Puget Sound Energy (PSE) 7.16.24 Equity Advisory Group Meeting

Transitioning to an Integrated System Plan we are transitioning to a integrated system plan approach and this really stems from the Washington uh large Washington decarbonization act for large utilities or House Bill 1589 that passed earlier this year part of that bill um recognizes that we have a number of Legacy planning processes that really need to change for us to be better positioned to meet our clean energy goals and so part of what that bill does is it streamlines several of our existing planning processes and you've heard about the IRP and the CIP before it brings them together into a single integrated system plan that we will file for the first time at the beginning of 2027 um now what does integrative system plan mean I mean that's something we'll still be figuring out the scope of over the next um few months but just big picture conceptually um an integrated system plan you know aims to pull together a decarbonization plan across both our gas and our electric utility um with the transmission needs the distribution system needs and the energy Supply needs really looked at and evaluated together as part of that um analysis so if you could go to the next slide please um so far so good on the internet so we um we filed a petition um that you may have seen in our previous updates to the commission uh last month um to really seek to begin to consolidate those different planning processes that we've had for a while now um specifically we asked the commission to wave our filing requirements in 2025 for our integrated resource plan or IRP and our clean energy implementation plan CIP that so many of you have worked with us on that 2021 CIP and the banial update um in making this request we had we needed to include a work plan and the work plan needed to demonstrate reasonable progress towards meeting our clean energy and Equity goals under Ceda um and we can put a link to that work plan in the chat I think we we did share it with you via email earlier um and it might be worth taking a look look at because it really does a nice job of telling the story of some of the progress we've made um to date we also have begun um while our petition was with the commission we we both began initially planning um for what a 27 ISP could look like while also um continuing critical work on the 2025 IRP um because there really wasn't certainty you know that the petition would be approved by the commission and then if it was approved just when the timing of that would happen so if you could go to the next slide I think you may already know the punchline which is that um our petition was approved last week on July 11th by the commission the um specifically the commission found that the work plan we gave them demonstrated reasonable progress um both towards meeting ca's requirements and achieving um our Equity goals and related to this um the commission has already begun a rulemaking process where they develop rules to implement that the the broad provisions of the house bill 1589 um they began that um gosh last month um with a kickoff workshop and that'll last um over the next year and wrap up in July of 2025 um so if we can go to the next slide just pivoting to talk about like what happens now as I mentioned before we've already started working and thinking about what this 2027 ISP will look like and we're really building off of the efforts we've made over the past year or so on our 2025 integrated resource plan um those rules that the commission are developing are also going to be important for some of the parameters of this first integrated system plan and then in the near ter term we plan engag with all of our advisory groups um especially the eag on on what engagement um should look like so talking to advisor groups about what topics should be included you know this is a broader scope than a traditional integrated resource plan and we always feel like we still have we have a lot of topics to cover in that forum and this integrated system plan is is broader than that so um we really want input and feedback um on what topics to prioritize for um discussion and that will help inform the development of an ISP engagement plan and that is something the commission is looking for us to file by the end of October and I'm going to Blink and it's going to be the beginning of October it feels like but it's still summer so I'm going to take that back we've got time but but you know time goes um and then we'll have more um information to share with you both on this ISP effort and some topics to get your feedback on during the September meeting and so this was really just hopefully a a high level sense of kind of what's to come and we really look forward to working with you on developing this this ISP effort which will be new for us and that plan's important because it will take us through one of the next key milestones in our clean energy Journey which is reaching um greenhouse gas neutrality by 2030 so we're um excited to be working on this with you and um Sophie I might pause there and take questions before I talk about feedback because that feels a little different related but different I I had the same thought so um new legislation Ru making happening changing the way PSC is planning let's hear from you all if you have any questions concerns about for that see go ahead what's the um I think you're going to report out on the feedback that you've been receiving I think I have one more slide if we could go there and really just wanted to touch a little bit on um kind of what we've heard from the series of conversations we've held over the last couple months with with this Advisory Group with um our resource planning advisor group on um how we're thinking about um Equity analysis um in the context of the integrated resource plan and now as we pivot to an integrated system plan um we're still thinking about what that Equity analysis um may look like so um you know on the electric utility side um some of the feedback we heard from all of you and the resource