MUNICIPAL ENERGY
EFFICIENCY 1 6
PROGRAMME, Relevant considerations for
Bulgaria planned activities
A1.1. What is the context, the
baseline and are the key
problems?
A1.2. What are the urgent
priorities herein?
A1.3. How would you define
sustainable development within
the context?
A1.1. estimated low energy
efficiency; bad technical
conditions of the sector
infrastructure; high expenses on at the local level
energy and lack of money; low
A
quality of the environment
Describe the
(insufficient heating) in
CONTEXT, setup the
residential, school and
BASELINE,
administrative buildings;
formulate
insufficien
PROBLEMS, identify
A1.2. diminution of expenses for A2.2. estimated need of new A3.2. no information available as A4.2. technical, political, social
NEEDS
energy consumption and
increase of the efficiency of the Ranking Criteria for Priority Expert assessment: diminution of
city energy infrastructure
A1.3.
overcoming the economic crisis; energy consumption at the
providing long-term development municipal level (the database budget of the municipality were
of local economy;
providing employment;
guaranteeing the quality of the
living environment for all citizens.
The Development Priorities of
the municipality are stated as
"initiation of growth and
economic development;
harmonious development of the
population; protection of natural
2 3
Tools, methods, indicators
A2.1. What tools are currently A3.1. Who might be influenced - A4.1. Who are the decision
applied?
A2.2. Do you plan to use a
new / different tool?
A2.3. What basic or additional A3.3. What are potential
information is needed for
using the tool? And is it
accessible?
A2.1. no previous experience A3.1. citizens, local business
of the Municipality in
evaluating energy efficiency
evaluation tools - the
Assessment (RCPA) tool
was developed based on
Norwegian and Dutch
methodologies that were
adapted to local climatic,
social and economic
conditions
A2.3. need for data about
was created within the
project)
Elements in decision making / planning
4 5
Expected Outputs /
Public Decision makers Communication
Deliverables
QUESTIONS - stage A
A5.1. What kind of A6.1. Do you plan to give an
whose problem is it? makers and main sectors communication strategy do you output at an early stage? To
involved? plan to establish? whom?
A3.2. How does the public define A4.2. What types of expertise A5.2. What do you plan to A6.2. Do you plan to prepare e.g.
sustainable development? are needed? communicate and to whom? a context report, data base
information, a summary of
A4.3. Is there a need for A5.3. What feedback (ideas, identified problems?
conflicts? external expertise and who recommendations) do you expect
(what organization) could from communication?
provide it?
A3.4. At what stage do you plan A5.4. What kind of information is
to involve them? planned to be accessible?
A3.5. What would be their role?
A3.6. What is your interest to
involve the public?
ANSWERS - stage A
A4.1. Municipal Council and A5.1. communication strategy A6.1. to the public: information
technical experts aimed at increasing awareness about possible EE measures and
about energy efficiency and about future activities
possible measures to achieve it,
flexible enough to match the
needs of various target groups
involved and to build up
motivation for action.
A5.2. communication with: (i) the A6.2. database of technical,
no inquiry on this was carried out and environmental public and (ii) different municipal economic, regulation, etc.
departments, in order to: provide information presented in: baseline
expenses for energy consumption information on the current state report, brochures, leaflets, a
and improvement in the quality of in the municipality concerning movie, Radio&TV broadcasts,
live energy consumption and
expenses; share practical
experience in the field of energy
effi
A3.3. the low income of the A4.3. yes, need of external A5.3. identification of existing
population and the restricted expertise - an organization with barriers to the implementation of
energy efficiency expertise energy efficiency policy:
not sufficient to meet high energy (Eneffect) and the Technical psychological, financial,
supply expenses University of Gabrovo behavioral, organizational, etc.
