Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FERC Issues Order No. 2222-B, Setting Demand Response Opt-Out for Further Consideration

By Katherine O'Konski & Russell Kooistra on June 29, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On June 17, 2021, FERC set aside its previous decision in Order No. 2222-A that allowed state regulatory authorities to prohibit demand response resources from participating in distributed energy resource (“DER”) aggregations in wholesale energy markets when the DER aggregation contains only demand response resources. As a result, upon the effective date of Order No. 2222-B, state regulatory authorities will be able to prohibit demand response resources from participating in all wholesale DER aggregations. However, FERC also stated that it will further consider the issue in the Notice of Inquiry (“NOI”) proceeding established in Order No. 2222-A to consider whether to revise its regulations to remove the demand response opt-out established in Order Nos. 719 and 719-A. FERC also extended the comment period in the NOI proceeding to ensure an adequate opportunity for interested parties to comment on these issues. Finally, Order No. 2222-B clarified the appropriate restrictions to avoid double counting of services and the compensation of demand response resources that participate in DER aggregations. Commissioners Neil Chatterjee and James Danly wrote separate concurring opinions; Commissioner Mark Christie concurred in part and dissented in part.

In Order No. 2222, issued in September 2020, FERC required regional transmission organizations and independent system operators (“RTOs/ISOs”) to amend their tariffs to include DER aggregations as a type of market participant, and to revise market rules that FERC determined were unjust and unreasonable barriers to DER participation in wholesale markets (see September 22, 2020 edition of the WER). However, FERC made clear that Order No. 2222 would not impact state regulatory authorities’ ability to prohibit DER aggregators from bidding retail customers’ demand response resources into RTO/ISO markets—in other words, to opt-out—per the requirements of Order Nos. 719 and 719-A. Order No. 2222-A set aside this aspect of Order No. 2222, holding that state regulatory authorities’ opt-out ability would apply only to DER aggregations that contained solely demand response resources (i.e., the aggregation is solely made up of retail customers’ resources), but not where the DER aggregation includes a mix of demand response and other DERs. See March 24, 2021 edition of the WER. Rather, at that time FERC held that DER aggregations made up of both demand response and other types of resources—termed “heterogenous DER aggregations”—did not fall within the opt-out requirements of Order No. 719, and applying the opt-out to these types of resources would inhibit innovation by preventing DER aggregators from taking advantage of different DER resources’ operational attributes and capabilities.

In Order No. 2222-B, FERC set aside its decision in Order No. 2222-A and restored state regulatory authorities’ opt-out capability for all demand response resources, including those that participate in “heterogenous” DER aggregations. However, FERC rejected arguments that it was legally required to grant the opt-out, pointing to the Supreme Court’s ruling in FERC v. Electric Power Supply Association that FERC’s regulation of demand response participation in wholesale markets does not violate the FPA because it directly affects wholesale rates. FERC acknowledged that many states broadly prohibited demand response participation in wholesale markets when implementing the Order No. 719 opt-out, and those states may not have anticipated the Order No. 2222 proceedings would call into question those broad prohibitions. FERC stated that, “Given the importance of these issues, which affect both federal and state regulatory interests, we believe the better course is to provide them full consideration through the Notice of Inquiry issued contemporaneously with Order No. 2222-A.”

Order No. 2222-B also clarified that a behind-the-meter resource that is used solely to facilitate demand response, i.e., deployed solely to reduce customer load from expected consumption, will itself be considered a demand response resource for purposes of determining whether the opt-out applies. Finally, Order No. 2222-B clarified under what circumstances behind-the-meter DERs participating as distributed energy resources in DER aggregations may be paid the full locational marginal price.

Commissioners Chatterjee, Danly, and Christie each wrote separate statements. Commissioner Chatterjee stated that he concurred with the Commission’s order because it continues to find that FERC is under no legal obligation to provide the Order No. 719 opt-out, which he characterized as “outdated” and irreconcilable with “the competitive principles underpinning Order No. 2222.” Commissioner Danly’s concurrence stated his position that Order No. 2222-B properly returns authority over demand response resources to states by permitting states to choose to prohibit demand response resources from participating in wholesale DER programs. Commissioner Christie concurred in the provisions of Order No. 2222-B that preserved the Order No. 719 opt-out provisions, but dissented from the remainder of the order.

Order No. 2222-B is available here.

Photo of Russell Kooistra Russell Kooistra

Russell Kooistra counsels an array of energy companies on various issues related to natural gas and electricity markets. Russell uses his in-depth knowledge of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) policy and regulations to advise clients on complex regulatory matters.

Read more about Russell KooistraEmail
  • Posted in:
    Energy and Utilities
  • Blog:
    Washington Energy Report
  • Organization:
    Troutman Pepper Locke
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo