Energy Efficiency Implementation Project # 27647

Load Management Subcommittee

Report to:

ERCOTDemand Side Working Group

August 8, 2008

2

2

Market Participants

TDSPs Consultants DRSP REPs Other

AEPGood

CompanyComverge / Enerwise

Cirro Energy ERCOT

CenterPoint FrontierConsumer

PowerlineConstellation Itron

CPS ICF EnerNOC Direct EnergyLegacy

Energy Mgmt Solutions

Entergy Site Controls TXU Energy eMeter

Oncor

3

3

Today’s Discussion

LM Subcommittee Mission Statement

LM Subcommittee Recommendations

LM Discussion of Recommendations

4

4

Encourage the collaborative development and deployment of cost

effective Load Management programs in order to meet the needs of Texas’

energy consumers, within the guidelines of Texas’ energy efficiency rule.

Load Management Subcommittee

Mission Statement

5

5

Much Needed Forum for Discussion

6

6

More Alphabet Soup

ACRONYMS:

DRSP – Demand Response Service Providers (load aggregators)

EE – Energy Efficiency

EESP – Energy Efficiency Service Provider (ESCOs)

LM – Load Management

LR – Load Resources

REP – Retail Electric Provider (electric retailers)

SOP – Standard Offer Program

TDSP – Transmission & Distribution Service Provider (wires utilities)

7

7

1) Contract Life Flexibility in LM Programs

2) Clarify DRSP, REP & TDSP Roles for LM Programs in Competitive Market

3) Consistent M&V Protocols Across TDSP & ERCOT LM Programs

4) Protocol for aggregation of non-IDR meters for LM Programs

5) Smaller Load Threshold for LM Programs

6) Eliminate 40% Participation Cap for LM Programs

7) Develop Standard Templates for LM Programs

8) Clarify Measure Life for LM Programs

9) Design TDSP & ERCOT LM Programs that Allow LRs to Receive Separate Benefits From TDSP & ERCOT Programs

Load Management Goals

8

8

Load Management Subcommittee

Recommendations

9

9

Contract Life Flexibility in LM Programs#1

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

TDSPs will adjust future LM program designs to allow multiple year contracts with DRSPs.

10

10

Clarify DRSP, REP & TDSP Roles for C&i LM Programs in Competitive Market

#2

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

TDSPs are willing to work toward future LM programs that are structured to allow DRSPs/REPs to recruit customer load for a fixed period of time from program launch.

If this period of time expires and the TDSPs program’s MW goal has not been met, TDSPs will then be free to contract directly with end-use customers for load participation. TDSPs believe it is important to find effective ways to engage DRSPs/REPs in LM programs.

11

11

Consistent M&V Protocols Across TDSP & ERCOT LM Programs

#3

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

ERCOT and TDSPs will review new NAESB protocols when published and determine if they are suitable for adoption in ERCOT. These protocols may not be available for use until 2010 program cycle.

12

12

Protocol for aggregation of non-IDR meters for LM Programs

#4

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

TDSP’s LM programs will follow the PUCT’s sub- metering protocol to allow for aggregation of non-IDR metered loads into LM programs.

13

13

Smaller Load Threshold for LM Programs#5

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

TDSP’s LM programs will require at least 100 kW of curtailable load per contract, with or without aggregation.

14

14

Eliminate Oncor & CenterPoint 40% Participation Cap for LM Programs

#6

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

Oncor & CenterPoint will work proactively with DRSPs/REPs to minimize the effect of the 40% participation cap within the management constraints of the utilities overall EE programs.

15

15

Develop Standard Templates for LM Programs#7

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

TDSPs will work proactively with DRSPs/REPs to develop LM program templates that may include tiered incentives for different levels of load commitment. Incentives for this matrix of programs could vary based on response time, number and duration of calls.

16

16

OPEN ISSUES

17

17

Clarify Measure Life for LM Programs#8

Non-consensus Position:

This is an issue that applies to various EE measures and requires a clarification by the Commission.

18

18

Design TDSP & ERCOT LM Programs that Allow LRs to Receive Separate Benefits From TDSP & ERCOT Programs

#9

LM Subcommittee Consensus Position:

This issue is beyond the scope of the subcommittee. We recommend that this issue be referred to Project # 32853: Evaluation of Demand-Response Programs in the Competitive Electric Market Project.

Coordination with the ERCOT DSWG will also be required to optimize LM program design for the ERCOT market.

AssociatesGood Company

We see the way forward.

Good Company envisions and develops market opportunities for companies with products and services that are good for the environment

and good business.

QUESTIONS?