A3.4. stage of formulation of A5.4. information about baseline
policy objectives conditions; Information about
A3.5. to state their problems and municipal energy planning
needs (Municipal Energy Efficiency
A3.6. to be sure that all the needs Programme)
and potentials are
fully/adequately met by the
MEEP
MUNICIPAL ENERGY Elements in decision making / planning
EFFICIENCY 1 6
2 3 4 5
PROGRAMME, Relevant considerations for Expected Outputs /
Tools, methods, indicators Public Decision makers Communication
Bulgaria planned activities Deliverables
QUESTIONS - stage B
B1.1. What are relevant B2.1. With respect to B3.1. What inputs would you B4.1. Are political and experts' B5.1. How do you explain the B6.1. Would you consider an
objectives in the overall context new/chosen alternatives: expect from the public? issues clearly identified? objectives to the stakeholders? announcement of objectives,
and connections between them? Would you need or have you scale, major steps, the level of
considered to use a detail, available and required
new/specific tool or method? capacities and alternatives to
other stakeholders conducive?
B1.2. Have you considered B2.2. Have you considered B3.2. Are their visions regarded? B4.2. Which key issues are B5.2. What feedback and
alternatives (of problem eventual changes of the time- relevant to select alternatives? positive impulse would you
solution)? frame as a result of expect from that step (response,
changes/innovations such as different attitudes, participation,
new implemented tools or commitment)?
B1.3. What would be the scope methods? B3.3. What would be paying B5.3. How could the readiness to
of the planned activity in terms of partnerships - who should be accept others' visions be
duration and scale? considered in each alternative? achieved?
B ANSWERS - stage B
Describe B1.1. local capacity building and B2.1. estimated need of new B3.1. changes in behavioral B4.1. yes, political: formulation B5.1. information dissemination - B6.1. only to experts
OBJECTIVES, demonstration projects for tools and methods - the patterns; support for municipality of policy aims; meetings, brochures,
identify different types of buildings and RCPA initiatives expert: choice of approach and broadcastings; non-expert
ALTERNATIVES, infrastructure in order to study methodology for policy language was considered of
define the LEVEL of the applicability of the measures implementation particular importance
DETAIL under the peculiar conditions and
to provide practical proof of the
benefits achieved.

B1.2. no reasonable alternative
to MEEP was found
B1.3. scale: municipal energy
infrastructure
duration: long-term goals with
visible short-term effects
(the most demonstration projects
were accomplished within 3
years)
B2.2. Yes, political and
organizational reasons were
considered
B3.2. yes, where possible
B3.3. not clear
B4.2. cost-effectiveness of the
measures (to combine long-term
goals with visible short-term
effects)
B5.2. increased awareness and
willingness for participation in
municipal activities; changes in
the patterns of energy
consumption
B5.3. public dialogue about the
objectives and possible
measures
 MUNICIPAL ENERGY Elements in decision making / planning
EFFICIENCY 1 6
2 3 4 5
PROGRAMME, Relevant considerations for Expected Outputs /
Tools, methods, indicators Public Decision makers Communication
Bulgaria planned activities Deliverables
QUESTIONS - stage C
C1.1. How would you describe C2.1. To which extent are C3.1. Is the public invited to C4.1. Who will carry out the C5.1. How would you approach C6.1. Do you plan to inform other
the expected key impacts? problems and key impacts define their priorities? evaluation? the stakeholder's attitude to risk stakeholders about alternatives,
addressed by indicators, tools and failure of the chosen including information about key
and methods? alternatives? impacts, indicators, methods and
tools?
C1.2. What indicators would you C2.2. Is there a need for new C3.2. Have you considered C4.2. Which key impacts C5.2. How would you C6.2. How would you present it
chose (according to key tools and data? information about chosen (social, environmental, communicate "uncertainty" in (report, internet, information
problems and impacts and indicators, methods or defined terms of considering potential
economic) have you regarded? flyer)?
objectives)? impacts helpful to get closer to risks and the possibility of
C1.3. What are likely barriers for the public? C4.3. Are people's concerns and failure?
not achieving the aims? ideas considered?
C4.4. Are quantified and non-
Stages of decision making / planning

quantifiable facts even balanced

C in the evaluation?
