Press release originally posted on PRWeb here.
Support for the appeal of a DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision that vacated Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) Order 745 (Electric Power Supply Ass’n v. FERC, D.C. Circuit No. 11-1486) has been filed by a diverse set of parties, including several Advanced Energy Management Alliance (AEMA) members and allied organizations. In mid-January, the U.S. Solicitor General filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court. At that time, EnerNOC, EnergyConnect, the PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, the Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers, and Viridity, all of whom had standing in the case, also jointly filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in support of appeal.
On February 17, several additional parties filed respondent briefs and amicus briefs in support of appeal. The States who were a part of the case, Maryland, California, and Pennsylvania all jointly filed a Respondent’s Brief in support of the appeal, as did the California Independent System Operator. Amicus briefs in support were also filed by demand response providers, consumer advocates, utilities, environmental groups, a large state university, municipal school districts, and industrial customers and associations. NRG, an owner of over 50,000 MW of generation across the country, and a member of EPSA, the Petitioner opposing appeal, also filed an amicus brief in support of appeal, appropriately noting “NRG agrees with petitioners that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must have the authority to regulate wholesale demand response to fulfill its statutory mandate to ensure that wholesale rates are just and reasonable and to eliminate undue discrimination and preferences.”
A full list of those who filed briefs in support of appeal is provided below.
“AEMA is pleased that diverse groups understand the importance of demand response in ensuring reliable, cost-effective and clean electric service for consumers,” stated Frank Lacey, Chair of AEMA and Senior Vice President at CPower, a demand response provider. “Our companies have been joined in our quest to allow consumers more choices, a greater ability to save on their energy bills, and cleaner air through reduced greenhouse gas emissions.”
We anticipate that a group made up of incumbent electricity generators whose profits are adversely affected by the cost savings demand response delivers to consumers will continue to oppose the effort to have the Supreme Court review this case.
Full List of Parties filing Petitions and Briefs
Petition for Writ of Certiorari
U.S. Solicitor General
EnerNOC, EnergyConnect, the PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, the Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers, and Viridity Energy
Respondent Briefs
Public Utilities Commissions representing California, Maryland, and Pennsylvania
CAISO
Amicus Briefs
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. and affiliates, National Grid USA and affiliates, and Northeast Utilities, doing business as Eversource Energy and affiliates
NRG Energy, Inc.
Delaware Division of the Public Advocate, Office of the People’s Counsel for the District of Columbia, Maryland Office of the People’s Counsel, New Jersey Rate Counsel, Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate, West Virginia Consumer Advocate Division, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, The Environmental Law and Policy Center of the Midwest, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Sierra Club, and Citizens Utility Board
Alcoa, Inc., Aqua America, Inc., Colonial Pipeline Co., Comverge, Inc., Cpower Corp., the Calvert County Board of Education, Direct Energy, the Electricity Consumers Resource Council, EnergyHub, Inc., Ferrite International Co., Icetec Energy Services, Industrial Energy Consumers of America, the North Penn School District, and the University of Maryland, College Park