Complaint of the Independent Market Monitor for PJM

- 1 -

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

)

Docket No. EL24-113-000

COMPLAINT OF THE INDEPENDENT MARKET MONITOR FOR PJM

Pursuant to Rule 206 of the Commission’s Rules and Regulations,

Monitoring

Analytics, LLC, acting in its capacity as the Independent Market Monitor (“Market

Monitor”) for PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”),

files this Complaint against the sellers

of Energy Efficiency MW that filed post installation M&V reports

by May 10, 2024

(“Reports”) to support their receipt of payments for Energy Efficiency (“EE”) effective

during the 2024/2025 Delivery Year (“Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers”).

The Reports

fail to provide adequate evidence to demonstrate that the included EE measures meet the

requirements to be approved and to receive payment.

It is unjust and unreasonable to

require PJM customers to pay a total of $128 million in the BRA alone for EE MW that have

18 CFR § 385.206 (2022).

Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined have the meaning used in the PJM Open

Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”), the PJM Operating Agreement (“OA”) or the PJM Reliability

Assurance Agreement (“RAA”).

RAA Schedule 6 § L.6.

The Reports will be included as confidential Attachment C.

RAA Schedule 6 § L.2.

- 2 -

not been demonstrated to meet the requirements to be paid. PJM should not make payment,

and the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers should be directed not to take payment for, any

Energy Efficiency MW during the 2024/2025 Delivery Year based on the Reports. Indicated

Energy Efficiency Sellers should be directed to cooperate with an investigation by PJM and

the Market Monitor into the complete details of the EE MW for which Indicated Energy

Efficiency Sellers have requested payment. PJM and the Market Monitor should be directed

to complete the investigation in a timely manner and make recommendations about

whether any of the EE MW have met the requirements to be paid. The Commission should

direct evidentiary hearings as needed.

The capacity auctions for the 2024/2025 Delivery Year have been completed. The

delivery year starts on June 1, 2024. As a result of the fact that EE is not a capacity resource

and does not affect reliability, there will no impact to PJM’s reliability if this Complaint is

granted.

The Complaint will be supplemented to include a nonpublic version with

confidential information redacted. The confidential information entirely consists of the

Reports to be included as Attachment C. A proposed protective agreement, based on the

Chief Administrative Law Judge’s Model Protective Order, but modified to remove

provisions related to oil pipelines and to take the form of an agreement, is included as

Attachment A. The Complaint does not include the Reports at this time out of deference to

the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers, who are expected to view the Reports as highly

confidential. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers may seek modifications to the

protective agreement, including a potential request to limit the disclosure of the Reports to

each other. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers have or should have their own Reports.

I. PARTIES

The following table lists each of the respondent Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

and their representatives, each of whom have received service of this Complaint.

Seller

Representatives

- 3 -

Affirmed Energy

Luke Fishback

[email protected]

BGE

Gregory Gronski

Gregory.Gronski@bge.com

Enel X Erin Donohue Erin.donohue@enel.com

Enerwise

J Russell Newbold

Russ.Newbold@CPowerEnergy.com

Exelon

Jim Fay

James.Fay@comed.com

Exelon

Sharon Midgley

Sharon.midgley@exeloncorp.com

Exelon

Noah Norman

Noah.Norman@exeloncorp.com

FirstEnergy

Cristy Ludrosky

cludrosky@firstenergy.com

PSEG

Frantz Zephyr

[email protected]

PSEG

Heather Svenson

Heather.Svenson@pseg.com

SMECO

Lezael Rorie

[email protected]p

SMECO

Eugene Bradford

Eugene.bradford@SMECO.coop

NRG

Neal Fitch

[email protected]

NRG

Gina Jardot

Gina.Jardot@nrg.com

Rockland Electric

Scott Berthiaume

berthiaumes@coned.com

II. BACKGROUND

A. Definition of Energy Efficiency MW

These are the facts about EE, based on PJM’s Market Rules. EE MW are not capacity

resources. EE MW are not included in the supply of capacity in any capacity market

auction. EE MW cannot be used to replace capacity resources. EE MW do not contribute to

PJM system reliability.

According to the PJM OATT and RAA, EE MW should not be included in the PJM

capacity market.

EE MW are not included in the PJM Capacity Market. EE MW are

OATT Attachment DD-1 § L.1.

- 4 -

nonetheless paid the capacity market clearing price and, while not part of the PJM Capacity

Market, are part of the PJM capacity construct as a result.

The original rationale for the inclusion of EE in the PJM Capacity Market was that

the load forecasts did not account for the impact of EE on demand for four years.

Regardless of whether that was a good reason at the time, that is no longer true. Because EE

measures are reflected in the peak load forecast for a delivery year for which an auction is

being conducted, the auction parameters must be adjusted, as described is Section 2.4.5 of

Manual 18, for the EE Resource(s) that are proposed for that auction in order to avoid

double counting of the EE measures.

This is sometimes referred to as the addback.

As a

result, EE is not actually included in the capacity market. EE is not a capacity resource in

PJM. The goal of the process is to ensure that EE does not directly affect the price for

capacity in the capacity markets. EE payments are a subsidy paid directly by load via an

uplift charge, through the capacity market mechanism. The term capacity market

mechanism is used rather than capacity market because EE does not participate in the

capacity market but is nonetheless paid the capacity market clearing price. EE should not

continue to be paid the capacity market clearing price because PJM’s load forecasts now

account for EE.

Revisions to the PJM load forecast to incorporate energy efficiency were

endorsed at the November 19, 2015, MRC with EE explicitly incorporated in PJM load

RAA Schedule 6 § L.1.

PJM, Manual 18B (Energy Efficiency Measurement & Verification) § 1.1 Rev. 05 (September 21,

2022) (“PJM Manual 18B”).

The Market Monitor explained the addback mechanism in a presentation at the May 1, 2024 MIC

Meeting, which can be found on the Monitoring Analytics, LLC website at

https://www.monitoringanalytics.com/reports/Presentations/2024/IMM_MIC_EE_Education_2024

0501.pdf>.

- 5 -

forecasts beginning with auctions conducted in 2016 for Delivery Years starting with

2016/2017.

