1. 1 Pepco and Delmarva Power September 1, 2008 EmPOWER Maryland Filing (Case Nos. 9155 and 9156 ) First Working Group Discussion Sept. 25, 2008

2. 2 Overview of Filings Blueprint for the Future Filings -- March 21, 2007 for both DPL and Pepco –Includes Energy Efficiency, Conservation, Demand Response, AMI, and support for Bill Stabilization Adjustment Mechanism Commission Orders Approving Bill Stabilization Adjustment Mechanism – July 19, 2007 –Pepco Case No. 9092, Order No. 81517 –DPL Case No. 9093, Order No. 81518 Order 81618, Case 9111 (Fast Track) issued September 19, 2007 –Approved Residential CFL Program, Customer Awareness Campaign, and DSM Surcharge Energy Efficiency Conservation and Demand Response Plans October 26, 2007 for both DPL and Pepco –EmPOWER MD Goal Achievement Filing on Energy Efficiency, Conservation, Demand Response, Dynamic Pricing, AMI, and Solar Initiative Pepco and DPL Demand Response Filings -- February 15, 2008 Commission issues Letter Orders approving DPL and Pepco Demand Response Service Program on April 18, 2008 Comprehensive Energy Efficiency/Conservation Programs in Response to Commission Data Request – Pepco filed on April 29, 2008 and Delmarva Power on May 2, 2008 Revised Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programs in Response to Data Request – July 29, 2008

3. 3 EmPower Maryland Energy Efficiency Act of 2008 §7-211(G)(1) (2) ENERGY -- Requires electric utilities to procure or provide cost-effective energy efficiency and conservation services with projected and verifiable electricity savings and are designed to achieve a targeted reduction of at least 5% by the end of 2011 and 10% by the end of 2015 or per capita electricity consumed in the company’s service territory during 2007. PEAK DEMAND -- Require electric utilities to implement a cost-effective demand response program in the company’s service territory that is designed to achieve a targeted reduction of at least 5% by the end of 2011, 10% by the end of 2013, and 15% by the end of 2015, in per capita peak demand of electricity consumed in the electric company’s service territory during 2007.

4. 4 EmPOWER Maryland Energy and Demand Reduction Goals for Pepco and Delmarva Power On August 15, 2008 the Commission issued its Notice establishing the energy and demand reductions goals for each utility: Delmarva Power Pepco

5. 5 EmPOWER Goals Programs have been developed to reduce annual electricity use, reduce peak electricity demand, provide savings opportunities to all customer segments (including low income and moderate income customers), incorporate new smart grid technology. Low Income program included. It is essential at this time to establish additional demand side programs that will permit Pepco to build upon the success of the ongoing residential energy efficient lighting program – thereby, helping Maryland consumers to reduce their energy costs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

6. 6 EmPOWER Maryland Energy and Demand Reduction Goals for Pepco and Delmarva Power In order to assist in reaching the EmPower Maryland goals, Pepco and Delmarva have identified several additional programs and will continue to work to identify new techniques and technologies that can be used to reduce consumption and peak demand as rapidly as possible (if approved by the Commission). Significant benefits of AMI deployment, including utility operational cost reductions, customer service improvements, demand side management supporting capabilities, and dynamic pricing to track wholesale energy market costs. Behavioral change promoted through information received from AMI, and validation of EE&C efforts. Company analysis has concluded that it is unlikely that we can meet the statutory energy consumption reduction goals using cost-effective programs (using the current Commission specified cost-effectiveness tests).

7. 7 Pepco/Delmarva Plan Overview Cost-effective utility provided energy efficiency and conservation programs Cost-effective utility provided demand response programs Low income weatherization program (does not pass traditional cost-effectiveness screening) AMI enabled dynamic pricing and AMI enabled detailed customer usage reports (AMI deployment justified through filed business cases demonstrating benefits are higher than costs) Efficient street lighting initiatives with local governments (funded through tariffs) A utility provided program designed to encourage customer purchase and installation of photovoltaic systems Utility distribution system photovoltaic installations Future possible distribution equipment efficiency improvements that may include transformers and smart grid voltage control equipment

8. 8 Forecasted Reductions If all elements of Pepco’s plans are implemented: –The peak electricity demand (PJM level) will be reduced by approximately 759 MW by year-end 2015 and 1,332,000 MWh of electric energy annually will be avoided –From 2008 to 2015 the projected total cost is $423,000,000 For Delmarva Power, if all elements are implemented: –The peak electricity demand (PJM level) will be reduced by approximately 238 MW by year-end 2015 and 332,000 MWh of electric energy annually will be avoided. –From 2008 to 2015 the projected total cost is $150,000,000.