planning advisor group was we heard some some general support for the updates we were proposing um which just as a refresher we we talked a bit about introducing a more qualitative assessment into the potential burdens and benefits as we look at generic electric resources in a in a modeling effort and we also talk about updating the scoring methodology in our portfolio Equity assessment and so we heard some general um support for kind of the direction we were headed in the main concerns we heard and we really appreciated sort of the constructive dialogue we we had at both tables um we heard some concerns about the metrics we're using um in the portfolio benefit analysis and how they may differ in their relative impacts um several different parties showed interest in in us um moving towards a more nuanced approach um beyond the binary scoring method that we talked about so that could look like waiting of metrics that could mean um using a more granular scoring scale than the 01 we had used um we also heard concerns some concerns regarding some of the metrics we're proposing and not all this feedback is is consistent so I mean we heard different points of view right so we're going to have to take a lot of this under advisement as we move towards the ISP and um and bring forward some um some further ideas but some of the things we heard was some of the metrics may be too correlated so we might we may be measuring the same thing multiple times and then we had some folks that wanted to see additional metrics measured and other folks were saying well maybe we should scale back the number of metrics we have to really focus more on those customer benefit indicators or cpis so um It's probably hard to do both but we're taking both um comment Ander advisement as we as we think about this and then on the gas utility side um we had proposed a new Equity assessment for the gas utility that was modeled after the portfolio benefit analysis we' done on the electric side and we heard similar themes of feedback related to the gas utility we heard um folks suggesting we reconsider how we score different gas resources um and also emphasizing we should ensure that there's some uniqueness in our metric so that we would minimize that risk that we're double counting things um and then we also just heard um feedback that it would be to align metrics we use on the gas side with those on the electric side so um given all that great feedback which we really really appreciate and that we're pivoting to this ISP approach I think we need to sit with this a little bit and we anticipate that we may revise our Equity strategy a little bit um given this feedback and given um that we're moving towards a broader plan um so we anticipate they'll we'll re-engage with all of you in the future not quite sure what month that is yet but we're we're very committed to just continuing the dialogue and the conversation and having a lot of um different diverse uh groups involved and helping us um develop what this Equity strategy looks like for the ISP so thanks everybody and um happy to take questions any question in the chat from c c was wondering was the feedback that you're talking about on the slide um from prior eag meetings or is it also from other groups so great question sorry I wasn't clear about that it's from both see so um this is some of the themes we heard from all of you in the equity Advisory Group meetings but we also sought feedback from our resource planning Advisory Group meeting and I think we might have even had a public webinar where we heard feedback as well I'd have to go back and double check um so this really is is from both advisory groups having a couple of meetings really on on this area hope that helps yeah other questions or comments for Cara on the feedback that PC has received on the equity analysis approach very good okay well carrot thanks for your time thank you to the uh you know internet fairies that cooperated um let's go to the next slide will perfect so um I'm going to turn it over to Michael in a moment I'll I'll note that Michael's going to do kind of a high level overview and then your breakout rooms will be a chance to maybe dig into some of the detail so let's spend I don't know 10 10 or so minutes 20 minutes in presentation mode and then we'll have about 20 minutes in breakout mode so take it away Michael all right Distributional Equity Analysis Pilot thank you Sophie and hello everybody uh Michael whing the energy Equity program manager of data analytics my pronouns or he him happy to present to you tonight and um uh we'll be actually doing a little bit of a front information here for just a couple slides and then going into a simulation experience too that I think will help you engage with our content as we're going forward and Sophie I'll just let you know I'm limited I can see the slides but if there's comments or things that come up I could use your support in terms of just calling out if there's questions or things so please interrupt me as you uh would I come from a loud Jewish Family we're really good at interrupting so we'll take care of that wonderful wonderful all right well let's go on to the next slide then uh and so we'll start out with uh all of youall at the eag and our question and quest for you is uh as we go through the material tonight and involve you in some of the uh Concepts and that sort of thing when we get to the end We'll be asking for how your suggestions and recommendations how would you improve what we've done with our distributional Equity analysis approach and any factors you think might be missing from the analysis and we'll speak more to that at the very end but just wanted to give you a heads up on the front end of the presentation of you know what is it we're asking for and then just call your attention to the picture on the left side is a picture of our community solar installation at Olympia High School which is featured as part of one of our um uh Equity distributional Equity analysis project sites so that gives you an idea of what one of them looks like all