When EE was added to the forecast and EE was removed from the capacity market,

PJM should have simply followed the tariff and eliminated payment to EE. Instead, PJM

began use of the addback method to reflect the inclusion of EE in the peak load forecast, to

eliminate the impact of EE on the capacity market and to provide for payment to EE at the

capacity market clearing price. The rationale for continuing to pay EE as if it were a

capacity resource was and is unclear. EE is already compensated through the PJM markets

to the extent that it actually reduces customer payments for energy and capacity. The

complete removal of EE from the capacity market mechanism would make it unnecessary

to address the multiple outstanding issues identified in this Complaint related to the task of

accurately measuring the impact of EE, determining the ownership of the imputed savings,

and ensuring that the resources are not paid for more than four years.

The term “installed” EE MW does not mean that a market seller installed an energy

efficient device in a home or business. The term installed simply refers to EE MW that a

market seller claims credit for and wants to be paid for.

B. Energy Efficiency Plans and Reports

An EE resource is required to be a project that involves the installation of more

efficient devices or equipment, or the implementation of more efficient processes or

systems, exceeding then current building codes, appliance standards, or other relevant

standards, at the time of installation, as known at the time of commitment, and meets PJM’s

requirements.

The EE resource must achieve a permanent, continuous reduction in electric

See Approved Minutes from the Markets and Reliability Committee, <https://www.pjm.com/-

/media/committees-groups/committees/mrc/20151217/20151217-item-01-draft-minutes-

20151119.ashx> (December 17, 2015).

RAA Schedule 6 § L.

- 6 -

energy consumption at the End Use Customer’s retail site during the defined EE

Performance Hours that is not reflected in the peak load forecast used for the auction

delivery year for which the EE resource is proposed.

An EE resource seller must submit an initial measurement & verification plan for the

EE resource no later than 30 days prior to the RPM Auction in which the EE resource is to

be initially offered.

An EE resource seller must submit an updated measurement &

verification plan for the EE resource no later than 30 days prior to the next RPM auction in

which the EE resource is eligible and is to be subsequently offered for up to a maximum of

four consecutive delivery years for any specific measure.

The nominated EE value

approved by PJM in an EE resource seller’s initial/updated M&V plan establishes the

maximum amount of MW that may be offered for payment in the capacity market

mechanism (on a summer period basis).

The capacity performance value approved by

PJM in an EE resource seller’s Initial/Updated M&V Plan provides guidance to the EE

resource seller on the maximum amount of MW that may be offered.

Post installation of

the EE resource, an EE resource seller must submit an initial post installation M&V report

for the EE resource prior to the first delivery year that the EE resource is committed.

EE resource seller must submit updated post-installation M&V reports prior to each

subsequent delivery year that the resource is committed. Failure to submit an updated post-

installation M&V report prior to a subsequent delivery year or failure to demonstrate that

post-installation M&V activities were performed in accordance with the timeline in the

Id.

RAA Schedule 6 § L.2.

PJM. “Manual 18: PJM Capacity Market,” § 4.4, Rev. 58 (Nov. 15, 2023).

PJM. “Manual 18B: Energy Efficiency Measurement & Verification,” § 1.1 Rev. 05 (Sep. 21, 2022).

Id.

- 7 -

approved M&V Plan will result in a final nominated EE value and final capacity

performance of an EE resource equal to zero MW for the delivery year.

C. Energy Efficiency Programs

Midstream EE programs are those that claim the rights to PJM capacity price

payments based on energy efficient products at the point of sale, typically through

agreements with electric equipment suppliers and retail chains. Upstream EE programs

similarly claim the rights to the PJM capacity price payments based on energy efficient

products upstream of the point of sale through agreements with distributors that supply

retail stores. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers repackage manufacturing and sales

data for energy efficient products and submit them as the basis for payments through the

PJM capacity market mechanism. EE providers’ arrangements with midstream and

upstream equipment suppliers sometimes include incentives in the form of payments to the

equipment supplier. These payments are represented to incent the purchase of the energy

efficient product, but there is no evidence that these payments result in a decreased sales

price to the customer rather than going directly to manufacturers and distributors.

For the Base Residual Auction for the 2024/2025 Delivery Year, EE sellers are slated

to receive $128 million in subsidy payments from the customers of the PJM Capacity

Market if their Post Installation Measurement and Verification (PIMV) reports are accepted.

These payments are based, in significant part, on EE providers’ representation that they

should be credited for providing EE resources based on energy efficiency product sales data

from retail chains. Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers add up these retail receipts and,

without contracts that support a claim of ownership, submit them for subsidy payments as

EE MW in the PJM capacity construct.

Id.

- 8 -

The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers should be required to demonstrate that they

meet the requirements in the PJM Market Rules.

The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers claim, without support, that they have

acquired exclusive ownership of the capacity price payment rights associated with those

products. They assert these claims even though they do not know and have no contractual

relationship with the ultimate purchaser of those products. They do not show that such

purchasers are aware that such rights exist and have been previously conveyed to the

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller have not

demonstrated that they have a legal claim to these rights, or are entitled to payment via

PJM’s capacity market mechanism for these products. The Indicated Energy Efficiency

Seller via midstream and upstream programs do not directly manufacture, distribute or sell

the products for which they obtain payments based on the capacity market price. The

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers simply collect data on the independent behavior of end

use customers. Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers do not show that such customers

engaged in such behavior because of the Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller’s actions.

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers nevertheless assert that such behavior is basis for energy

efficiency payments.

Due to the overlapping products and territories in which the Indicated Energy

Efficiency Sellers operate, and the absence of a registration system for their products, there

is no way to identify duplicative claims on capacity rights of products among Indicated

Energy Efficiency Seller. Due to the absence of a direct contractual relationship with the end

use customers for such products, Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers have not and cannot

provide information about whether, when or where these products are installed.