9. 9 Forecasted EmPower Achievements (with line losses) Pepco20112015 MW512759 MWh604,0001,332,000 Cost$54M$423M % Goal MW151%108% %Goal MWh67%66% DPL20112015 MW137238 MWh154,000332,448 Cost$14M$150M % Goal MW125%99% %Goal MWh55%61% Note: Costs include AMI, EE&C, DR and Other Programs.

10. 10 Pepco & Delmarva EE & C Program Descriptions General Energy Awareness Campaign Educate customers about energy efficiency, conservation and demand response opportunities using public relations and media messaging to create awareness of programs Residential Low Income Program Provide comprehensive weatherization, energy conservation and education services to low- income customers. Residential HVAC Efficiency Program Motivate customers to select high efficiency unitary AC and heat pump equipment when making HVAC purchase decisions. Also education of marketplace about increased efficiency and improved comfort from proper HVAC system installation. Residential Lighting and Appliance Program Increase ENERGY STAR © lighting and window AC products, using rebates and/or middle- market buy-downs Home Performance with ENERGY STAR Program Improve overall performance of the home when improvements are being considered, by taking a whole house approach to reducing energy Building Commissioning and O & M Program Improve the way customers commission, operate and maintain their facilities.

11. 11 Pepco & Delmarva EE & C Program Descriptions (Cont'd) Non-Residential HVAC Efficiency Program Motivate non-residential customers to select high efficiency options when purchasing HVAC systems through incentives for high efficiency unitary AC and heat pump equipment. Non-Residential Prescriptive Rebate Program Provide incentives for selected common, cost-effective energy efficiency measures. Custom Incentive Program Any cost-effective non-lighting energy efficiency improvements that are not eligible for rebates through the Company’s other non-residential DSM programs.

12. 12 Demand Programs Non-Residential Internet Platform for load Curtailments Customers will receive hourly energy data, hourly Zonal Locational Marginal Prices (LMPs), and load reduction calculations (hourly energy savings) presented through the Internet platform. Residential Direct Load Control (approved and starting implementation) Residential central air conditioner and heat pump cycling program to enable the reduction in high summer electric demand through the remote cycling of customer central electric air conditioner and heat pump compressors Non-Residential Direct Load Control Non-Residential central air conditioner and heat pump cycling program to enable the reduction in high summer electric demand through the remote cycling of customer central electric air conditioner and heat pump compressors

13. 13 Pepco & DPL Additional Recommended Programs Dynamic Pricing AMI enabled program that offers all SOS customers dynamic pricing. Will provide both energy savings and peak demand reductions. Maryland Facility Solar Installations Provides a renewable distributed generation asset on Company owned sites, offsetting utility load, and generating clean energy for Maryland customers. Electricity generated and SRECS will be used to offset program costs. Production coincident with peak. Photovoltaic Customer Installation Program Provides turnkey photovoltaic installation service by certified contractors, a 15 year discounted (by 2 percent) fixed interest loan included on the customers bill, and a maintenance program. Customers would own the installations and receive any available state and federal incentives. Efficient Street Lighting Conversion of mercury vapor streetlights to more energy efficient high pressure sodium streetlights. Distribution/Transmission System Improvements Identification and installation of distribution and transmission equipment that lessens energy use. Transformer and Distribution Efficiency Company requires all distribution transformer manufacturers to supply units that exceed current minimum energy efficiency levels now (TSL2), moving to the Commission mandated purchasing rules effective beginning in 2009 and has already begun purchasing network and subsurface distribution transformers that meet the 2010 DOE standards.

