures
- Preventative maintenance plan for equipment
Element 11: Design & Procurement of Energy Services, Product Equipment and Energy
- Opportunities List
- Procurement Policies
- Energy Incident Management procedure
Required Documents and Records Reference Materials
Element 12: Monitoring, measurement & analysis
- Records associated with calibration and maintenance of monitoring and measurement equipment
- Records of monitoring and measurements
- Information to monitor performance, applicable operational controls and conformity with the organization's energy objectives and targets
- Reports of progress toward meeting objectives and targets
- Monitoring equipment calibrations
- incident Management reports
- Permits, licenses and other approvals
Element 13: Evaluation compliance
- EnMS audit and regulatory compliance audit reports
Element 14: Nonconformity, corrections, corrective action and preventive action
- New changes to the program resulting from findings once the corrective and preventive actions have been taken
- Reports of identified nonconformance, corrective action plans and corrective action tracking
- Reports of hazardous material spills or other energy incidents
Element 15: Control of Records
- Records as necessary to demonstrate conformity to the requirements of the EnMS and of the International Standard. - Training, energy
management audit and management review
- Sampling and monitoring data
- Equipment maintenance records
Page 95 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
- Record retention policy
- Vital legal and financial records (accounts receivable; contracting and acquisition files; official personnel files: social security, payroll, retirement, and insurance records; and property management and inventory records)
- Logs and notes for emergency response exercises
Element 16:Internal energy management system audit
- Self assessments
- energy management audit reports
Element 17: Management review
- Results of management reviews - Senior managers meeting minutes
- Change to energy management system
- Results of management review
Page 96 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX M: BPA METERING MAP
Page 97 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX N: GAP ANALYSIS STRATEGIC RECOMMNEDATIONS
STRATEGIC ACTION ITEMS CATEGORY ANALYSIS ITEMS LOE COST TIME FRAME COMMENTS
Designation of an Energy ChampionOrg. Structure /
PolicySEG Action Item EHV LOW Q1 FY14
ISO, SEG, and ANSI all suggest that an Energy Champion be
designated; and we agree based upon our own analyses. The
designation of an Energy Champion can be carried out in two ways:
One, it can be accomplished by designating an existing individual to
carryout all of the necessary responsibilities. The potential
advantage of this is avoiding the addition of 1 FTE to staff. The
disadvantage of this is that it is an 1FTE equivalent position and it
requires offloading the duties previously carried out by the
designated individual to be partially or totally re-designated to
others. It is our position that adding 1FTE, though more expensive, is
the optimal decision for ensuring the success of an EnMS
Create clearly defined policy that supports EnMS Policy PSU ISO GAP 1-8 "Energy Policy" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
A policy needs to be in place. Many other items in this analysis are
dependent upon a policy being in place. The EnMS policy
characteristics in items 2-8 should be present in order to maximize
effectiveness. This idea is also supported by ETO report and ANSI SEP
standards.
Clearly define EnMS framework, objectives Policy PSU ISO GAP 9-12 "Planning" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
A clearly defined EnMS is not in place. There is insufficient data for
“energy review” to take place. Items 9-12 are dependent upon this
EnMS and, more specifically, data collection and processing for
precision review to take place.
Maintain Legal Compliance/ Awareness Policy / Enabling PSU ISO GAP 13-14 "Planning" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
BPA is, by virtue of its function, legally compliant. How much further
this is carried are dependent upon POLICY and the identification of
key energy aspects. No special action required at this time.
Clarify Energy Objectives, Targets, and
Responsibilities. Policy PSU ISO GAP 15-19 "Planning" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
These are in place to some degree and are dependent upon a policy
and specified targets being in place.
Facilitate communication between stakeholders PolicyPSU ISO GAP 26-28 "Implementation and
Ops"EHV LOW Q1 FY14
Communication must be facilitated to a greater degree between
stakeholders. Key stakeholders must be made aware of one another
and ccountability introduced around communicating. This is
supported by ISO 50001, ETO report, and ANSI SEP standards.
Determine appropriate level of document
controlPolicy
PSU ISO GAP 30-31 "Implementation and
Ops"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Doc control per ISO standard not cost effective: labor intensive, not
necessarily accurate. Level of doc control to be determined
Document operational controls procedures PolicyPSU ISO GAP 32-24 "Implementation and
Ops"EHV LOW Q1 FY14
BPA is primarily looking at targets, not POLICY. This should change.
Operational controls should reflect policy
Establish a periodic review policy for energy
usersPolicy
PSU ISO GAP 35-38 "Implementation and
Ops"EHV LOW Q1 FY14
There is no periodic review policy for procurement of optimal energy
users
Drive accountability within lower tiers of the
organizationPolicy/Enabling PSU ISO GAP 43-46 "Checking" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
Accountability for non-conformity is an essential aspect of
encouraging performance. Put POLICIES and METRICS in place that
allow INDIVIDUALS to be held accountable for non-conformity to
EnMS standards
Create policy for maintenance of records Policy PSU ISO GAP 47-49 "Checking" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
Policies for EnMS records management do not exist. Create policy for
the generation and maintenance of records that demonstrate
conformity with EnMS standards. Include standards for storage,
identification, tractability and review.
Establish internal audit plan of EnMS records Policy PSU ISO GAP 50-53 "Checking" EHV LOW Q1 FY14, ongoing
EnMS internal audit procedures & related not in place. Establish
specific policy around internal audit of EnMS records. Audits should
have the following characteristics: *They are conducted at planned
intervals, determine level of compliance with EnMS, determine to
what degree the EnMS has been properly implemented and
maintained, verify that the EnMS is providing audit results to
management, have an audit process that is able to be modified and
maintained on the basis of previous audits, clearly state
responsibilities and requirements for planning and conducting audits
as well as reporting results. Audit criteria, scope, methods should be
clearly stated and there should be transparency with regard to how
these were determined. Auditable materials should be
consolidated for ease of access.
Review EnMS adequacy Policy PSU ISO GAP 54 "Management Review" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
No such policy exists. Review of the adequacy, effectiveness and
process of the EnMS by top management should be part of the target
review process.
Follow-up on actions from previous management
reviewsPolicy PSU ISO GAP 55-57 "Management Review" EHV LOW Q1 FY14
No such policy exists. Shifting review from examining targets to
examining systems will ensure quality of outputs. Ensuring follow-up
actions from previous management reviews, changing circumstances,
and recommendations for improvement are implemented feed the
continuous improvement cycle.
ENABLING ACTION ITEMS CATEGORY ANALYSIS ITEMS LOE COST TIME FRAME COMMENTS
Define Roles & ResponsibilitiesPolicy / Org
Structure
PSU ISO GAP 20-22 "Implementation and
Operation"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Partially in place. Ensure resources are in place for the
implementation and control of EnMS. This includes the designation
of roles and responsibilities.