For all ANSWERS - stage C
ALTERNATIVES: C1.1. comparison between C2.1. chosen indicators and C3.1. yes, public discussion C4.1. local (municipality, C5.1. the demonstration projects C6.1. not clear
Define KEY baseline (present) condition and methods addressed Technical University) and were aimed at reducing the risk
IMPACTS, describe expected impacts in terms of economic, environmental and external experts (Eneffect) of failure when applying
and chose on lower expenses on energy social aspects of the measures from elsewhere
INDICATORS, consumption, better living problems
METHODS and environment in buildings
TOOLS (heating) and higher safety in
urban space (street lighting)
C1.2. ENCON (energy C2.2. yes, need for new tools C3.2. public dissemination of C4.2. social - providing a better C5.2. A business plan was C6.2. information flyer
conservation) potential, CO2 to match local context- RCPA information about MEEP impact quality of the living environment developed to address possible
savings, SPB (simple payback), was considered but there is no for vulnerable social groups; risks and alternative actions
technical state and exploitation information available about environmental - reduction of
conditions of the objects, etc. implemented evaluation methods; GHG emissions;
economic - lower expenses on
energy consumption

C1.3. lack of adequate C4.3. yes, external expert

experience and skills; regulatory evaluation of public attitude
and financial constraints; C4.4. yes, balance between
absence of mechanisms for rapid quantified and non-quantifiable
and easy exchange of facts
MUNICIPAL ENERGY
EFFICIENCY 1 6
PROGRAMME, Relevant considerations for
Bulgaria planned activities
D1.1. What needs to be
evaluated and why?
D1.2. What would be the aim ?
D1.3. What social, environmental
and economic aspects should be
taken into consideration?
D
EVALUATION of
D1.1. cost-efficiency of the D2.1. Ranking Criteria for
ALTERNATIVES,
proposed measures (to combine Priority Assessment tool
select the final
measures with short and long-
alternative / solution
term effect)
D1.2. combination of cost-
efficient measures
D1.3. total energy consumption
by energy sources; degree of
Municipality’s influence;
motivation and commitment of
actors for participation in the
MEEP
E1.1. How would you describe
necessary measures for
improvement?
E1.2. What planning and
E
management tasks would you
define/consider
need to consider?
necessary
MITIGATION and
amend details in
PLANNING and
MANAGEMENT
Е1.1. lack of information
TASKS
Е1.2. established working group E2.2. yes, should be provided
for project implementation, a
consultative council, an
Elements in decision making / planning
2 3 4 5
Expected Outputs /
Tools, methods, indicators Public Decision makers Communication
Deliverables
QUESTIONS - stage D
D2.1. What tool or method D3.1. Who should be invited for D4.1. Who should do the D5.1. How and to whom would D6.1. Would you consider a
would you use for the the evaluation? evaluation? you communicate about written statement of evaluation
evaluation and the selection evaluation, selection results and results?
process? selection process?
D3.2. How could you guarantee D4.2. How will the final D5.2. Do you plan to present or D6.2. How would you report about
sufficient transparency for non- alternatives be validated? explain the results? the results?
experts? D6.3. Which alternative has been
chosen - explain why?
ANSWERS - stage D
D3.1. no public hearing D4.1. local and external experts, D5.1. meetings, consultations, D6.1. a written report to the
local authorities discussions with different experts Municipal Council
and politicians;
informing the public about the
final decisions.
D3.2. Municipality energy D4.2. political decision by the D5.2. yes, to municipal D6.2. not clear (report about the
department continually informs Municipal Council authorities, public, financing results to Municipal Council and
the public and the municipal institutions financing institutions)
authorities about MEEP D6.3. the most cost-efficient
implementation measures;
the choice was also influenced by
political considerations and
citizens' attitude.
QUESTIONS - stage E
E2.1. What are the E3.1. What kind of E4.1. How are stakeholder E5.1. How and to whom would E6.1. How would you report /
requirements to introduce a responsibilities could be relations organized? you communicate required inform the stakeholders about
new tool or method? attributed to different public measures for improvements? required measures to achieve
groups? improvements?
E2.2. Would that result in E4.2. What could stakeholders E6.2. What would you expect
additional training and eventually provide for the from that move?
education (capacity building)? implementation of measures?