The Market Monitor believes that EE providers use of the midstream and upstream

programs fails to comply with the basic requirements set out in the PJM Tariff and

Manuals. Specifically, EE providers fail to demonstrate that midstream and upstream

programs cause any reductions in energy consumption or behavior by end use customers;

lack any contractual relationship with end-use customers; and fail to establish legal rights to

- 9 -

the capacity value required to be eligible to receive capacity payments from PJM. There is

no evidence that EE participation in PJM markets causes end use customers to reduce their

energy consumption beyond what they would have otherwise.

EE providers convert the sales data collected from their midstream and upstream

partners into an estimate of the number of MW of energy consumption that results from the

product’s use. Most EE MW are not directly measured. Savings are calculated based on an

assumed installation rate and assumed usage level, compared to the assumed electricity

usage of the default. The inputs to these calculations are based on assumptions and

observations over very limited periods and with limited data samples. EE providers do not

generally provide evidence that they meet the statistical significance requirements of the

PJM Market Rules.

Many EE providers rely on usage assumptions from industry

publications rather than from primary data collected from measurements of their own

customers. A commonly referenced document in supporting Measurement & Verification

reports is the Maryland/Mid-Atlantic Technical Reference Manual (TRM) facilitated and

managed by Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization

funded by various advocacy groups and the federal government.

While this manual

focuses on a geographic region included in PJM’s service territory, EE Providers can and do

use assumptions based on installations in locations outside of PJM’s service territory. The

technical reference manuals (TRM) referenced by EE providers are often several years old

and are unlikely to include the actual current baseline conditions that should be used for

valuation of projects. Given the development cycle, the data underlying the TRM lags the

PJM. “Manual 18B: Energy Efficiency Measurement & Verification,” Section 9. § 1.1 Rev. 05 (Sep.

21, 2022).

See Maryland/Mid-Atlantic Technical Reference Manual Version 10 <https://neep.org/mid-atlantic-

technical-reference-manual-trm-v10> (May 27, 2020).

See Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnership <https://neep.org/ > (March 4, 2024)

- 10 -

publishing date by several years. Of TRMs frequently referenced by EE providers, the

Maryland/Mid-Atlantic TRM was published in 2020, the Pennsylvania TRM in 2021 and the

Ohio TRM in 2019. The Pennsylvania PUC updates and approves its TRM on a 5-year

cycle.

As a result, for the normal three year capacity market timing, a three year old TRM,

relying on data from as much as five years prior to publication, is used to estimate savings

for at least four years into the future. As a result, in the fourth year of the EE resource, its

purported savings will be based on data from 15 years earlier. That is not a reasonable basis

for calculating savings. In addition to Technical Reference Manuals, other studies and

references are cited in EE M&V Plans and Reports. These citations are likewise used to

justify the claimed benefits and savings attributed to EE projects. These materials, as with

the TRMs, are often several years out of date and commonly 10 years old and in some cases

older.

A capacity market seller may submit a Sell Offer for a capacity resource in a base

residual auction or incremental auction only if such seller owns or has the contractual

authority to control the output or load reduction capability of such resource and has not

transferred such authority to another entity prior to submitting such Sell Offer.

Capacity

resources must satisfy the capability and deliverability requirements of RAA, Schedule 9

and RAA, Schedule 10, the requirements for demand resources or EE resources in Tariff,

Attachment DD-1 and RAA, Schedule 6, as applicable, and, the criteria in Tariff,

Attachment DD, section 5.5A.

An EE resource is a project, including installation of more efficient devices or

equipment or implementation of more efficient processes or systems, exceeding then-

current building codes, appliance standards, or other relevant standards, designed to

66 PA § 2806.1(c)(3)

OATT Attachment DD § 5.5.

- 11 -

achieve a continuous (during peak summer and winter periods as described herein)

reduction in electric energy consumption at the End-Use Customer's retail site that is not

reflected in the peak load forecast prepared for the delivery year for which the EE resource

is proposed, and that is fully implemented at all times during such delivery year, without

any requirement of notice, dispatch, or operator intervention.

D. Energy Efficiency Seller’s Midstream and Upstream Programs Fail to

Demonstrate Legal Ownership of Capacity Rights to End-Use Customer

Projects.

Section 5.5 of the PJM OATT requires that a capacity market seller may submit a Sell

Offer for a capacity resource in a base residual auction or incremental auction only if such

seller owns or has the contractual authority to control the output or load reduction

capability of such resource.

There is no evidence to support any assertions that any

partner agreements supporting midstream and upstream programs legally convey, to the

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers, the capacity rights to the products purchased by end-

use customers. Such agreements and any related contracts have not been provided by

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers. The program partner agreements purport to transfer

OA Section L.1.

A “Capacity Market Seller” is defined to mean “a Member that owns, or has the contractual

authority to control the output or load reduction capability of, a Capacity Resource, that has not

transferred such authority to another entity, and that offers such resource in the Base Residual

Auction or an Incremental Auction.” OATT § 1 (Definitions C–D). A “Capacity Resource” is

defined to mean “megawatts of (i) net capacity from Existing Generation Capacity Resources or

Planned Generation Capacity Resources meeting the requirements of the Reliability Assurance

Agreement, Schedules 9 and Reliability Assurance Agreement, Schedule 10 that are or will be

owned by or contracted to a Party and that are or will be committed to satisfy that Party's

obligations under the Reliability Assurance Agreement, or to satisfy the reliability requirements of

the PJM Region, for a Delivery Year; (ii) net capacity from Existing Generation Capacity Resources

or Planned Generation Capacity Resources not owned or contracted for by a Party which are

accredited to the PJM Region pursuant to the procedures set forth in such Schedules 9 and 10; or

(iii) load reduction capability provided by Demand Resources or Energy Efficiency Resources that

are accredited to the PJM Region pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Reliability Assurance

Agreement, Schedule 6.” RAA Art. 1–Definitions.

- 12 -

the capacity rights associated with end use customer products and projects to Indicated

Energy Efficiency Sellers even though the program partner themselves never owned the

projects or products. The end use customers own those projects by installing energy-saving

devices and equipment, and there is no evidence that Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

were involved in a direct exclusive contract with those customers. There is no evidence that

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers through midstream and upstream programs provided

legally required consideration to any end-users for the rights to their projects or products.

The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers therefore are not the owners of the requisite

contractual rights required by the PJM Tariff to be eligible to receive revenues from the PJM

Capacity Market.

