What was expected to be a short discussion at Wednesday’s PJM Members Committee meeting regarding the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s request to attend Liaison Committee meetings turned into a two-hour debate.

In a sector-weighted vote of 3.39 (67.8%), stakeholders indefinitely postponed a vote on allowing the PSC to observe LC meetings, surpassing the 3.33 threshold. An amendment by Public Service Enterprise Group to not produce a voting report was also added to the motion.

The LC is a closed-door forum, billed as an opportunity “for direct communication between the members and the PJM Board” of Managers. RTO staff, the Independent Market Monitor, government officials and members of the media are not allowed to observe.

The original motion, advanced by Procter & Gamble and seconded by the Organization of PJM States Inc. (OPSI) on behalf of the PSC, asked, “Do members object to the request of the Public Service Commission of West Virginia (as an ex officio non-voting member of the standing committees) to attend the Liaison Committee as an observer?”

Jackie Roberts — the PSC’s federal policy adviser and former West Virginia consumer advocate — said some members have “strong opinions” about who can attend the LC.

“This is not about how we feel about it or what we want or don’t want,” Roberts said. “This is about the language in our governing documents.”

2018 Vote

From 2011 to 2018, PJM had allowed certain non-members — such as state regulators and their staff, FERC staff, PJM management and staff, and the Monitor — to attend the LC, though this was technically unallowed. The MC voted in September 2018 to enforce the committee’s charter and keep the meetings private. (See “Liaison Committee Meeting to be Closed to Nonmembers,” PJM MRC/MC Briefs: Sept. 27, 2018.)

From 2011 to 2018, OPSI and all the state commissions were allowed to participate in the Liaison Committee, but the 2018 vote enforced the charter and limited attendance after some members requested enforcement.

In support of the PSC motion and attendance at the LC, Roberts cited Section 1.4.4 of Manual 34 that states:

OPSI and its member regulatory agencies are not members of PJM. Under a June 2005 memorandum of understanding between the OPSI and PJM boards, commissioners and their staff participate, deliberate, give input and engage at all levels of PJM stakeholder groups but do not vote on any issue.

But Roberts argued that under PJM’s governing documents, as one of the only ex officio members in the RTO — along with the Consumer Advocates of the PJM States (CAPS), which is allowed to attend as a voting member — the West Virginia PSC is “entitled” to act as a member on the LC.

“Clearly the Liaison Committee is a stakeholder group,” Roberts said. “If we don’t have a culture of compliance at PJM, then we don’t have a stakeholder process.”

Susan Bruce, counsel to the PJM Industrial Customer Coalition, sponsored the motion on behalf of Procter & Gamble; Greg Poulos, executive director of CAPS, seconded it on behalf of the Delaware Division of the Public Advocate.

Bruce said that because conversations impacting states have taken place at recent LC meetings, it’s “important” for the PSC to be in attendance. Bruce cited “incredibly informative” discussions on the capacity market, auction revenue rights and financial transmission rights.

“We think there’s value if states have the ability to be participating,” Bruce said. “We have no objection to their listening to the conversation to inform their advocacy.”

Jeff Whitehead of Eastern Generation asked why the motion was necessary if the governing document language was “clear cut” to allow the PSC to attend the LC, as Roberts argued. He said he was uncomfortable with voting on “interpretations” of the governing documents.

Roberts said the PSC informed PJM that it would be attending the LC, but the RTO responded that it was “concerned” over the 2018 vote and “how passionate the members can be” about attendance at the meetings.

PJM General Counsel Chris O’Hara said there is “clearly a difference” between the ex officio role of a non-voting member like the PSC and the ex officio role of a voting consumer advocate member.

O’Hara said it’s also “not clear” that the LC is a standing committee. He said the committee was created out of a “conversation” between members and the board and not intended to be a committee reporting to the MC.

The 2018 vote at the MC was the clearest indication of member opinions on who could attend the LC, O’Hara said.

Tabled

Ed Tatum, vice president of transmission at American Municipal Power, appealed the decision of committee Chair Erik Heinle to put the motion up for a vote. Tatum said from a “parliamentarian standpoint,” the language of the motion was “a bit confusing” because it was written in the negative and is typically not considered at stakeholder meetings.

Tatum said he was “happy” to have a discussion if the PSC should be a part of the LC, but the vote on the motion seemed “inappropriate.”

“I’m a little bit confused as to what we’re doing here and why,” Tatum said.

Jason Barker of Exelon said the OA language doesn’t identify the LC as a standing committee, so the ex officio status regarding attendance of the LC is “meaningless.” Barker said the motion “intended to provide new rights” that are not included in the OA language.

In a sector-weighted vote of 3.28 (65.6%), the motion to reverse the decision of the chair was endorsed with 59 votes in favor, passing the 2.5 threshold.

Bruce offered to amend the language of the motion from “Do members object to” to “Do members support.”

Tatum said it was “still suffering from another defect” in that there are differing opinions whether the governing documents allow for ex officio attendance. He suggested the PSC come back with “explicit, specific changes” to either the OA or manual language.

“It’s important to me how this committee does business,” Tatum said. “The stakeholder process is important, and we all need to behave to a certain standard.”

Barker made a motion to indefinitely postpone the amended motion, with Calpine’s David “Scarp” Scarpignato, seconding it. Alex Stern, director of RTO strategy for PSEG Services, requested an amendment to suspend the rules to not produce a voting report generated on the issue, which was accepted.

Roberts said she “doesn’t have any idea” why members not impacted by the West Virginia PSC would have a stake in suspending the rules to not generate a voting report.

She said she was “really appalled” the rules would be suspended on the voting report, especially at a time when FERC is reaching out to states wanting help in solving resource adequacy and transmission issues.