Dive Brief:
- 14 coalitions have filed comments on changes to PJM's capacity performance system, and they are generally split with six of the groups in favor of the proposal and eight submitting comments in opposition.
- A group focused on advanced energy management said the proposal would essentially remove demand response from the PJM market and called on the grid operator to move away from a the addition of new penalties for non-performing demand response (DR).
- A group of suppliers including FirstEnergy and AEP were supportive of the proposal, saying they have not been adequately compensated since PJM instituted its reliability pricing model.
Dive Insight:
Comments are in regarding PJM's proposed capacity market changes, and they shake out about how one would expect. Energy management groups are in opposition to the plans, which they say will quash demand response, while suppliers submitted comments generally supportive of the measures.
“It is manifestly unjust and unreasonable to move the goal posts yet again to now categorically exclude customers that have proven reliable and made investments to support PJM system reliability,” said the advanced energy management group. RTO Insider reports that the group, which includes demand response leader EnerNOC, wants PJM to increase the base demand allowed. The current base DR cap is “what effectively amounts to an anticompetitive cap on DR.”
Generators including FirstEnergy, which has filed a lawsuit to pull demand response out of capacity markets following the courts overturning FERC Order 745, said "PJM needs to clarify that demand response products are not supply side products and must be appropriately measured and verified and, as utilized in RPM, cannot inappropriately suppress the RPM clearing price in future auctions."