Provide EnMS training Policy / AdminPSU ISO GAP 23-25 "Implementation and
Operation"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Partially in place. Energy Management specific training should be
matured and readily available. Accountability must be introduced to
ensure compliance with Energy Management standards.
Facilitate communication between stakeholders Policy / AdminPSU ISO GAP 26-28 "Implementation and
Operation"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Partially in place. Communication must be facilitated between
traditionally "siloed" positions. Stakeholders must be made aware of
one another and be held to a specified standard re: quality and
frequency of contact.
Foster organizational commitment Policy / AdminPSU ISO GAP 39-42 "Implementation and
Operation"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Partially in place. More rigor needed. Organizational commitment to
compliance with EnMS must be made clear and communicated.
Measures for the ongoing monitoring and measuring of EnMS
compliance should be put in place. Data collection and review must
be facilitated in order to make informed decisions and to measure
progress accurately.
Communicate expectation to stakeholders Policy / AdminPSU ISO GAP 29 "Implementation and
Operation"EHV LOW Q1FY14
Partially in place. Level of ISO Compliance / Energy Efficiency
appropriate to BPA must be made explicit and targets must be
communicated to stakeholders.
Functional Action Items CATEGORY ANALYSIS ITEMS LOE COST TIME FRAME COMMENTSCollect and store data securely for review Process DOE/SEG "Data Capture" action items HIGH Ongoing Collect and store data securely for review
Review data at specified intervals Process DOE/SEG "Data Capture" action items DHV HIGH Ongoing Review data at specified intervals
Specify centralized repository Process DOE/SEG "Data "Review" action items DHV LOW Ongoing
Discuss review of metered data centralized location with key
management to inform EnMS policy and targets with an emphasis on
continuous improvement against backdrop of ADF framework.
Page 98 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX O: ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS
STATUS QUO (0)
CostStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5
Costtodeployanadvancemeter -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Costtodeployabasicmeter -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
AdditionalLumpSumMeterDeploymentCost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$Costtomaintainameter -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
TotalNumberofMetersDeployed 150 150 150 150 150
TotalNumberofAdvancedMetersDeployed -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
TotalNumberofBasicMetersDeployed -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Manhours 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
Costofmanhour 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$
Initialofdatamanagementsystem -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Annualcostofdatamanagementsystem 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$
3rdPartyVerifiedScenario -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Training/FacilityOperations,hrs 0 0 0 0 0Training/EnergyManagement,hrs 0 0 0 0 0
NumberofFOStrainees 0 0 0 0 0
TotalInitialCost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$YearlyCost 96,160$ 96,160$ 96,160$ 96,160$ 96,160$
TotalYear1cost 96,160$
Stage1 Stage2
BenefitStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5
TotalBPAengeryconsumption,kWh 27,333,333 27,333,333 27,333,333 27,333,333 27,333,333MarketvalueofakWh 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$
HawethorneEffect 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughO/Mactivities 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughCAPEXdecisions 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%TotalpercentgainfromEnMS 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
TotalkWhgain 546,667 546,667 546,667 546,667 546,667MarketvalueofkWHgain 32,800$ 32,800$ 32,800$ 32,800$ 32,800$
Stage1 Stage2
NetPresentValueStage3 Stage4
Year 1 2 3 4 5NetValue (63,360)$ (63,360)$ (63,360)$ (63,360)$ (63,360)$ (63,360)$
NetPresentValue (58,667)$ (54,321)$ (50,297)$ (46,571)$ (43,122)$ (792,000)$
Stage1,NPV (112,988)$
Stage2,NPV (96,869)$Stage3,NPV (43,122)$
Stage4,NPV (792,000)$
IRR 0.08NPV (1,044,978)$
Paybackperiod,yrs n/a
Stage1 Stage2
Page 99 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
STEP UP (1)
CostStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5Costtodeployanadvancemeter 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$
Costtodeployabasicmeter 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$AdditionalLumpSumMeterDeploymentCost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Costtomaintainameter 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$TotalNumberofMetersDeployed 166 166 166 166 166
TotalNumberofAdvancedMetersDeployed 16 16 16 16 16TotalNumberofBasicMetersDeployed 0 0 0 0 0
Manhours 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500Costofmanhour 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$
Initialofdatamanagementsystem -$ -$ -$ -$ -$Annualcostofdatamanagementsystem 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$ 10,000$
3rdPartyVerifiedScenario -$ -$ -$ -$ -$Training/FacilityOperations,hrs 160 160 160 160 160
Training/EnergyManagement,hrs 360 360 360 360 360NumberofFOStrainees 20 20 20 20 20
TotalInitialCost 80,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$ 80,000$YearlyCost 183,869$ 183,869$ 183,869$ 183,869$ 183,869$
TotalYear1cost 263,869$
Stage1 Stage2
BenefitStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5TotalBPAengeryconsumption,kWh 92,407,995 92,407,995 92,407,995 92,407,995 92,407,995
MarketvalueofakWh 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$HawethorneEffect 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughO/Mactivities 0% 0% 5% 5% 5%TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughCAPEXdecisions 0% 0% 0% 0% 5%
TotalpercentgainfromEnMS 2% 2% 7% 7% 12%TotalkWhgain 1,848,160 1,848,160 6,468,560 6,468,560 11,088,959
MarketvalueofkWHgain 110,890$ 110,890$ 388,114$ 388,114$ 665,338$
Stage1 Stage2
NetPresentValue
Stage3 Stage4
Year 1 2 3 4 5NetValue (152,979)$ (72,979)$ 204,245$ 204,245$ 481,469$ 481,469$
NetPresentValue (141,647)$ (62,568)$ 162,136$ 150,126$ 327,680$ 6,018,360$
Stage1,NPV (204,215)$Stage2,NPV 312,262$
Stage3,NPV 327,680$Stage4,NPV 6,018,360$
NPV 6,454,086$IRR 0.08
Paybackperiod,yrs 3.3 0.3
Stage1 Stage2
Page 100 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
STEP UP PLUS (2)
Cost
Stage3Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5
Costtodeployanadvancemeter 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$Costtodeployabasicmeter 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
AdditionalLumpSumMeterDeploymentCost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$Costtomaintainameter 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
TotalNumberofMetersDeployed 192$ 192$ 192$ 192$ 192$TotalNumberofAdvancedMetersDeployed 42$ 42$ 42$ 42$ 42$
TotalNumberofBasicMetersDeployed -$ -$ -$ -$ -$Manhours 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040
Costofmanhour 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$Initialofdatamanagementsystem 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$
