PJM told FERC that a complaint seeking to use statistics to estimate customers’ demand response when accessing meter data is not practical (EL26-4).

Curtailment service providers Voltus and Mission:data filed the complaint against PJM, but the issues are all tied to state regulators — or relevant electric retail regulatory authorities (RERRAs) — who have the authority over end-use customers’ smart meters and the data they use, the RTO told FERC on Oct. 28.

“There is considerable history behind why RERRAs put limitations on the release of customer data without customer consent, and those restrictions are embedded in many cases in state law or state regulations as a consumer protection measure given widespread evidence of the misuse of customer data,” PJM said. “Complainants ask this commission to circumvent all of those state laws and regulations by instead amending PJM’s tariff to decrease the accuracy associated with the accounting of and compensation for residential customer demand response data.”

Fixing the state-level issue through a degradation of the information PJM gets on DR shows that FERC is not the proper venue to deal with the issue, the RTO argued, especially as Voltus and Mission:data have not exhausted the options available to them in state regulatory proceedings.

“The complainants effectively ask this commission to circumvent the states’ jurisdiction over retail data access issues by requiring PJM to allow for less accurate data for interval metered residential demand response customers without even showing any attempt to work with the RERRAs on this issue,” the RTO told FERC.

FERC examined the issue in 2023, when it rejected a similar complaint from CPower over lack of evidence that customer data were not widely available. Voltus and Mission:data offered some specific information on how difficult it was to get data from mass market customers at specific utilities. (See Voltus, Mission:data Seek Changes to PJM Data Requirements for DR.) PJM rules require actual meter data in all cases except when a residential customer does not have an installed interval meter.

“For residential customers that do not already have interval meters installed to measure their actual use as it changes by interval, the CSP may rely on a statistical estimate derived from sampling the usage of customers that do have interval metering,” PJM said. “This reduces the barriers to entry for such residential customers to participate as demand response in PJM’s markets, as it allows CSPs to facilitate their participation while only incurring the cost of installing interval meters for a representative sample of residential customers without interval metering.”

None of the evidence offered about difficulties at specific utilities shows that Voltus and Mission:data tried to get rules changed in state proceedings, PJM said. It is also unclear how the RTO could enforce the standard that statistical modeling is allowed when metering data is difficult to obtain, it argued.

“It is reasonable that CSPs may have to conduct some level of administrative work in registering residential demand response customers, and the complaint offers no clear criterion by which PJM could determine whether interval metered data is ‘not reasonably available,’” the RTO said.

Granting the complaint would lead to widespread use of statistical modeling, which is less accurate than the actual metering data required today, PJM said.

PJM’s Independent Market Monitor also took issue with the complainants’ proposed remedy.

“Using statistical sampling when actual interval meter data is available would unjustly and unreasonably degrade PJM’s ability to accurately measure the megawatts of capacity actually available and the actual performance of that capacity and therefore degrade PJM’s ability to maintain resource adequacy and to correctly determine efficient capacity market prices through supply and demand in the market,” the Monitor told FERC. “In addition, such treatment would introduce undue discrimination in favor of the demand response resources that do not use available meter data, which is what all other capacity resources are required to use.”

DR has to be timely and verifiable because knowing exactly when and how much load is cut is critical to reliably operating the grid and accurately compensating, the Monitor argued.

“If load reductions are only measured on coarse intervals or through statistical sampling, it is not possible to verify that the defined reduction can occur and did occur when dispatched and thereby to count on it for reliability and compensate it appropriately,” it said. “The public interest in system reliability and efficiency justifies the metering requirement for participants seeking to sell demand response.”

Exelon argued that the complaint misconstrues utility data practices, which are required by state regulations.

The company’s utilities “adhere to state laws and regulations to safeguard customer data, including complying with critical energy/electric infrastructure information (CEII), which includes sensitive grid and infrastructure data,” Exelon told FERC. “Furthermore, where the complaint objects to CSPs’ limited access to tools available for licensed retail electric suppliers, the complaint is in fact taking issue with state laws, regulations and fundamental elements of restructuring that require such limitations.”

Voltus and Mission:data were not without their supporters, which included CPower.

“PJM’s present rules have erected an impenetrable barrier to curtailment service providers seeking to enroll residential customers in demand response programs,” the company said. “CPower has experienced identical unreasonable barriers, both before and since CPower filed a similar unsuccessful complaint in 2023.”