right we can move on to the next slide all right thank you to Dennis for uh mentioning the procedural Justice quadrant earlier tonight just a couple things about this slide we'll be focusing on obviously the distribution Justice quadrant since it is a distributional equity assessment and I'll be speaking more in just a minute about what that actually is in this context but the procedural Justice quadrant also plays a really important part and I want to call that out now because that was one of our primary learnings as we went through the pilot and again I'll give you more information about that but I wanted to give you uh you know just focus on those two quadrants of our model I want to also on this slide uh I believe the eag is pretty familiar with the model over all but you can see that this is how psse as well thinks about energy Equity with the four quadrants coming from the energy Equity project associated with University of Michigan so that's our model for how we Implement equity and I also would like to associate this slide with what we call a Cascade order which was guidance given that we'll speak about on the next slide uh which uh informs all Washington utilities about how we are to respond to an energy equity uh in our um regulatory space so if there's no questions here we'll go ahead and move on to the next slide all right this is a very busy slide so several things I want to talk about first I want you to think about it as uh if you've ever been to a shopping mall and you've seen one of those Maps where all the stores are uh you notice on the bottom left side we are here so we're going to start over there on floor one and then there's a vertical line in the middle and that's kind of floor too over on the other side um and I also want to give um a shout of appreciation to Megan Walsh uh Megan you made some comments in the last eag meeting uh talking about neurodiverse audiences and so we've tried to take these sets of slides we're going through and Implement some of those recommendations so I hope you find some themes that you mentioned in practice here uh and that that's helpful as we go through the presentation so starting on floor one or the left side side uh you can see at the very top we have uh the wutc Washington utilities and Transportation Commission which governs uh investor own utility Statewide and we're moving through time uh from the top as in the past you know towards the middle present and Bottom future and there are two different channels that are coming down so as I mentioned on the last slide with the four quadrants of energy Equity there in the Cascade order utilities were instructed uh through through that docket that uh each utility would have to consider equity and that each action or investment or opportunity is either advancing Equity or hindering Equity they use different uh exact words for that but that there's no neutrality basically in utilities need to be prepared to explain and document how they're going about that and of course we use the four quadrants as our model about how to do that as we move forward in time from the past the reason why we're doing a distributional Equity assessment is because it was a part of our general rate case or GRC uh that we filed in 20122 and we received an order from the commission that we could go ahead with that GRC uh provided that we performed a distributional equity analysis and so then that brings us down to that uh last balloon there that we are here but over just to the right you'll notice that there's another uh docket coming down from the uh Washington utilities and transport ation commission which is the equity docket and that is a bigger process that provides guidance for all of the investor own Utilities in Washington and so that is a process that we anticipate will probably end in 2026 and each year is looking at a quadrant this year is looking at the procedural quadrant and next year will be looking at the distributional quadrant so we're kind of in the perfect space right now to be talking about the distributional equity assessment and Gathering your recommend recomendations and uh information and feedback so what we anticipate is going to happen is with our distributional Equity assessment that it will be moved over into that larger docket at some point and it's just important to note that we're in that process because we're waiting to receive information back about the methodology that we demonstrated and as Cara just described in some of the you know metrics and uh discussion that was going on we want to make sure that we're in that conversation of are we performing this correctly is are there other considerations we need to conclude before we go further with the methodology so that is the state context and where we are in time with kind of two different sets of proceedings that we're juggling or managing between in order to perform the distributional equity assessment we're going to move over to floor two on the right side of the screen at the na Nationwide stage and so what we did is not uh in order to find guidance for how to perform a distributional equity assessment we did some literature research and looked at who was working in that space and identified Lawrence Berkeley National Labs which is one of 17 different National Labs under the United States Department of energy so they were working on some theoretical uh inquiries into the space of distributional equity assessments and we contacted them and said we'd like to you know work with some advisement with you and they said great uh this is an opportunity to move Theory into practice we could use this uh study this uh DEA or distributional Equity assessment as a case study and that would help us take some of these ideas and thoughts uh and move them into practice with some tangible parts and pieces and see how that works so Lawrence Berkeley National Labs was the goet between psse and the United States Department of energy so they kind of captained the project or guided the project and we worked with them and then over on the right side I'm just kind of calling out they formed a an Advisory Board and uh people were invited from all these different um organizations not everybody was able to make the meetings and attend but The Advisory Board was convened from a broad variety of perspective we had uh representatives from State commissions outside of Washington uh we had members of academ Academia some Consultants uh we had uh folks from another utility there I think it was Southern California Edison and uh nonprofits as well as the some other Commissioners can I can I just break in um just in case some of you are having trouble looking at the chat I want to just recognize that Chris wrote uh great way to make the case for psc's leadership in utilizing the distribution of equity inclusion through these valuable assessments good job and uh Steve was reminding everyone that GRC it's a general rate case um so just the acronym piece of there all right we're updated on the chat now so go ahead Michael great yes I'm sorry for that oversight we should have spelled that out earlier um but anyway I would like just going back to floor to over here on the national stage to sum up what I've been saying is we looked for expertise across the country in order to inform the methodology that we're doing and we worked with those folks in order to create the product which is the assessment methodology that we're going to talk about tonight so again that comes back to our state context over on the left we're here and we're kind of out in front of the larger process so just so everybody has that context because that is I think important when we get to the very end and ask for your recommendations that you understand where we are all right that's a lot of thoughts about policy pieces and puzzles I'll if there's any questions that people have I'd be happy to take them and I do want to move forward if we can uh because we want to move into the activity as soon as we can yeah questions for Michael or comments on kind of the big picture of the map the mall map if you will okay Michael you can roll on forward all right next slide all right this one is an anchor slide for us tonight because it really illustrates what the tool is that is a DEA or distributional Equity assessment so again our slide is divided into two halves the left and the right on the left side we have some narrative that is describing what's called a uh benefit cost analysis and then a DEA and uh let me just summarize a benefit cost analysis is when we that we've done that many many many years in utility industry where we look at okay if we want to buy something or Finance something what are all the benefits that's going to bring to our customers will it deliver value for what it's supposed to do and at what cost will that be and if the benefits outweigh the cost threshold then we can go ahead and purchase that or add that to our resources and if the costs are too high then that means we're going to not purchase that resource because it wouldn't be affordable and uh efficient so that's just kind of a a high low on the BCA side of things to simplify it what's important to understand about the DEA or distributional Equity assessment is in that blue uh box on the left side where it says priority populations and other customers we're adding a new lens or a new vision into that affordability of it is it affordable and delivers benefits or not not only are we considering that but now we're adding a horizontal left to right Axis to say Well when something is Affordable or not how does that affect all the customers especially if we put a focus on a priority population and a priority population is like it's like a variable in a math equation it could mean a lot of different things our audience here with the eag is familiar with our context of Highly impacted communities and highly vulnerable populations or vulnerable populations and maybe perhaps deepest need from some of the content we've talked about before those could be priority populations we could also you know in another assessment be looking at maybe a specific vulnerability with perhaps uh elderly customers who are have higher exposure to climate change factors that might be a priority population or they getting a share of a resource so you could Define it in many ways but what a DEA does is say what is going to be the effect or benefit on that part of the population versus the rest of the customer population so moving over to the right side of the slide we can think about that where you see BCA going up and down on the sideways Blue Bar there kind of that vertical axis of is it affordable and does it deliver the value that we want it to and if it's above in the top half of the box there that means yes it does and then when you look at the DEA results rectangle on the bottom that goes left to right if it is an action that is worsening equity it's going to end over in the left half of the rectangle so that goes back to the C Cascade order again we're either improving Equity or we're making it worse if it's on the right half of the rectangle that means Equity is improved so you can think about even though it's just a a static rectangle there with four quadrants in it kind of like uh when you use your camera on your phone to take a picture and you move it around and if yours is like mine it has a little circle that lights up when you get it just right and says take the picture now and what we're trying to do is land in that top right corner where it says deer should be approved because that means we've accounted for equity and we are improving it and it also is cost effective or above that middle line there now what it it does add is that maybe something is Affordable over there in the top left corner but it's not improving Equity so then if that is the result you get you want to reconsider is there a change we could make in what we're doing that would improve Equity where we can move it the result over to the right side uh and that might be creating a new program it might be adjusting some of the parameters of the program or uh some other outcome