Demand side management Indiana

PeakIQ™ supports DSM by giving operations lead time to act during peak-risk windows, using a response window your organization agrees to in advance.

Alerting is not the strategy, but it makes the strategy usable. Without a reliable trigger, sites either react too late, or they overreact too often. PeakIQ™ is positioned as an early-warning layer that supports disciplined execution, not guesswork.

A practical PeakIQ™ routine includes:

• Recipient design: primary and backup contacts by site, including off-hours coverage.

• Response window selection: aligned to approvals, staffing, and operational reality.

• Alert-to-action mapping: each alert triggers a defined subset of playbook actions.

• Action logging: a simple record of what was done and when.

• Post-window review: confirm performance using interval data and update the playbook.

For procurement, PeakIQ™ improves predictability because peak response becomes consistent and measurable. For operations, it reduces disruption because actions are planned and pre-approved. For finance, it improves reconciliation because actions are tied to clear windows that can be reviewed and validated.

PeakIQ™ works best when it is paired with a playbook that is short, approved, and executable on any shift.

FacilityIQ™ helps multi-site DSM by making performance visible during the window across all sites, using a consistent view that supports governance and fast issue detection.

Multi-site programs often fail due to inconsistency. One site executes well, another site misses a step, and the portfolio outcome becomes difficult to explain. FacilityIQ™ is positioned to reduce that gap by keeping performance tied to the same time window across sites, rather than relying on post-event spreadsheets.

What portfolio leaders typically need:

• A single view of performance across sites during key windows.

• Early detection of underperformance while corrective action is still possible.

• A consistent reporting format for procurement and finance.

• An operating record that supports playbook updates.

FacilityIQ™ also supports practical troubleshooting. When a site underperforms, the team can focus on the real causes: staffing coverage, controls behavior, process constraints, or data issues. That reduces internal debate and improves the playbook over time.

For Indiana portfolios, the value is not just visibility. It is standardization. Standardization is what makes DSM repeatable and scalable without increasing administrative burden.

SettlementIQ™ supports billing confidence by providing a structured approach to validating costs and exceptions using interval data, so finance sees issues earlier and spends less time on reconciliation.

DSM and demand response can create value, then value can leak through billing confusion, delayed discrepancy discovery, and repeated disputes. Finance teams typically do not object to DSM. They object to uncertainty and surprises at month-end.

A finance-ready validation routine should:

• Surface anomalies early, while the underlying cause is still traceable.

• Reduce manual spreadsheet work and repeated back-and-forth.

• Support consistent reporting across accounts and sites.

• Provide an audit-friendly record of expected versus observed outcomes.

SettlementIQ™ is positioned as a way to strengthen that routine. It complements operational performance visibility by helping ensure the financial story matches the operational story.

For procurement leaders, this matters because finance confidence is what keeps DSM funded. For operations, it matters because questions can be answered with a consistent process tied to the same time windows when actions were taken. For leadership, it matters because reporting becomes reliable and less dependent on individual analysts.

DSM is the broader strategy. Demand response is one way to monetize part of that strategy, when a site is eligible and can deliver verified performance.

Think of DSM as the operating system: you identify peak risk, define allowed actions, assign owners, and build a routine the site can run safely. Demand response is an application: you enroll in a program and get paid to reduce load during specific event windows, under defined rules.

For Indiana decision-makers, the difference matters because:

• DSM can start immediately as an internal operating discipline, even before any program enrollment.

• Demand response adds obligations including measurement, verification, and settlement processes.

• DSM reduces risk by making execution repeatable, which improves confidence if demand response is added later.

A clean way to manage both is to standardize the operating fundamentals:

• A protected-load list, approved by operations and safety.

• A short action list that works across shifts.

• A clear go or no-go decision owner, with backups.

• A post-window review routine that improves the playbook over time.

Then, if demand response participation is a fit, the organization is not starting from zero. It already has the governance, documentation, and execution habit that keeps performance stable and reporting credible.

It means you may be able to get paid for flexible load that can respond to system needs, when your site is eligible and can perform safely within program requirements.

For large facilities, the practical question is not terminology. It is feasibility. Can the site reduce load on demand without compromising safety, quality, comfort, or uptime, and can it prove performance through clean measurement and reporting.

A procurement-ready approach treats this as an operating decision:

• Define the boundaries: what the site will never curtail, and what conditions stop participation.

• Confirm the action list: steps that can be executed consistently, across shifts.

