Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District reviews Voltus demand-response program; board to vote in two weeks
Summary
Voltus presented a voluntary demand-response program that pays a standby fee (~$25,000 per MW per year) plus event payments ($2,000 per MW per hour); staff said participation is voluntary, the district keeps control of curtailment decisions, and the item returns for a formal vote in two weeks.
Voltus representative Kurt, joining virtually, walked Urbana School District 116 trustees through a demand-response program the company has run with the district since 2019. He said the program pays two revenue streams: a standby payment for being enrolled and an event payment if deployed.
Kurt described the current rates the company presented to the board: about "$25,000 per megawatt of curtailment" per year as a standby payment and an event payment of "$2,000 per megawatt of reduction per hour" if an event is dispatched and the district participates. He emphasized the program is voluntary and that the school retains the right to decline participation for any particular event: "We would notify you and your team in advance of 6 hours... Are you able to participate? Yes or no?"
Voltus explained an annual one-hour self-test is required to validate curtailable load and that the district would coordinate internally which sites (elementary, middle, high school) are included; current discussion with operations staff suggested central office and the bus garage are not part of the curtailable load. Board members asked staff to provide prior-year curtailment measurements so trustees can assess technical impact and likely revenue; Kurt said staff would provide those figures ahead of the vote.
No vote occurred; staff said the contract will return to the board for approval at the next meeting in two weeks. Board members flagged operational coordination and asked staff to confirm exact curtailment megawatt assumptions and which district facilities would be included in any enrollment.
The presentation did not commit the district to participation; it was informational with staff recommending a follow-up vote after requested technical clarifications.