14. 14 EmPOWER Maryland 2011 Energy Efficiency, Conservation and Demand Response Achievements - Pepco

15. 15 EmPOWER Maryland 2011 Energy Efficiency, Conservation and Demand Response Achievements - Delmarva

16. 16 PEPCO Plan and Programmatic Cost Effectiveness

17. 17 Delmarva Plan and Programmatic Cost Effectiveness

18. 18 Pepco Projected Total Program Costs by Year

19. 19 Delmarva Power Projected Total Costs By Year

20. 20 Benefits of Advanced Metering Infrastructure Demand Response: –Integrates AMI system with demand response enabling technology – remotely controllable programmable thermostat –Supports demand response through pricing options that more closely track wholesale electricity market supply conditions – hourly pricing, critical peak pricing and critical peak load reduction rebates –Enhances customer control over monthly bills through additional information regarding electricity consumption – empowers better customer control over energy costs Remote Meter Reading: –Eliminates need for meter reader to read the meter – enables exchange of data between network and meter eliminating need for utility worker to access meters, increasing accuracy of data, allowing immediate availability of energy consumption data permitting rapid response to usage inquiries –Permits more frequent reading – meter collects hourly data on a daily basis –Supports enhanced customer service capabilities – customer selectable billing dates, improved utility response to high bill inquiries, ability to readily obtain meter readings that coincide with customer move dates, rapid utility notification of customer outages. –Improves reading accuracy –Discovers malfunctioning meters – numerous processes to verify proper recording of data, software to detect and report meter and communication malfunctions –Provides additional customer specific load research data – compiles interval data for all customers which can be used to optimize the design of the electric system and allow competitive and wholesale suppliers to refine prices and improve their price bids

21. 21 Benefits of Advanced Metering Infrastructure Distribution System Monitoring –Improves distribution system design, reliability and performance – smart grid concepts available to permit the deployment of an array of sensors and control devises to provide additional real-time monitoring Distribution System Asset Management –Supports more rapid customer restoration time – system can detect outages independent of customer calls which allows utility to respond quicker –Allows utilities to dispatch repair crews in a more efficient manner – outage data acquired within minutes allowing utility to determine type of repair likely to restore power quickly to most customers

22. 22 Advanced Metering Infrastructure – Supporting Dynamic Pricing and Energy Use Information Phased deployment of AMI meters planned to begin during 2010, completed by summer 2011 Will support peak demand response activities including dynamic pricing and deployment of demand response enabling equipment. Costs: –Cost of universal deployment of AMI for its Maryland customers: Pepco $127.8 million Delmarva $51 million –AMI system incremental cost to operate: Pepco $1,038,000 annually Delmarva $431,000 annually Savings: –Operational savings from AMI deployment over 15 year period: Pepco $74.5 million Delmarva $36.5 million –Estimated demand response benefits: Pepco $314 million Delmarva $52 million Financial benefits resulting from AMI deployment would, on a net present value basis over a 15 year period: –Delmarva: exceed program costs by between $1 million and $35 million –Pepco: exceed program costs by between $46.7 million and $265.7 million

23. 23 EE&C Modeling Improvements Program Model –Redesigned for 4 PJM Time Periods (per PSC) –Individual measure load-shape based avoided kWh cost to properly calculate NPVs –Updated Avoided Costs –Measure Selection Based Upon Retail Avoided Costs (per PSC Staff) –Updated and reverified Measure Costs –Prior modeling conducted during 2007 based primarily upon 2005 available data –Updated to new building codes effective 2007 –Added Utility Cost Test (per PSC) Improved DOE-2 energy analysis –Modeled additional measures to capture interactive impacts –Improved equipment sizing routines –Refined water heating algorithm –Enhanced HVAC analysis –Included minor residential end-uses in savings estimates to increase accuracy

24. 24 Modeling Improvements (Cont.) Updated measure costs using most recent CA DEER database and market data available Updated measure assumptions –Commercial lighting updated to latest ASHRAE –Refined assumptions on internal heat gains to more closely match real-world conditions –Refined assumptions on lighting and appliance consumption based on latest data –Updates HVAC tune-up assumptions based on latest information and program designs

25. 25 TRC Comparison Increase in Retail TRCs comparing Comprehensive to Empower can largely be explained by increase in SOS rates and change of program selection. Pepco Comprehensive: Wholesale TRC 2.7, Retail TRC 3.5 EmPower: Wholesale TRC 3.82, Retail TRC 4.1 DPL Comprehensive: Wholesale TRC 2.7, Retail TRC 2.9 EmPower:Wholesale TRC 2.84, Retail TRC 2.95

26. 26 Two Avoided Cost Methodologies: Retail Vs. Wholesale Traditionally, utility DSM cost-effectiveness analysis is conducted based upon wholesale electric market avoided costs. However, to help Maryland policymakers gain an understanding of the benefits of recommended DSM programs to Maryland consumers, cost-effectiveness evaluation of the programs using retail avoided costs were used for efficiency measure selection and program level cost effectiveness calculations. Program level cost-effectiveness using wholesale electric level avoided costs are also provided to further demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of the proposed efficiency programs. PHI recommended DSM programs are clearly cost-effective and beneficial to Maryland consumers and should be implemented in the near-term.

