1. Best Practices, Design Guidelines and Standards
National Town Meeting on Demand Response
Washington, DC June 3, 2008
Best Practices, Design Guidelines and Standards
A Demand Response Research Center Progress Report
Roger Levy
Program Development and Outreach
Demand Response Research Center
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

2. Communication Standard
Demand Response Progress
DRRC research is supporting the California Public Utilities Commission and California Energy Commission to develop Demand Response best practices, guidelines and standards.
Building Standard
Global Temperature Setback (Title 24, 2008)
Open Automated Demand Response – communication/information model
Programmable Communicating Thermostat Reference Design (Title 24 – under review)
Default Dynamic Pricing (CPUC Ruling for PG&E and SDG&E)
Communication Standard
Reference Design
Best Practice

3. DRRC Challenge
Objective
to develop, prioritize, conduct, and disseminate multi-institutional research to facilitate DR
Improve DR effectiveness
Improve DR reliability and reliability
Reduce cost
Scope
Focus on technologies, policies, programs, strategies and practices that emphasize
A market based approach
Customer Choice.

4. DR Value Proposition – AutoDR Design Advantages
Market-Based Price Responsive DR
Conventional Program-Based DR
Participation
Targeted, Limited
All Customers
Value of DR
Utility Value
Customer Value
DR-EE Link
No Integration
Integrated
Equipment
Utility Provided
Few Suppliers
Customer Provided
Customization
Utility defined
Customer Defined
Participation, Baseline Issues
Performance, No Baseline
Incentives
Automation
Not Required
Required

5. What is AutoDR AutoDR is not a program or a technology.
Communication Standard
AutoDR is not a program or a technology.
AutoDR is an information model that provides…
Open, interoperable signaling communication and technology platform
Provides customers with automated, electronic price and reliability signals.
Provides customers with capability to automate customized site-specific DR strategies.
Provides utilities with dispatchable operational capability similar to conventional generation resources.
Supports all DR direct control, emergency, bidding, and pricing options.
AutoDR is being developed as a national communications standard through an industry consortium lead by the DRRC that includes PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, and CAISO.

6. AutoDR Automation Server and Client

7. AutoDR Automation Server and Client

8. Open AutoDR Communications Standards
Features
Continuous and Reliable - Provides continuous, secure, and reliable communications infrastructure.
Translation - Translates pricing, reliability and DR events into continuous, open protocol internet signals
Automation – Customer established DR action(s) programmed into facility energy management systems and control equipment initiated by receipt of price, reliability, event signal.
Opt-Out – Customer decides and always has the capability to decide to participate, opt-out or override any event.
Complete Data Model – Describes information model and architecture to communicate price, reliability, and other DR activation signals.
Scalable – Provides scalable architecture scalable
Benefits
No stranded technology assets - Interoperable
Supports RTP - Supports states policies to promote price response.

9. Why a Standard ?
Reduce barriers to DR - Integrate customer energy management and building control systems to facilitate customer response.
Reduce the cost of DR – standards allow vendors and service providers to address common protocols and to develop common response strategies.
Improve the effectiveness of DR – automation of “customer devised” response strategies
improves participation
Increases value by facilitating simultaneous economic and reliability applications

10. Standards Organizations
Contributors and Need for Support
Technical Advisory Group
Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
Southern California Edison Co.
San Diego Gas and Electric Co.
California Independent System Operator
California Energy Commission
UC Berkeley
California Institute for Energy and the Environment
Enernex
Standards Organizations
National Institute of Standards and Testing
Electric Power Research Institute
Building Automation Controls Network - Utility Working Group
Gridwise
Open Advanced Meter Infrastructure
Open Home Automation Network
Gridnet

11. Why AutoDR ?
AutoDR Field Results
Customer driven control strategies
Increased DR impacts / effectiveness
Continuity of customer response
Reliable, stable load impacts
Simultaneous price and reliability capability
Dispatchable
Reduced cost