or dismissing that particular effort of saying we can't invest in this it's not Equitable and the same thing over there on the bottom right corner uh where it's not affordable but it would be improving Equity is there anything we can do or something we could change that would nudge it up above that line so it lands up in the top right corner so again that's the Crux of what this tool does it gives us a way a second Vision to look at our cost analysis and to bring an equity lens into how we evaluate things and that's what we will be looking to apply from this methodology as we go forward uh in time as a utility so I just want to Anchor that for a moment and this is again an important one if there's any questions here before we move on to the next one be happy to explain further yeah um so sure all right now we're changing uh changing seats here a little bit I'm setting you all up in the DEA to get your hands dirty a little bit with some of the material don't worry it's going to be a little complex but I'm confident that you'll do well with it so what we're going to ask you to do is to put together a DEA or to frame one up and we're going to give you some content in the breakout rooms in order to do that so on this slide here there are going to be five components to the DEA you're going to construct and let me just say a DEA in this sense is a lot like a recipe and you may end up in your group deciding to bake a cake and the other group may end up deciding to make a chili and they're both similar and that they're going to be using these components but you'll have different ingredients and you might choose to measure things differently because of that so what is important to know in this recipe there is going to be something called a system role which is looking at a deer and what function is it going to serve and you'll have some choices to choose between does that have to do with reliability or resilience or affordability and we'll make that more clear in your instructions you'll select a priority population from uh among a series of choices about uh who you want to set aside as the uh group of focus compared to the other customers you'll give be given some choices about a project location uh where it's going to be and the important thing there is what is the information about the physical infrastructure of the electric system and how that's different at different locations and how does that overlap with the customer characteristics of that site you'll be looking at uh the procedural quadrant uh in terms of what type of commun based organization are you going to approach and work with for that uh feedback and engagement in your project and then you'll also select a metric which is what is the thing that's going to measure and tell you and indicate if the priority population is experiencing the outcome you're Desiring to frame up in your project so uh there are no wrong choices there will be uh choices in there there's a lot of different creative outcomes that could be a part of it you will have uh either Katie or myself in your room as a resource to provide more context and more tools and directions that'll be provided when we get there so uh if you don't understand everything yet that's okay and we can go ahead to the next slide and I think will is GNA jump in at this point thanks so much Michael um yeah so I think I first want to share that this is intended to be a discussion and so please ask questions um want to reiterate that there are no no wrong answers we'll be using a Miro board um the same mirro board in each of the two groups to drag and drop each of the selections that Michael was just talking about what I'm going to drop in the chat now is some detailed definitions and instructions for this breakout room and again this is for your reference as you're looking at the terms on the Muro just to have some background context but again Michael and and Katie will be there to provide any sort of technical assistance and answer the questions that you have but Kim will be creating the breakout rooms and then we'll be dividing folks evenly and plan on uh 20 minutes H for the breakout and if everyone could open the breakouts answering Megan's question is can you tell us what you'd like to get out of this exercise so as you're going to your rooms making sure that uh will and Seth as facilitators just start with that goal um respect the fact that you want to go back into the breakout rooms and have some more time uh I also want to make sure we're saving time for the rest of the presentation because I think the rest of the presentation really um provides information about two projects that we actually went through with this pilot so folks can get a chance to see what we really wrestled with there and that I think that could be very helpful um and then for sure this is going to be the only topic we cover for the rest of the meeting uh to make sure we do it justice uh and then Michael as you go into the presentation part um I would encourage you to sort of focus on the Practical information um and maybe we um you know keep it at that level so that folks can see the the two projects we actually worked with as part of this pilot yeah thanks for that Troy for for that guidance um let's just do kind of maybe finish your thought 10 minutes in in the breakout room so 626 to 6:36 and then use the rest of the meeting for Michael to step through the example so um being Nimble here on the Fly so Kim um I believe room one had C Dennis Emma and Elizabeth and room two had Deo TJ Megan and Christopher and I think you're you're on top of it as you always are we'll do another 10 minutes thanks for being Nimble and flexible everyone and come back uh 6:37 for about you know you have about 10 15 minutes here to kind of walk through these applications and uh take it take it away sure and I hope there was some value for everybody let me just say in the exercise um obviously we hoped it' go a little smoother and been continuous but even just working with some of the components I think gave you a little more experience of