27. 27 Retail Electric Avoided Costs Based on current Residential Retail Standard Offer Service Rates. Residential SOS Bill Impacts from April 2008 SOS Bids has increased rates 5.5% for Pepco and 2.7% for DPL (Case 9054). These new rates were adjusted with the embedded value of capacity, as avoided cost of capacity and the benefits of reduced demand at peak hours is evaluated separately in the cost effectiveness modeling. Capacity Adjusted SOS apportioned across four energy time-of-use bins specified by the Commission. Avoided costs for capacity utilized in the Retail model is the same for the Wholesale Electric Avoided Costs.

28. 28 Pepco Comparison of Avoided Costs from EmPOWER to the Comprehensive July 29 2008 filing EmPOWER time weighted average SOS is $0.1135/KWh. Removing capacity (74.05% weighted average is comprised of energy) equals a Energy All Hours energy equivalent all hours energy only $0.084/KWh. Focusing only on energy, there was 40% to 50% increase over Pepco Comprehensive EE&C wholesale avoided costs $0.058/KWh. But this will vary by measure because of the 4 bins. Key is the load profile of EE&C measure, how it is impacted by capacity prices. Primarily due to including retail margins and the most recent rate increase. Wholesale Comprehensive Retail Empower

29. 29 DPL Comparison of Avoided Costs from EmPOWER to the Comprehensive July 29 2008 filing EmPOWER All hours cost is $0.1079/KWh. Removing capacity (74.05% weighted average is comprised of energy) equals a Energy All Hours energy equivalent 0.0769/KWh. 17% increase over DPL Comprehensive EE&C wholesale avoided costs $0.068/KWh. Primarily due to including retail margins and the most recent rate increase. Wholesale Comprehensive Retail Empower

30. 30 Wholesale Electric Market Avoided Costs IPM is a linear optimization model, least cost means of meeting electric generation energy and capacity requirements. Used established capacity prices through 2011/2012 from PJM BRA. Future unknown energy, capacity, and natural gas prices were developed using the latest forecast from ICF’s Integrated Planning Model (IPM®) for the PJM South region. Complies with specified constraints: air pollution regulations, transmission constraints, and plant specific operational constraints. The IPM forecast includes emissions allowance prices (CO2, SOx, NOx, and Hg) for future cost of energy. Societal Test benefit adder of $0.0115 per KWh reduced accounts for externalities and uses a different (societal) discount rate KWh reduced. IPM forecast does not reflect losses, reserves, T&D costs, or the externalities required for the test. Therefore, the addition of 7% for losses, 15% for reserves, a $5 addition for T&D per kW have been added to the IPM values.

31. 31 New Measures

32. 32 New Measures (Cont.)

33. 33 New Measures (Cont.)

34. 34 New Measures (Cont.)

35. 35 Understanding the Program Model Calculates yearly load-shape based avoided energy cost for every measure Predicts energy efficiency potential –Analyzes measure level impacts and cost-effectiveness –Develops measure penetration estimates Estimates measure impacts and costs over time Develops Program Impacts and Budgets Calculates Program Cost-effectiveness

36. 36 Load-shape Based Avoided Energy Cost Avoided Costs are in Assumptions worksheet Calculated for every measure Calculated for all years through 2034 Calculated in worksheet DOE-2 and shown in Avoided Costs Example Calculation

37. 37 Predicting Energy Efficiency Potential Analyzed 213 potential residential and 268 non-residential measures (Technologies and DOE-2) Consider measure incremental cost, 4-bin energy, demand and therm impacts to determine measure level TRC test cost-effectiveness (Technologies, Measure TRC) Develop annual installation potential estimates for cost-effective measures (Technologies, Documentation)

38. 38 Estimating Measure Impacts and Costs Calculate yearly measure energy impacts (Benefits) Calculate yearly measure costs (Costs)

39. 39 Develop Program Impacts, Budgets and Cost- effectiveness Define programs (Program Inputs) Calculate Program impacts and costs (Program Output) Calculate Program cost-effectiveness (Program Tests)