Annualcostofdatamanagementsystem 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$3rdPartyVerifiedScenario -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Training/FacilityOperations,hrs 160 160 160 160 160Training/EnergyManagement,hrs 360 360 360 360 360
NumberofFOStrainees 20 20 20 20 20TotalInitialCost 310,000$ 310,000$ 310,000$ 310,000$ 310,000$
YearlyCost 292,976$ 292,976$ 292,976$ 292,976$ 292,976$TotalYear1cost 602,976$
Stage1 Stage2
BenefitStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5TotalBPAengeryconsumption,kWh 102,484,333 102,484,333 102,484,333 102,484,333 102,484,333
MarketvalueofakWh 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$HawethorneEffect 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughO/Mactivities 0% 0% 5% 5% 5%TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughCAPEXdecisions 0% 0% 0% 0% 8%
TotalpercentgainfromEnMS 2% 2% 7% 7% 15%TotalkWhgain 2,049,687 2,049,687 7,173,903 7,173,903 15,372,650
MarketvalueofkWHgain 122,981$ 122,981$ 430,434$ 430,434$ 922,359$
Stage1 Stage2
NetPresentValueStage3 Stage4
Year 1 2 3 4 5NetValue (479,995)$ (169,995)$ 137,458$ 137,458$ 629,383$ 629,383$
NetPresentValue (444,440)$ (145,743)$ 109,118$ 101,036$ 428,347$ 7,867,283$
Stage1,NPV (590,183)$Stage2,NPV 210,154$
Stage3,NPV 428,347$Stage4,NPV 7,867,283$
NPV 7,915,600$
IRR 0.08Paybackperiod,yrs 4.9 0.9
Stage1 Stage2
Page 101 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
MAX IMPLEMENTATION (3)
Cost
Stage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5
Costtodeployanadvancemeter 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$ 5,000$
Costtodeployabasicmeter 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$
AdditionalLumpSumMeterDeploymentCost -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Costtomaintainameter 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$ 25$
TotalNumberofMetersDeployed 217 217 217 217 217
TotalNumberofAdvancedMetersDeployed 42 42 42 42 42
TotalNumberofBasicMetersDeployed 25 25 25 25 25
Manhours 4040 4040 4040 4040 4040Costofmanhour 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$ 57.44$
Initialofdatamanagementsystem 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$
Annualcostofdatamanagementsystem 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$ 50,000$
3rdPartyVerifiedScenario 23,000$ 23,000$ 23,000$ 23,000$ 23,000$
Training/FacilityOperations,hrs 160 160 160 160 160
Training/EnergyManagement,hrs 480 480 480 480 480
NumberofFOStrainees 20 20 20 20 20
TotalInitialCost 408,000$ 408,000$ 408,000$ 408,000$ 408,000$YearlyCost 320,494$ 320,494$ 320,494$ 320,494$ 320,494$
TotalYear1cost 728,494$
Stage1 Stage2
BenefitStage3
Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5TotalBPAengeryconsumption,kWh 105,984,333 105,984,333 105,984,333 105,984,333 105,984,333
MarketvalueofakWh 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$ 0.060$HawethorneEffect 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughO/Mactivities 0% 0% 5% 5% 5%TotaladditionalgainexpectedthroughCAPEXdecisions 0% 0% 0% 0% 8%
TotalpercentgainfromEnMS 2% 2% 7% 7% 15%TotalkWhgain 2,119,687 2,119,687 7,418,903 7,418,903 15,897,650
MarketvalueofkWHgain 127,181$ 127,181$ 445,134$ 445,134$ 953,859$
Stage1 Stage2
NetPresentValueStage3 Stage4
Year 1 2 3 4 5NetValue (601,313)$ (193,313)$ 124,640$ 124,640$ 633,365$ 633,365$
NetPresentValue (556,771)$ (165,735)$ 98,943$ 91,614$ 431,057$ 7,917,060$
Stage1,NPV (722,506)$Stage2,NPV 190,557$
Stage3,NPV 431,057$Stage4,NPV 7,917,060$
NPV 7,816,169$
IRR 0.08Paybackperiod,yrs 5.2 0.2
Stage1 Stage2
Page 102 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX P: EXPLANATION OF KEY VARIABLES
Cost to deploy meter: Includes material and labor to install
The cost to deploy a meter was estimated using interview data of internal BPA experts
and a DOE paper (US Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy, 2006). The cost should include material and labor and is considered average
for a single meter. The cost to deploy a meter was broken up into two tiers, with $5000
for an advanced meter and $1000 for a basic meter. Advanced meters were counted as
deployed to sites with over 5000 sq. ft., while sites under 5000 sq. ft. received basic
meters.
Lump sum payouts to install specialty meters at big sites
BPA experts indicated that certain meters will require expensive installations on a one-
time basis. This variable allows entering this cost at the beginning of the EnMS
investment cycle.
Annual cost to maintain a meter
This evaluation relies on a DOE paper titled, “Guidance for Electrical Metering in
Federal Buildings,” to provide the avg. annual cost to maintain a meter.
Total number of meters deployed, and total number of new meters deployed
This metric assumes that certain sites are already metered, and that new meters will be
deployed. An assumption about new meters is made here.
Man-hours dedicated to EnMS on an annual basis
This metric makes multiple assumptions. The first is that an FTE working full time on
EnMS represent 2040 labor hours a year. The second assumption is that there are
currently analysts who spend roughly 500 hours a year on EnMS, for a combined 1500
hours in the current state scenario. In the step up scenario we estimated the FTE hours
to be increased to 2000. In the step-up plus and the Max scenario the total hours
allotted were 4040.
Avg. dollar cost of a man-hour
This number is $57.44 and obtained from the Human Capital Management Department.
(US Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 2006)
Initial cost of data management system
This is the upfront cost of purchasing an application to manage the flow of data.
Annual cost of data management system
Page 103 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
This is the annual cost to maintain and upgrade a data management application.
Training costs
Training costs are separated into multiple inputs.
Total BPA energy consumption
Total BPA energy consumption is established as 109 mil kWh according to the BPA
sustainability metrics and analytics database.
The energy consumed for this variable was derived from an analysis on the power
consumption of the largest sites. The spreadsheet for this is provided in Appendix S.
Market value of a kWh
The market value of a kWh is estimated at $.06. This represents the benefit of the
energy saved, which can now be sold.
Likely efficient gains under different scenarios
This evaluation relies on three assumptions. There are three stages in our scenarios,
and in each stage we make qualitative assumptions about likely efficiency gains. These
assumptions can be refined as time goes on.
In the first stage, we assume that simply metering a site will lead to at least a 2 percent
efficiency gain, which benefits BPA every year. This is referred to as the Hawthorne
effect (US Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 2006).
This represents the floor of our expected efficiency gain spectrum. The high end of our
spectrum is 15 percent efficiency gain, which BPA would benefit from every year. The
high end of the spectrum was established by receiving data from the US State
Department benchmarks (US State Dept. Interview).
Required rate of return (used to discount future cash flows)
This required rate of return helps represent what future cash flows are worth to us today. It is a discount rate for the present value of money calculations. This number was simply assumed as reasonably 8 percent. Other rates can be used. Changes in the discount rate do profoundly change outcome scenarios, although the four scenarios should remain relatively ordered in terms of their attractiveness compared to each other.
