Maryland PSC Staff See EV Service Providers as Needing License, Absent Legislative Exemption

Electric vehicle service providers and electric vehicle charging stations should be regulated as electricity suppliers under PUA §1-101(j)(1)(ii), barring a legislative exemption in the General Assembly's 2012 legislative session, Maryland PSC Staff said in comments to the PSC (9261).

Staff supports -- and expects -- a legislative alternative to exempt electric vehicle charging stations and EV service providers as electricity suppliers under the PUA. However, Staff said that any such exemption should be limited to grid-to-vehicle (G2V) applications. Staff does not support a legislative exemption for vehicle-to-grid (V2G) applications because such an exemption would be inconsistent with the precedent set in Order No. 84275, in which the Commission ruled that curtailment service providers must be licensed as electricity suppliers.

Under the PUA §1-101(j)(1)(ii), an "electricity supplier" is, "a person who purchases, brokers, arranges, or markets electricity or electricity supply services for sale to a retail electric customer."

Staff said that, absent legislation, Order No. 84275 provides precedent for the regulation electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) and EV service providers as electric suppliers.

"While charging services do not constitute electric generation, the simple business model of charging customers by supplying them with electricity at an EVCS is also 'a service directly related to and comparable with the supply of electricity,'" Staff said, which was one of the features cited by the PSC in compelling the licensure of curtailment service providers.

"A charging station itself is a visual example of electric storage supply ready for customer use at a price. Whether a customer pays the moment he or she charges from the electricity supply equipment is immaterial. A transaction has occurred in which one party has supplied the other with electricity and then charged a fee for the service. Even if the fee is in the form of a monthly lump sum, as is the case with some EV service providers, they are still ultimately charging money for the supply of electricity,' Staff said.

"Further, in their efforts to gain traction within Maryland's marketplace, EV service providers would be marketing their electricity supply services to customers through advertising. Their services would advertise for the provision of leased, residential EVSE [electric vehicle service equipment] for customer use and the privilege to use one for their EVCSs for recharging. In attempting to sign up utility customers for this monthly service via advertising, EV service providers would fit the definition of an electricity supplier from the marketing perspective," Staff added

"Absent clear statutory language exempting EVCSs and EV service providers, the Commission has no choice but to interpret the plain-language reading of PUA §1-101(j)(1)(ii), which mandates the regulation of any entity that 'markets electricity or electricity supply services for sale to a retail electric customer,'" Staff said.

While Staff does support a legislative exemption for EVCSs and EV service providers from licensing, it does not support an exemption for vehicle-to-grid service providers.

"V2G transfer of electricity inherently involves the aggregation of electricity resources and their retail distribution of them. Staff believes this scenario parallels the CSP [curtailment service provider] situation in Case No. 9241. In that case, while the Commission agreed that demand response per se did not constitute electricity, the aggregation and subsequent selling of demand resources transformed the bundle into a product or 'service directly related to and comparable with the supply of electricity,"" Staff said.

The Maryland Energy Administration submitted comments stating that, "regulating EVCS operators as electricity suppliers will negatively affect the development of the EV market," and requested that the Commission not issue a ruling in favor of regulating EVCS operators as suppliers at this time. MEA did not distinguish between grid-to-vehicle applications and vehicle-to-grid applications.