III. COMPLAINT

In their Reports, the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers fail to demonstrate that their

midstream and upstream programs cause any reductions in energy consumption or

behavior by end-use customers. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers fail to show any

contractual relationship with end-use customers, and they fail to establish legal rights to

any reductions in energy usage required to be eligible to receive energy efficiency payments

from PJM. The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers provide no or inadequate evidence that

their actions result in end use customers reducing their energy consumption beyond what it

would have been otherwise, including failure to demonstrate that they meet required tests

of statistical significance; reliance on outdated and irrelevant baseline data; and failure to

adequately support leakage assumptions.

A. Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller’s Midstream and Upstream Programs Do

Not Cause Changes in End Use Customer Behavior or Result in a Reduction in

Energy Usage.

The PJM OA defines an EE resource as a project, including installation of more

efficient devices or equipment or implementation of more efficient processes or systems,

exceeding then-current building codes, appliance standards, or other relevant standards,

- 13 -

designed to achieve a continuous reduction in electric energy consumption at the End-Use

Customer's retail site that is not reflected in the peak load forecast prepared for the delivery

year. EE resources are therefore required to cause decreases in energy consumption at an

end use customer’s location. EE resources are intended to cause changes in end use

customer behavior resulting in a reduction in energy usage beyond what they would have

otherwise. The causation requirement for EE resources may be found in North American

Energy Standards Board energy efficiency standards. Standard WEQ-021-3.1.1, states that

“[a]n Energy Efficiency Resource may participate in wholesale markets where there is a

verified permanent load reduction behind the distribution meter resulting from installation

of Energy Efficiency equipment, processes, or systems.”

Standards WEQ-021-1.1 and

WEQ-0.0.0 require ISOs and RTOs to establish M&V methodologies that “determin[e]

reductions in usage and/or demand resulting from Demand Response or Energy

Efficiency.”

NAESB Standard WEQ-021-3.2.9 requires EE resource providers to submit

M&V plans that “include a detailed description of calculations used to establish Energy

Efficiency Baseline and actual Demand Reduction Value.” NAESB defines “Energy

Efficiency Baseline” as “[e]nergy usage that would have occurred without implementation

of the subject measure or project.”

Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller’s midstream and upstream programs simply

aggregate sales data of products that end use customers independently made the decision

NAESB, WEQ-021-1.1, Measurement and Verification of Energy Efficiency Products (WEQ Version

003.3, Mar. 30, 2020)

NAESB, WEQ-000, Standards and Models Relating to Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Definition of

Terms (Mar. 20, 2020).

NAESB, WEQ-021-3.2, Measurement and Verification of Energy Efficiency Products (WEQ Version

003.3, Mar. 30, 2020)

NAESB, WEQ-000, NAESB Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Definition of Terms (WEQ Version

003.3, Mar. 30, 2020)

- 14 -

to purchase, claim to own the associated capacity rights and submit this data to PJM to

support its participation in PJM’s Capacity Market.

B. Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers’ Midstream and Upstream Programs Do

Not Meet the Requirement of Addressing Energy Consumption at End Use

Customer Locations.

Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller’s midstream and upstream programs do not cause

changes in end use customer behavior, purchasing decisions or cause reductions in energy

consumption beyond what they otherwise would have. The PJM OA defines an EE resource

as a project designed to achieve a continuous reduction in electric energy consumption at

the End-Use Customer's retail site. In its 2017 decision in Advanced Energy Economy,

FERC held that EE resources in PJM are “by definition, composed of retail customer actions

that reduce load.”

Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller’s midstream and upstream programs

are not characterized by the requisite element of being associated with end use customers.

These programs instead aggregate sales data of products that end use customers

independently made the decision to purchase, claim to own the associated capacity rights

and submit this data to PJM to support its participation in PJM’s Capacity Market.

C. Energy Efficiency Payments Are Not Part of the Capacity Market and Have No

Impact on Resource Adequacy.

According to the PJM OATT and RAA, EE MW should not be included in the PJM

Capacity Market.

EE MW are not included in the PJM Capacity Market. EE MW are

nonetheless paid the capacity market clearing price and, while not part of the PJM Capacity

Market, are part of the PJM capacity construct as a result.

Advanced Energy Economy, 161 FERC ¶ 61,245 at P 59 (2017).

OATT Attachment DD-1 § L.1.

RAA Schedule 6 § L.1.

- 15 -

D. The Reports Do Not Provide a Just and Reasonable Basis for Payments to the

Indicated Energy Efficiency Providers.

Indicated Energy Efficiency Providers must meet the following requirement in the

RAA to be paid for EE:

For every Energy Efficiency Resource clearing an RPM Auction

for a Delivery Year, the Capacity Market Seller shall submit to the

Office of the Interconnection, by no later than the start of such

Delivery Year, an updated project status and detailed

measurement and verification data meeting the standards for

precision and accuracy set forth in the PJM Manuals.

The RAA provides for PJM to determine a value of EE supported by the report:

The final value of the Energy Efficiency Resource during such

Delivery Year shall be as determined by the Office of the

Interconnection based on the submitted data.

The RAA further provides for PJM to perform audits of EE:

The Office of the Interconnection may audit, at the Capacity

Market Seller’s expense, any Energy Efficiency Resource

committed to the PJM Region. The audit may be conducted any

time including the Performance Hours of the Delivery Year.

RAA Schedule 6 § L.6; PJM Manual 18B at 12 states: “The last Post-Installation M&V Report

submitted and approved by PJM prior to the Delivery Year that the EE Resource is committed

establishes the final Nominated EE Value and Capacity Performance value that is used to measure

RPM Commitment Compliance during the Delivery Year. The final Nominated EE Value

establishes the installed capacity value of an EE Resource for the summer period of June through

October and May of the Delivery Year. The Capacity Performance value establishes the installed

capacity value of an EE Resource for the non-summer period of November through April of the

Delivery Year. Details regarding RPM Commitment Compliance and the associated penalty for

failure to deliver the unforced value of an RPM capacity commitment (i.e., Capacity Resource

Deficiency Charge) are provided in PJM Manual for PJM Capacity Market (M-18).”

