PJM officials last week defended their practice of creating interfaces to capture operator actions in response to voltage problems, saying they can’t guarantee the constraints will be modeled in Financial Transmission Right auctions.

In the last year, PJM has created “closed loop” interfaces in at least four locations so that operator actions — such as sub-zonal dispatch of demand response — are captured in Locational Marginal Prices rather than uplift. PJM said it must use the interfaces to set prices because its modeling software can only set prices for thermal constraints, not voltage problems.

But in its effort to reduce uplift, PJM is exacerbating FTR underfunding, DC Energy’s Bruce Bleiweis told the Market Implementation Committee during a discussion last week.

PJM has promised to provide notice of any new interfaces at least one day before implementing them. But that’s not enough time for FTR holders to react, said Bleiweis, who noted that the RTO requires 90 days’ notice before implementing special protective schemes (SPS).

He proposed PJM provide notice of the potential need for a new constraint as soon as it has identified one and discuss the results of their analysis at the next meeting of the MIC or Markets and Reliability Committee. Interfaces should be announced prior to the next FTR or Balance of Planning Period auction and not implemented until the beginning of the next month, Bleiweis said.

PJM “shouldn’t be in the position of choosing who will gain and who will lose,” he said.

PJM officials said Bleiweis’ proposal was unworkable.

“A lot of those things come up quicker than the time that Bruce would want,” said Adam Keech, director of wholesale market operations. “We might know two days before we need it, not 45 days. Forty-five days later we may not need it. We’re just printing uplift in between.”