FERC poised to remove State Opt-Out for Demand Response programs

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is poised to removed State Opt-out for Demand Response Programs based on scanning the comments filed in the Notice of Information (NOI) docket # RM21-14 here

https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/docketsheet?docket_number=RM21-14&Subdocket=All&dtFrom=1960-01-01&dtTo=2021-08-09&chklegadata=false&PageNm=dsearch&dateRange=custom&searchType=docket&dateType=filed_date&sub_docket_Q=Allsub

A quick summary of main commenters, and a single line excerpt follows:

Advanced Energy Management Alliance (AEMA) says, "the Demand Response Opt-Out is no longer just and reasonable and should be removed to unleash the latent demand flexibility currently hidden in these markets".

Voltus said, "Eliminating the antiquated opt-out for demand response would allow providers to deliver billions of dollars of pent-up consumer benefits as well as reliability and sustainability benefits".

Illinois Commerce Commission said, "Illinois Commerce Commission (“ICC”) offers the following comments and observations in support of removing the DR opt-out provisions from the Commission’s regulations"

PJM said, "When locational marginal prices are high in PJM’s Energy Market, economic demand response, referred to as an Economic Load Response Participant, has the opportunity to reduce electricity consumption and receive compensation"

Midwest Energy Consumers Group (“MECG”) "supports termination of the Demand Response Opt-Out. Eliminating the Demand Response Opt-Out would provide for greater participation by demand response resources"

California Air Resources Board (CARB), the Maine Office of Public Advocate, and the Attorneys General of Maryland, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island said "support the repeal of the Demand Response Opt-Out, consistent with the Commission’s treatment of other aggregations of resources at the generation, retail, or distribution levels, but urge that, if the Commission finalizes that repeal, it do so while recognizing the States’ traditional, statutorily preserved jurisdiction"

Ted Thomas, Chairman of the Arkansas Public Service Commission said "the Supreme Court permitted FERC to set the amount of compensation paid to end-use customers for participation in a demand response program in spite of the fact that the end-use customer had previously been seen on the state side of the “bright line”1 dividing state and federal jurisdiction"

Google said, The Demand Response Opt-Out allows states within an RTO/ISO market to prevent distributed energy resources (DERs) already on the grid from participating i n the wholesale energy markets."

Advanced Energy Economy (AEE) said "the Commission should remove the “opt-out” provisions from its existing regulations, originally adopted over a decade ago in Order No. 719, that allow state and local regulators and load-serving entities to bar aggregations of retail demand response customers from participating in the RTO/ISO markets."

R Street said "Since 2009, the demand response opt-out has limited substantial opportunities for saving customer money and lowering system costs in those jurisdictions that implemented the opt-out."

Those in favor of retaining the State Opt-Out include - American Public Power Association (“APPA”) and the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (“NRECA”), Entergy Operating Companies, Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC), Edison Electric Institute (EEI), and Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO).