FERC Order 2222 opens wholesale markets to distributed energy resource aggregators

U.S. electric utility regulators have issued an order requiring the nation's regional organized wholesale electric markets to allow participation by portfolios of solar projects and other distributed energy resources. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Order 2222 finds that existing regional electricity market rules are unjust and unreasonable in light of barriers that they present to the participation of DER aggregations in these markets, and requires regional grid operators to revise their tariffs to accomodate distributed energy resource aggregators. While further process and uncertainty remain ahead, FERC Order 2222 should facilitate the development of distributed energy resources by removing barriers to electricity market participation.

As defined by the FERC, distributed energy resources (DER) encompass a variety of types of technology when installed on the distribution system, a distribution subsystem or behind a customer meter. Typically less than 10,000 kilowatts in capacity for each installation, DER technologies include solar photovoltaic systems and other distributed generation or intermittent generation, electric storage, electric vehicles and their charging equipment, thermal storage, and other consumer-side measures like demand response and energy efficiency. The U.S. is experiencing significant growth in the number and size of DERs installed on the system, due to factors including federal tax incentives and state incentives, as well as considerations of reliability and utility rate design.

Through Order 2222, issued on September 17, 2020, FERC has now found "that existing RTO/ISO market rules are unjust and unreasonable in light of barriers that they present to the participation of distributed energy resource aggregations in the RTO/ISO markets, which reduce competition and fail to ensure just and reasonable rates." As a result, the Commission adopted a final rule requiring regional transmission organizations and other organized wholesale market operators to establish DER aggregators as a type of market participant, to allow them to register their DERs under one or more participation models that accommodate the physical and operational characteristics of those resources and to participate in the regional organized wholesale capacity, energy and ancillary services markets. Order 2222 allows DERs to aggregate together to satisfy minimum size and performance requirements that they might not meet individually.

The boundaries between federal and state jurisdiction over DERs arise as a matter of federal law, and have occasionally been tested -- most recently in connection with FERC Order 841, governing storage. As noted by the Commission, its Order 2222 final rule "builds off the DC Circuit Court’s recent ruling on Order No. 841, in which the court affirmed the Commission’s exclusive jurisdiction over the regional wholesale power markets and the criteria for participation in those markets." Order 2222 prohibits state regulators from broadly excluding DERs from participating in regional markets, but gives state retail regulatory authorities some power by creating a "small utility opt-in", as well as respecting states regulators’ current ability to prohibit aggregators from bidding retail customers’ demand response into regional markets. Regarding interconnection, Order 222 explains that "state and local authorities remain responsible for the interconnection of individual DERs for the purpose of participating in wholesale markets through a DER aggregation."

The final rule largely tracks a 2016 proposed rule developed by FERC staff, with some changes. The regulator appears excited to take this step. According to a fact sheet issued by the Commission under the title, "FERC Order No. 2222: A New Day for Distributed Energy Resources", Order 2222 "will help usher in the electric grid of the future and promote competition in electric markets by removing the barriers preventing distributed energy resources (DERs) from competing on a level playing field in the organized capacity, energy and ancillary services markets run by regional grid operators."

Order 2222's final rule will take effect 90 days after its publication in the Federal Register. Grid operators will then have 270 days within which they must submit to FERC a compliance filing and a plan for timely implementation of the final rule. While Order 2222 and federal laws place some constraints on what the grid operators may propose, each regional transmission organization or independent system operator has some leeway to develop and propose solutions it views as tailored to its own markets and needs. This feature of federalism will likely result in some diversity in terms of regional designs, to be considered through regional stakeholder discussion and the Commission's regulatory processes.

Maine advances legislation restoring net metering

The Maine state legislature has voted to advance a bill that would amend the state's statute governing the net metering of small distributed renewable energy projects. If enacted into law, the amendment would reverse regulatory changes imposed in 2017 that reduced the value of net energy billing to participating customers.

Maine has allowed customers with distributed renewable energy generation to use the power they produce to offset their electricity bill since the 1980s. In 2017, the Maine Public Utilities Commission amended its rules governing net energy billing to reduce the amount of power that a customer could net against its electric utility bill. The Commission did this by inventing a concept called "gross metering," which allowed electric utilities to collect charges even for power generated and consumed on-site in real time, while requiring participating customers to install a second meter.