RAA Schedule 6 § L.6.

RAA Schedule 6 § L.7; PJM Manual 18B states at 12: “PJM reserves the right to audit the results

presented in an Initial or Updated Post-Installation M&V Report. The M&V Audit may be

conducted any time, including during the defined EE Performance Hours. If the M&V Audit is

performed and results finalized prior to the start of a Delivery Year, the Nominated EE Value and

- 16 -

PJM Manual 18B states (at 20) that the initial post-installation reports should include:

• Cover page with list of changes/updates contained in the Initial

Post-Installation M&V Report

• Details of any changes between the prior Updated M&V Plan and

as-built conditions, and any changes to the estimated demand and

energy reductions

• Detailed list of installed equipment

• Documentation of all post-installation verification activities

(verifying that the equipment/systems were installed and are

operating)

• Documentation of performance measurements conducted to

validate the Nominated EE Value and Capacity Performance

value of the EE Resource (if applicable in accordance with the

approved M&V Plan)

• Detail any changes to the Nominated EE Value and Capacity

Performance value of the EE Resource

The Reports fail to satisfy the requisite criteria for approval. The Reports fail to

adequately demonstrate exactly where the measures were installed. As a result, there can be

only a description of the types of equipment but no actual list of installed equipment or

actual end use customer locations. There can be only a general post installation review

based on assumptions and no actual documentation post installation verification of actual

installations by customer location. The Reports do not provide the contracts or agreements

needed to establish that the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers even have the legal ability to

evaluate the behavior of the end use customers, including confirmation of the installation

Capacity Performance value confirmed by the Audit becomes the Final Nominated EE Value and

Capacity Performance value that is used to measure RPM Commitment Compliance during the

Delivery Year. If the M&V Audit is performed and results finalized after the start of a Delivery

Year, the Nominated EE Value and Capacity Performance value confirmed by the M&V Audit

becomes the basis to determine if any incremental RPM Commitment Compliance Shortfall needs

to be assessed retroactively from June 1 of the Delivery Year to May 31 of the Delivery Year.”.

- 17 -

locations of EE measures they claim to have installed. Review of the agreements is also

needed to determine whether the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers have valid legal rights

to the results of any behavior that creates any EE. There is no way to ensure that any such

legal rights have not also been sold to others, potentially resulting in duplicate EE. The

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers do not establish that they know the identity of any or all

of the end use customers that are asserted to be providing EE. Because the Reports do not

contain the information indicated in PJM Manual 18B, PJM does not have the ability to

conduct audits during the delivery year that the RAA provides for.

Because the Reports provide no basis for determining that the Indicated Energy

Efficiency Sellers have provided any energy efficiency relevant to PJM or PJM customers, it

is unjust and unreasonable to require PJM customers to pay, in the aggregate, $128 million

in the BRA alone for EE that has not been demonstrated to exist. PJM should not make

payment, and the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers are not entitled to and should be

directed not to take payment for, any EE during the 2024/2025 Delivery Year based on the

filed Reports.

The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers, if they continue to seek payment, should be

directed to file reports revised to provide the information required to show that energy

efficiency has been provided to PJM. There should be no presumption that a valid

explanation exists.

In the event that the deficiencies in the Reports are deemed to be curable, in whole

or in part, including the requirement that they be submitted in accordance with the RAA’s

deadline, the best course of action is to set the complaint for hearing and discovery, which

would allow for the investigation of whether, and, if so, to what extent, the Indicated

Energy Efficiency Sellers have provided EE to PJM. To conduct the fact intensive

investigation that would be required, to develop a record basis for a decision, and to avoid

unnecessary delay, there is no reason to delay a hearing by first initiating settlement judge

proceedings. Such settlement judge proceedings cannot be expected to resolve factual

disputes. The goal would be to determine whether the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

- 18 -

have provided any identifiable EE and to determine the value of any such EE. The

development of a record based on compulsory discovery would enhance the ability to reach

a timely resolution of the issues raised in this Complaint.

IV. RULE 206 REQUIREMENTS

A. Rule 206(b)(1): Action or Inaction Alleged to Violate Statutory Standards or

Regulatory Requirements

The Reports provided by each of the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers do not

support payment for capacity for the 2024/2025 Delivery Year, none of the Indicated Energy

Efficiency Sellers should receive payment.

B. Rule 206(b)(2): Legal Bases for Complaint

The legal bases for this Complaint are set forth in detail in Section III.

C. Rules 206(b)(3) and 206(b)(4): Issues Presented as They Relate to the

Complainant and Quantification of Financial Impact on Complainant

PJM customers should not pay more than $128 million to the Indicated Energy

Efficiency Sellers for alleged EE that has not been shown to exist.

D. Rule 206(b)(5): Nonfinancial Impacts on Complainant

Not applicable.

E. Rule 206(b)(6): Related Proceedings

Complainant is not aware of any other pending proceedings that are directly related

to the issues raised in this Complaint.

F. Rule 206(b)(7): Specific Relief Requested

The Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers are not entitled to and should be directed to

not take payment from PJM for EE described in the reports filed May 10, 2024, during the

2024/2025 Delivery Year.

A. Rule 206(b)(8): Documents that Support the Complaint

This pleading and its attachments support the complaint.

- 19 -

B. Rule 206(b)(9): Dispute Resolution

The Market Monitor has not contacted the Enforcement Hotline or Dispute

Resolution Service or made use of the tariff-based dispute resolution mechanisms. Such

mechanisms are neither intended nor appropriate for resolving disputes of this nature.

C. Rule 206(b)(10): Form of Notice

A form of notice suitable for publication in the Federal Register is included as an

Attachment B.

D. Rule 206(c): Service on Respondent

The Market Monitor certifies that copies of this Complaint were served by email on

each respondent in the Indicated Energy Efficiency Seller listed in the table in Section I.

