WASHINGTON — PJM and MISO will need to add a few more chairs for their next Joint and Common Market meeting.

Impatient over the pace of progress, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said last week it will begin having FERC staff monitor JCM meetings focused on eliminating barriers to the coordination of energy and capacity across the RTOs’ seam.

“Staff’s participation in this process will aid the Commission in monitoring the RTOs’ progress” in meeting the schedule they set out in a work plan filed Sept. 26, the commission said in an order (AD12-16).

The commission wants “to make sure [PJM and MISO] stay on track,” acting Chair Cheryl LaFleur said after the meeting.

Asked what the commission might do if staff reports insufficient progress, LaFleur responded: “We would be in a position to take a more aggressive step.”

Action on NIPSCO Complaint Deferred

In a related matter, the commission deferred action on Northern Indiana Public Service Co.’s (NIPSCO) complaint (EL13-88) over the PJM-MISO Joint Operating Agreement interregional transmission planning process.  NIPSCO noted that the JOA had failed to produce a single cross-border transmission upgrade after nine years.

The commission said it was delaying a ruling pending related proceedings in other dockets.

One of those cases was docket AD12-16, which the commission initiated in June 2012 to solicit comment on how the RTOs could eliminate barriers to the delivery of generation capacity between them.

Work Plan Filed

The September 26 filing by PJM and MISO followed an unusual commission meeting June 20 in which representatives of the RTOs and state regulators made presentations on why the process has bogged down.

MISO complained that PJM was improperly limiting generators in its footprint from full participation in the PJM capacity market. PJM officials denied the claim, noting that MISO generators more than doubled the volume of cleared capacity in this year’s auction compared with 2012.

Several commissioners voiced frustration at that meeting and indicated the commission would take a more active role in the process.  (See FERC Likely to Increase Pressure on PJM-MISO Joint Market Talks.)

The RTOs told the commission in the September filing that a survey of PJM and MISO stakeholders had identified data exchange and transparency; transmission and generation outage coordination and day-ahead market coordination as their highest priorities. Capacity deliverability modeling, capacity product definition and transmission allocation for cross-border capacity transactions were identified as the lowest priorities.

Deliverability Analyses

To address the conflict over cross-border capacity sales, the RTOs said they will conduct a series of deliverability analyses that increase the number of resources considered with each iteration. The schedule said the fact finding will be complete by March 31, 2014 and that any proposed changes that meet a cost-benefit analysis will be developed by fall 2014. (See PJM and MISO: Best of Frenemies)

The RTOs also said they were pursuing initiatives to address their higher priority issues and considering modifications to the JOA regarding participant funded transmission upgrades and auction revenue rights. Already, the RTOs said, they have improved the coordination of their generation interconnection and transmission service request queues.

The commission Thursday created a new docket (AD14-3) to oversee “the broadened scope of issues” identified by the RTOs.

NIPSCO Complaint

Caught in the middle of the PJM/MISO seam issues is NIPSCO, a MISO member whose territory is located between two PJM transmission zones, Commonwealth Edison to the west and AEP to the east.

NIPSCO asked for changes to the JOA’s interregional planning process in September, filing a section 206 complaint that alleged the JOA process had failed to address seams issues. It also filed protests to the MISO (ER13-1943) and PJM (ER13-1944) Order 1000 interregional compliance filings, saying the RTOs’ submissions do not comply with the commission directive.

Because of those failures, NIPSCO said it was being charged “unjust and and unreasonable” congestion costs. Congestion on MISO market-to-market (M2M) constraints totaled $367 million last year 2012, according to the MISO State of the Market report.

NIPSCO suggested six structural changes, including changes to transmission planning schedules and common metrics for valuing cross-border “market efficiency” projects. (See NIPSCO’s Prescription for PJM-MISO Seams Issues.)

“No cross border projects have been approved despite the presence of significant M2M costs, significant congestion, significant and ongoing operational impacts on NIPSCO’s system (including the need for operating guides to protect NIPSCO’s equipment and customers), and despite forecasts that the picture is only going to get worse,” NIPSCO wrote. “…The time for active Commission intervention is now.”

The commission rejected the RTOs’ request that it dismiss the section 206 complaint but said it was “premature” to rule on it pending further commission action on the Order 1000 filings, the capacity delivery efforts within the JOA and Docket No. EL13-75 (relating to MISO-PJM JOA market-to-market issues).

Commissioner Philip Moeller issued a concurring opinion, saying NIPSCO’s complaint “should be a high priority” when the commission rules on the MISO-PJM Order 1000 interregional compliance filings.

“It’s something I hope we can continue to stay focused on,” Moeller said in comments during the meeting, “because there’s a lot of money at stake.”