The "gross metering" concept was controversial for a variety of reasons, including the fact that it deterred customer adoption of solar power and other distributed renewables (by adding costs while cutting compensation), and the fact that for the first time ever it allowed utilities to collect charges from customers for power produced and consumed entirely on the customer's premises even where that power never went on utility grid facilities.  The Commission later exempted most medium and large customers from this policy after finding that the cost of installing an extra meter wasn't justified, but left the gross metering requirements in its Rule Chapter 313 governing net energy billing. In response, in 2019 various state legislators proposed bills that would alter or restore the net energy billing paradigm.

One of these bills has now received favorable votes in both the state House and Senate. LD 91, An Act to Eliminate Gross Metering, was originally sponsored by Representative Seth Berry. It clarifies the statutory definition of net energy billing, which currently defines the concept as "a billing and metering practice under which a customer is billed on the basis of net energy over the billing period taking into account accumulated unused kilowatt-hour credits from the previous billing period." As amended by LD 91, the definition would specifically define "net energy" as the "difference between the kilowatt-hours delivered by a transmission and distribution utility to the customer over a billing period and the kilowatt-hours delivered by the customer to the transmission and distribution utility over the billing period." This clarification removes the Public Utilities Commission's ability to define "net energy" in any other way. LD 91 also directs the Commission to amend its rules "to be substantively equivalent to the rules in effect on January 1, 2017" (that is, before the Commission's 2017 regulatory amendment.)

LD 91 faces additional votes in the state legislature, before it would move to the desk of Governor Janet Mills for her signature. The legislature is also expected to consider other bills affecting net energy billing or expanding incentives for solar development, later this session.

FERC distributed energy resource technical report

A technical report by U.S. electricity regulatory staff assesses the potential reliability issues and likely benefits to the bulk power system resulting from an increased penetration of distributed energy resources. According to the report, increasing penetration of distributed energy resources may bring several associated reliability benefits to the bulk power system -- or could cause reliability concerns, if the resources are not properly accounted for.

Distributed energy resources, or DERs, have no single definition -- but they are generally conceived of as small, geographically dispersed electric resources, installed and operated on the distribution system at voltage levels below the typical bulk power system levels of 100kV. Historically, the term focused on generation like rooftop solar panels or on-site combined heat and power plants, but its meaning has broadened to include energy efficiency, microgrids, and even new technologies like energy storage. Distributed energy resources can be cost-effective alternatives to traditional utility infrastructure and business models.

Distributed energy resources installations have increased significantly in some regions of the United States in recent years thanks to factors including technology advances and state energy policies. In 2016, when distributed energy resources of all types accounted for about two percent of the nation's installed generation capacity, distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) installations alone represented over 12 percent of new capacity additions.  At the same time, regulators and industry participants are working to integrate these resources into the grid from engineering, reliability, and system planning perspectives.

In February 2018, staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission published a report, "Distributed Energy Resources: Technical Considerations for the Bulk Power System." This report filed in Docket No. AD18-10-000 considers how the increasing penetration and integration of distributed energy resources in specific regions may affect bulk power system reliability. It summarizes technical assessments performed by Commission staff using industry power system models and commercially available power system simulation software "to identify the potential reliability issues and likely benefits to the bulk power system" from increasing distributed energy resource penetration. The study notes that its modeling of distributed energy resource capacity was "based on current trends for technology types, operational capabilities, and deployment distributions."

According to the report, greater penetration of distributed energy resources could have associated reliability benefits for the bulk power system. For example, by providing power close to the customer distributed resources can serve to reduce grid losses and reduce system peak load, or can serve as non-transmission alternatives that displace the need for more expensive wires upgrades.

At the same time, the report warns that "increasing DER capacity, if not properly accounted for, could cause reliability concerns for the bulk power system." It calls for improving and refining the data that is available for distributed energy resources for incorporation into planning and operating models, noting, "Collecting and using the most current and accurate data is key to getting a complete picture of how DERs affect the bulk power system."

