Workgroup 4: Implementation Mechanism (IM)

---

The choice of implementation mechanism will be a key decision for customers to decide which option best fits their local needs. Much of the work of this workgroup will be to help define the details of the Pay for Performance (PFP) path. This will provide clear parameters to assist customers in making a decision about which option works best.

Co-Chairs: Melissa Podeszwa (BPA) and Larry Blaufus (Clark PUD).

Participants and stakeholders may submit documents, discussion comments, questions, etc., to the workgroup email address: workgroupfour@bpa.gov.

Workgroup 4 Materials

---

CALENDAR

• Workgroup Meetings

AGENDAS

• October 26, 2010


• October 12, 2010


• September 28, 2010


• Tuesday, September 14, 2010


• Tuesday, August 31, 2010


• Monday, August 2, 2010


• Tuesday, July 20, 2010

MEETING NOTES

• October 26, 2010


• October 12, 2010


• September 28, 2010


• September 14, 2010


• August 31, 2010


• August 2, 2010


• July 20, 2010

Workgroup 4 Issues

---

The following questions help lay the groundwork for the workgroup:

• What are the differences/benefits/drawbacks of non-standard agreements?
  
  • Are there fewer touch points between BPA and the customer utility? (A utility that has been using a non-standard agreement for a number of years could discuss how its agreement works today to help inform the discussion.)
    
• How much BPA technical assistance (internal and Technical Service Provider (TSP)) is made available to the two implementation mechanisms (outside of 3rd party programs)?
  
• How can making changes be more routine and uniform for all PFP utilities?
  
• How can BPA and its customers most effectively develop the PFP agreement so it is standardized and as transparent as possible in the reimbursement level for PFP?
  
• How can 3rd party programs be easily incorporated into the PFP mechanism?
  
• How much, if at all, do M&V protocols/guidelines for PFP need to be discussed? Need to determine what is needed, develop the protocols, and determine how (if necessary) BPA will verify adherence to the protocols. Is it any different than today?
  
• How can it be ensured that the PFP agreements will not dampen the incentive for utilities to pursue the diversity of measures and new technologies needed to maximize acquisition?
  
• How can BPA most effectively implement administration and performance payments?
  
• When does a utility need to declare which implementation mechanism it intends to use? If it wants to switch, when can it do so?
  
• Will BPA adjust its reimbursement calculations/determinations?
  
• How often can utilities report for reimbursement purposes?
  
• Should there be a flat reimbursement per kWh?
  
• How do the mechanisms be designed so as not to favor one method over another?
  
• Does either the standard offer or the PFP allow for utility pooling?
  
  
  Phase 2 Overview