Electric Grid Modernization: Working
Group
November 14, 2012
Facilitator: Dr. Jonathan Raab, Raab Associates
Consultant: Tim Woolf, Synapse Energy Economics
Goal of Working Group
 Develop recommendations for the DPU in moving forward
with grid modernization
 Education and joint fact finding on grid-facing and customer-
facing electric grid modernization opportunities
 Understanding stakeholders’ perspectives on opportunities,
benefits, costs, challenges, and concerns
 Identifying and evaluating strategy and regulatory options for
Massachusetts
 Make recommendations to DPU on strategy and regulatory
options, noting the level of agreement
2
Scope of Working Group
 Grid-Facing Technologies
 Customer-Facing Technologies
 Time Varying Rate Design
 Costs & Benefits
 Grid Modernization Policies
 Pace of Grid Modernization Implementation
 Other Issues/Concerns: Health, Interoperability,
Cybersecurity, & Privacy
3
Working Group Structure
 Steering Committee—(Group that will ultimately make
recommendations to the DPU)
 Two Subcommittees—(Serving the Steering Committee by
conducting research, framing options, and providing advice
on select issues)
 Grid-Facing
 Customer-Facing
 Technical Advisory Panel (under consideration)—Provide
advice to Steering Committee and potentially participate in
Subcommittees
4
Distribution of Scope
 Steering Committee
 Cost-Effectiveness Methodology
 Grid Modernization Policies (including cost-recovery)
 Integrating Work of Grid- and Customer-Facing Subcommittees
 Other Issues/Concerns: Health, Interoperability, Cybersecurity, & Privacy
• Grid-Facing Subcommittee
 Opportunities, Benefits, and Costs Related to Grid-Facing Options
 Grid Facing-Technologies
 Pace of Grid-Facing Modernization Implementation
• Customer-Facing Subcommittee
 Opportunities, Benefits, and Costs Related to Customer-Facing Options
 Customer-Facing Technologies
 Time Varying Rate Design
 Pace of Customer-Facing Modernization Implementation
Note: All Subcommittee scope will be framed, vetted, and ultimately used
to inform Steering Committee recommendations
5
Schedule
 December 2012—June 2013 (7 months)
 Steering Committee
 5 day-long meetings—approximately every 6 weeks
 First on 12/17 (at Foley Hoag, remaining at Fed Reserve)
 Subcommittees (Grid- and Customer-Facing)
 4 day-long meetings (each Subcommittee)
 Meet between Steering Committees
 First meetings January (at Fed Reserve or Saltonstall)
 Report to DPU w/Recommendations due June 19, 2013
6
Month
Kick-off Workshop
Plenary Sessions - First one
mid-December, and then
every 6 weeks
Customer-Facing
Subcommittee - First one 3
weeks from first Plenary,
and then every 6 weeks
Grid Facing Subcommittee- First one 4 weeks from
first Plenary, and then
every 6 weeks
Final Roadmap Report to
DPU—June 19th (2013)
7
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
11/14
P1
P2
CFS
GFS
P3
CFS
GFS
P4
CFS
P5
CFS
GFS
GFS
6/19
Meeting Dates
Steering
Committee
December 17
February 5
March 12
April 23
June 5
8
CustomerFacing
Subcommittee
January 9
February 26
April 4
May 14
Grid-Facing
Subcommittee
January 14
February 28
April 10
May 22
Membership
 Steering Committee (25-30)
 Two Subcommittees
 Grid-Facing (20-30)
 Customer-Facing (20-30)
 Members of Steering Committee should have person on at least
one Subcommittee (need not be the same person)
 Likely allow additional organizations to participate in each
Subcommittee
 Committee and Subcommittee members can each have an
alternate from same (or different) organization
 Note: Approximately 60 organizations expressed interest in
participating in working group process
9
Steering Committee Make-Up
(under consideration)
Stakeholder
10
Number
Distribution Utilities
5
State Agencies
5
Independent System Operator
1
Consumer Groups
2
Environmental Groups
2
Distributed Generators
3
Energy Efficiency & Demand Response
3
Battery/Storage & Electric Vehicles
2
Other Load Serving Entities/Competitive Suppliers
3
Other Stakeholders
2
TOTAL
28
Criteria for Working Group Selection
 Manageable size but cover range of stakeholder group





11
interests
Utilities, state agencies, & ISO automatic
Organizations and not individuals
Organizations representing multiple entities preferred over
individual companies
Expect clustered interests to work together thru member
Still contemplating appropriate role of consultants and
vendors—tap expertise but likely not have seat on Steering
Committee
Proposed Membership: Utilities & ISO
 Distribution Utilities (5)
 National Grid
 NSTAR
 Unitil
 WMECO
 MMWEC (need to invite)
 ISO New England (1)
12
Proposed Membership: State Agencies
 State Agencies (5)
 Attorney General’s Office
 MA Clean Energy Center
 MA Dept. Telecom & Cable
 MA DOER
 MA DPU staff (ex officio—active participants)
13
Proposed Membership:
Consumer and Environmental
 Consumer Groups (2)
 Low Income Network
 C/I (A Better City and/or AIM)
 Environmental Groups (2)
 CLF
 Environment Northeast
14
Proposed Membership:
DG, Storage, EVs
 Distributed Generation (3)
 Solar (SEBANE/SEIA or designee—Borrego Solar, My
Generation Energy, Allied Innovators, Rivermoor Energy,
Zapotec Energy)
 CHP (NECHPI or designee—Source One)
 Fuel Cells (Trade Association? or designee--Bloom Energy)
 Battery/Storage/Electric Vehicles (2)
 Storage (Allied Innovators/ESA or designee—Ambri, Beacon
Power, Zinc Air )
 Electric Vehicles (no one signed up—recruit?)
