Docket No. ER21-2460-002

I dissent in part on today’s order because it affirms the majority’s prior finding that the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) may exclude energy efficiency from participating in distributed energy resource (DER) aggregations without running afoul of the requirements of Order No. 2222.  I disagree with that decision and therefore would have granted the request for rehearing on this issue submitted by Clean Energy and Consumer Advocates[1] and found that NYISO’s definition of DER does not comply with Order No. 2222.

As I explained in my statement on the Commission’s June 2022 order addressing NYISO’s compliance filing,[2] excluding energy efficiency is at odds with the express purpose of Order No. 2222 to “remove the barriers that qualification and performance requirements currently pose to the participation of [DERs] in the RTO/ISO markets.”[3]  It is also contrary to the Commission’s plain requirement in Order No. 2222 that “RTOs/ISOs may not prohibit any particular type of [DER] technology from participating in [DER] aggregations.”[4]

On rehearing, the majority again accepts NYISO’s assertion that its compliance proposal, including its DER definition, “does not prohibit any type of technology from participating in an Aggregation” because energy efficiency resources are not capable of meeting all of the current operational requirements to provide resource adequacy in NYISO.[5]  However, as noted above, the very purpose of Order No. 2222 was to remove this type of barrier to DER participation.  NYISO is the sole RTO/ISO with a capacity market that precludes the participation of energy efficiency in its capacity market,[6] a fact that belies the claim that energy efficiency is not technically capable of providing resource adequacy.  By permitting NYISO to exclude energy efficiency from its DER rules, I believe the majority alters the requirements of Order No. 2222 that laudably sought to “ensur[e] that any resource that it is technically capable of providing wholesale services through aggregation is eligible to do so[.]”[7]

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent in part.

 

 

[1] Clean Energy and Consumer Advocates July 18 Rehearing Request.

[2] New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 179 FERC ¶ 61,198 (2022) (Clements, Comm’r, concurring in part and dissenting in part).

[3] Participation of Distributed Energy Resource Aggregations in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, Order No. 2222, 172 FERC ¶ 61,247, at P 26 (2020), order on reh’g, Order No. 2222-A, 174 FERC ¶ 61,197 (2021), order on reh’g, Order No. 2222-B, 175 FERC ¶ 61,227 (2021).

[4] Order No. 2222, 172 FERC ¶ 61,247 at P 114 n.277.

[5] New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 181 FERC ¶ 61,054, at P 18 (2022).

[6] New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 179 FERC ¶ 61,198 (Clements, Comm’r, concurring in part and dissenting in part, at P 2 n.6).

[7] Order No. 2222, 172 FERC ¶ 61,247 at P 114.

Contact Information


This page was last updated on October 25, 2022