Page 104 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX Q: BPA AGENCY DECISION FRAMEWORK
Page 105 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX R: DOE EGUIDE FOR ISO 50001 IMPLEMENATION
Step 1 Getting Started
Step 1.1 Make the business case
Step 1.1.1 Identify key internal influencers
Step 1.1.2 Understand your business drivers
Step 1.1.3 Prepare sales pitch
Step 1.1.4 Brief top management
Step 1.2 Secure top management commitment
Step 1.2.1 Establish the scope and boundaries
Step 1.2.2 Appoint a management representative
Step 1.2.3 Assign the members of the energy team
Step 1.2.4 Define the energy policy
Step 1.2.5 Create organizational awareness
Step 1.2.6 Ensure continual awareness
Step 1.3 Establish the structure for EnMS implementation
Step 1.3.1 Set the timeframe for implementation
Step 1.3.2 Develop the implementation plan
Step 1.3.3 Establish communication channels
Step 1.3.4 Celebrate success often
Step 1.4 Understand the role of documents and records
Step 2 Profile Your Energy Situation
Step 2.1 Identify, evaluate and track legal and other requirements
Step 2.1.1 Identify and access legal requirements
Step 2.1.2 Identify and access other requirements
Step 2.1.3 Establish a process for evaluating and updating requirements
Step 2.1.4 Plan for evaluating compliance with legal and other requirements
Step 2.2 Acquire, analyze and track energy data
Step 2.2.1 Identify data needs
Page 106 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Step 2.2.2 Determine availability of data
Step 2.2.3 Formulate a process for acquiring and recording data
Step 2.2.4 Investigate tools for analyzing and tracking energy data
Step 2.2.5 Choose and implement an energy data management tool
Step 2.3 Determine significant energy uses
Step 2.3.1 Prepare a list of your energy systems
Step 2.3.2 Develop an energy balance
Step 2.3.3 Determine criteria for significance
Step 2.3.4 Record significant energy uses and the method used
Step 2.3.5 Analyze and track significant energy uses
Step 2.4 Identify energy opportunities
Step 2.4.1 Use energy assessments
Step 2.4.2 Utilize other methods
Step 2.5 Prioritize energy opportunities
Step 2.5.1 Get the right people together
Step 2.5.2 Review relevant organizational information
Step 2.5.3 Determine criteria
Step 2.5.4 Develop tools or techniques for applying criteria
Step 2.5.5 Apply criteria to prioritize opportunities
Step 2.6 Establish a baseline and determine energy performance indicators (EnPIs)
Step 2.6.1 Get stakeholder requirements for measuring performance
Step 2.6.2 Establish a baseline
Step 2.6.3 Develop a list of possible EnPIs
Step 2.6.4 Determine factors that affect EnPIs
Step 2.6.5 Select and test EnPIs
Step 2.6.6 Analyze EnPIs to determine performance
Step 3 Develop Objectives, Targets and Action Plans
Step 3.1 Establish energy objectives and targets
Page 107 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Step 3.1.1 Get the right people together
Step 3.1.2 Provide appropriate inputs
Step 3.1.3 Define and document objectives and targets
Step 3.1.4 Obtain management approval
Step 3.1.5 Communicate the energy objectives and targets
Step 3.2 Formulate energy management action plans
Step 3.2.1 Select projects based on resources and other factors
Step 3.2.2 List the actions needed
Step 3.2.3 Develop the schedule
Step 3.2.4 Assign roles and responsibilities
Step 3.2.5 Document and regularly update the action plans
Step 4 Reality Check: Stop! Look! Can I Go?
Step 4.1 Review the status of your efforts
Step 4.2 Perform a sanity check on resources
Step 4.3 Identify accomplishments and lessons learned
Step 4.4 Conduct a management review
Step 4.5 Communicate across the organization
Step 5 Manage Current State and Improvements
Step 5.1 Manage and control information
Step 5.2 Determine operational controls
Step 5.2.1 Determine and establish effective operating criteria
Step 5.2.2 Operate according to established controls
Step 5.2.3 Communicate operational controls
Step 5.3 Ensure competence of personnel
Step 5.3.1 Define competencies
Step 5.3.2 Assess personnel against competencies
Step 5.3.3 Develop plan to address training needs
Page 108 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Step 5.4 Ensure awareness of personnel
Step 5.4.1 Define awareness requirements
Step 5.4.2 Plan and implement training
Step 5.5 Define purchasing specifications for energy supply
Step 5.6 Incorporate energy considerations in procurement
Step 5.7 Manage energy considerations in design
Step 5.8 Communicate internally
Step 5.9 Decide on external communications
Step 6 Check the System
Step 6.1 Monitor, measure and analyze key characteristics
Step 6.2 Calibrate monitoring and measuring equipment
Step 6.3 Evaluate legal and other compliance
Step 6.4 Plan and conduct internal audits
Step 6.5 Take action to correct and prevent nonconformities
Step 6.6 Check and use the evidence
Step 7 Sustain and Improve the System
Step 7.1 Collect information for management review
Step 7.2 Conduct management reviews
Step 7.3 Ensure continual improvement
Page 109 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX S: BPA FACILITY PORTFOLIO BASELING ENERGY INTENSITY
Electricity (KWH) Total
2003 Field HQ St Serv Ross kWh kBTU
