News Stories
Sponsored by Earth Etch. Regulatory insight and compliance solutions for today’s energy markets.
Hearing Officer Indicates More Detail Needed in AMI Data Access and Implementation Plans
On June 1, 2026 a Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) Hearing Officer issued a notice stating that multiple rounds of discovery will help to inform the need for, and issues to be addressed, at potential technical sessions in evaluating advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) data access protocol and related issues.
The notice also indicated that the DPU will establish a procedural schedule at a later date accounting for the discovery to be issued, responses submitted, and any technical session(s) conducted
Previously several parties filed comments on the utility filings:
AG “requests that the Department fully investigate the EDCs’ AMI data access protocol implementation plans in an administrative adjudication. Such formal investigation should provide the opportunity for a full procedural schedule with dates for discovery, expert testimony, evidentiary hearings, and submission of briefs, and should comply with all other requirements set forth in G.L. c. 30A § 11”.
NRG and Vistra objected to the utilities’ proposal of “an annual fee structure for non-customer, third-party users of the centralized data repository,” recommending that if DPU finds the proposed repository cost-effective, it “reject the proposed third-party fee structure and instead fund the repository through existing cost recovery mechanisms as a utility back-office investment benefiting all ratepayers”.
In comments NRG and Vistra also recommended that the DPU: (i) “Convene a technical conference to assess the incremental capabilities and ratepayer value of the centralized data repository”; (ii) “Affirm the opt-out default for data sharing by customers who have selected a competitive supplier or are participating in municipal aggregation”; (iii) “Require the EDCs to share their draft customer outreach and education materials regarding data sharing permission management with competitive suppliers and municipal aggregators, as well as with the Department, prior to dissemination”; and (iv) “Use the technical conference to examine whether data latency below 24-to-48 hours is warranted for certain near-real-time use cases, and at what incremental cost to ratepayers.“
See docket link for all comments filed.