V. COMMUNICATIONS

All communications with respect to this pleading and in connection with this

proceeding should be addressed to the following:

Joseph E. Bowring

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

President

Monitoring Analytics, LLC

2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160

Eagleville, Pennsylvania 19403

(610) 271-8051

[email protected]om

Jeffrey W. Mayes

General Counsel

Monitoring Analytics, LLC

2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160

Eagleville, Pennsylvania 19403

(610) 271-8053

jeffrey.mayes@monitoringanalytics.com

Designated to receive service.

- 20 -

VI. CONCLUSION

The Market Monitor respectfully requests that the Commission afford due

consideration to the arguments raised in this Complaint as the Commission resolves the

issues raised in this proceeding.

Joseph E. Bowring

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

President

Monitoring Analytics, LLC

2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160

Eagleville, Pennsylvania 19403

(610) 271-8051

[email protected]om

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey W. Mayes

General Counsel

Monitoring Analytics, LLC

2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160

Eagleville, Pennsylvania 19403

(610) 271-8053

jeffrey.mayes@monitoringanalytics.com

Paul G. Scheidecker

Senior Analyst

Monitoring Analytics, LLC

2621 Van Buren Avenue, Suite 160

Eagleville, Pennsylvania 19403

(610) 271-8050

paul.scheidecker@monitoringanalytics.com

Dated: May 31, 2024

ATTACHMENT A

Protective Order

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

)

Docket No. EL24-___-000

PROTECTIVE AGREEMENT

This Protective Agreement is entered into this ______ day of ____________, ____, by and

between the Independent Market Monitor for PJM (Monitoring Analytics, LLC) (“Complainant”)

and ________________________ (“Respondent/Intervenor”), and shall govern the use of all

Privileged Material, as defined herein, submitted by Complainant or Respondent/Intervenor to the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (the “Commission”) in this proceeding. Complainant and

Respondent/Intervenor are referred to herein individually as a “Party” and jointly as “Parties.”

1. The complaint (“Complaint”) filed by Complainant in the above-captioned proceeding

included documents that contained Privileged Material. Respondent/Intervenor is a

“participant” in such proceeding, as such term is defined in 18 C.F.R. § 385.102(b), or has

filed a timely motion to intervene or a notice of intervention in such proceeding. The

Parties enter into this Protective Agreement to govern the use of Privileged Material or

CEII produced by Complainant or Respondent/Intervenor in the above-referenced

proceeding. Notwithstanding any order terminating such proceeding, this Protective

Agreement shall remain in effect unless and until specifically modified or terminated

jointly by the Parties or by the Commission or a court of competent jurisdiction.

2. The Commission’s regulations

and its policy governing the labelling of controlled

unclassified information (“CUI”),

establish and distinguish the respective designations of

Privileged Material and CEII. As to these designations, this Protective Agreement provides

that a Party:

A. may designate as Privileged Material any material which customarily is treated by

that Party as commercially sensitive or proprietary or material subject to a legal

privilege, which is not otherwise available to the public, and which, if disclosed,

Compare 18 C.F.R. § 388.112, with 18 C.F.R. § 388.113. This Protective Agreement does not alter

the respective requirements imposed by these sections on Privileged Material or CEII.

Notice of Document Labelling Guidance for Documents Submitted to or Filed with the Commission

or Commission Staff, 82 Fed. Reg. 18,632 (Apr. 20, 2017) (issued by Commission Apr. 14, 2017).

would subject that Party or its customers to risk of competitive disadvantage or

other business injury; and

B. must designate as CEII, any material that meets the definition of that term as

provided by 18 C.F.R. §§ 388.113(a), (c).

3. For the purposes of this Protective Agreement, the listed terms are defined as follows:

A. Party(ies): As defined above.

B. Privileged Material:

i. Material (including depositions) provided by a Party in response to

discovery requests or filed with the Commission, and that is designated as

Privileged Material by such Party;

ii. Material that is privileged under federal, state, or foreign law, such as work-

product privilege, attorney-client privilege, or governmental privilege, and

that is designated as Privileged Material by such Party;

iii. Any information contained in or obtained from such designated material;

iv. Any other material which is made subject to this Protective Agreement by

the Commission, any court, or other body having appropriate authority, or

by agreement of the Parties;

v. Notes of Privileged Material (memoranda, handwritten notes, or any other

form of information (including electronic form) which copies or discloses

Privileged Material);

The Commission’s regulations state that “[f]or the purposes of the Commission’s filing

requirements, non-CEII subject to an outstanding claim of exemption from disclosure under FOIA will be

referred to as privileged material.” 18 C.F.R. § 388.112(a). The regulations further state that “[f]or material

filed in proceedings set for trial-type hearing or settlement judge proceedings, a participant’s access to

material for which privileged treatment is claimed is governed by the presiding official’s protective order.”

18 C.F.R. § 388.112(b)(2)(v).

See infra P 11 for the procedures governing the labeling of this designation.

The Commission’s regulations state that “[a] presiding officer may, by order …. restrict public

disclosure of discoverable matter in order to …. [p]reserve a privilege of a participant….” 18 C.F.R.

§ 385.410(c)(3). To adjudicate such privileges, the regulations further state that “[i]n the absence of

controlling Commission precedent, privileges will be determined in accordance with decisions of the

Federal courts with due consideration to the Commission’s need to obtain information necessary to

discharge its regulatory responsibilities.” 18 C.F.R. § 385.410(d)(1)(i).

Notes of Privileged Material are subject to the same restrictions for Privileged Material except as

specifically provided in this Protective Agreement.

vi. Copies of Privileged Material.

vii. Privileged Material does not include:

a. Any information or document that has been filed with and accepted

into the public files of the Commission, or contained in the public

files of any other federal or state agency, or any federal or state

court, unless the information or document has been determined to

be privileged by such agency or court;

b. Information that is public knowledge, or which becomes public

knowledge, other than through disclosure in violation of this

Protective Agreement; or

C. Critical Energy/Electric Infrastructure Information (CEII): As defined at 18 C.F.R.

§§ 388.113(a), (c).

D. Non-Disclosure Certificate: The term “Non-Disclosure Certificate” means the

certificate attached to this Protective Agreement, by which individuals granted

access to Privileged Material, and/or CEII must certify their understanding that

such access to such material is provided pursuant to the terms and restrictions of

this Protective Agreement, and that such Parties have read the Protective

Agreement and agree to be bound by it.