• Assign ownership: one decision owner, backups, and clear roles.

• Confirm measurement readiness: interval data access and site mapping.

• Plan for settlement: a repeatable process for finance to validate outcomes.

Demand response should not create operational risk. When it is structured correctly, it becomes a controlled revenue option tied to flexibility the site already has, rather than a disruption.

A DSM playbook is a short, written set of approved actions that your site can execute during peak-risk windows without compromising safety, quality, or uptime.

The best playbooks read like an SOP, not a brainstorm. Each action includes an owner, timing, a recovery step, and a stop point. Stop points are the guardrails that keep the program safe and credible. They should be specific, easy to interpret, and authorized by the right stakeholders.

A practical playbook structure includes:

• Tier 1 actions: always allowed, low-risk actions that can be executed quickly.

• Tier 2 actions: actions that require explicit approval, with a named approver.

• Off-limits list: actions the site will not take due to operational risk.

• Stop points: conditions that end participation immediately.

• Recovery steps: how the site returns to normal operation safely.

To make this shift-ready, the playbook should also include:

• Primary and backup contacts by shift.

• A single decision owner for the event window.

• A simple method to log actions taken.

A playbook that depends on one expert being on shift is not scalable. The goal is reliable execution that can withstand staffing changes and production variability.

Demand side management in Indiana is a planned approach to reducing or shifting electricity use during peak periods to manage peak-related costs and support grid reliability.

For a large facility, DSM is not a one-time project. It is an operating discipline that answers three practical questions: Which hours matter most, what actions are allowed on-site, and how will the organization prove the result to finance. The “prove it” part matters because DSM only survives budget cycles when the reporting is clean and repeatable.

A procurement-ready DSM program typically includes:

• Scope: which meters and sites are in scope, and which are not.

• A playbook: a short list of approved actions that are safe, reversible, and shift-ready.

• Stop points: conditions that end participation immediately, written in plain language.

• Measurement: interval data review tied to the actual time window when actions were taken.

• Finance validation: a routine to reconcile outcomes without spreadsheet rebuilding.

DSM often overlaps with demand response, where eligible. In that case, DSM becomes the operating backbone that supports performance during event windows. The key is staying realistic. A smaller action set that the site can execute consistently is more valuable than an aggressive target that breaks down on nights, weekends, or high-production days.

Rodan’s role is to help you put structure around this so the plan works across procurement, operations, and finance, without introducing operational risk.

The strongest DSM candidates are loads that can be reduced or shifted for short windows, are reversible, and can be executed consistently across shifts.

The exact list depends on site type, equipment, and constraints, so the best practice is to start with operating boundaries and interval patterns, then select actions that fit. In many large facilities, teams evaluate a mix of supporting systems and scheduling levers.

Common categories organizations often review include:

• HVAC and ventilation adjustments: within approved temperature and air quality limits.

• Compressed air optimization: pressure bands and staged operation within equipment limits.

• Pumps, fans, and supporting systems: sequencing and scheduling changes that do not destabilize processes.

• Process scheduling moves: shifting discretionary steps away from peak-risk windows.

• Deferrable loads: timing changes for loads that can move without operational risk.

Procurement leaders should focus less on the category and more on the controls:

• Is there a protected-load list?

• Are stop points written and enforceable?

• Is there a recovery step to avoid downstream issues?

• Can the site execute the same actions on any shift?

DSM works when the action list is small, approved, and repeatable. That is what protects operations and creates results that finance can reconcile.

They should expect a consistent, auditable link between three things: the window when actions were taken, the interval data that shows performance, and the billing outcome that finance reconciles.

If reporting is vague, DSM becomes hard to defend. If reporting is structured, DSM becomes a controllable lever that procurement can include in planning and that finance can trust during close.

A finance-ready DSM reporting package typically includes:

• Window-based reporting: performance tied to specific time windows, not weekly averages.

• Site-level visibility: results by meter and by site, especially for multi-site portfolios.

• Exception handling: a way to flag anomalies early and document root cause.

• Attribution discipline: a consistent approach for explaining outcomes without hand-waving.

Procurement should also look for governance signals:

• Was the playbook followed?

• Were stop points triggered?

• Was the decision owner available?

• Were actions logged, and were recovery steps completed?

These details matter because they explain performance variance in a way leadership understands. They also prevent the “we think it worked” problem that often kills programs after one season.

The most important reporting rule is simple: if finance cannot reconcile it, it will not scale.