VALLEY FORGE, Pa. — Two proposals that would have delayed the disclosure of financial transmission rights ownership following an auction were defeated by the Market Implementation Committee on Wednesday.
Bruce Bleiweis of DC Energy offered a package that would have allowed PJM to post aggregate data after an auction, mask ownership data for three to six months and disclose ownership after one year. It garnered only 10% of a sector-weighted vote.
A PJM proposal would have aligned the release of data with how the RTO treats other information, disclosing full ownership after four months. It received only 21% in a sector-weighted vote. (See “Proposals Would Delay Posting of FTR Ownership,” PJM Market Implementation Committee Briefs.)
Bleiweis said his proposal was intended to provide FTR owners the same confidentiality as other market participants.
The rejections were not a surprise. Several members and Market Monitor Joe Bowring had expressed opposition when Bleiweis won MIC approval of a problem statement to explore the issue in September.
Day-ahead Submission Deadline Moved up
Members endorsed updates to PJM’s regional transmission and energy scheduling practices intended to improve the alignment of the gas and electric markets.
A five-minute “shotgun” start window was created for hourly spot-in reservations (spot market imports), and the day-ahead bid submission deadline was moved from noon to 10:30 a.m.
Operating Parameter Definitions Approved
The committee approved short-term operating parameter definitions and voted to amend a problem statement to set June 1, 2017, as the deadline for permanent clarifications of the terms.
The amendment was proposed by Bob O’Connell of Main Line Electricity Market Consultants and included some clarifications to the terms cold/warm/hot start-up time, minimum run time and cold/warm/hot soak time.
PJM’s definitions were approved by 82% of the members in a sector-weighted vote. O’Connell’s definitions were approved by 60% of the vote. Both proposals will advance to the Markets and Reliability Committee, although O’Connell’s definitions will not be considered if PJM’s definitions are approved.
Clarifications Sought for Bilateral Transactions
Members approved a problem statement and issue charge to clarify rules on how auction-specific bilateral transactions credit bonus payments and indemnification. (See “PJM Proposes Clarifications to Capacity Bilateral Transactions,” PJM Market Implementation Committee Briefs.)
In such transactions, a seller transfers capacity to a buyer, but the obligation for performance remains with the seller.
The problem statement seeks to clarify how nonperformance charges and bonus payments apply to such transactions, and how they would be treated in litigation such as bankruptcies.
– Suzanne Herel