E. Reviewing Representative: A person who has signed a Non-Disclosure Certificate

and who is:

i. Commission Trial Staff designated as such in this proceeding;

ii. An attorney who has made an appearance in this proceeding for a Party;

iii. Attorneys, paralegals, and other employees associated for purposes of this

case with an attorney who has made an appearance in this proceeding on

behalf of a Party;

iv. An expert or an employee of an expert retained by a Party for the purpose

of advising, preparing for, submitting evidence or testifying in this

proceeding;

v. A person designated as a Reviewing Representative by order of the

Commission; or

vi. Employees or other representatives of a Party appearing in this proceeding

with significant responsibility for this docket.

4. Privileged Material and/or CEII shall be made available under the terms of this Protective

Agreement only to Parties and only to their Reviewing Representatives as provided in

Paragraphs 6-10 of this Protective Agreement. The contents of Privileged Material, CEII

or any other form of information that copies or discloses such materials shall not be

disclosed to anyone other than in accordance with this Protective Agreement and shall be

used only in connection with this specific proceeding.

5. All Privileged Material and/or CEII must be maintained in a secure place. Access to those

materials must be limited to Reviewing Representatives specifically authorized pursuant

to Paragraphs 7-9 of this Protective Agreement.

6. Privileged Material and/or CEII must be handled by each Party and by each Reviewing

Representative in accordance with the Non-Disclosure Certificate executed pursuant to

Paragraph 9 of this Protective Agreement. Privileged Material and/or CEII shall not be

used except as necessary for the conduct of this proceeding, nor shall they (or the substance

of their contents) be disclosed in any manner to any person except a Reviewing

Representative who is engaged in this proceeding and who needs to know the information

in order to carry out that person’s responsibilities in this proceeding. Reviewing

Representatives may make copies of Privileged Material and/or CEII, but such copies

automatically become Privileged Material and/or CEII. Reviewing Representatives may

make notes of Privileged Material, which shall be treated as Notes of Privileged Material

if they reflect the contents of Privileged Material.

7. If a Reviewing Representative’s scope of employment includes any of the activities listed

under this Paragraph 7, such Reviewing Representative may not use information contained

in any Privileged Material and/or CEII obtained in this proceeding for a commercial

purpose (e.g. to give a Party or competitor of any Party a commercial advantage):

A. Energy marketing;

B. Direct supervision of any employee or employees whose duties include energy

marketing; or

C. The provision of consulting services to any person whose duties include energy

marketing.

8. If a Party wishes to designate a person not described in Paragraph 3(E) above as a

Reviewing Representative, the Party must seek agreement from the Party providing the

Privileged Material and/or CEII. If an agreement is reached, the designee shall be a

Reviewing Representative pursuant to Paragraph 3(E) of this Protective Agreement with

respect to those materials. If no agreement is reached, the matter must be submitted to the

Commission for resolution.

9. A Reviewing Representative shall not be permitted to inspect, participate in discussions

regarding, or otherwise be permitted access to Privileged Material and/or CEII pursuant to

this Protective Agreement until three business days after that Reviewing Representative

first has executed and served a Non-Disclosure Certificate.

However, if an attorney

qualified as a Reviewing Representative has executed a Non-Disclosure Certificate, any

participating paralegal, secretarial and clerical personnel under the attorney’s instruction,

supervision or control need not do so. Attorneys designated Reviewing Representatives

are responsible for ensuring that persons under their supervision or control comply with

this Protective Agreement, and must take all reasonable precautions to ensure that

Privileged Material and/or CEII are not disclosed to unauthorized persons.

10. Any Reviewing Representative may disclose Privileged Material and/or CEII to any other

Reviewing Representative as long as both Reviewing Representatives have executed a

Non-Disclosure Certificate. In the event any Reviewing Representative to whom

Privileged Material and/or CEII are disclosed ceases to participate in this proceeding, or

becomes employed or retained for a position that renders him or her ineligible to be a

Reviewing Representative under Paragraph 3(D) of this Protective Agreement, access to

such materials by that person shall be terminated. Even if no longer engaged in this

proceeding, every person who has executed a Non-Disclosure Certificate shall continue to

be bound by the provisions of this Protective Agreement and the Non-Disclosure

Certificate for as long as the Protective Agreement is in effect.

11. All Privileged Material and/or CEII in this proceeding filed with the Commission or

submitted to any Commission personnel, must comply with the Commission’s Notice of

Document Labelling Guidance for Documents Submitted to or Filed with the Commission

or Commission Staff.

Consistent with those requirements:

A. Documents that contain Privileged Material must include a top center header on

each page of the document with the following text: CUI//PRIV. Any corresponding

electronic files must also include this text in the file name.

B. Documents that contain CEII must include a top center header on each page of the

document with the following text: CUI//CEII. Any corresponding electronic files

must also include this text in the file name.

C. Documents that contain both Privileged Material and CEII must include a top center

header on each page of the document with the following text: CUI//CEII/PRIV.

Any corresponding electronic files must also include this text in the file name.

D. The specific content on each page of the document that constitutes Privileged

Material and/or CEII must also be clearly identified. For example, lines or

During this three-day period, a Party may file an objection with the Commission contesting that an

individual qualifies as a Reviewing Representative, and the individual shall not receive access to the

Privileged Material and/or CEII until resolution of the dispute.

See infra P 19.

82 Fed. Reg. 18,632 (Apr. 20, 2017) (issued by Commission Apr. 14, 2017).

individual words or numbers that include both Privileged Material and CEII shall

be prefaced and end with “BEGIN CUI//CEII/PRIV” and “END CUI//CEII/PRIV”.

12. If any Party desires to include, utilize, or refer to Privileged Material or information derived

from Privileged Material in testimony or other exhibits during the hearing in this

proceeding in a manner that might require disclosure of such materials to persons other

than Reviewing Representatives, that Party first must notify counsel for the disclosing

Party, and identify all such Privileged Material. Thereafter, use of such Privileged Material

will be governed by procedures determined by the Commission.