12. 8 industry participants
AutoDR Summary Results
CPUC ACR Objectives
2006
2007
Installed
In-Process
1. Accelerate Implementation
Commercial participants
Industrial participants
Peak Load Reduction 13
1 MW
125 3
18 MW 16 8
7 MW
2. Expand AutoDR beyond CPP to other DR options
CPP
only
CPP, DBP, CBP
3. Expand the role of Technical Providers
none
8 industry participants
4. Improve DR performance (Peak Reduction)
Commercial
Industrial
Aggregate All Participants
13% --
23%
46%
31%
12%
66%
37%
2007
Total
152
25MW
21%
52%
34%

13. Continuity / Reliability of Customer Response10
Average Peak Reduction for AutoDR Customers Continuing in 2007 0% 4% 8%
12%
16%
20%
Average Peak Load Reduction
15 Sites
14%
13 Sites
13%
11%
5 Sites
10%
20031
20041
20052
20062
20072
1 - Customer response to test signals
2 - Customer response to CPP rate price signals.

14. PG&E AutoDR Test Day – Non-Industrial AutoDR Participants
Auto-DR Load Impact – 8/30 Non-Industrial
PG&E AutoDR Test Day – Non-Industrial AutoDR Participants
12000
13000
14000
15000
16000
17000
18000
19000
20000
21000
11000
12:00
3:00
6:00
9:00
Noon
Whole Building Power (kW)
AutoDR saves Energy
AutoDR saves Capacity
Loads
3-10 MA
Baseline

15. Auto-Demand Bid Performance
Max 2
Hour
2pm-6pm
Avg
DBP
Baseline
8/30/07 11
10,850
10,674
10,416
Date of DBP Event
Number of
Participating
Sites
Estimated
Load
Shed (kW)
Actual as
Percent of
DBP Baseline
Actual Load Shed (kW)
98%

16. With and Without AutoDR
AutoDR Customer CPP Performance
Average CCP
Peak Load Reduction
8% w/AutoDR
-1% w/o AutoDR
C/I Customer on CPP
With and Without AutoDR

17. Bldg.Load Percent Reduction
AutoDR Customer Performance / Cost
$57.62 / kW*
202 33 45
219 71 78 61 18
111 52
Avg. kW Reduction (3 hr. shed)
15%
10%
12%
25%
16%
21% 5% 2%
20%
Bldg.Load Percent Reduction
$4,510
3 (1) 46
Chabot
$12,000
$3,312
$375
$5,050
$7,500
$3,620
$2,000
$1,614
$12,824
One-time Setup
Cost
4 (1) 56
Target
0 (2)
265
USPS
1 (0) 65
Oracle
208
Gilead
2 (0)
272
IKEA
4 (3)
110
Echelon
1 (3) 92
2530 Arnold
4 (4) 85
50 Douglas
3 (4)
227
B of A
4 (0) 84
ACWD
Events
(2003-4/2005)
Non-
CoincidentMax kW
Reduction
Company
Summary
951
13.4% 49
1,510

18. Contact Information
Demand Response Research Center -
Mary Ann Piette, Director
Phone:
Ed Koch
Chief Technology Officer, Akuacom
Phone:
Sila Kiliccote,
Senior Scientific Engineering Associate
Phone:
Greg Wikler
Global Energy Partners, LLC
Tel:
Roger Levy,
Program Development and Outreach
Phone:
Open AutoDR Communication Standards -

19. GLOBAL TEMPERATURE SETBACK
Building Standard
GLOBAL TEMPERATURE SETBACK
In facilities with multiple space-conditioning zones for comfort heating or cooling, each controlled by an individual thermostatic control, authorized personnel shall have the capability to perform Global Temperature Adjustment (GTA) of the set points of all zones simultaneously from a single location. The centrally generated GTA command shall cause the thermostatic control of each individual zone to increase cooling set points by at least 3º F and decrease heating set points by at least 3º F.
EXCEPTION to Section 122 (b) 4: Systems with stand-alone thermostats that are not connected via an Energy Management and Control System (EMCS) communication network.