what's involved in putting together a DEA and I'm going to tell you the story now of what we did to develop the methodology with uh Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories so we had uh uh 80 different me 80 megawatts of resources that are part of our clean energy plan and we picked a representative sample that we could focus on in order to develop a DEA methodology and so we focused on two sites one the Olympia High School uh which you saw a picture of at the very beginning of our time together and the other is at a site in the noac Indian tribe that hasn't been built yet and what I really want to focus on uh here in this table is that time frame uh column that you see notice that for the Olympia High School it's retrospective so we're looking backwards in time at a project that was already built and then we're looking at uh the outcomes for uh the priority population and other populations that we already have some data for in contrast to that for the nuac Indian tribe we were looking in a prospective uh perspective Ive or forward-looking so the project hasn't been built yet and we're going to analyze the area and two different project sites to compare them to see how would that benefit a priority population differently depending on which site was picked there's a little bit more complexity to the noac Indian tribe site in that one site it later came out in the procedural uh Dimension that there was interest in including a battery storage feature to that site and so that differentiated it and that would be the apartment complex versus the administrative building site so two different sites we evaluated and looked at how would that affect the priority populations on where they were um so if there's no questions on the framing of those two different site locations and then two options within the nox site we'll move on to the next slide all right so priority populations we had a question come up in our breakout room like what do you do first and it's very important to get your priority population identified as part of your analysis and that you involve that priority population all the way through how you develop your metrics and in your procedural quadrant of how you engage the design of the project and particularly that was a big learning for us working with the noack Indian tribe about uh both doing the analysis and then bringing in information that was brought forward by the community and that affected the uh interpretation of how the decision will probably go and where the uh site will actually be built um but so you can see the stages here you identify your priority population and then uh we weren't able to get to the metric selection but you're trying to measure what is the outcome that you want to see is it improving or not improving for that priority population and then apply that to your priority population in order to get back to that tool we talked about a few slides earlier before the exercise with the four quadrants are is it a cost benefit effective can we purchase this resource and is it improving Equity or not improving Equity so this helps set that up by identifying your priority population and the metric that you're measuring it on all right and we can go to the next slide if there's no questions here Michael I'll just um articulate what's in the chat c was asking about um a uh what is that fancy word for it the story map a story map and we just added the link in the chat and it was also just provided with some handout materials so take a look in in your free time okay no no other questions that I'm seeing at this time Michael great so in our approach uh I think we're backt tracking or well going here a little bit remember that we had the you know working with El L and the national experts advising us on how to put it together so we were using the frame of the four energy quadrants from the energy Equity project and then we were applying it to a representative sample and we just walked through the Olympia High School as well as the NC Indian tribe sites and so we're taking our tangible data and moving from Theory which is represented by the two documents you see on the right from lbnl and the uh uh researchers that were involved in developing the methodology applying it to a tangible or real place and seeing what kind of results we would get with that um and then uh you can see uh let's see the very last one there we plan to use this methodology in the future upon getting further feedback and guidance about how to implement it further again going back to when Cara was talking about some of the feedback uh in the other process as well we want to make sure we've included all that information before we move forward and implement it uh so that was our approach to the uh design of our distributional Equity assessment and then we can go to the next slide and this is a Crux here again going back to what Dennis shared the theme for our meeting today in the procedural quadrant even though this is a distributional equity assessment we really learned a lot in our engagement with the NOC Indian tribe so it's worth highlighting that here on this Slide the department of energy was already engaged with the noac tribe in their energy transitions partnership and so because that relationship was already going on and they're strategically mapping out with the noac tribe what is the future that you want for your energy reality as a a community and so they were working together in that and we got invited in as part of our project to participate uh with that site selection in the procedural uh Equity Dimension and so uh I was not there personally myself but those who were part of the project that were there talked about they got this guidance from being a part of that Community uh during the couple days that was going on that you're invited uh we worked with a qualified facilitator who was experienced and invited by the tribe to work uh in that context uh we were invited to describe both uh the participants we're invited to describe their lived experience as well as their professional