Entire BPA Portfolio*Station Service + HQ + Ross + metered field (including leased s i tes + projects ) Changes (2003-2012)
KBTU SQFT KBTU / SQFT 2.7% reduction
2003 397,422,188 3,295,814 120.58
2010 385,412,125 3,293,814 117.01
2011 396,064,843 3,293,814 120.25 2.1% reduction
2012 389,122,079 3,315,045 117.38
Owned*Station Service + HQ + Ross + metered field (excluding leased s i tes + projects )
Changes (2003-2012)KBTU SQFT KBTU / SQFT
2003 393,381,806 3,295,814 119.36 2.3% reduction
2010 381,371,744 3,293,814 115.78
2011 391,160,420 3,293,814 118.76
2012 386,712,750 3,315,045 116.65 1.7% reduction
Metered*HQ + metered field (excluding leased s i tes + projects )
*Exclues Station Service and Ross Changes (2003-2012)KBTU SQFT KBTU / SQFT
2003 117,641,893 2,483,677 47.37 10.0% reduction
2010 105,223,875 2,481,677 42.40
2011 110,175,950 2,468,968 44.62
2012 106,422,879 2,496,747 42.62 9.5% reduction
Metered/Occupied*HQ + metered/occupied field (excluding leased s i tes )
*Exclues Station Service and Ross Changes (2003-2012)KBTU SQFT KBTU / SQFT
2003 51,224,753 910,257 56.28 56.3 14.5% increase
2010 65,823,191 1,033,643 63.68
2011 69,129,156 1,033,643 66.88
2012 66,923,125 1,038,363 64.45 64.2
Consumption Reduction
Intensity Change
Intensity Reduction
Consumption Reduction
Intensity Reduction
Consumption Reduction
Intensity Reduction
Page 110 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Everything 22,609,216 9,998,000 79,567,320 --- 112,174,536 382,755,386
Owned 22,048,635 9,998,000 79,567,320 --- 111,613,955 380,842,604
Metered 22,048,635 9,998,000 --- --- 32,046,635 109,347,651
Metered/Occupied 3,665,621 9,998,000 --- --- 13,663,621 46,622,207
Electricity (KWH) Total
2010 Field HQ St Serv Ross kWh kBTU
Everything 17,651,060 10,918,000 79,567,320 119,560 108,255,940 369,384,582
Owned 17,090,479 10,918,000 79,567,320 119,560 107,695,359 367,471,800
Metered 17,090,479 10,918,000 --- --- 28,008,479 95,568,891
Metered/Occupied 5,904,983 10,918,000 --- --- 16,822,983 57,402,398
Electricity (KWH) Total
2011 Field HQ St Serv Ross kWh kBTU
Everything 18,048,951 11,318,000 81,243,168 116,700 110,726,819 377,815,573
Owned 17,465,693 11,318,000 81,243,168 116,700 110,143,561 375,825,415
Metered 17,465,693 11,318,000 --- --- 28,783,693 98,214,034
Metered/Occupied 5,842,914 11,318,000 --- --- 17,160,914 58,555,466
Electricity (KWH) Total
2012 Field HQ St Serv Ross kWh kBTU
Everything 17,263,036 10,858,000 81,123,717 113,828 109,358,581 373,146,950
Owned 16,885,426 10,858,000 81,123,717 113,828 108,980,971 371,858,491
Metered 16,885,426 10,858,000 --- --- 27,743,426 94,664,494
Metered/Occupied 5,770,470 10,858,000 --- --- 16,628,470 56,738,692
Natural Gas (Therms) Total
2003 Field* HQ Ross* therms kBTU
Everything 58,193 46,025 42,450 146,668 14,666,802
Owned 36,917 46,025 42,450 125,392 12,539,202
Metered 36,917 46,025 --- 82,942 8,294,242
Metered / Occupied - 46,025 --- 46,025 4,602,546
*no data available, assumed same as FY2010
Natural Gas (Therms) Total
2010 Field HQ Ross therms kBTU
Everything 58,193 59,633 42,450 160,275 16,027,544
Owned 36,917 59,633 42,450 138,999 13,899,944
Metered 36,917 59,633 --- 96,550 9,654,984
Metered / Occupied 24,575 59,633 --- 84,208 8,420,793
Natural Gas (Therms) Total
Page 111 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
2011 Field HQ Ross therms kBTU
Everything 70,185 78,577 33,731 182,493 18,249,270
Owned 41,042 78,577 33,731 153,350 15,335,005
Metered 41,042 78,577 --- 119,619 11,961,916
Metered / Occupied 27,160 78,577 --- 105,737 10,573,690
Natural Gas (Therms) Total
2012 Field HQ Ross therms kBTU
Everything 49,867 78,926 30,959 159,751 15,975,129
Owned 38,658 78,926 30,959 148,543 14,854,259
Metered 38,658 78,926 --- 117,584 11,758,385
Metered / Occupied 22,919 78,926 --- 101,844 10,184,433
Total Energy SQFT Total Intensity
2003 kBTU Field HQ Ross SQFT KBTU / SQFT
Everything 397,422,188 1,796,478 700,700 798,636 3,295,814 120.58
Owned 393,381,806 1,796,478 700,700 798,636 3,295,814 119.36
Metered 117,641,893 984,341 700,700 798,636 2,483,677 47.37
Metered / Occupied 51,224,753 209,557 700,700 --- 910,257 56.28
Total Energy SQFT Total Intensity
2010 kBTU Field HQ Ross SQFT KBTU / SQFT
Everything 385,412,125 1,796,478 700,700 796,636 3,293,814 117.01
Owned 381,371,744 1,796,478 700,700 796,636 3,293,814 115.78
Metered 105,223,875 984,341 700,700 796,636 2,481,677 42.40
Metered / Occupied 65,823,191 332,943 700,700 --- 1,033,643 63.68
Total Energy SQFT Total Intensity
2011 kBTU Field HQ Ross SQFT KBTU / SQFT
Everything 396,064,843 1,796,478 700,700 796,636 3,293,814 120.25
Owned 391,160,420 1,796,478 700,700 796,636 3,293,814 118.76
Metered 110,175,950 971,632 700,700 796,636 2,468,968 44.62
Metered / Occupied 69,129,156 332,943 700,700 --- 1,033,643 66.88
Total Energy SQFT Total Intensity
2012 kBTU Field HQ Ross SQFT KBTU / SQFT
Everything 389,122,079 1,817,709 700,700 796,636 3,315,045 117.38
Owned 386,712,750 1,817,709 700,700 796,636 3,315,045 116.65
Metered 106,422,879 999,411 700,700 796,636 2,496,747 42.62
Metered / Occupied 66,923,125 337,663 700,700 --- 1,038,363 64.45
Page 112 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Number of BPA Sites*
*Number of sites does not reflect the total number of buildings. There are approximately 1100 buildings which are not necessarily all electrified.
