Load Shift Working Group November 14, 2018 10AM – 4:30PM PST CPUC Goldengate room https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Agenda 10:00AM-10:30AM: Intros, Updates, and Purpose  Reg Updates Energy Division remarks on what happens after the report is finalized MIDAS call recap Proposal updates: anything that changed since last meeting  10:30AM-11:00AM: Summary of comments received on outline Discussion  11:00AM-12:30PM: Exercise Comparing Products Dispatch method (CAISO market dispatch <--> out of market dispatch) Settlement level (aggregation <--> device) Dispatch geographic granularity (DLAP/zone <--> circuit) Dispatch time granularity (hourly <--> seconds) https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Agenda 12:30PM-1:30PM: Lunch  1:30PM-3:00PM: Exercise Continued Role of IOU (large <--> small) Role of aggregator (large <--> small) Role of customer (large <--> small)  3:00PM-3:15PM: Break  3:15PM-3:45PM: Exercise Continued Launch viability (hard <--> hardest)  3:45PM-4:30PM: Putting the Pieces Together Discuss cross-cutting insights https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Introduction and Purpose Roll call DR Regulatory Updates https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ ED Remarks D.16-09-056 Goal for demand response programs: Commission-regulated demand response programs shall assist the State in meeting its environmental objectives, cost‑effectively meet the needs of the grid, and enable customers to meet their energy needs at a reduced cost. Principals for demand response programs: Demand response shall be flexible and reliable to support renewable integration and emission reductions; Demand response shall evolve to complement the continuous changing needs of the grid; Demand response customers shall have the right to provide demand response through a service provider of their choice and Utilities shall support their choice by eliminating barriers to data access; Demand response shall be implemented in coordination with rate design; Demand response processes shall be transparent; and Demand response shall be market‑driven leading to a competitive, technology‑neutral, open‑market in California with a preference for services provided by third‑parties through performance‑based contracts at competitively determined prices, and dispatched pursuant to wholesale or distribution market instructions, superseded only for emergency grid conditions. https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ ED Remarks D.17-10-017 Commission must undertake several activities before launching new models of demand response. Final report may inform a future rulemaking on new models of demand response. Developing a proposal for a foundation that the Commission can use to inform the rulemaking to adopt policies and designs for new models of demand response. The final report may be used to inform a new rulemaking to develop a foundation for new models of demand response. https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ MIDAS Call Recap Webinar was held on 11.7 Agenda included: What would a pilot look like? Who should bear the risk in such a pilot? How could MIDAS interact with a Distribution System Operator (DSO)? Are there any distribution level considerations for the MIDAS group? How can avoided capacity payments be rolled into these products (estimating the capacity value of market informed products)? https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Proposal Updates Product comparison matrix has been updated (11.6) Has anything that changed since last meeting? https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Report Outline Comments received from: CAISO CLECA CPower Peter Alstone (Schatz/LBNL) PG&E Public Advocates Office SCE Organizational comments Put “why load shift” section ahead of “introduction” Suggest including most of “why shift load” section as an appendix https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Report Outline – Comments Differences of perspective on RA section: Current RA framework already reflects value of raising minimum load (albeit indirectly) Curtailment works, too. Gridworks Draft Recommendations: Long-term commitment to Load Shift may be premature Consider more detailed procedural recommendations (e.g., how to invite pilot proposals, give further consideration to demand charges) Suggested additions: More complete data access section Load Shift relative to rates, EIM, XSP, DERMs Consideration of whether pilots are scalable GHG impact data form Shatz/LBNL Consideration of how exporting resources create unique value and performance evaluation dynamics Acknowledge potential costs and need for consideration of cost-effectiveness Highlight differences between PDR-LSR and LSR 2.0 https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Report Outline – Requests for Clarifications SCE to CLECA: clarify what customer receives/pays when real time prices swing SCE to CLECA: DA clearing price, not forecast, right? What notification time needed to make this possible… 2pm or 4pm? CLECA on CCP: Suggest 3-4pm, “This would allow 2 hours after CAISO’s IFM, but early enough so customers can plan on changes for the next day.” PG&E on LSR 2.0: bidding at positive prices allowed under proposal, correct? CAISO on LSR 2.0: clarify existing performance evaluation methodologies are for curtailment only. CPower on LSR 2.0: Yes, but they are being used for consumption in XSP and seem to be working. CAISO on MIDAS: need a suggested performance evaluation methodology before asserting market revenues CAISO on Sunrun Integrated: clarify the difference b/w this proposal and LSR 