The Regulatory Assistance Project 177 Water St. Gardiner, Maine USA Tel: Fax: State Street, Suite 3 Montpelier, Vermont USA Tel: Fax: Website: MADRI Facilitation and Comparison with NEDRI Midwest Demand Response Initiative February 9, 2007 Richard Sedano

Perspective of Facilitator  Important to enable everyone to engage  Key concerns must get into the discussion  Sometimes, people are too polite  Sometimes, “outsiders” need encouragement  Meetings need to be interesting  Other factors important to MADRI  Focus – choose most important issues  Forum for Third Parties and utilities  Starting place for PUC initiatives – they are key  Innovation and Product Oriented

MADRI and NEDRI  New England Demand Response Initiative  (MADRI started in mid-2004)  Focused most on RTO and improving demand response programs, states resisted pricing reforms (MADRI focus is on states)  Operated by consensus to create a single set of recommendations (MADRI focus is options)  Handout of final recommendations, report available at PORTJuly2003%2Epdf PORTJuly2003%2Epdf  Process ran out of steam (MADRI still vital)

MADRI and NEDRI  More NEDRI-MADRI comparisons  NEDRI drew on very close, sometimes contentious NEPOOL relationships (MADRI, less so, and has much more third party (CSP) participation)  NEDRI had low commissioner-level attention (MADRI has good commissioner attention through a steering committee)

Consistencies  Both processes noted by FERC  Both produce implemented results  Both used sub-groups to bore in on key issues  MADRI’s got to more fundamental issues  Participating states have common concerns  Market power, wholesale market function  Both have DEP/Air Director participation  Both address energy efficiency, though not comfortably  Both assisted by experts, incl. RAP, supported by federal government (NEDRI had more financial support from RTOs)