M/O= 17
Metered = 145
All – Leased = 581
All BPA = 601
17%
10%
1%72%
BPA Portfolio Metered vs Station Service
Metered/Occupied
Metered
Leased/projects
Station Service
Page 113 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX T: SITES RECOMMENDED FOR METERING (5000SQ/FT+)
SQFT Estimated Consumption (kWh)
Ross Complex 797,154 32,298,180.62
Celilo Converter Station (Starr Complex) 187,402 7,592,941.45
Bell Substation 75,124 3,043,788.93
Olympia Substation & Maintenance HQ 61,260 2,482,063.12
Alvey Substation & Maintenance HQ 61,100 2,475,580.42
Covington Substation & Maintenance HQ 56,117 2,273,684.89
Chemawa Substation & Maintenance HQ 55,290 2,240,177.44
Redmond Substation & Maintenance HQ 49,848 2,019,684.66
Snohomish Substation & Maintenance HQ 45,245 1,833,185.54
Munro BPA System Control Center 40,489 1,640,487.33
Keeler Substation 32,541 1,318,459.29 Grand Coulee TLM Maintenance
Headquarters 32,272 1,307,560.25
Chehalis Substation 30,782 1,247,190.12
Ashe Substation & Maintenance HQ 28,430 1,151,894.46
Garrison Substation 27,520 1,115,024.11
McNary Substation 25,539 1,034,760.20
Midway Substation 22,256 901,743.34
John Day Substation 21,093 854,622.22
Custer Substation & Maintenance HQ 17,704 717,310.57
Maple Valley Substation 14,688 595,111.71
Chief Joseph Substation 12,987 526,192.52
Santiam Substation 12,275 497,344.51
Monroe Substation 10,800 437,582.14
Hot Springs Substation 10,551 427,493.44
Columbia Substation 9,192 372,431.02
Troutdale Substation 9,041 366,312.97
St Johns Substation 9,014 365,219.02
Anaconda Substation 8,620 349,255.37
Kalispell Substation 8,588 347,958.83
Valhalla Substation 8,096 328,024.54
Hanford Substation 7,864 318,624.62
Troutdale Maintenance HQ 7,520 304,686.82
Conkelley Substation 6,568 266,114.77
Libby Substation 6,423 260,239.82
Longview Substation 6,406 259,551.03
Port Angeles Maintenance HQ 6,177 250,272.67
Pearl Substation 5,866 237,671.93
Port Angeles Substation 5,824 235,970.22
Page 114 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Tacoma Substation 5,663 229,447.00
Lane Substation 5,404 218,953.14
Fairmount Substation 5,232 211,984.24
Alcoa Substation 5,030 203,799.83
Hatwai Substation 4,760 192,860.28
Sno-King Substation 4,710 190,834.43
Murray Substation 4,700 190,429.26
Oregon City Substation 4,132 167,415.68
Kitsap Substation 4,078 165,227.77
Buckley Substation 4,073 165,025.19
Albany Substation 4,060 164,498.47
Lower Monumental Substation 3,965 160,649.37
Walla Walla Substation 3,951 160,082.13
Little Goose Substation 3,945 159,839.03
Potholes Substation 3,620 146,671.05
Intalco Substation 3,488 141,322.82
Toledo Substation 3,420 138,567.68
Bakeoven Compensation Station 3,413 138,284.06
Lower Granite Substation 3,196 129,491.90
Fairview Substation 3,128 126,736.75
Bellingham Substation 3,108 125,926.41
North Bonneville Substation 3,011 121,996.28
Eugene Substation 2,688 108,909.33
Moxee Substation 2,520 102,102.50
Boundary Substation 2,464 99,833.55
Heyrend Storage yard 2,400 97,240.47
Sifton Substation 2,364 95,781.87
South Tacoma Substation 2,225 90,150.02
Rock Creek Substation 2,100 85,085.42
Page 115 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
APPENDIX U: STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW)
Client Name: Stephan Capps, NW Workplace Services (BPA)
From: Rodrigo George, William Jones, PhD, Ian Barker, Qingru Meng, and Heath Nieddu
Date: 05/22/2013
Re: Energy Management at BPA Facilities
CLIENT PROJECT CHALLENGE / PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING
“The Bonneville Power Administration is a federal nonprofit agency based in the Pacific
Northwest. Although BPA is part of the U.S. Department of Energy, it is self-funding and
covers its costs by selling its products and services. BPA markets wholesale electrical
power from 31 federal hydro projects in the Columbia River Basin, one nonfederal
nuclear plant and several other small nonfederal power plants. About one-third of the
electric power used in the Northwest comes from BPA. BPA’s service territory includes
Idaho, Oregon, Washington, western Montana and small parts of eastern Montana,
California, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming.”
“As part of its responsibilities, BPA promotes energy efficiency, renewable resources
and new technologies. The agency also funds regional efforts to protect and rebuild fish
and wildlife populations affected by hydroelectric power development in the Columbia
River Basin.”
BPA in 2012 conducted an ISO 14001 audit. One of the results was that the agency
should consider integrating portions of ISO 50001 into its operational practices.
BPA’s FY13 sustainability plan calls for a gap analysis of the agency’s ability to
implement Energy Management Standards not limited to but including ISO 50001.
Members of PSU’s graduate business program can complete this gap analysis and
make a recommendation on the appropriateness of implementing an Energy
Management System (EnMS). A PSU-sponsored MIM Capstone Project team
(including current BPA employee) is ready to conduct an analysis by the end of fiscal
year 2013 (9/13/2013).
Page 116 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
CLIENT GOALS
A recommendation on how BPA should plan and manage its facilities’ energy
consumption using the agency’s decision framework (ADF). The range of the
alternatives to answer this question goes from doing nothing to building a fully
certified energy management system not limited to but including ISO 50001.
A comprehensive gap that includes a detailed cost analysis and Level of Effort
(LOE) associated with implementation of the above recommendation
A high level implementation strategy and timeline
PROJECT APPROACH TO MEET CLIENT GOALS
The PSU team mentioned above will act as consultants for BPA. The PSU team will
conduct primary and secondary research in order to develop an understanding of how
BPA consumes power at its facilities, how other - commercial and industrial
organizations are applying energy management framework ISO 50001, and what
practical steps BPA could take to manage its energy use internally.
The team will use existing data at BPA to gain an overview of BPA’s facility landscape
and augment that data with interviews/surveys if necessary. Students will do the same
for any other - organizations if those agencies are found to offer helpful examples for
energy management ISO 50001 implementation. Every attempt will be made to find
valid industry benchmarks and internal metrics to assess BPA’s performance towards
reaching the standard ISO 50001.
The team will take the results of this research and deliver the following by 9/13/2013:
Input for ADF decision framework
Energy Management System gap analysis based on ISO 50001
Alternative scenarios of three varying degrees of implementation of Energy
Management Systems ISO 50001
EnMS implementation recommendations
A cost/benefit and level of effort (LOE) estimate
Final written report and presentation
There are doubtless administrative and unseen costs and risks that cannot be predicted
by the PSU team to implement of a fully certified energy management system ISO
50001. The PSU team will be able to identify the major costs and benefits involved in
implementing an energy management system, and provide an evidenced-based,
understandable analysis of likely costs and benefits as well as associated risks.
Page 117 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
PROJECT TEAM/CONSULTANT GOALS
To provide the deliverables listed above
To consider how ISO 50001 is being applied domestically and internationally
To maintain appropriate project management infrastructure, including: plan
development and approval, reporting, execution, and accountability of plan tasks
PROJECT WORK PLAN DESCRIPTION
Brief overview of the work tasks to be taken to support project goals.
1. To conduct project initiation and kick-off meeting(s) with client in order to gain a
consensus on the projects goals and outcomes
2. To consult with BPA technical advisory team to understand key constraints and
needs for the implementation of an energy management system at BPA
3. To conduct primary/secondary research and benchmarking analysis to
understand how BPA and other organizations have or have not benefited from
the implementation of energy management systems
4. Synthesize research results into various forms of analysis, including: current over
all assessment, cost/benefit analysis for three levels of implementation of an
EnMS, an LOE analysis, comparison of BPA results to benchmarks, and inputs
into ADF.
5. To analyze and identify strategic recommendations and action plan on how BPA
should approach energy management at BPA facilities using Energy
Management Systems including but not limited to ISO 50001
6. To maintain regular status updates to BPA stakeholders per agreed timeline and
provide final report no later than September 13th, 2013
Task 1: Project initiation
Task Purpose
Gain common understanding between BPA’s NW Workplace Services and PSU’s Team
on the goals, deliverables, and deadlines for this project.