40. 40 Program Model Demonstration

41. 41 Changes for PHI – EE&C 2015 EmPOWER: $170M 285 MW 1,446,000 MWh Comprehensive: $161M 241 MW 1,214,000 MWh

42. 42 Changes for Pepco – EE&C 2015 EmPOWER: $125M 228 MW 1,166,000 MWh Comprehensive: $107M 166 MW 915,000 MWh EmPower Budget Difference - $18.6M additional –Added Low Income Program - $17.8M –Internet Platform moved to Demand Response Programs ($679,000) –No major change spend level with the General Awareness Campaign Non-Residential Programs –Increased spending from $28.6M to $43.5M.due primarily to selection of additional measures –MWh increased from 393 to 736 –MW increased from 82 to 132 Residential –Increased spending 6% from to $68M to $72.3M due primarily to low income –Reduced HPwES spending due to incentive emphasis on financing ( $17.7M) –MWh decreased 18% from 522 to 430 primarily due to refinements in lighting penetration modeling –MW Increased 13% from 85 to 96

43. 43 Changes for DPL – EE&C 2015 EmPOWER:$ 45M57 MW 280,000 MWh Comprehensive: $ 54M 75 MW 299,000 MWh EmPower Budget Difference - $8.8M lower –Internet Platform moved to Demand Response Programs ($340,000) Non-Residential Programs –Decreased spending from $23.5M to $11.9M –MWh decreased from 220 to 124 –MW decreased from 52 to 23 –12.5 % due to Internet Platform Residential –Increased spending 12.5% from to $23.2M to $26.1M due primarily to Low Income –Reduced HPwES spending due to incentive emphasis on financing ( $9.6M) –MWh increased 96% from 79 to 156 primarily due to refinements in lighting penetration modeling –MW Increased 47% from 24 to 35

44. 44 Pepco/Delmarva EE&C Program Bill Impact Benefits to individual account holders will largely depend on the voluntary participation level of the customers. Each participant may select different alternative measures, therefore the Company has formulated various levels of participation to provide illustrative bill impacts for residential customers –Scenario 0 – assumes a res. customer installs one CFL 18 W Bulb purchased through the mass market discount programs offered at selected stores. Approximate energy savings of 67 KWh per CFL is estimated. –Scenario 1 – assumes a res. customer installs six CFL 18 W Bulbs purchased through the mass market discount programs offered at selected stores. Assumed customer hasn’t installed all CFLs in high use light fixtures, if customer had installed CFLs in areas where run time is higher than 3 hour run time, the breakeven point with the DSM surcharge could be as few as 2 CFLs. Approx. energy savings of 67 KWh per CFL is estimated. –Scenario 2 – assumes new heat pump is installed and 12 CFLs are installed. –Scenario 3 – Home Performance Energy Star High Efficiency Central A/C tune up with duct sealing is estimated to save 1,752 KWh per year plus the savings from 18 CFLs. –Scenario 4 –Home Performance ENERGY STAR Audit of household with heat pump tune up and 18 CFLs. Annual estimated energy savings of the Home Performance ENERGY STAR Audit is estimated at 5,671 KWh. This is a class average of a participant taking advantage of all the recommended conservation measures that on average would be applicable to the audit.

45. 45 Pepco Program Bill Impact The typical residential and commercial customer will achieve significant benefits in the form of reduced electric bills from the Pepco and Delmarva plans. DSM Surcharge for residential customer begins 2009 at a rate of $.52 per month based on 1,000 KWh in sales and increases to $2.48 in 2015 as the program is fully ramped up. Commercial monthly rate impact, based on 15,701 KWh in sales ranges between $4.21 in 2009 to $19.94 in 2015.

46. 46 Delmarva Program Bill Impact DSM Surcharge for residential customer starts in 2009 at a rate of $.54 per month based on 1,000 KWh in sales and increases to $2.36 in 2015 as the program is fully ramped up. Commercial monthly rate impact, based on 7,228 KWh in sales ranges between $1.79 in 2009 to $7.76 in 2015.