The report identified key bulk power system reliability topics to explore in light of the growing adoption of distributed energy resources in the U.S., including:

• The impact of the current common industry modeling practice of netting DERs with load, which may mask the effects of DER operation;
• DER capabilities for voltage and frequency ride through during contingencies;
• The potential for improved voltages due to the unloading of the bulk power system associated with the location of DERs at or near customer loads;
• Potential effects upon system -wide transmission line flows and generation dispatch due to changing load patterns;
• The sensitivity of voltage or power needs to different types of DER applications (i.e., providing energy, capacity, or ancillary services);
• The need to develop planning processes that capture more detailed models of DERs and allow for modeling of the interface between the transmission and distribution systems to enable information exchange and more accurate calculations of the DER impact on the bulk power system; and
• The advantages and disadvantages of allowing DERs to participate directly in the organized wholesale electric markets.

The report also calls for continued examination of other issues, such as "sensitivities with higher DER penetration levels, changes in siting patterns, and potential impacts to the system’s response to events, disruptions and outages, including frequency events." It concludes, "Efforts such as these could help track and assess the impact of changing conditions on the bulk power system to identify emerging trends and address potential future reliability challenges."

Montana to study customer-generator costs, benefits

Montana utility regulators are preparing to study the costs and benefits of distributed solar energy projects and other customer-generators.  The results could reshape the way net-metered customers are charged for electric service, including the creation of a separate service classification and rates for customer-generators.

Earlier this year, the Montana legislature enacted House Bill 219, a law requiring utility NorthWestern Corp. to "conduct a study of the costs and benefits of customer-generators," for submission to the state Public Service Commission to inform future ratemaking.  The law allowed the Commission to establish "minimum information requirements" for inclusion in the study.

On June 16, 2017, the Commission posted a Notice of Opportunity to Comment on potential benefit and cost elements and study questions.  That notice identified categories of potential benefits including avoided energy costs, avoided capacity costs, avoided transmission and distribution capacity costs, avoided system losses, avoided renewable portfolio standard compliance costs, avoided environmental compliance costs, market price suppression effects, avoided risk, avoided grid support services costs, avoided outages costs, and non-energy benefits.  It also identified categories of potential costs, including reduced revenue, administrative costs, interconnection, integration, and cost shifts in production, transmission, and distribution.

The Commission's notice also posed a series of questions relevant to cost-benefit studies, including:

• What, if any, assumptions regarding the adoption rate of solar or other net metering technologies should the Commission specify?
• What, if any, time frame for calculating benefits and costs should the Commission specify (e.g., 10 years, 20 years, etc.)?
• What, if any, assumptions regarding utility rates should the Commission specify (e.g., rate of increase, changes in rate design (time-of-use, other))?
• What, if any, methodology for cost-effectiveness tests should the Commission specify (e.g., standard practice manual or the Cost Benefit Framework developed by the Electric Power Research Institute)?
• What cost-effectiveness perspective(s) should the Commission require be evaluated (e.g., societal, utility/program administrator, ratepayer, participant)?
• Should the Commission specify the generating resource avoided by net-metered systems?  If so, what generating unit should be used?
• Should the Commission specify a particular locational attribute that counts as either a benefit or cost adder/subtractor?
• What, if any, other compensation approaches in addition to net metering should be assessed in the study NorthWestern is required to conduct?

The Commission invited interested persons to submit written comments addressing the potential benefit and cost elements and study questions identified above no later than July 7, 2017.  It also directed the utility to provide information on the scale and scope of data it has collected, or intends to collect, regarding variations in the usage profiles of customer-generators compared to other customers in the same rate class.

Maine net energy billing rules, 2017 revision

On January 31, 2017, the Maine Public Utilities Commission adopted revisions to its rule chapter 313, governing net energy billing.  Net metering, or net energy billing, is the metering and billing mechanism that Maine and most other states have adopted to promote the development of solar photovoltaic and other distributed renewable energy facilities.  While the Commission first adopted a net energy billing rule in the early 1980s, its 2017 revisions to that rule reduce the benefits of net metering for future projects.  Here's a look at Maine's revised net energy billing rules.

The Commission described its actions in a written order dated March 1, and published its final rule on the same date.   Most notably, the Commission reduced the amount of future generation facility output that can be netted against its transmission and distribution utility bill -- by first introducing, then reducing, a concept called "nettable energy."  Nettable energy is now the entire amount of energy generated by the facility, including the amount consumed by a customer “behind-the-meter”.  This shift -- from netting on a net basis, to netting on a gross basis -- is a significant change in state policy that is unfavorable for behind-the-meter generation.

