Peak load management
Kentucky

PeakIQ supports DSM by providing peak-risk alerts with lead time, giving operations enough notice to run an approved checklist during peak windows. Consistency is the point. When peak routines depend on someone watching conditions manually, results drift, and the program becomes fragile.

A strong PeakIQ routine keeps the work simple:

• Primary and backup recipients by site, including off-hours coverage

• A response window that matches staffing and approvals

• A short action checklist tied to alerts

• A quick log of actions taken

PeakIQ is not a substitute for operating boundaries. It works best when boundaries are already set, protected loads are known, and stop points are written down. That is what keeps response safe and repeatable.

Procurement benefits because peak routines become easier to explain and defend. Finance benefits because actions can be tied to defined windows, which supports reconciliation. Operations benefits because the site gets notice, time to coordinate, and a clear list of steps that fit daily realities.

For multi-site portfolios, PeakIQ also helps standardize cadence across sites. Sites do not need identical actions. They need the same rhythm: alert, execute within limits, verify performance, and review outcomes. Rodan supports that rhythm and keeps the program grounded in what each site can execute safely.

A DSM playbook is a short, written checklist of approved actions that can be executed during peak-risk windows without compromising safety, quality, or uptime. For manufacturing and logistics sites, the playbook has to work on real shifts with real staffing coverage, or it will not be used consistently.

A workable playbook is built around site constraints:

• Protected loads that cannot be changed

• Minimum operating requirements tied to safety and product quality

• Staffing patterns, including nights and weekends

• Recovery steps to avoid downstream issues after the window

A practical structure includes:

• Always-allowed actions: low-risk steps that can be executed quickly

• Approval-required actions: steps that require sign-off, with the approver named

• No-go list: actions the site will not take

• Stop points: conditions that end participation immediately

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

The playbook also needs role clarity. One person owns the go or no-go call during the window, and backups are named. Actions are logged, even in a simple format, so post-window review is based on what happened rather than memory.

This matters for procurement because DSM is judged on repeatability, not on one strong day. It matters for finance because reporting becomes defensible when actions are tied to defined windows and supported by interval data. Rodan helps build playbooks that respect site limits and can be executed the same way each time, even when conditions are busy.

Rodan needs enough information to confirm scope, define operating limits, and identify realistic actions. The goal of the first assessment is not a long report. It is clarity: which sites are in, what the sites can do safely, and how results will be verified.

A useful starter package includes:

• Utility bills and supplier invoices for each Kentucky site in scope

• Meter identifiers, site addresses, and who owns each account internally

• Interval data access details, or the path to obtain it

• Site operating schedules, staffing coverage, and key constraints

• A protected-load list, even if it is a rough draft

A portfolio assessment should also clarify internal roles:

• Who approves site actions

• Who executes actions on each shift

• Who reviews interval performance after the window

• Who in finance validates billing outcomes and exceptions

With partial footprints, this work matters even more. A portfolio map prevents teams from rolling out procedures to sites that do not benefit and helps keep reporting clean. It also makes it easier to stage rollout: start with the sites that have clear exposure and realistic flexibility, then expand when execution is stable.

Rodan uses the assessment to produce a decision package: sites in scope, draft playbooks, and a reporting approach. Demand response participation is considered only where it fits site limits and measurement readiness.

Demand side management in Kentucky is a structured way to reduce or shift electricity use during peak periods that drive cost exposure, while keeping operations inside agreed limits. It is not a one-off project. It is a repeatable operating routine that procurement can support and finance can reconcile.

Kentucky matters because many portfolios are split across service territories. A DSM program has to start with scope. The goal is simple: confirm which sites are eligible for participation paths tied to MISO or utility programs, then build a playbook for those sites only. Without that step, teams spend time collecting data, writing procedures, and scheduling meetings for facilities that may never be in scope.

A DSM program that works over multiple seasons typically has these parts:

• Site list and meter map: what is in scope, and what is not

• Operating boundaries: protected load, no-go actions, and stop points

• Action checklist: short steps that can be executed on any shift

• Role clarity: who approves, who executes, who logs the action

• Verification routine: interval data review tied to the time window when actions were taken

• Finance review cadence: a consistent way to reconcile outcomes without rebuilding spreadsheets

Demand response can fit inside the same structure when a site is eligible and can deliver verified performance without creating risk. Rodan’s role is to help Kentucky teams put structure around DSM so execution and reporting stay consistent across sites and billing cycles.

Demand side management is the broader operating program. Demand response is a paid participation path that can sit inside that program when a site is eligible and can deliver verified performance safely.

DSM covers peak routines, load shifting, operating boundaries, and measurement discipline. Demand response adds program obligations: event windows, performance measurement, and settlement follow-through. Demand response tends to run well when DSM fundamentals already exist, since the site has a playbook, role clarity, and a routine for verifying outcomes.

A simple way to separate them inside a business:

• DSM: the day-to-day operating routine for peak windows

• Demand response: the program path that pays for verified reduction during events

Demand response is not a fit for every site. Procurement should look for three conditions:

• The site can reduce load in a defined window without operational risk

• The decision owner and backups are defined for off-hours coverage

• Interval data is clean enough to validate performance consistently

DSM can still be useful even when demand response is not a fit. Many sites benefit from a peak routine that reduces variance and makes bills easier to predict. When a site becomes eligible later, or when operating conditions change, demand response can be evaluated again without starting from scratch because the DSM routine is already in place.

Rodan supports both paths by focusing on practical execution and finance-ready reporting, so participation decisions stay grounded in what the facility can deliver.

Start with a scoped assessment that confirms eligibility by site, documents operating boundaries, and produces a short playbook that can be executed consistently. The first step should be light enough to start quickly and specific enough to support real decisions.

A practical starting set includes:

• A recent utility bill for each site in scope

• Interval data access details, or the path to obtain it

• Site schedules, staffing coverage, and protected loads

• Names of the operations approver and finance reviewer

Procurement should expect clear outputs:

• A map of sites that are in scope for participation paths

• A prioritized list of sites based on exposure and flexibility

• A draft playbook per site with owners, stop points, and recovery steps

• A reporting routine tied to interval performance and billing validation

Demand response is evaluated only where it fits. That means the site can deliver verified reduction within firm limits and measurement readiness is solid. When demand response is not a fit, DSM still provides value by reducing peak-driven variance and improving predictability.

Rodan’s goal is a program that runs smoothly: clear scope, safe execution, and finance-ready reporting. That is what makes DSM a durable part of how Kentucky sites manage energy costs and risk.

“Partial” means Kentucky participation is not uniform across the state. Eligibility depends on the service territory and the meter. For a multi-site business, that can create confusion unless the portfolio is mapped carefully.

Procurement leaders run into two common issues in partial footprints. One is wasted effort, where teams build a DSM routine for sites that have no applicable participation path. The second is reporting noise, where a portfolio report mixes in-scope and out-of-scope sites, making results look inconsistent even when the in-scope sites performed well.

A clean approach treats “partial” as a scoping step, not a barrier. Start by collecting:

• Utility bills for each site

• Meter identifiers and site addresses

• Interval data access details, or the path to obtain it

• Site operating schedules and critical constraints

From there, the portfolio can be split into clear groups:

• Sites with a realistic participation path

• Sites where DSM is still useful for internal peak control, even without program participation

• Sites that should be out of scope for now due to process constraints or limited flexibility

That structure helps operations, too. Operators do not want a peak routine that changes week to week or differs by who is on shift. When scope is settled, the playbook can be standardized and training becomes simpler.

Rodan supports this by starting with a site-by-site review and building a DSM approach that respects facility limits. That keeps the program customer-facing, practical, and aligned to the way procurement and finance measure success.

FacilityIQ supports multi-site DSM by providing window-based visibility across the portfolio. That matters because portfolio programs often fail due to inconsistency. One site executes well, another site misses a step, and leadership gets mixed results.

A portfolio view helps teams:

• See performance by site during the window

• Spot underperformance early and address it

• Compare sites using consistent timing and definitions

• Maintain a reliable record that supports governance

FacilityIQ also supports troubleshooting. When a site underperforms, the team can focus on practical causes: staffing coverage, process constraints, controls behavior, or data gaps. That keeps discussions productive and improves the playbook over time.

For procurement, this matters because DSM programs are evaluated on repeatability. For finance, it matters because a consistent operational record supports billing validation and any program settlement follow-through. For operations, it matters because the focus stays on safe, approved actions rather than blame.

FacilityIQ fits best when it is paired with a post-window routine. Review what happened, capture constraints, adjust the checklist, and confirm readiness for the next peak window. That keeps the program stable across seasons and staffing changes.

Demand side management helps manage cost exposure tied to peak demand and peak timing, where a small set of hours can influence the bill more than the average day. It also helps reduce month-to-month variance, which is often the real pain point for procurement and finance.

Many large energy users focus on the supply rate and total kWh. Peak-driven exposure behaves differently. It often shows up as unexpected swings driven by operating schedules, weather, or how large equipment ramps. DSM gives the business a way to control those swing hours with a planned routine.

A useful DSM program does not chase every day. It targets the hours that matter most and builds confidence through repeatable actions:

• Staggering large starts to avoid spikes

• Adjusting setpoints within approved ranges

• Shifting discretionary processes to a different time window

• Coordinating maintenance windows with known peak seasons

• Using onsite assets only within site policy and operational approvals

Finance confidence depends on verification. A DSM routine needs interval data to show what happened during the window, plus a consistent way to tie actions to billing outcomes. Without that, teams rely on assumptions, and the program loses credibility.

When demand response participation is available and appropriate, DSM becomes the operating backbone that supports event execution. In that case, the business case becomes easier to defend because actions are tied to a specific window, and performance can be reviewed against program requirements and settlement outcomes. Rodan supports that work by helping sites operate inside firm limits and by keeping reporting aligned with what finance needs to see.