13. Nothing in this Protective Agreement shall be construed as precluding any Party from

objecting to the production or use of Privileged Material and/or CEII on any appropriate

ground.

14. Nothing in this Protective Agreement shall preclude any Party from requesting the

Commission or any other body having appropriate authority to find this Protective

Agreement should not apply to all or any materials previously designated Privileged

Material pursuant to this Protective Agreement. The Commission or any other body having

appropriate authority may alter or amend this Protective Agreement as circumstances

warrant at any time during the course of this proceeding.

15. Each Party governed by this Protective Agreement has the right to seek changes in it as

appropriate from the Commission or any other body having appropriate authority.

16. Subject to Paragraph 18, the Commission shall resolve any disputes arising under this

Protective Agreement pertaining to Privileged Material according to the following

procedures. Prior to presenting any such dispute to the Commission, the Parties to the

dispute shall employ good faith best efforts to resolve it.

A. Any Party that contests the designation of material as Privileged Material shall

notify the Party that provided the Privileged Material by specifying in writing the

material for which the designation is contested.

B. In any challenge to the designation of material as Privileged Material, the burden

of proof shall be on the Party seeking protection. If the Commission finds that the

material at issue is not entitled to the designation, the procedures of Paragraph 18

shall apply.

C. The procedures described above shall not apply to material designated by a Party

as CEII. Material so designated shall remain subject to the provisions of this

Protective Agreement, unless a Party requests and obtains a determination from the

Commission’s CEII Coordinator that such material need not retain that designation.

17. The designator will have five (5) days in which to respond to any pleading requesting

disclosure of Privileged Material. Should the Commission determine that the information

should be made public, the Commission will provide notice to the designator no less than

five (5) days prior to the date on which the material will become public. This Protective

Agreement shall automatically cease to apply to such material on the sixth (6th) calendar

day after the notification is made unless the designator files a motion with the Commission,

with supporting affidavits demonstrating why the material should continue to be privileged.

Should such a motion be filed, the material will remain confidential until such time as the

interlocutory appeal or certified question has been addressed by the Motions Commissioner

or Commission, as provided in the Commission’s regulations, 18 C.F.R. §§ 385.714, .715.

No Party waives its rights to seek additional administrative or judicial remedies after a

decision regarding Privileged Material or the Commission’s denial of any appeal thereof

or determination in response to any certified question. The provisions of 18 C.F.R.

§§ 388.112 and 388.113 shall apply to any requests under the Freedom of Information Act

(5 U.S.C. § 552) for Privileged Material and/or CEII in the files of the Commission.

18. Privileged Material and/or CEII shall remain available to Parties until the later of 1) the

date an order terminating this proceeding no longer is subject to judicial review, or 2) the

date any other Commission proceeding relating to the Privileged Material and/or CEII is

concluded and no longer subject to judicial review. After this time, the Party that produced

the Privileged Material and/or CEII may request (in writing) that all other Parties return or

destroy the Privileged Material and/or CEII. This request must be satisfied with within

fifteen (15) days of the date the request is made. However, copies of filings, official

transcripts and exhibits in this proceeding containing Privileged Material, or Notes of

Privileged Material, may be retained if they are maintained in accordance with Paragraph

5 of this Protective Agreement. If requested, each Party also must submit to the Party

making the request an affidavit stating that to the best of its knowledge it has satisfied the

request to return or destroy the Privileged Material and/or CEII. To the extent Privileged

Material and/or CEII are not returned or destroyed, they shall remain subject to this

Protective Agreement.

19. Regardless of any order terminating this proceeding, this Protective Agreement shall

remain in effect until specifically modified or terminated by the Commission. All CEII

designations shall be subject to the “[d]uration of the CEII designation” provisions of 18

C.F.R. § 388.113(e).

20. Any violation of this Protective Agreement and of any Non-Disclosure Certificate executed

hereunder shall constitute a violation of an order of the Commission.

21. Neither Party waives the right to pursue any other legal or equitable remedies that may be

available in the event of actual or anticipated disclosure of Privileged Material, including

but not limited to indemnification for unwarranted release of Privileged Material and

injunctive relief.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties each have caused this Protective Agreement to be

signed by their respective duly authorized representatives as of the date first set forth above.

By:

Name:

Title:

Representing Complainant

Name:

Title:

Representing Respondent/Intervenor

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

)

Docket No. EL24-___-000

NON-DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE

I hereby certify my understanding that access to Privileged Material and/or Critical

Energy/Electric Infrastructure Information (“CEII”) is provided to me pursuant to the terms and

restrictions of the Protective Agreement in this proceeding, that I have been given a copy of and

have read the Protective Agreement, and that I agree to be bound by it. I understand that the

contents of Privileged Material and/or CEII, any notes or other memoranda, or any other form of

information that copies or discloses such materials, shall not be disclosed to anyone other than in

accordance with the Protective Agreement. I acknowledge that a violation of this certificate

constitutes a violation of an order of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

By:

Title:

Representing:

Date:

ATTACHMENT B

Draft Notice

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Independent Market Monitor for PJM

Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

)

Docket No. EL24-___-000

NOTICE OF COMPLAINT

(____, 2024)

Take notice that on May 31, 2023, pursuant to section 206 of the Rules and Practice and

Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), 18 CFR § 385.206 (2011),

Monitoring Analytics, LLC, acting in its capacity as the Independent Market Monitor for PJM

(Complainant) filed a formal complaint against the Indicated Energy Efficiency Sellers

(Respondents) requesting that the Commission direct Respondent not to take payment from PJM for

Energy Efficiency described in the reports filed May 10, 2024, during the 2024/2025 Delivery Year.

The Complainant states that copies of the Complaint were served on representatives of the

Respondents.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules

211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214).

Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but

will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party

must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent’s answer

and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent’s

answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of

paper using the “eFiling” link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should

submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426.

This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the “eLibrary” link and is

available for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an

“eSubscription” link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a

document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please

[email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-

8659.

Comment Date: 5:00 pm Eastern Time on __, 2024.

Acting Secretary, Debbie –Anne A. Reese

ATTACHMENT C

Reports

[CUI-PRIV, To Be Provided]