E4.3. Who proposes mitigation
measures?
ANSWERS - stage E
E2.1. decision of the E3.1. to provide that different E4.1. co-ordination of all the E5.1. interactive process E6.1. meeting at the municipality
Municipal Council based on target groups involved in the actions is provided by Eneffect between technical experts and
proposal by technical experts project implement proposed and the municipal EE office politicians
measures in respective objects
E4.2. not clear E6.2. not clear
by an expert organization E4.3. project leader, business
partners, etc.
MUNICIPAL ENERGY
EFFICIENCY 1 6
PROGRAMME, Relevant considerations for
Bulgaria planned activities
F1.1. What would you report to
whom?
F1.2. Would you report on the
outcomes & choice of
alternatives?
F1.3. What kind of follow up
F activities would be required for
Define rules for considerations?
REPORTING / follow-
up ACTION
F1.1. MEEP implementation
results are reported to the
financing institution, monitoring
body
F1.2. yes
F1.3.not clear
G1.1. What should be monitored G2.1. Have you considered a G3.1. Who could be involved to G4.1. How would you include
(e.g. the project development or specific method or technology take over parts of the monitoring new emerging interests?
potential project impacts)? for the monitoring?
G1.2. What means (e.g. tools,
personnel) would be needed to
do a monitoring?
G1.3. Have you thought of a
certain monitoring pattern
(frequency, scope, scale)?
G
Define rules for
G1.1. both
MONITORING
G1.2. technical experts, technical
instruments, evaluation tools
G1.3. once per year for all
demonstration projects
2 3
Tools, methods, indicators
F2.1. How would you report
about introducing a new tool
or method?
F2.1. written report to the
Municipal Council
process?
G4.1. different monitoring G3.1. Citizens, NGOs, etc.
methods was applied to each
group of objects; reported
difficulties in environmental
assessment
Elements in decision making / planning
4 5
Public Decision makers
QUESTIONS - stage F
F3.1. Do you consider a non- F4.1. Is there a major target
technical summary of the final group to report to?
outcomes?
F3.2. Do you plan to provide a F4.2. Who makes the decision
draft report for public for the implementation of the
consultation? final plan or project (e.g. which
level in decision making)?
ANSWERS - stage F
F3.1. brochures addressed to the F4.1. Municipal Council,
general public with information for financing organization
non-experts
F3.2. not necessary F4.2. Municipal Council took the F5.2. not clear
decision for MEEP
implementation
QUESTIONS - stage G
G4.2. Which administrative unit G5.2. Have the original needs of G6.2. To what extent was the
would be responsible?
G4.3. Who could take over
responsibility to continue after
the monitoring?
ANSWERS - stage G
G4.1. assessment of the
changed political, social and
environmental situation
G4.2. The municipal energy
efficiency office responsible for
newly arising interests/needs
G4.3. not clear
Communication
F5.1. How would you
communicate results to different
stakeholders?
F5.2. Where are the final
proposal information
documented?
F5.1. meeting of stakeholders
with Project leader, Mayor,
Municipal Council.
G5.1. Who should report to
whom about the monitoring?
stakeholders changed over time? initial problem(s) solved?
G5.3. What action would result
from that?
G5.1. the organization
responsible for the monitoring to created by Eneffect is regularly
the Municipal Council
G5.2. yes
G5.3. revision of measures and
recommendations for new
measures
Expected Outputs /
Deliverables
F6.1. How do you plan to present
results?
F6.2. Is the report understandable
also for non-experts?
F6.3. Have you planned any
follow-up activities?
F6.4. Have you considered an
action or management plan?
F6.1. reports, presentations,
brochures, film, etc.
F6.2. yes
F6.3. monitoring of the results,
information dissemination
F6.4. yes
G6.1. Are there regular, periodical
reports assigned, e.g.
maintenance of the data base?
G6.1. yes, the database initially
updated by the municipal energy
efficiency office
G6.2. Yes, fully solved in
administrative buildings that are
municipal property and with
regard to the street lighting; to a
great extent solved in school
buildings; to certain extend solved
in residential buildings that were