47. 47 Pepco EE&C Program Bill Impact

48. 48 Delmarva EE&C Program Bill Impact

49. 49 Benchmarking Compared the proposed Pepco and Delmarva Power portfolios to the reported energy efficiency spending and savings results of other utilities who spent over $1M in 2006 as reported in the 2006 DOE EIA Form 861 data. The primary comparison to evaluate cost effectiveness is the cost per kWh of energy savings: –The projected DSM costs of both companies’ proposed programs : Pepco: $0.099/annual kWh first year spend Delmarva: $0.115/annual kWh first year spend –The highest cost reported was by New York Power Authority -$7.927/ kWh –The lowest cost reported was City of Pasadena - $0.027/kWh Also compared 2009 residential & non-residential energy savings to the 2006 EIA data: –The projected residential and non-residential : Pepco: residential – 47,829 MWh savings non-residential – 93,548 MWh savings Delmarva: residential – 17,365 MWh savings non-residential - 16,033 MWh savings –The highest savings reported: Residential: PG&E – 378,907 MWh savings Non-residential: PG&E – 354,359 MWh savings –The lowest savings reported: Residential: Utah Municipal Power Authority – 3 MWh savings Non-residential: Southwestern Public Service Co – 0 MWh savings

50. 50 Customer Opportunities Programs designed to provide savings opportunities for all customer segments, particularly residential and low/moderate Income customers Core statewide Programs – Similar DSM proposals made by Pepco and Delmarva in their jurisdictions. Worked with stakeholders to develop their EmPower Maryland plans and anticipate continuing such discussions to establish consistent program initiatives across the state. Advertising in targeted publications and outreach to community leaders and government agencies serving “hard-to-reach” populations (low income, seniors, ethnic groups) ensure all consumers are reached. Small businesses targeted through outreach to organizations that serve them. Detailed publications and a web site will be available for consumers who are ready for more information or to sign up for programs. Pepco’s call center employees will be prepared to answer questions and requests for more information or to sign up customers.

51. 51 Statewide DSM Businesses and Contractor Opportunities Promotes economic development. Contractor training with MEA taking the lead, and coordinating with utility EE&C programs. Development of a trained and certified group of HVAC, insulation, and home improvement contractors capable of providing whole-house energy services. HVAC, insulation, and home improvement contractors will be offered training opportunities and encouraged to become quality certified. EE&C services will be delivered through a network of providers operating in the Company's’ service territory that have been trained in program protocols and participation processes. For smaller facilities, commissioning providers will conduct a targeted assessment of areas with substantial energy savings opportunities such as packaged HVAC units. Larger facilities will be eligible to receive a more comprehensive assessment of building systems and controls. The Company will make special effort to involve minority owned and disadvantage business in the RFP processes.

52. 52 How we are going to get customers to participate? General Energy Awareness Campaign Educate customers on energy efficiency, conservation and demand response opportunities. Coordinate with other Maryland utilities, the MEA and electricity stakeholders to maximize the effectiveness. The strategy: Reach the maximum number of customers at least cost. Special focus on reaching hard to reach customers due to either language and or social-economic barriers. Radio and print to create awareness by reaching large numbers of customers.

53. 53 Achievements To Date CFL Program as of June 30 2008 has sold nearly 900,000 CFLs, (808,000 Pepco and 86,000 DPL). CFL Program annual estimated savings 43.8 million KWh (40 million KWh Pepco and 3.8 million KWh DPL). In addition to CFL bulb giveaway program, Pepco and DPL became an ENERGY STAR© Change a Light, Change the World campaign pledge drivers. As a pledge driver, Pepco and DPL have committed to collecting pledges (each pledge is an individual’s commitment to changing at least one bulb) for the campaign. The campaign is an effort by the EPA/DOE ENERGY STAR program to encourage consumers across the nation to replace at least one incandescent bulb with a CFL bulb. Residential DLC approval, BRA Auction activity for delivery of 99MW Pepco and 24MW DPL Residential DLC RFP for contractor selection is in process.

54. 54 Review of Corrections and Revisions Dynamic Pricing MW Revisions The prior dynamic pricing load reduction figures used in the EmPOWER MD filings showed the dynamic pricing impacts based upon the DLC participation schedule anticipated when the Brattle study was done in the late summer/early fall of 2007. Energy savings associated with the Pepco and DPL Smart Thermostat will be posted on tables 1, 2 and 2.2. Degree of change is less than ½ a percent. Line Loss Correction

55. 55 Solar Initiative Applies to Residential and Small Commercial Customers Average size PV array – 3.5 KW Average KWh/KW/year – 1,500 KWh Assumed installation cost/KW - $10,000 2% Interest buy down on customers 15 year loan SRECS valued Per RPS Statute