15
Proposed Membership:
EE, DR, LSE/Competitive Suppliers
 Energy Efficiency/Demand Response (3)
 Conservation Services Group
 NEEP
 EnerNOC
 Other Load Serving Entities/Competitive Suppliers (3)
 Trade Organization? (e.g., RESA)
 Constellation/Exelon
 Direct Energy
16
Proposed Membership:
Other Stakeholders
 Other Stakeholders (2)
 Cape Light Compact
 New England Clean Energy Council
 Other?
17
Consultants
 Bridge Energy Group
 Navigant
 IREC
 Applied Energy Group
 General Electric Co.
 MIT (Harvey Michaels)
 PerfectPower Institute
 PJA Energy Systems Design
18
Vendors
 Itron, Inc.
 Opower
 Xtreme Power
 eCurv
 Enabla Power Networks
 First Fuel Software, Co
 Viridity Energy
 Utilidata, Inc.
 S&C Electric Co.
 Ambient Corporation
19
Others Interested
 Berkshire Gas
 AT&T
 West Boylston Municipal Lighting Plant (WBMLP)
20
Technical Advisory Committee:
Potential Roles & Make-Up
 Roles
 Attend and participate in Steering Committee meetings (could
have 2nd table for them)
 Invited presentations on specific topics
 Provide background material to the process
 Review things for Steering Committee or Subcommittees
 Participate directly in Subcommittees?
 Make-Up
 Include (some) consultants/vendors already signed up
 Recruit other organizations w/useful expertise (e.g., NIST,
EPRI, RAP, DOE, other consulting firms, etc.)
21
Consultant/Vendor: Potential Roles
 Some potentially selected for Technical Advisory Panel
 Others could potentially become members of one or other
Subcommittee
 Vendors (and possibly consultants) could be invited to make
presentations on their products & services
 Could possibly attend Committee and Subcommittee
meetings as non-Members and provide periodic input
22
Final Report to DPU
 Due on June 19, 2013
 Broad Report Outline
 Description of steering committee & subcommittee process
 Summary of joint fact finding results (including referencing
other key documents/presentations)
 Recommendations to DPU on strategy and regulatory
framework
23
Report Recommendation Groundrules
 The goal of the process will be to make substantive recommendations by
agreement of the Steering Committee members (organizations) where
possible
 The Steering Committee’s Final Report to the DPU at the end of the
process will identify all areas of agreement, and will provide a description
of the alternative approaches preferred by members if and where the
Committee is split on what to recommend
 Where multiple options are offered, Steering Committee members
supporting alternative approaches will ascribe their organizations’ names to
their preferred alternative
 There will also be an opportunity for organizations participating in the
Subcommittees (who are not Steering Committee members) and possibly
Technical Advisory Panel to add their organization’s names to the report,
and to note their preferences in any areas where multiple options are
offered by the Steering Committee
24
Other Groundrules
 Will be provided and discussed at first Steering Committee
and Subcommittee meetings
25
Website
 http://magrid.raabassociates.org/
 Dates/meeting locations
 All documents (NOI, agendas, meeting summaries, ppt
presentations, background documents)
 Membership (Names and contact information for Steering
Committee and Subcommittee members)
26
Next Steps
 Today
 Clarifying questions
 Feedback/suggested improvements
 By November 20th COB
 Optional--any additional feedback on working group process
 If interest changed in terms of Steering Committee membership (i.e.,
prefer to only be on one or other Subcommittee, or observer)
 We will send out an email tomorrow to all those expressed interest in
working group w/instructions
 For those on Steering Committee will need to know who
representative (and alternate if any), and who will participate in
which Subcommittee
27