Midwest Demand Response Regulatory Framework Whitepaper Sources

CPower Energy policy experts have authored a whitepaper for state regulators and municipal and cooperative utilities in MISO to provide a framework to help drive the development of demand response (DR) in the region: Regulating Demand Response and Aggregators in the Midwest While Safeguarding Local Jurisdiction.

All the decisions, tariffs and documents cited as footnotes in the whitepaper have been collected and are available for viewing and downloading through the links below. The whitepaper’s authors are also available to discuss any of the topics raised in the whitepaper, and invite interested individuals to contact them at Peter.D.Westphalen@CPowerEnergyManagement.com or Kenneth.Schisler@CPowerEnergyManagement.com.

 

Footnotes with sources

  1. For ease of reference in this whitepaper, the terms “utility” and “customer” used throughout this whitepaper are meant to include electric cooperatives and members of electric cooperatives, respectively.
  2. MISO 2022/23 Planning Resource Auction (PRA) Results (April 14, 2022).
  3. Order No. 2222, 172 FERC ¶ 61,247 (2020); Codified at 18 C.F.R. §35.28(g) (12) (2022).
  4. Brattle Group, The National Potential for Load Flexibility: Value and Market Potential through 2030, (2019), p.18.
  5. While LMR availability and testing requirements have increased in recent years, following FERC’s recent acceptance of MISO’s proposed changes to move from an annual to seasonal capacity market, beginning with the 2023-24 MISO Planning Year LMRs must be available for at least 16 events per year if they participate in all four seasons. See, Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 180 FERC ¶ 61,141 (2022); see also, MISO, FERC Electric Tariff, Module E-1, § 69A.3.5 (42.0.0).
  6. id.
  7. See, Section 6.2, MISO, Manual No. 26, Business Practices Manual – Demand Response, Rev. 9 (October 1, 2022)
  8. ARCs only engaged in providing DR services make no sales for resale and are not a public utility required to have a tariff rate on file with the Commission. EnergyConnect, Inc., 130 FERC ¶ 61,031 at P 30 (2010).
  9. Id. at P 32.
  10. Order No. 719, 125 FERC ¶ 61,071 (2008); Codified at 18 C.F.R. §35.28(g)(1)(iii) (2022).
  11. EPSA v. FERC, 136 S. Ct. 760, slip op. at 25 (2016) (referring to the ability of a RERRA to opt out or not opt in).
  12. Id. at P 155.
  13. Order 719-A, 128 FERC ¶ 61,059 at P 54 (2009).
  14. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 128 FERC ¶ 61,238, at P 15 (2009).
  15. Id. at P 22.
  16. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. 131 FERC ¶ 61,069, at P 23 (2010).
  17. Supra, note 8, at P 35.
  18. Missouri Public Service Commission Staff, Staff Report on Distributed Energy Resources, Mo. P.S.C. File No. EW-2017-0245, at p19-22 (April 5, 2018).
  19. EnergyConnect, Inc., 130 FERC ¶ 61,031, P 30-32 (2010).
  20. Order Instituting Rulemaking Regarding Policies and Protocols for Demand Response Load Impact Estimates, CostEffectiveness Methodologies, Megawatt Goals and Alignment with California Independent System Operator Market Design Protocols, California Public Utilities Commission, Decision 10-06-002 (June 2010) at page 23, Conclusion of Law 1.
  21. See, Pacific Gas & Electric, Electric Rule 24 Direct Participation Demand Response, available at: https://www.pge.com/tariffs/ assets/pdf/tariffbook/ ELEC_RULES_24.pdf.
  22. See, Southern California Edison, Rule 24 Direct Participation Demand Response, available at: https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/ PublishedDocs/Published/ G000/M037/ K189/37189001.pdf.
  23. See, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Rule 32 Direct Participation Demand Response, available at: https://tariff.sdge.com/tm2/ pdf/tariffs/ELEC_ELECRULES_ERULE32.pdf.
  24. See, New York Public Service Commission, Case 15-M-0180, In the Matter of Regulation and Oversight of Distributed Energy Resource Providers and Products, Order Establishing Oversight Framework and Uniform Business Practices for Distributed Energy Resource Suppliers (March 14, 2019), Appendix A.
  25. City of Cleveland, OH, City Council Resolution No. 144-11, (2011).
  26. See, MPSC Case No. U-20348.
  27. MPUC Docket No. E002/M-21-101, Order Approving Modified Load-Flexibility Pilots and Demonstration Projects, Authorizing Deferred Accounting, and Taking Other Action (March 15, 2022), at p.28.
  28. The label “Indiana Model” was used in a Missouri PSC staff report that evaluated and recommended the approach for use in Missouri. See supra, note 9.
  29. Indiana Michigan Power Company tariff, Original Sheet No. 33, Rider D.R.S.1 (Demand Response Service – Emergency).

 

Additional references

These sources were used in the writing of the whitepaper but are not cited as footnotes.

  1. California Public Utilities Commission Resolution Adopting Rule 24
  2. New York Uniform Business Practices DERS
  3. Order 719-B, 129 FERC ¶ 61,252