As before, a net energy billing customer with solar or other eligible generation may offset all of its energy supply bill with its nettable energy.  But the Commission's new rule phases out the former 100% crediting of net energy for transmission and distribution charges.  Depending on the year into which a project is placed in service, the new rule reduces the portion of the "nettable output" -- what counts for netting -- by 10% in each of the next 10 years, reaching 0% T&D crediting for customers that become net energy billing customers after calendar year 2026.  The result is a gradual reduction of the incentive to net energy bill.  (Note that once a customer becomes a net energy billing customer, its rate treatment will generally last for 15 years.  Likewise, existing net energy billing customers may continue to net bill under the previous rule's approach for a 15-year period, after which they could continue to net for supply but not for T&D.)

The Commission also added a section covering renewable energy credit (REC) aggregation.  Section 4 of Chapter 313 provides that new customers in 2018 and after may elect to have the RECs or environmental attributes of project power be aggregated by their local investor-owned utility for sale into the regional market, with the proceeds returned to participating customers.  The Commission described its decision to include a REC aggregation program as "an effort to obtain on an optional basis a value stream that is not currently being monetized."  If small renewable projects would qualify for RECs, but are either not doing so or are not selling the RECs, REC aggregation options may allow some projects to connect with the market.  On the other hand, by selling the RECs, the project owner or power consumer cannot claim to have consumed green electricity, so there are tradeoffs.

The Commission did not change some other aspects of the rule, such as maximum project size (660 kW) or its limit on the number of accounts or meters permissible under a single net energy billing arrangement (10).  It noted, "Fundamental changes to NEB in Maine and promotional programs for larger renewable and community solar projects are the purview of the Legislature as a matter of State energy policy."

Based on a list of legislative requests, the state legislature will consider at least 12 bills relating to solar energy in its 2017 session.

On March 10, the Commission published a Frequently Asked Questions document covering the Chapter 313 net metering rules.  The FAQ provides answers to 10 questions, ranging from why the Commission changed the rule, to providing specific examples of how much nettable energy a customer would be able to claim depending on the year in which its project was placed in service.

Massachusetts develops next solar incentive

The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) is designing a new solar incentive program to encourage the continued development of solar renewable energy generating sources by residential, commercial, governmental and industrial electricity customers, based on a state law enacted this spring. The so-called "next solar initiative" program could affect the pace of solar photovoltaic project development in Massachusetts, as policymakers seek a smooth transition from the current SREC II program as it reaches full capacity.

On April 11, 2016, Governor Charlie Baker signed into law An Act Relative to Solar Energy, also known as Chapter 75 of the Acts of 2016.  The law preserved and expanded net metering, preserving the value of that policy for projects developed by residential, small commercial, municipal and government customers.

As described by the Baker administration, the law also allows DOER and the Department of Public Utilities to "gradually transition the solar industry to a more self-sustaining model." In particular, section 11 of the act directed DOER to "develop a statewide solar incentive program to encourage the continued development of solar renewable energy generating sources by residential, commercial, governmental and industrial electricity customers throughout the commonwealth."

The law prescribed twelve requisite characteristics of the solar incentive program, but left the creation of rules and regulations to DOER.  Some criteria are process-oriented, such as that the program "promotes the orderly transition to a stable and self-sustaining solar market at a reasonable cost to ratepayers," or considers underlying system costs, environmental benefits, energy demand reduction and other avoided costs provided by solar renewable energy generating facilities.

Other criteria define structural requirements for the program, such as that it "relies on market-based mechanisms or price signals as much as possible to set incentive levels," "differentiates incentive levels to support diverse installation types and sizes that provide unique benefits," and "features a known or easily estimated budget to achieve program goals through use of a declining adjustable block incentive, a competitive procurement model, tariff or other declining incentive framework."  The law also requires the program to promote investor confidence through long-term incentive revenue certainty and market stability.

After the solar bill's enactment, DOER held two public listening sessions, and solicited comments on the development of the "next solar incentive" through June 30, 2016.  Many commenters expressed support for a continuation of the SREC framework, such as "SREC III."  Other comments focused on locational issues, such as proposing policies to deter the development of projects located on farmland or other undeveloped "greenfield" sites.

