Transmission owners said last week that they will address transparency concerns over their load calculations but insisted the issue be resolved by their committee rather than in the Markets and Reliability Committee.
The MRC approved a problem statement in June after industrial customers complained that two-thirds of PJM’s transmission owners have failed to file FERC-approved tariffs disclosing the methodology their electric distribution companies (EDCs) use to allocate costs to load serving entities (LSEs). (See Industrials Call for Transparency in Transmission Owner Calculations.)
At a special MRC meeting Wednesday, members agreed to delay action on the problem statement to allow a response from transmission owners. Meg Sullivan, of Duquesne Light, chair of the Transmission Owners Agreement Administrative Committee (TOA-AC) told the meeting that the issue was under the jurisdiction of the TO panel and would be on its Nov. 6 meeting agenda.
Proper Forum
“We believe the forum to address the problem statement should be” the TOA-AC, she said. She said the TO panel would seek to “address it to everyone’s satisfaction.”
Attorney Robert Weishaar, who represents the PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, said he was willing to delay further action but not to concede that the TOs’ committee has jurisdiction over calculation of the total hourly energy obligations (THEO), peak load contributions (PLC), and network service peak loads (NSPL).
“I’m certainly willing to have the discussion with the TOs-slash EDCs,” he said, calling it a “practical step forward.
“But some aspects of the problem statement will have to come back to the MRC,” he added.
Weishaar said NSPL calculations are the transmission owners’ jurisdiction, but that other calculations are under MRC’s purview.
Equal Footing
David Scarpignato, representing retail provider Direct Energy, noted that only transmission owners have voting rights within the TOA-AC. “For everyone to have equal footing, it has to be in the stakeholder process,” he said.
But PJM’s Dave Anders, secretary of the MRC, urged a delay in further MRC action to give the TOA-AC “a couple months” to find a solution. He noted that most EDCs are represented in the TOA-AC. “There’s no reason to at least not have that discussion.”
David Pratzon, who represents generators, agreed. “Let’s not have this jurisdictional fight at this time if we don’t need it,” he said.
Weishaar said the lack of transparency undermines accountability, noting that utilities sometimes change methodologies without notice. The calculations are used to allocate energy, capacity, and transmission cost responsibility among LSEs.
Weishaar’s proposal would require Baltimore Gas & Electric, PECO Energy, PPL Electric Utilities, Dominion, Dayton, PEPCO, AEP, Duquesne Light Company, Rockland Electric, and Duke Energy to file Attachments M-1 or M-2 to the PJM OATT disclosing their methodologies. FirstEnergy, Commonwealth Edison, Public Service Electric & Gas, Atlantic City Electric and Delmarva Power & Light have already filed such disclosures, according to Weishaar.
