PJM Won’t Name Uplift Recipients

Feb 4, 2014

PJM's Market Monitor would like to tell stakeholders the identifies of the handful of generators that received $350 million in uplift charges last year. But PJM officials said they are prevented from disclosing the names.

There were more than a few concerned stakeholders at last week’s Members Committee webinar when Market Monitor Joe Bowring presented data showing that only 10 generating units were responsible for 38% of the RTO’s uplift charges in 2013.

Whose generators are they and where are they located? Bowring would like to tell you. But PJM officials said they are prevented by the RTO’s confidentiality rules from disclosing the names.

Uplift Charges 2012 vs. 2013 (Source: Monitoring Analytics LLC) — (Source: Monitoring Analytics LLC)

“The only way that’s ever going to get released by PJM is if we get a FERC order,” Executive Vice President for Markets Andy Ott told the Markets and Reliability Committee Thursday.

The 10 units were responsible for about $335 million of uplift charges in 2013. In total, PJM had $882 million in uplift, or operating reserve charges, for the year, a $231 million increase over 2012. Reactive service charges increased $263.5 million, while black start costs jumped $78 million. (See related story, Black Start Units to See More Green.) Balancing and day ahead charges decreased by a combined $110 million.

Ott said the recent spike in reactive charges is temporary – a result of coal plant closures forcing operators to order more out-of-merit dispatch -– and will be corrected by the addition of new generation and reactive upgrades.

“The reactive issue will be done before we could get [FERC approval for] language changes” to the confidentiality rules, Ott said.

Howard Haas, representing the Monitor, told the MRC the confidentiality rules don’t apply because it is not market-sensitive information. “This is a non-market payment. It’s not hedgeable, so there’s no problem in releasing the information,” he said.

Dave Anders, PJM manager of member services, said that while the Energy Market Uplift Senior Task Force is devising strategies to reduce uplift, PJM staff is considering operational changes it can make without modifying the Tariff or Operating Agreement. “Can we change the model and how we commit units? We may be able to take steps to limit the cost of reactive uplift,” he said.

Bruce Bleiweis, of DC Energy, said it was improper for PJM to take actions “that divide us all into winners and losers without subjecting it to the stakeholder process.”

Ott insisted the changes were permitted. “Similar decisions are made every day.”

PJM Markets and Reliability Committee (MRC)PJM Members Committee (MC)