Sub-Task 1.1: Introductions
Sub-task Purpose:
The purpose of this sub-task is to introduce the PSU team to the BPA team and
stakeholders, and to introduce the PSU team to each other.
Sub-Task Activities:
Page 118 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Rodrigo George will be the central point of contact between the BPA team and
the PSU team. He will provide all initial meeting date coordination activities.
The PSU team’s Academic advisor, William Jones, PhD, will meet BPA’s project
sponsor, Stephan Capps, Director of Facilities, to establish a mutual
understanding of the projects goals and achievable deliverables.
The PSU team will convene a kick-off meeting to confirm understanding of BPA’s
needs and initiate discussions as to the appropriate approach to meeting those
needs.
The PSU team will meet with Guy Kyle, Project Oversight Liaison, in order to
confirm project goals, and discuss BPA’s reporting needs throughout the project.
Deliverables/Products/Dates:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
1.1 Establish primary
communication liaison
March 20th,
2013
N/A N/A
1.1 PSU Academic
Advisor to meet with
BPA project sponsor
April 11th,
2013
N/A N/A
1.1 PSU Team kick-off
meeting
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.1 Academic Director to
meet with BPA
Project Oversight
Liaison and present
Final SOW
May 14th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.1 Write progress
reports to client*
Weekly on
Fridays*
N/A N/A
*Please refer to appendix with decision flowchart
Sub-Task 1.2: PSU Team Establishes Communication Methods, Document Sharing Infrastructure, and Meeting Schedule
Sub-task Purpose:
PSU creates project infrastructure.
Page 119 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Sub-Task Activities:
PSU Team confirms expectations for constant communication, best times to
communicate, and best methods, whether in-person, or through technology.
PSU Team creates a document-sharing infrastructure to store, exchange, and review all
project deliverables and research data.
PSU Team exchanges availability dates and determines a window for a weekly meeting.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
1.2 Establish
communication
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.2 Create document
share
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.2 Establish weekly
meetings
April 29th, 2013 N/A N/A
Sub-Task 1.3: Review and confirm goals, BPA’s schedule for receiving deliverables, and SOW sign-off
Sub-task Purpose:
The purpose of this sub-task to ensure that the Scope of Work actually addresses
BPA’s goals and that the PSU team clearly understands what dates BPA desires needs
various deliverables.
Sub-Task Activities:
PSU Team reviews Scope of Work (SOW), focusing on BPA’s stated goals, and
ensures that the Scope of Work provides a clear path to help BPA reach those goals.
PSU Team shares the SOW with the BPA team, and allows for a BPA review period.
Both PSU and BPA teams sign the SOW.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
1.3 SOW PSU Peer April 27, 2013 April 27- May N/A
Page 120 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Review 8th, 2013
1.3 SOW BPA Peer
Review (Final)
May 9th, 2013 May 1-9th, 2013 May 14th, 2013
1.3 SOW sign-off May 14th, 2013 May 14th-17th ,
2013
May 17th, 2013
Task 2: Consult with BPA Technical Advisory Team
Task Purpose
To understand the current context, key constraints, and needs for the implementation of
an energy management system at BPA with input from SMEs.
Task Activities
PSU Team members will meet those Technical Advisory Team members who are
available to discuss the current challenges to energy management.
PSU Team members who meet with Technical Advisory Team members will create a
notes document and place it in the research library, as well as brief the project team at
the next weekly meeting.
Sub-Task 2.1: Meet with Technical Advisory Team Members
Sub-task Purpose:
To discuss current challenges in EnMS at the facility level.
Sub-Task Activities:
Rodrigo George to help schedule and facilitate small group meetings with the Technical
Advisory Team.
Each team member who conducts an interview creates a notes document and briefs the
project team on the contents of interview. Attempt to identify during these interviews
candidates for future surveys during the primary research phase.
Update project research plan with the input from interviews.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
Page 121 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
2.1 Technical Advisory
Team Interviews
May 30th, 2013 N/A N/A
2.1 Meeting with Director
of Facilities for
Executive Steering
Committee Meeting
May 30th, 2013 N/A N/A
2.1 Executive Steering
Committee
Presentation
May31st, 2013 My 31st – June
6th, 2013
June 6th, 2013
2.1 Briefing to Executive
Steering Committee
June 7th , 2013 N/A June 7th
2.1 Adjust research plan June 7th, 2013 June 7th-June
13th, 2013
June 13th, 2013
Task 3: Conduct research
Task Purpose
To conduct primary/secondary research and benchmarking analysis to understand how
BPA and other organizations have or have not benefited from the implementation of
energy management systems
Task Activities
Conduct secondary research in order to gain baseline understanding of energy
management at BPA and throughout the power utility industry. Determine any gaps in
research to be filled by primary research.
Conduct primary research on BPA and other firms identified as benchmark candidates.
Sub-Task 3.1: Secondary Research
Sub-task Purpose:
Conduct secondary research in order to gain baseline understanding of energy
management at BPA and throughout the power utility industry. Determine any gaps in
research to be filled by primary research.
Sub-Task Activities:
Page 122 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Consult Kerry Wu, PSU’s business librarian to ensure that the most relevant secondary
research sources are being used.
Conduct secondary and exploratory research. Utilize the PSU library, BPA-available
data and on-line resources. Share key findings within the PSU team on a weekly basis.
Identify potential candidate firms in the power utility industry to serve as benchmarks.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
3.1 Consult PSU
Business Librarian
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
3.1 Develop Research
Design
N/A N/A N/A
3.1 Secondary Research N/A N/A N/A
3.1 ID benchmark
domestic &
international
candidates
N/A N/A N/A
Sub-Task 3.2: Primary Research
Sub-task Purpose:
To fill gaps in secondary research by conducting through direct investigation, data
collection, and experimentation so that the PSU team gains the most timely and
complete picture of BPA’s energy management practices at its facilities. These same
activities should be conducted for the identified benchmark candidates.
Sub-Task Activities:
Design primary research plan.
For portions of the primary research plan that involve surveys, interviews, focus groups,
etc., ensure that questions to be used are reviewed by academic professionals and
client to determine if they will provide valid and reliable results. For portions of the
primary research plan that involve analyzing data to create models or descriptive
statistics, identify what qualified academic professionals can review this analysis.
Page 123 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Design a set of consistent metrics to be used to assess both BPA and benchmark
candidates.
Conduct primary research on BPA facilities’ power consumption for internal operations
and the same research methods on benchmarking candidates. Interview and gather
data from people identified as facility resources in the Technical Advisory interview
stage.
Organize secondary and primary data into excel spreadsheets and information
graphics.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
3.2 Conduct primary
research at facilities
May 30th , 2013 May 30th -Aug
1st, 2013
August 1st,
2013
3.2 Deliver research
results in technical
memo form
Aug 15th, 2013 Aug 15th – Aug
22nd , 2013
Aug 22nd ,
2013
Task 4: Analyze Results
Task Purpose
Synthesize research results into various forms of analysis, including: current overall assessment, cost/benefit analysis for three levels of implementation of an EnMS, an LOE analysis, comparison of BPA results to benchmarks, and inputs into ADF.