DOER is expected to release a first draft of its next solar incentive program this summer.

NERC suggests Clean Power Plan reliability considerations

The electric reliability organization for North America has issued an assessment of reliability considerations it thinks state electricity and environmental regulators should take into account in crafting state plans to comply with the Clean Power Plan.

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) is a not‐for‐profit regulatory authority whose mission is to assure the reliability of North America's bulk power system.

Last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its Clean Power Plan, a final rule limiting carbon dioxide emissions for existing electric generation facilities.  States are expected to prepare individual or collaborative plans to comply with the regulation.  Because reducing the carbon intensity of electric power generation is the goal, EPA expects that some plans will include a shift from coal-fired power plants to less carbon-intensive sources.  As NERC wrote in its assessment:

The BPS is already undergoing a broad transformation with retirements of coal units and some nuclear units, and additions of resources fueled by natural gas, wind, and solar. Distributed generation, energy efficiency, and demand response are also changing the way in which system planners must account for resources. The CPP has the potential to hasten the transformation of the electric system started by market and political factors such as natural gas supply and pricing and federal and state policy decisions with respect to renewables and energy efficiency and other environmental regulations.

But reliability is a key issue at stake in any shift in the portfolio of generating resources.  The Clean Power Plan rule explicitly requires that states consider reliability as part of their plans.

NERC's assessment, Reliability Considerations for Clean Power Plan Development, presents its view of "aspects of plan design that need to be considered to reliably accommodate this broad transformation."  NERC's ten key reliability considerations are:

• State coordination with system planning entities - planners and coordinators working together
• Essential reliability services - "In order to maintain an adequate level of reliability through this transition, generation resources need to provide sufficient voltage control, frequency support, and ramping capability — essential components to the reliable operation of the BPS. It is necessary for policy makers to recognize the need for these services by ensuring that interconnection requirements, market mechanisms, or other reliability requirements provide sufficient means of adapting the system to accommodate large amounts of variable and/or distributed energy resources (DERs)."
• Timing considerations for energy infrastructure development - "Retirements can happen quickly, but adequate replacement facilities must be in service prior to retirement. As natural gas‐fired generation replaces coal‐fired generation the requisite timeline for natural gas pipeline infrastructure becomes even more relevant."
• Electricity imports and exports - "If a state intends to use resources from nearby states as part of a compliance strategy, it is important to determine if the necessary transmission capability is available to reliably transport electricity from those resources."
• Change in generator cycling and operations - coal plants may serve more seasonal peak demands, so "states should take account of changes in maintenance requirements likely due to cycling and the risk of increased forced outages of these coal‐fired plants. Additionally, increased and sufficient coordination between gas and electric system operators becomes much more critical to ensure adequate amounts of fuel are available."
• Reserve margin assessment - "As more variable and energy ‐ limited resources are added, the system will likely require additional reserve capacity to maintain a similar level of reliability compared to a system with all conventional generation."
• Energy efficiency - "Given that EE can be used as a potential CPP compliance tool, it is important that states evaluate the realistic potential for EE to displace load and the likely duration of those impacts. Shorter term EE measures may serve as a potential bridge to meet CPP requirements."
• Emissions trading - "In general, emissions trading promotes additional reliability compliance options by effectively broadening the compliance region as well as the availability of allowances and credits. However, some resource options that might be assumed available through emissions trading may not be, due to another state’s plan. Because trading is optional, states should coordinate to ensure the most beneficial approach of trading is considered."
• Reliability safety valve - "States must understand how the Reliability Safety Valve works and its limits, recognizing that it cannot be used as a planning tool to meet CPP requirements."
• North American and European precedents - states should review carbon market precedents like RGGI and shifts in Canada and Europe toward renewable and distributed resources as case studies for potential strategies, lessons learned in implementation, and insights as they develop their plans.

Some states are already developing Clean Power Plan compliance plans.  Meanwhile, judicial challenges have been filed.  Initial plans are due to the EPA later this year.

Maine utility requests net metering review

Maine transmission and distribution company Central Maine Power Company has asked the Maine Public Utilities Commission to review whether the state's net metering program should continue or be modified.

Maine allows customers with qualifying distributed electric generation to net the power they produce against their consumption of power from the grid.  The Maine Public Utilities Commission adopted rules governing this "net energy billing" or net metering arrangement.  Most customer-scale solar photovoltaic projects in Maine rely on net energy billing, including those located in the service territory of utility Central Maine Power or CMP.

One provision of those rules, found in Section 3(J) of Chapter 313, provides for regulatory review of net metering once a utility reaches a threshold of installed net metering capacity:

A transmission and distribution utility shall notify the Commission if the cumulative capacity of generating facilities subject to the provisions of this Chapter reaches 1.0 percent of its peak demand. Upon notification, the Commission will review this Chapter to determine whether net energy billing pursuant to this Chapter should continue or be modified.

On January 14, 2016, CMP filed a letter with the Maine Commission requesting that the Commission undertake the review of net energy billing described in Section 3(J) of Chapter 313.  In support of that request, CMP notes:

As of the end of calendar year 2015, the cumulative capacity of the generating facilities for which CMP has net energy billing agreements under Chapter 313 is approximately 1.04% of CMP’s annual peak demand. The 1.04% is based upon the ratio of 16.261/1,565.300, where the numerator is the megawatts of nameplate capacity of contracted net energy billing facilities and the denominator represents the Company’s 2015 annual hourly peak demand.

The Maine Public Utilities Commission has docketed CMP's request as 2015-00008.  At the same time, the Commission is concluding a months-long legislatively mandated stakeholder process to consider alternatives to net energy billing, after which the Commission is scheduled to present a report to the state's legislative energy committee.

These two proceedings have different direct origins, but their effects could be similar.  CMP's letter under Chapter 313 says it was triggered by growth of enrolled net metering capacity, while the stakeholder process resulted from a direct legislative requirement.  Nevertheless both proceedings may affect the future of net metering in Maine.

CT examines energy storage, grid improvements

The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection has opened a proceeding to implement a state law advancing energy storage systems and other improvements to the electric grid.  The Distributed Energy Resource Integration Demonstration Project program is designed to find best practices on how different grid-side system enhancements can be reliably and efficiently integrated into the grid in a manner that is cost-effective for all ratepayers.  The recently opened case has the potential to lead to significant investment in energy storage in Connecticut and other grid advancements.

The Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, or DEEP, was established on July 1, 2011 as a combination of the Department of Environmental Protection, the Department of Public Utility Control as well as other state energy policy staff.  DEEP has a dual mandate of conserving, improving and protecting Connecticut's natural resources and environment, as well as supporting economic development by making cheaper, cleaner and more reliable energy available.

In June 2015, the Connecticut legislature passed a sweeping bill formally known as June Special Session Public Act 15-5, An Act Implementing Provisions of the State Budget for the Biennium Ending June 30, 2017, Concerning General Government, Education, Health and Human Services and Bonds of the State (“the Act”).  Section 103 of the Act requires Connecticut electric distribution companies to submit a proposal or proposals to DEEP for demonstration projects to build, own, or operate grid-side system enhancements, such as energy storage systems.  Proposals are supposed to:

• Demonstrate and investigate how distributed energy resources (DER) can be reliably and efficiently integrated into the electric distribution system;
• Maximize the value provided to the electric grid, electric ratepayers, and the public from distributed energy resources; and
• Complement and enhance the programs, products, and incentives available through the Connecticut Green Bank, the Connecticut Energy Efficiency Fund, and other similar programs.

As an initial step in the implementation of this program, DEEP has opened a proceeding to establish priority goals and objectives for the DER Integration Demonstration Projects.  The proceeding includes opportunity for public comment, as well as a stakeholder workshop scheduled for October 5.

Ultimately, Connecticut's electric distribution companies will propose specific demonstration projects for approval first by DEEP, then by the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority or PURA.  Much emphasis has been placed on energy storage systems as a likely beneficiary of the program.  Other grid-side system enhancements could include distribution system automation and controls, intelligent field systems, advanced distribution system metering, communication, and systems that enable two-way power flow.  DEEP has until January 1, 2017 to evaluate the approved proposals and report to the state's legislative committee with jurisdiction over energy.