experience as part of building trust in the procedural exchange and to engage as an active listener and be primarily a listener to what the tribe uh Community or the tribal Community was bringing forward and that has had an important effect on the outcome uh that we'll talk about later but just really important to highlight that even though that there's a lot of metrics and data and numbers this element is very important and one of our key learnings in the distributional equity assessment process or methodology and we can go on to the next slide okay so here we're seeing uh the application of the metrics to the priority populations and so it's a little we'll start over on the Olympia project on the left and notice in there we have two columns the general population and the income eligible population uh and so what we're looking at there is then moving through the middle table there are some metrics that we're looking to measure uh how is equity improved or not improved and how which population would it be applied to in this case uh and so that first one uh looking at the count of participating customers and that there are Income eligible customers that are participating in the community solar project uh through that program uh uh the next one looking at the amount of energy burn we didn't actually track that in this project but how it would be applied to the uh income eligible population on the Olympia site the next one uh the culturally uh linguistic accessible program and Communications for named communities didn't apply because it was a retrospective it had already been implemented in this case we could evaluate the reduced greenhouse gas emissions from the technology and uh the outages and access to clean renable energy with emergency power did not apply in the Olympia project scenario then looking over at the Nooksack sites for Whispering seeders and administrative building uh you can see that um when we looked at the uh metrics for the equity assessment the distribution Equity assessment that the whispering Cedars uh population scored on more of those uh metrics in terms of it applying to them versus at the administration building so it's just a matrix that shows when you app apply the metrics how do they map to your priority populations that you've identified and so this if we can go to the next slide um and this was a finding in the methodology of you know what are the benef or the uh the positives and drawbacks for each type of approach whether you're looking as a retrospective analysis in the past or prospective analysis into the future um and we found you know working with the Olympia data you already have a tangible data set um so you can measure those impacts to Priority populations and you know consider like well what if we changed the program uh and had changed you know maybe an incentive amount here that sort of thing we can project what kind of outcome would that have had in the past if that condition had been changed the um drawbacks or the cons to the retrospective analysis is that you can't set intentional goals for that program because it's already been occurring in the past and it's harder to divide to identify intentional populations for the project when it's already been in place so you're looking at the Historical past and then thinking about well how might that apply in the future to another project location or program design on the other side in the forward-looking uh analysis you can say all right you know for this program in the Nooksack site for example we can have some goals uh that we're looking to enroll a certain amount of deepest need customers or meet that population's need um and identify that particular population ahead of time in the design of building the program out and build it out to meet that need or that goal and the difficult part there is um you don't necessarily know what exactly is going to happen with the program impacts until you've actually started the program and the enrollments and can see what are the effects as they begin to happen in time and it can be challenging one part is managing the physical project so the technology that's going to be built and the schedule and the permitting and all that stuff and bringing that timeline into synchronicity with the engagement of the priority population and interested parties and interested communities uh to bring that whole process together was a challenge in that particular case Michael just you have two more minutes to wrap up so we can ask eag's a quick question go ahead okay uh can we go to the next slide then so where we're at right now and kind of going back to that first slide in the with the equity um uh docket we anticipate that we are going to take this methodology and apply it to all different kinds of programs across psse basically anywhere we can consider a benefit cost analysis we could add an equity Dimension to that whether we're looking at our energy effic efficiency programs or assistance programs uh infrastructure programs all those uh examples that are listed here and again we've brought forward the methodology we've reported it and now we're waiting for feedback on the methodology itself to determine next steps of how we will apply it going forward in addition lbnl has taken our case study and published their tools on the website for the Department of energy to make that uh available for uh you know resour as a resource Across the Nation for other utilities for other Regulators uh and interested parties and so on great thanks so much Michael it seems like there's many potential applications so in the last you know seven or eight minutes here if if uh EEG members wouldn't mind just turning their cameras on because we have just a question that we want to end on hearing from you all and that question is um you know you had a chance to try on on this this approach and breakout rooms you heard from Michael what's your feedback for PSC on this do you have any recommendations about how this might change are there factors missing from this analysis let's hear from from you all if you