Sub-Task 4.1: Overall Assessment
Sub-task Purpose:
To provide an overall conclusion regarding the results of research.
Sub-Task Activities:
Discuss within the PSU team research findings.
Write a memo summarizing the overall management of energy at BPA facilities.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
Page 124 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
4.1 Discussion of
research findings
Aug 20th, 2013 Aug 20th-27th,
2013
Aug 27th, 2013
4.1 Write technical
memo
Sept 1st, 2013 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13, 2013
Sub-Task 4.2: Cost/Benefit Analysis of Three Levels of EnMS implementation
Sub-task Purpose:
To illustrate a set of forecasts based on research findings based on three EnMS
implementation scenarios. One scenario will be no ISO 50001 implementation, one
scenario for a partial implementation blended with BPA’s other EnMS practices, and a
third scenario of complete ISO 50001 implementation.
Sub-Task Activities:
Use research findings to create up to three forecasts for implementation costs under the
described scenarios.
Net out the costs and the benefits for each scenario and illustrate those results in a
graphic.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
4.2 Integration of
Cost/Benefit analysis
into final report
Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
Sub-Task 4.3: Level of Effort (LOE) Analysis
To establish the level of effort (LOE) required to support the implementation of Energy
Management System within BPA’s organization
Sub-task Purpose:
To identify efforts required to implement an Energy Management System at BPA
facilities which have neither a definable discrete set of predetermined tasks nor a
measurable tangible output
Sub-Task Activities:
Page 125 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Level of Effort (LOE) planning session
Inventory of support-type activities
Integration of LOE into overall cost/benefit analysis
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
4.3 Integration of LOE
into final report Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
Sub-Task 4.4: Benchmark Analysis
Sub-task Purpose:
To compare BPA’s current EnMS performance results to other energy agencies.
Sub-Task Activities:
Design graphic comparing results of pre-designed metrics of BPA’s energy
management at its facilities and compare it to other commercial and industrial
organizations that have applied energy management standards to their operations.
Summarize the results in a memo.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-
Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period
Final to Client
4.4 Integration of
benchmark analysis
into final report
Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
Task 5: Create Recommendations for BPA’s use of an Energy Management System based on ISO 50001
Task Purpose
Synthesize research and analytic results into a set of recommendations supported by evidence discovered through the engagement.
Task Activities
Page 126 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Write a memo that describes the team’s key recommendations, and supports those recommendations with evidence discovered in the engagement.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review Period
Final to Client
5 Recommendation Memo
Sept 1, 2013 Sept 1-6, 2013 Sept 13, 2013
Task 6: Deliver periodic reporting and final presentation
Task Purpose
Provide BPA Stakeholders a final presentation of results.
Task Activities
Provide BPA Stakeholders a final presentation of results.
Deliverable/Products:
Task/Sub-Task
Deliverable To Client Client Review Period
Final to Client
6 Final written report and presentation to BPA
Sept 13, 2013 Sept 13 – 20, 2013
Sept 20, 2013
SCHEDULE & SUMMARY OF KEY DELIVERABLES The following summarizes the key deliverables/dates and a general project schedule. Task/Sub-
Task Deliverable To Client Client Review
Period Final to Client
1.1 Establish primary communication liaison
March 20th, 2013
N/A N/A
1.1 PSU Academic Advisor to meet with BPA project sponsor
April 11th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.1 PSU Team kick-off meeting
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.1 Academic Director to meet with BPA Project Oversight Liaison and present Final SOW
May 14th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.1 Write progress reports to Weekly on N/A N/A
Page 127 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
client Fridays
1.2 Establish communication
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.2 Create document share April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.2 Establish weekly meetings
April 29th, 2013 N/A N/A
1.3 SOW PSU Peer Review April 27, 2013 April 27- May 8th, 2013
N/A
1.3 SOW BPA Peer Review (Final)
May 9th, 2013 May 1-9th, 2013 May 14th, 2013
1.3 SOW sign-off May 14th, 2013 May 14th-17th , 2013
May 17th, 2013
2.1 Technical Advisory Team Interviews
May 30th, 2013 N/A N/A
2.1 Meeting with Director of Facilities
May 30th, 2013 N/A N/A
2.1 Executive Steering Committee Presentation
May31st, 2013 My 31st – June 6th, 2013
June 6th, 2013
2.1 Briefing to Executive Steering Committee
June 7th , 2013 N/A June 7th
2.1 Adjust research plan June 7th, 2013 June 7th-June 13th, 2013
June 13th, 2013
3.1 Consult PSU Business Librarian
April 25th, 2013 N/A N/A
3.1 Develop Research Design
N/A N/A N/A
3.1 Secondary Research N/A N/A N/A
3.1 ID benchmark domestic & international candidates
N/A N/A N/A
3.2 Conduct primary research at facilities
May 30th , 2013 May 30th -Aug 1st, 2013
August 1st, 2013
3.2 Deliver research results Aug 15th, 2013 Aug 15th – Aug 22nd Aug 22nd , 2013
Page 128 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
in technical memo form , 2013
4.1 Discussion of research findings
Aug 20th, 2013 Aug 20th-27th, 2013
Aug 27th, 2013
4.1 Write technical memo Sept 1st, 2013 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13, 2013
4.2 Integration of Cost/Benefit analysis into final report
Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
4.3 Integration of LOE into final report
Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
4.4 Integration of benchmark analysis into final report
Sept 1st, 2014 Sept 1-6th, 2013 Sept 13th, 2013
5 Recommendation Memo
Sept 1, 2013 Sept 1-6, 2013 Sept 13, 2013
6 Final written report and presentation to BPA
Sept 13, 2013 Sept 13 – 20, 2013
Sept 20, 2013
Page 129 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
PROJECT SCHEDULE GANNT CHART
Page 130 of 131 FINAL VERSION 09/20/2013
Scope Approval
The following signatures accept the project work scope as outlined in this document. As the project moves forward, it may become necessary to alter the deliverables presented here in order to best cover the intent of the project. Should that occur a written work order will outline all work scope changes. No work scope changes are valid until all parties agree on changes and have signed the modified work scope.
Bonneville Power Administration
Portland State University, School of Business Administration: MBA, MIM, MSFA, MIM Capstone Team Members
Signature Client Representative Here, Date Signature Team Member Here, Date
Guy Kyle, 05/22/2013 Rodrigo George 05/22/13
Signature Client Representative Here, Date (Add other signature lines if needed) Signature Team Member Here, Date
Stephan Capps 05/22/13 Heath Nieddu 05/22/2013
Signature Team Member Here, Date
Qingru Meng 05/22/213
Signature Team Member Here, Date (Add other signature lines if needed)
Ian Barker 05/22/13
Capstone Project Faculty Advisor
William M. Jones, Ph.D./Date School of Business Administration Portland State University