By Christen Smith

FERC dismissed a complaint from the New York Power Authority last week that alleged it was not responsible for PJM’s upgrade charges incurred after one of its merchant transmission facilities relinquished firm transmission withdrawal rights (TWRs) (EL17-94).

The complaint dates to 2017, when FERC forced PJM to modify interconnection service agreements with Hudson Transmission Partners and Linden VFT to convert firm TWRs to non-firm, relieving the companies from hundreds of millions in costs under PJM’s Regional Transmission Expansion Plan. (See NJ Tx Operators Win Relief on Upgrade Costs.)

HTP owns a 660-MW, 345-kV underwater HVDC line that connects PJM in northern New Jersey and NYISO in New York City. FERC issued a show cause order after Public Service Electric and Gas rejected HTP’s request to convert 320 MW of firm TWRs to non-firm. (See Rejecting PJM ‘Wheel’-related Requests, FERC Sets Inquiry.)

Linden VFT, which operates three 105-MW variable frequency transformers between the PSE&G system and Consolidated Edison, also filed a complaint after PSE&G rejected its request to convert 330 MW of firm TWRs to non-firm.

The two merchant projects were part of a decades-old service agreement between PSE&G and Con Ed that the latter terminated in April 2017. The service “wheeled” 1,000 MW from upstate New York through PSE&G’s facilities in northern New Jersey and into New York City.

Hudson notified NYPA of the relinquishment of its TWRs with PJM on June 2, 2017, but the commission did not approve the change until Dec. 15 of that year. PJM continued to bill NYPA for RTEP upgrades between June and December — a practice that NYPA called “unjust and unreasonable.”

“Because Hudson (and therefore NYPA) held firm transmission withdrawal rights until Dec. 15, 2017, and received service pursuant to those firm transmission withdrawal rights, we find no basis to support NYPA’s contention that PJM should not invoice NYPA for the period prior to Dec. 15, 2017,” the commission wrote in its ruling Thursday.

In a related ruling, FERC dismissed a consolidated docket of proceedings that contested ever-changing cost allocations for the Bergen-Linden Corridor (EL15-67). State agencies in New York and New Jersey, as well as PJM transmission owners, requested rehearing of FERC’s decision to set the dispute for settlement judge procedures last year. (See FERC Rethinking DFAX for Stability Tx Projects.) The protesters argued that the commission should have given them a chance to comment on how the revisions to Hudson and Linden’s TWRs and the canceled wheeling agreement should impact cost allocation.

Settlement negotiations were terminated in July and the original rehearing requests were punted back to FERC. The commission dismissed the filings as “moot,” saying “the requests for rehearing do not challenge the commission’s authority to establish settlement judge procedures.”