2.0 + whether it’s supply-side bid (PDR) or load bid. CLECA on CCP: underlying ratemaking has complexities not captured in the summary and needing further review https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Product Comparison https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Objectives & Assumptions Draw out key similarities and differences between products Show the diversity of products and how they complement other programs/initiatives Enable the Commission to weigh relative strengths of the products Postpone premature determinations on 'good' or 'bad' in favor of relative advantages Begin evaluating the viability of products Gridworks assumptions: Proposals lie on a spectrum Deciding between them isn't required at this time Funding determinations will require more detail but we have enough info to  decide whether to take the appropriate next steps A portfolio of approaches hedges risk https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Key Questions Where do the proposals sit on the spectrum? Why is this a key criteria? What’s important about it? Does a product’s capabilities relative to this criterion impact its ability to meet certain grid needs? If so, which ones? Are there barriers associated with this criterion that need to be reported? https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Evaluation Criteria Dispatch method (CAISO market dispatch <--> out of market dispatch) Settlement level (aggregation <--> device) Dispatch geo-granularity (zone <--> circuit) Dispatch time granularity (hourly <--> seconds) Role of IOU (large <--> small) Role of aggregator (large <--> small) Role of customer (large <--> small)  Launch viability (hard <--> hardest) https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Comparing Products Evaluation Criteria: Dispatch method (CAISO market dispatch <--> out of market dispatch) Settlement level (aggregation <--> device) Dispatch geo-granularity (zone <--> circuit) Dispatch time granularity (hourly <--> seconds) Role of IOU (large <--> small) Role of aggregator (large <--> small) Role of customer (large <--> small)  Launch viability (hard <--> hardest) Key Questions: Where do the proposals sit on the spectrum? Why is this a key criteria? What’s important about it? Does a product’s capabilities relative to this criterion impact its ability to meet certain grid needs? If so, which ones? Are there barriers associated with this criterion that need to be reported? https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Cross-cutting Considerations What does the whole analysis say about the relative merits of product proposals? What does this evaluation tell us about the main recommendations the group would make to the Commission? Are there examples where these proposal are already implemented? https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Next Steps Final Report Timeline Update on Future Sessions https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ Next Steps Date Milestone Topics   Notes Friday, Nov. 30 Report Draft to WG    Gridwork to WG Monday, Dec. 10 Stakeholder Submissions WG comments on first draft of report Deadline for stakeholders to provide written feedback on report draft Wednesday, Dec. 12 CPUC’s Courtyard Room Working Group Meeting Review draft 1 and stakeholder comments on it Consider if a phone or in-person meeting is needed in January on the report Dec. 14 Report Draft V2 to WG Gridwork to WG Friday, Dec. 21 WG comments due on report draft V2 Deadline for stakeholders to provide written feedback on report V2 draft Monday, Dec. 31 Final report to working group Gridwork to WG Redline + clean draft for transparency Jan, 2019 Admin time to submit report Possible phone or in-person meeting to discuss the https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Appendices

https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/ A B C D E F G H   Dispatch Method Dispatch Geo-Granularity Negative Pricing? Transaction Settles at... Settlement & Performance Evaluation Role of IOU Role of Third-party Aggregators PDR LSR Market Sublap Yes Aggregated Resource Metered + Typical-Use Adjustment Program Administrator Aggregate, Bid, Coordinate, Settle LSR 2.0 Baseline Support Rule 24; LSE CCP Program Administrator Signal Based on Day-Ahead Market Price Nodal Partial Premise Aggregate, coordinate, settle MIDAS Program Administrator Signal Based on Market Price or Other Grid State Indicators Scalable MIDAS group to provide feedback Aggregate, Coordinate Sunrun Integrated Program Administrator Signal Based on Market Price or Grid Condition Price Device (solar vs storage) Metered plus... Active DSO Sunrun Informed Permanent/Scheduled Device Metered Passive DSO P4LS Scheduled Premise or Aggregated Participant pool vs. average (control group) Determine Schedule Aggregate & coordinate https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/

Primary Identified Barriers LSR 2.0 Approval by CAISO and FERC following a subsequent stakeholder initiative considering how technological neutrality. CCP Mitigation for an increase in a customer maximum non-coincident demand charge caused by increased load from a CCP event. MIDAS More granular/accurate grid state indicators. Sunrun Integrated CPUC needs to expand RA beyond peak load and enable alignment with capacity planning needs within all time and grid domains. Sunrun Informed CPUC would need to expand RA beyond peak load and enable alignment with capacity planning needs within all time and grid domains. P4LS Developing load shape schedules and measuring performance. https://gridworks.org/initiatives/load-shift-working-group/